Cam+ls3 intake valves
05-02-2014, 12:17 PM
#1
Teching In
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cam+ls3 intake valves I'm about to but a cam on the ve ss 2009 with l98 ... 6.0 non dod..
The cam specs are
223/227
610/614
114+4
7400 pushrods
With changing the intake valves with the ls3 vavles..
The car is on vraram,kooks long
tubes 178 2.5 x force cat back
Is it a good set up?? Or there are some faults
...
The cam specs are
223/227
610/614
114+4
7400 pushrods
With changing the intake valves with the ls3 vavles..
The car is on vraram,kooks long
tubes 178 2.5 x force cat back
Is it a good set up?? Or there are some faults
...
05-24-2014, 09:30 AM
#4
MASS seller approved
iTrader: (148)
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: ELSA, South TEXAS (956) 802-7700
Posts: 1,403
Received 116 Likes
on
79 Posts
Assuming youre putting ls3 rectangular heads on the 6.0 since ls3 valves wont go on cathedral heads, id be concerned with ptv clearance due to the bigger intake valves. I would recommend a comp 228 232, 588 595, 114+4 cam from personal experience. I also recommend a dual 3 into 3.5 exhaust.
Rob (956) 802 7700
Rob (956) 802 7700
05-24-2014, 02:29 PM
#5
You wont need to worry about the valves really. They can help in the higher rpms, but using a heavier spring than stock and better lobes than stock will likely outweigh the "benefits" of using the stock LS3 valves.
I cannot actually think of a test ran showing any gains from using one over the other on the exact same setup. If you are staying under 6500 you likely wouldnt see any difference until above 4k -4500 really IF even then.
I cannot actually think of a test ran showing any gains from using one over the other on the exact same setup. If you are staying under 6500 you likely wouldnt see any difference until above 4k -4500 really IF even then.
05-24-2014, 02:39 PM
#6
Anytime you can get weight out of the spring side of the valve train that is a good thing.
Springs last longer and you don't need as much spring to control it.
If weight was able to be overcome with more spring there would be no need for the light stuff in a production car.
Tim
Springs last longer and you don't need as much spring to control it.
If weight was able to be overcome with more spring there would be no need for the light stuff in a production car.
Tim
05-24-2014, 03:08 PM
#7
In a production vette they use the same spring which is very light for the LS6 valves to a solid stem LS2 valve to the LS3 valve, yet use a heavier valve in the L92 heads in a truck with a lighter spring. I would not go by what gm is doing as it seems they are doing it backwards then.
Trending Topics
05-24-2014, 03:24 PM
#8
How many l92 engines knock the heads off valves.
The ls3 valve weighs 88 grams the L92 is 108 if I remember right.
My cam guy has 30 years of experience and recommends the ls3 valve over the L92 any day of the week.
Heavier springs are hard on rockers valve tips.
Tim
The ls3 valve weighs 88 grams the L92 is 108 if I remember right.
My cam guy has 30 years of experience and recommends the ls3 valve over the L92 any day of the week.
Heavier springs are hard on rockers valve tips.
Tim
05-24-2014, 03:37 PM
#9
Quite a few l92 vavles have screwed up in gm trucks esp from 2009-11 but that was from broken springs or stuck/dropped valves according to GM though. And quite a few gen3 trucks suffer from broken valve springs. Are they related to the valves? Not the gen 3 stuff as they use them in the ls2s all the time with the ls6 spring. But then again so did quite a few ls7 exhaust valves and even intake valves. Same year range also.
As far as the rocker arm/valve tip wear....metallurgy has come quite a way in 30 years.
As far as the rocker arm/valve tip wear....metallurgy has come quite a way in 30 years.
05-24-2014, 04:10 PM
#10
The weight of the valve all plays into springs breaking. all the ones I have seen are the intakes.
There were a few posts of guys putting a bunch of spring on these motors and having rocker and valve wear issues.
Flowtech induction gets more work from so called internet experts selling things that flat out don't work together.
I don't sell parts and am not trying to but I get a few emails a month with questions on how I get my car to run like it does. I don't take credit for the engine I have very little to do with the design of it.
We let the results speak for themselves when it comes to cylinder head and valve train development.
Tim
There were a few posts of guys putting a bunch of spring on these motors and having rocker and valve wear issues.
Flowtech induction gets more work from so called internet experts selling things that flat out don't work together.
I don't sell parts and am not trying to but I get a few emails a month with questions on how I get my car to run like it does. I don't take credit for the engine I have very little to do with the design of it.
We let the results speak for themselves when it comes to cylinder head and valve train development.
Tim
05-24-2014, 04:20 PM
#12
The real answer to the OP is run what you want and if you can justify spending money then that is up to you.
There are so many top end swaps with reg l92 valves in them its unreal and they run everything from ls6 springs to the comp 925s and beyond and normally use just stock rockers and have no issues. Those are proven.
Will you actually gain anything going to the ls3 valve over the l92 for the power range your cam will have? No real proof, so inconclusive on that one. Will you gain longevity? Possibly. But there is alot more to consider than just one piece of an entire puzzle on that.
There are so many top end swaps with reg l92 valves in them its unreal and they run everything from ls6 springs to the comp 925s and beyond and normally use just stock rockers and have no issues. Those are proven.
Will you actually gain anything going to the ls3 valve over the l92 for the power range your cam will have? No real proof, so inconclusive on that one. Will you gain longevity? Possibly. But there is alot more to consider than just one piece of an entire puzzle on that.