224/224 on a 110+0 LSA
02-20-2007, 01:37 PM
#1
TECH Regular
Thread Starter
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: CA
Posts: 464
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
224/224 on a 110+0 LSA How does this cam do in the 5.7s? I have a 5.3 and thinking about going with this over a the 112 lsa. Who has this cam in their ls1? How does idle sound? Any driveability or tuning issues? Overall power how does it feel?
Last edited by 99/5.3w/hips; 02-20-2007 at 03:21 PM. Reason: added information
02-20-2007, 08:25 PM
#6
Based on valve area, displacement and 1.7 rockers that the LS1 uses, a 110 is better than a 112. Every motor has an ideal lsa. LS2's have less valve area per displacement and could use even tighter lsa. Going with too wide of a lobe center loses power, more than going too narrow. I believe the right way to design a cam is select LSA first, choose amount of overlap desired, then select duration to give the correct overlap.
Last edited by NoMoreFWD; 02-20-2007 at 08:37 PM.
02-21-2007, 02:39 PM
#7
Originally Posted by NoMoreFWD
Based on valve area, displacement and 1.7 rockers that the LS1 uses, a 110 is better than a 112. Every motor has an ideal lsa. LS2's have less valve area per displacement and could use even tighter lsa. Going with too wide of a lobe center loses power, more than going too narrow. I believe the right way to design a cam is select LSA first, choose amount of overlap desired, then select duration to give the correct overlap.
I completely disagree. ICL and LSA are a by product of the valve events you are looking for. Taking and selecting your lobes based on your use and using ICL/LSA to align your valve events is better IMO. There is no perfect ICL/LSA just as there is no perfect lobe nor rocker ratio.
Trending Topics
02-21-2007, 06:39 PM
#8
TECH Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 10,341
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by NoMoreFWD
Based on valve area, displacement and 1.7 rockers that the LS1 uses, a 110 is better than a 112. Every motor has an ideal lsa. LS2's have less valve area per displacement and could use even tighter lsa. Going with too wide of a lobe center loses power, more than going too narrow. I believe the right way to design a cam is select LSA first, choose amount of overlap desired, then select duration to give the correct overlap.
Valve events are what you determine and LSA shakes itself out....
02-22-2007, 04:19 PM
#9
Originally Posted by CHRISPY
WTF?
Valve events are what you determine and LSA shakes itself out....
Valve events are what you determine and LSA shakes itself out....
02-22-2007, 11:10 PM
#10
Back on topic... I'm running a 224/228 on 110+0 installed dot to dot. Lots of low-end fun and pulls well up top. Idle at 950-1000 doesn't sound heavily cammed, but you can tell something is there through the LTs/ORY combo. This year I want to drop the idle to 800rpms or so to make it sound a bit choppier while adding cats to quiet the car down a bit and remove some of the weird tones of the Magnaflow with LTs/ORY combo.
I imagine it'd be a pretty fun cam in a 5.3, obviously with a bit less low-end and a bit more high-end but the powerband shouldn't be too far off of what it is in an LS1.
02-22-2007, 11:19 PM
#11
TECH Enthusiast
iTrader: (11)
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Upstate, SC
Posts: 541
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by DuronClocker
doesn't sound heavily cammed, but you can tell something is there through the LTs/ORY combo.
