Turbo cam?
10-31-2012, 05:43 PM
#1
TECH Resident
Thread Starter
iTrader: (13)
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Harford co. MD
Posts: 821
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Turbo cam? Looking for some input on a cam i may use in my lsx 427 build here are the specs=
XER lobes 1.8 ratio
int. lobe 3732 exh. lobe 3734
244 248 .648" .651" 115 +3
The build will be a large single or twins have not decided just yet but it will sport LS7 port heads and valvetrain just want to know how this will preform on the street/track idle and rpm wise. Anyone with thoughts or knowledge on a cam with this specs please chime in!
XER lobes 1.8 ratio
int. lobe 3732 exh. lobe 3734
244 248 .648" .651" 115 +3
The build will be a large single or twins have not decided just yet but it will sport LS7 port heads and valvetrain just want to know how this will preform on the street/track idle and rpm wise. Anyone with thoughts or knowledge on a cam with this specs please chime in!
10-31-2012, 11:01 PM
#3
No.
Lobes wrong.... no way on gods green earth would i use an XER lobe. Too aggressive. It will not be stable.
Twins and singles cam completely different on the exhaust side. Make your mind up on that first.
Do you have aftermarket rockers??
Lobes wrong.... no way on gods green earth would i use an XER lobe. Too aggressive. It will not be stable.
Twins and singles cam completely different on the exhaust side. Make your mind up on that first.
Do you have aftermarket rockers??
10-31-2012, 11:11 PM
#4
why not just get a TU1 or TU2 from speed inc
theyve already done all the R and D on the cam
they say the TU1 good for 700-900 i believe and the TU2 is good for 900+ i believe
its all on their site,
hell the ls6 cam works great and there are even people making great power on the stock truck cams
theyve already done all the R and D on the cam
they say the TU1 good for 700-900 i believe and the TU2 is good for 900+ i believe
its all on their site,
hell the ls6 cam works great and there are even people making great power on the stock truck cams
10-31-2012, 11:15 PM
#5
TECH Resident
Thread Starter
iTrader: (13)
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Harford co. MD
Posts: 821
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No rockers yet but they will probably be Jesels and I had Pat G do a spec which used Huc lobes however the cam seemed small for the build. i had Futral specs some also they came up with these=
Single 91mm " 239 234 - .639" / .612" - 114 + 4 "
Twin 62-67mm " 239 / 241 - .639" / .629" - 115 + 5 "
No idea of the lobe type for these two!
Its real difficult finding the right cam i'm finding out that why i am hping someone with first hand exp. an help me out!
Single 91mm " 239 234 - .639" / .612" - 114 + 4 "
Twin 62-67mm " 239 / 241 - .639" / .629" - 115 + 5 "
No idea of the lobe type for these two!
Its real difficult finding the right cam i'm finding out that why i am hping someone with first hand exp. an help me out!
10-31-2012, 11:24 PM
#6
Denmah... this isnt a 5.3 or 4.8.
Did a cam for a tt427 for LS1Nova here. Made 860 with a 228/232 @ 21psi.
My cam made 997@21. It was 19 degrees bigger on the intake lobe.
You cant stick an LS6 cam in everything. It just wont work.
Did a cam for a tt427 for LS1Nova here. Made 860 with a 228/232 @ 21psi.
My cam made 997@21. It was 19 degrees bigger on the intake lobe.
You cant stick an LS6 cam in everything. It just wont work.
Trending Topics
10-31-2012, 11:52 PM
#8
No rockers yet but they will probably be Jesels and I had Pat G do a spec which used Huc lobes however the cam seemed small for the build. i had Futral specs some also they came up with these=
Single 91mm " 239 234 - .639" / .612" - 114 + 4 "
Twin 62-67mm " 239 / 241 - .639" / .629" - 115 + 5 "
No idea of the lobe type for these two!
Its real difficult finding the right cam i'm finding out that why i am hping someone with first hand exp. an help me out!
Single 91mm " 239 234 - .639" / .612" - 114 + 4 "
Twin 62-67mm " 239 / 241 - .639" / .629" - 115 + 5 "
No idea of the lobe type for these two!
Its real difficult finding the right cam i'm finding out that why i am hping someone with first hand exp. an help me out!
The "twin cam" is what i would think about doing for a big single. The exhaust port would have to be absolutely kick *** thou....
The 239 intake lobe would work well with that head..its a big port...and it flows well. No need to hang the valve open a ton.
239/244 .657/.630 114+4 would be my "big single" if we are talking about G trim turbine stuff.
239/250 .657/.648 115+3-5 would be what i would do for a pair of twins such as 7675's.
The exhaust lobes aggressiveness would vary some depending on the turbine size of the turbos selected.
11-01-2012, 07:09 AM
#9
TECH Resident
Thread Starter
iTrader: (13)
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Harford co. MD
Posts: 821
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My turbo choices would be twin BB 6767's .81 ar or 94MM T6 1.08 AR BB single if that helps. Heads will will be cnc'd aftermarket's so they should flow well just dont want a super agressive cam but one that will work well! Thanks LilJohn for the help i appreciate it!
Last edited by 6togo; 11-02-2012 at 06:57 AM.
11-04-2012, 01:31 AM
#12
No i dont believe it was.
I know theres no quantitave comparison that can be made... but even with a 25% fudge factor low to high its still approaching a triple digit gain.
It was all in the fact the first cam was sooooo freakin wrong. A 228 intake lobe in a 427 inch motor...whoever speced that at the speed shop in texas where it came from.... screwed the pooch bad. If it had been a 231-235 lobe to start with like it should have been....the gains wouldnt have been 50 if that..
247 is a HUGE intake lobe for it.... but the cam was an experiment on overlap placement in relation to TDC for aquiring a certain idle characteristic. By moving that around a bit i was able to provide a little more lope at idle than my cams normally make without putting excessive overlap in it.
All in all, even without definitive back to backing on the same dyno(which i wouldve loved to have had... hint hint Nathan) the guys happy with it and it makes his 2 ton GTO run like stink.
I know theres no quantitave comparison that can be made... but even with a 25% fudge factor low to high its still approaching a triple digit gain.
It was all in the fact the first cam was sooooo freakin wrong. A 228 intake lobe in a 427 inch motor...whoever speced that at the speed shop in texas where it came from.... screwed the pooch bad. If it had been a 231-235 lobe to start with like it should have been....the gains wouldnt have been 50 if that..
247 is a HUGE intake lobe for it.... but the cam was an experiment on overlap placement in relation to TDC for aquiring a certain idle characteristic. By moving that around a bit i was able to provide a little more lope at idle than my cams normally make without putting excessive overlap in it.
All in all, even without definitive back to backing on the same dyno(which i wouldve loved to have had... hint hint Nathan) the guys happy with it and it makes his 2 ton GTO run like stink.
11-04-2012, 12:27 PM
#14
FormerVendor
Personally I drive turbo cars because they can be built with stock type drivability and still make a ton of power.
My 427ci APS twin turbo 07 Z06 had a 226 intake lobe. Trapped 152.9mph at 16psi while driving as smooth as stock. Is that screwing the pooch as well?
When talking cam specs we need to start out by talking goals.
As for the OP, I agree, no way on the XER lobes
11-04-2012, 02:47 PM
#15
FormerVendor
http://www.ls1gto.com/forums/showpos...&postcount=145
The variables were the first cam was ran on a "stingy Mustang dyno" which "should equal 1000 plus on a Dynojet". A car that made 830rwhp on the same Mustang dyno "made 1050 on a inertia Dynojet 2 weeks later."
http://www.yellowbullet.com/forum/sh...90&postcount=5
http://www.yellowbullet.com/forum/sh...4&postcount=38
http://www.yellowbullet.com/forum/sh...6&postcount=39
Second cam ran on a Dynojet.
I'm all for before/after comparisons but this wasn't even back to backed on the same type of dyno.
I use a cam in many naturally aspirated 427's with a 227 intake lobe that makes 580+rwhp.
Obviously that isn't going to be a choke point at less than 1000rwhp with twin turbos.
Just keeping it real!
Last edited by qqwqeqwrqwqtq; 11-04-2012 at 03:38 PM.
11-04-2012, 08:11 PM
#16
First of all- I spec'ed the first cam. It was on xer
Lobes too. 228/232.
The Gto owner and I and Nathan jerked me around on the pushrods when they first bought the engine, so then, it turned a lifter, I felt no reason to help them above and beyond with the warranty with comp. it was old, we moved, GSS was no
Longer in business, it was really hard to get the paperwork they needed. After a lot of leg work and just asking comp for a favor, they warriented his lifters.
I'd be upset at me too, I guess. But it's life.
The original build called for 6262s, but IIRC, I recommended we bump up to 6765s because it was an auto car.
I don't know the way the owner drives, but I know that a guy who has never had a 1000 rwhp car before, isn't going to give two ***** about 850? Or 975?
When shipping and engine 1000 miles away, that I can't put my finger on the tune, the install, the trouble shooting. I'm going to spec what I KNOW works, and what I've personally made 1100ish in a similar platform. Why experiment?
So you can talk bad about the cam all you want, but if I came in behind some one else who had already had a baseline, a dyno, and a first revision, rev 2 will be a winner.
What if someone had a TR224 cam, and it
Made 450. Then joe blow gets a chance at a second shot, and goes with a TRex? Yes. It will make more power, at the expense of other areas. Duh. It's duration silly. There is a give and a take. It's compromise.
So call me a pooch screwer idiot all you want, but at the end of the day, I'm the one building these engines and doing the research and development, not taking Kurt urbans 6.83 motor and adding 10* of duration and patting myself on the back.
Lobes too. 228/232.
The Gto owner and I and Nathan jerked me around on the pushrods when they first bought the engine, so then, it turned a lifter, I felt no reason to help them above and beyond with the warranty with comp. it was old, we moved, GSS was no
Longer in business, it was really hard to get the paperwork they needed. After a lot of leg work and just asking comp for a favor, they warriented his lifters.
I'd be upset at me too, I guess. But it's life.
The original build called for 6262s, but IIRC, I recommended we bump up to 6765s because it was an auto car.
I don't know the way the owner drives, but I know that a guy who has never had a 1000 rwhp car before, isn't going to give two ***** about 850? Or 975?
When shipping and engine 1000 miles away, that I can't put my finger on the tune, the install, the trouble shooting. I'm going to spec what I KNOW works, and what I've personally made 1100ish in a similar platform. Why experiment?
So you can talk bad about the cam all you want, but if I came in behind some one else who had already had a baseline, a dyno, and a first revision, rev 2 will be a winner.
What if someone had a TR224 cam, and it
Made 450. Then joe blow gets a chance at a second shot, and goes with a TRex? Yes. It will make more power, at the expense of other areas. Duh. It's duration silly. There is a give and a take. It's compromise.
So call me a pooch screwer idiot all you want, but at the end of the day, I'm the one building these engines and doing the research and development, not taking Kurt urbans 6.83 motor and adding 10* of duration and patting myself on the back.
11-05-2012, 01:33 PM
#18
Did you know that XER lobes reset the Texas mile corvette record in 08 with a TT 427?
See, I actually put XER lobes in turbo cars, and they work with my combos
Compared to what I've been running lately? They are soft. But you would actually have to test that to know!
Go back to reading now, you're missing out on a lot of R&D over on the bullet!
See Martin, the problem is, I just play on the Dyno, and test, and try stuff, and throw some stuff out and use some stuff, and then I might post up an excerpt or two, maybe shed some insight here and there, but I don't toot my ******* horn. It's called being humble.
But when I smell bullshit? With little knowledge? I'll call it when I see it.
Science. Not the Internet, is what moves this industry forward.
Louis
See, I actually put XER lobes in turbo cars, and they work with my combos
Compared to what I've been running lately? They are soft. But you would actually have to test that to know!
Go back to reading now, you're missing out on a lot of R&D over on the bullet!
See Martin, the problem is, I just play on the Dyno, and test, and try stuff, and throw some stuff out and use some stuff, and then I might post up an excerpt or two, maybe shed some insight here and there, but I don't toot my ******* horn. It's called being humble.
But when I smell bullshit? With little knowledge? I'll call it when I see it.
Science. Not the Internet, is what moves this industry forward.
Louis
11-05-2012, 01:44 PM
#19
Test?
Is that what you called taking the specs off of Bills cam, grinding a copy and sticking it in that 427/F1x combo?
231/239 118+2 isnt exactly your run of the mill grind that everyone runs....
Should copy Martins cam for your Rev2. Bet that thing will make 1000+.
Or just Ask Tooley to do you a blower cam instead of copying a spec he did for a twin turbo car.
And by the way... you calling yourself humble.... best laugh Ive had all day.
Is that what you called taking the specs off of Bills cam, grinding a copy and sticking it in that 427/F1x combo?
231/239 118+2 isnt exactly your run of the mill grind that everyone runs....
Should copy Martins cam for your Rev2. Bet that thing will make 1000+.
Or just Ask Tooley to do you a blower cam instead of copying a spec he did for a twin turbo car.
And by the way... you calling yourself humble.... best laugh Ive had all day.
11-05-2012, 01:48 PM
#20
Louis, I could sit here all day and talk about your downfalls, the bridges you have burnt and all the screw ups you've had in this industry.
Believe me, I've learned a lot about you and your "humbleness" in the past week and a half.
You're some piece of work. When your style is to **** everyone off, tell them they don't know what they're doing, like you told Jonathan that time he didn't know how to measure for PTV and that you were going to cut us off, like we even order **** from you to begin with....yea....*******.
You keep you specing those cams that break the best springs people have in this industry, tell others that they don't know what they're doing like your **** doesn't stink, and you're going to find yourself very alone in this world.
Believe me, I've learned a lot about you and your "humbleness" in the past week and a half.
You're some piece of work. When your style is to **** everyone off, tell them they don't know what they're doing, like you told Jonathan that time he didn't know how to measure for PTV and that you were going to cut us off, like we even order **** from you to begin with....yea....*******.
You keep you specing those cams that break the best springs people have in this industry, tell others that they don't know what they're doing like your **** doesn't stink, and you're going to find yourself very alone in this world.