Camshaft Discussion part II
08-19-2004, 04:15 PM
#341
6600 rpm clutch dump of death Administrator
Thread Starter
Absolutely there can be cams that are designed and look good on paper and will not hit their intended goal. That is one of the reasons that an engine dyno is important when working on a package. Often times when trying out combos you may have to play with several cams to find the right one. There are guys out there who will buy all the mis-grinds you can make.
I never said that you hit the mark on the first try. But, in most cases even a cam that may not be perfect will be better than a box cam. The issue we run into is that in some fairly tight class racing close isn't good enough. You need that extra X hp, and to get there takes some R&D time.
I never said that you hit the mark on the first try. But, in most cases even a cam that may not be perfect will be better than a box cam. The issue we run into is that in some fairly tight class racing close isn't good enough. You need that extra X hp, and to get there takes some R&D time.
08-19-2004, 04:22 PM
#343
LS1Tech Co-Founder
iTrader: (34)
A few quick direct comments:
Stock GenIII cams were designed to
a) pass emissions
b) idle extremely well
c) have strong performance
Not withstanding the fact that you can to a point mix and match intake and exhaust lobes, I do know that our aftermarket ability to tune GenIII aftermarket cams has been only around for a few years but we are catching up fast. Remember when the only people who could tune a cam were Ed Wright and Steve Cole? I fondly recall having a cammin' LS1 in 1999 and lacking the ability to fine tune my Ed Wright tune.
Silversurfer, the one disadvantage, to the extent that it matters to you, is that the cam with less LSA, generally speaking, will out do the same cam with more LSA in the first 330 at the dragstrip. I'm just now seeing some data of some back to back testing of some big cams on a 112 vs 114 and the differences are 10rwhp at peak but the tighter LSA did better off the line. I wonder if the Z06's have the wider LSA's to keep from shocking the tires as much AND to keep the driveline alive.
Stock GenIII cams were designed to
a) pass emissions
b) idle extremely well
c) have strong performance
Not withstanding the fact that you can to a point mix and match intake and exhaust lobes, I do know that our aftermarket ability to tune GenIII aftermarket cams has been only around for a few years but we are catching up fast. Remember when the only people who could tune a cam were Ed Wright and Steve Cole? I fondly recall having a cammin' LS1 in 1999 and lacking the ability to fine tune my Ed Wright tune.
Silversurfer, the one disadvantage, to the extent that it matters to you, is that the cam with less LSA, generally speaking, will out do the same cam with more LSA in the first 330 at the dragstrip. I'm just now seeing some data of some back to back testing of some big cams on a 112 vs 114 and the differences are 10rwhp at peak but the tighter LSA did better off the line. I wonder if the Z06's have the wider LSA's to keep from shocking the tires as much AND to keep the driveline alive.
08-19-2004, 04:30 PM
#344
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: L.I. NY
Posts: 603
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
J-rod 
Ok, but you got guys in this and the last thread that were saying "send me this info and I'll design a cam for ya". Not that simple is it. The shelf cams we have available to us here in the states have had some good R&D put into them.
I believe some of the grinds might be a little dated by now, I know the TR 224's been around for a while, but they are proven performers. Not so much in my case (LOL) but it's not the cam's or head's fault. It's the "tuning" I got from a reputable Vette "Physician" here on LI. I've read the PCM when I got my HP Tuner and saw that the ONLY thing tuned was idle speed, +50 rpm, when compared to a stock PCM file.
Ok, but you got guys in this and the last thread that were saying "send me this info and I'll design a cam for ya". Not that simple is it. The shelf cams we have available to us here in the states have had some good R&D put into them.
I believe some of the grinds might be a little dated by now, I know the TR 224's been around for a while, but they are proven performers. Not so much in my case (LOL) but it's not the cam's or head's fault. It's the "tuning" I got from a reputable Vette "Physician" here on LI. I've read the PCM when I got my HP Tuner and saw that the ONLY thing tuned was idle speed, +50 rpm, when compared to a stock PCM file.
08-19-2004, 04:39 PM
#345
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: L.I. NY
Posts: 603
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PSJ, I think in regards to the Z06 cam, it's a combination of all the things you listed. But I do hope all, a through c, received equal consideration. I think the research GM is doing on the LS2 Z06 motor goes to prove that performance is very high on their list.
The Z06 driveline seems to have proven it's self pretty durable, but not owning one, damn it lol, I can't say that for sure. It's definately superior to the M6 Fbody driveline IMO, well at least in the rear end dept. lol
The Z06 driveline seems to have proven it's self pretty durable, but not owning one, damn it lol, I can't say that for sure. It's definately superior to the M6 Fbody driveline IMO, well at least in the rear end dept. lol
08-19-2004, 04:56 PM
#346
6600 rpm clutch dump of death Administrator
Thread Starter
Originally Posted by SilverSurfer
J-rod
Ok, but you got guys in this and the last thread that were saying "send me this info and I'll design a cam for ya". Not that simple is it. The shelf cams we have available to us here in the states have had some good R&D put into them.
Ok, but you got guys in this and the last thread that were saying "send me this info and I'll design a cam for ya". Not that simple is it. The shelf cams we have available to us here in the states have had some good R&D put into them.
What are shelf cams? Shelf cams are a stab at a combo. What are many of those cams especially from the big companies. They put a wide LSA and a bunch of advnace on a cam to protect you from overcamming your engine which is what 90% of the folks out there do.
I believe some of the grinds might be a little dated by now, I know the TR 224's been around for a while, but they are proven performers. Not so much in my case (LOL) but it's not the cam's or head's fault. It's the "tuning" I got from a reputable Vette "Physician" here on LI. I've read the PCM when I got my HP Tuner and saw that the ONLY thing tuned was idle speed, +50 rpm, when compared to a stock PCM file.
You can get what you want which is a smooth idle while still maintaining correct valve events. The only issue is that you are cutting down the ammount of time the valve is open so you have to get air moving. There are a couple of ways to do this. In fact often small lobes are used to crutch overported heads since the short duration gets velocity up.
This is why LPE heads work with their small cams. Big volume port and small cams.
Also, passing emissions is more than just LSA.
You have a TR224. What LSA is it? Does it have some lope to it? Do you find that offensive? Would a cam that idles the same way be accpetable or un-acceptable? Do you want something that has no lope at all?
I have some dyno graphs from a small custom ground cam with less lobe duration and under .570 lift on both lobes which outpowered a big (low 230/high 230) "box" cam with way more duration and a wider LSA. Power was up all the way across from start to finish. The cam had some lope to it, but it idled, and it had good drivability.
08-19-2004, 05:13 PM
#347
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: L.I. NY
Posts: 603
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
See here's my point, I'm not interested in record setting cams or the design behind them. My car's a daily driver as are alot of the cars on this board. I'm interested in a smoooooooth idling cam that will give me a decent power increase. Maybe I want it all, but I've yet to see much R&D on such a cam. I'm sure I wouldn't be the only one standing in line for such a cam.
My TR224 is on a 114 lsa and I'm not too fond of it's idling characteristics. But I'm not knocking the cam because I got a shitty tune, errr...make that no tune. So I know there's room for improvement there. Honestly I would not want a bigger cam than that but listening to Offaxis' MTI R1 and having been in that car (which was properly tuned) I can say I might put a cam like that in my car. Seeing as I have one laying around and all. lol BUT, the one thing that I have learned from Offaxis is that the car won't hold an idle too well in closed loop, so his car was tuned in open loop. Making 20 extra HP with that cam at the expense of getting 12 MPG is not my cup of tea. At least not for my daily driver.
My TR224 is on a 114 lsa and I'm not too fond of it's idling characteristics. But I'm not knocking the cam because I got a shitty tune, errr...make that no tune. So I know there's room for improvement there. Honestly I would not want a bigger cam than that but listening to Offaxis' MTI R1 and having been in that car (which was properly tuned) I can say I might put a cam like that in my car. Seeing as I have one laying around and all. lol BUT, the one thing that I have learned from Offaxis is that the car won't hold an idle too well in closed loop, so his car was tuned in open loop. Making 20 extra HP with that cam at the expense of getting 12 MPG is not my cup of tea. At least not for my daily driver.
08-19-2004, 05:50 PM
#348
TECH Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 10,341
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by SilverSurfer
See here's my point, I'm not interested in record setting cams or the design behind them. My car's a daily driver as are alot of the cars on this board. I'm interested in a smoooooooth idling cam that will give me a decent power increase. Maybe I want it all, but I've yet to see much R&D on such a cam. I'm sure I wouldn't be the only one standing in line for such a cam.
My TR224 is on a 114 lsa and I'm not too fond of it's idling characteristics. But I'm not knocking the cam because I got a shitty tune, errr...make that no tune. So I know there's room for improvement there. Honestly I would not want a bigger cam than that but listening to Offaxis' MTI R1 and having been in that car (which was properly tuned) I can say I might put a cam like that in my car. Seeing as I have one laying around and all. lol BUT, the one thing that I have learned from Offaxis is that the car won't hold an idle too well in closed loop, so his car was tuned in open loop. Making 20 extra HP with that cam at the expense of getting 12 MPG is not my cup of tea. At least not for my daily driver.
My TR224 is on a 114 lsa and I'm not too fond of it's idling characteristics. But I'm not knocking the cam because I got a shitty tune, errr...make that no tune. So I know there's room for improvement there. Honestly I would not want a bigger cam than that but listening to Offaxis' MTI R1 and having been in that car (which was properly tuned) I can say I might put a cam like that in my car. Seeing as I have one laying around and all. lol BUT, the one thing that I have learned from Offaxis is that the car won't hold an idle too well in closed loop, so his car was tuned in open loop. Making 20 extra HP with that cam at the expense of getting 12 MPG is not my cup of tea. At least not for my daily driver.
I have seen 224/224 114LSA cams with a mild exhaust and you literally can't tell the car has a cam in it at all. The difference before tuning versus after tuning is really quite large.
Also you do NOT need open loop tuning to get a great idle and good low speed characteristics from a ~230 duration cam. If the cam is ground and tuned correctly it'll work very well.
Read some of the tuning posts in the PCM section and look at the VE changes, throttle screw and TPS posts.
Chris
08-19-2004, 06:09 PM
#349
6600 rpm clutch dump of death Administrator
Thread Starter
Agreed, a untuned 224 could be a beast. Look at how "radical" a 221/221 was back in the day when no one could tune...
BTW, here is something light to read on its by David Vizard, and it sums some points up pretty well.
http://www.hotrod.com/techarticles/18218/
Deciding LCAs for a popular line of street cams is, apart from engineering requirements, a question of market perception. Corporate marketing policies dictate as much as anything what will be used. For instance, some companies tend to grind their performance street profiles on wide LCAs typically ranging from 110 to 116 degrees. This produces what these companies feel to be the most marketable balance between idle quality, vacuum, economy and horsepower. Very often the choice of wide LCAs is made knowing that some of the potential power increase will be sacrificed for idle quality and high vacuum for any accessories requiring it.
Wide LCAs are not the only way to go. Not everyone wants the smoothest idle and the highest intake manifold vacuum possible. Many, building even the mildest tow vehicle engine, are more interested in maximizing torque. To satisfy this market, some companies will grind their popular short duration profiles on a tighter LCA. Such cams, though less civilized when longer street duration is used, tend to produce more torque. However, it is important to realize that a tighter LCA is totally acceptable if the overlap developed by the LCA and duration combination isn’t excessive. Also, remember that good vacuum is an important factor for a vehicle that has vacuum accessories such as power brakes, vacuum operated air conditioning controls, etc. The tighter the LCA you choose, the shorter the cam must be to preserve vacuum and idle. This is so because the overlap comes back to roughly the same as that given by a longer duration, wider LCA cam. Obviously a shorter cam on a tighter LCA won’t make as much top end horsepower, so again there is a balance of tradeoffs to consider.
BTW, here is something light to read on its by David Vizard, and it sums some points up pretty well.
http://www.hotrod.com/techarticles/18218/
Deciding LCAs for a popular line of street cams is, apart from engineering requirements, a question of market perception. Corporate marketing policies dictate as much as anything what will be used. For instance, some companies tend to grind their performance street profiles on wide LCAs typically ranging from 110 to 116 degrees. This produces what these companies feel to be the most marketable balance between idle quality, vacuum, economy and horsepower. Very often the choice of wide LCAs is made knowing that some of the potential power increase will be sacrificed for idle quality and high vacuum for any accessories requiring it.
Wide LCAs are not the only way to go. Not everyone wants the smoothest idle and the highest intake manifold vacuum possible. Many, building even the mildest tow vehicle engine, are more interested in maximizing torque. To satisfy this market, some companies will grind their popular short duration profiles on a tighter LCA. Such cams, though less civilized when longer street duration is used, tend to produce more torque. However, it is important to realize that a tighter LCA is totally acceptable if the overlap developed by the LCA and duration combination isn’t excessive. Also, remember that good vacuum is an important factor for a vehicle that has vacuum accessories such as power brakes, vacuum operated air conditioning controls, etc. The tighter the LCA you choose, the shorter the cam must be to preserve vacuum and idle. This is so because the overlap comes back to roughly the same as that given by a longer duration, wider LCA cam. Obviously a shorter cam on a tighter LCA won’t make as much top end horsepower, so again there is a balance of tradeoffs to consider.
08-19-2004, 06:15 PM
#350
LS1Tech Co-Founder
iTrader: (34)
Do you want to go faster than 11.84 or do you want more driveability at the expense of ET? Remember, you can't just say "I want a smooth cam with big legs so I will custom design... hmmmm... a 220/220//118 +4."
Maybe you could get a cam like that, maybe you can't. Maybe a cam like that would peak at 6600. Maybe not. Maybe it would run 12.2@120mph.
I ran a 222/224//113 cam back in 2000 and went 11.75 with a LS1 intake. Car was a daily driver of sorts.
I'm not a custom cam hater, not at all. We need innovation. But some of the negative comments in this longass thread towards box cams are frankly unsupported. I see some folks dogg box cams, when they themselves have not run a genIII combo at the track of their own. Remember, at the end of the day, a 224/112 with XE-R lobes is a great cam. And it's the one to beat.
Maybe you could get a cam like that, maybe you can't. Maybe a cam like that would peak at 6600. Maybe not. Maybe it would run 12.2@120mph.
I ran a 222/224//113 cam back in 2000 and went 11.75 with a LS1 intake. Car was a daily driver of sorts.
I'm not a custom cam hater, not at all. We need innovation. But some of the negative comments in this longass thread towards box cams are frankly unsupported. I see some folks dogg box cams, when they themselves have not run a genIII combo at the track of their own. Remember, at the end of the day, a 224/112 with XE-R lobes is a great cam. And it's the one to beat.
08-19-2004, 08:07 PM
#351
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: L.I. NY
Posts: 603
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For once Chris and I agree. LOL I need to get a good tune that's for sure. Damn car popped a head gasket with the wonderful tune I had in there. But only after I try fiddling with it myself some. Guess I better get 2 sets of head gaskets. lol
I had no part in tuning Offaxis' car but it's done by a very reputable guy who sure as hell knows alot more about this than I. But like I said, it's not my bag baby. lol
J-Rod, I agree not everyone wants what I do, otherwise all women would need DDD bras and size 5 shoes. lol But seriously, this being a cam discussion I figured I'd throw my 2 cents in and guys started giving me change. lol
I agree with you on what some cam manufacturers take into account in their popular cam grinds. That's fine because alot of us want exactlly what they're offering, a good balance. It's not tops at any particular thing, but it does the job it's supposed to, make more power. I know that a cam designed specifically for a combination will make the most power, but some of us don't want the trade-offs associated with a cam like that in a daily driver. Some don't care and are sticking T-rexs/G5X3s/Magic Sticks or other large cams in bolt-on cars. More power to them, if that's they're bag baby. lol
PSJ, I do want to go faster and the car as is (minus the tune lol) is capable of more. I could have ran what I'm running now with an LS6 cam, don't think I'm not kicking myself cause that was my original plan. TEA heads/LS6 cam and intake/extrude honed 2000+ exhaust manifolds/mild converter/3.42 gears/a real tune. Except for the cam, headers and tune, I got real close. I would be running the same times I'm running now, but the car would be so nice and QUIET. lol I surely can't be the only one who's thought about going back to "stock" after they modded their car. They're such nice cars when they're stock.
I had no part in tuning Offaxis' car but it's done by a very reputable guy who sure as hell knows alot more about this than I. But like I said, it's not my bag baby. lol
J-Rod, I agree not everyone wants what I do, otherwise all women would need DDD bras and size 5 shoes. lol But seriously, this being a cam discussion I figured I'd throw my 2 cents in and guys started giving me change. lol
I agree with you on what some cam manufacturers take into account in their popular cam grinds. That's fine because alot of us want exactlly what they're offering, a good balance. It's not tops at any particular thing, but it does the job it's supposed to, make more power. I know that a cam designed specifically for a combination will make the most power, but some of us don't want the trade-offs associated with a cam like that in a daily driver. Some don't care and are sticking T-rexs/G5X3s/Magic Sticks or other large cams in bolt-on cars. More power to them, if that's they're bag baby. lol
PSJ, I do want to go faster and the car as is (minus the tune lol) is capable of more. I could have ran what I'm running now with an LS6 cam, don't think I'm not kicking myself cause that was my original plan. TEA heads/LS6 cam and intake/extrude honed 2000+ exhaust manifolds/mild converter/3.42 gears/a real tune. Except for the cam, headers and tune, I got real close. I would be running the same times I'm running now, but the car would be so nice and QUIET. lol I surely can't be the only one who's thought about going back to "stock"
after they modded their car. They're such nice cars when they're stock.
08-19-2004, 09:16 PM
#352
TECH Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 10,341
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by SilverSurfer
For once Chris and I agree. LOL
Doing an open loop tune is not a bad thing at all except for mileage.
It just takes more work to get the closed loop tune perfect. (ie: tuning on the dyno, driving around, making changes, hitting the dyno again)
Are you near Kevin? (NOGO)
It is worth driving 6-8 hours and paying for 8 hours worth of solid tuning. Doing a tune in an hour or two wont cut it imo.
There are other competent tuners as well but I have been really impressed with Kevin. Mikey does good work too as well as a bunch of other sponsors.
08-19-2004, 11:16 PM
#354
Chris, actually the LS1 shares some of the technology of the 3.8, such as the intake manifold design. lol
Silver, actually not. The intake comes from Mercedes as explained to me. It so happens the company that manufactures the manifolds for several OEM's is in Frankfort, KY. A good friend of mine is head of QC. Ford and Chevy both based the new modular engines off of it.
I think that generalizations like many in this thread comparing genIII stuff to SBC's and 5.0's are interesting but fall short. Cylinder heads are a major key and they are being glossed over.
PSJ, by far the Ls1's have good heads, but after modifications they all are quite close. Now give me a set of SB2.2's or a set of Yates and yeah you are right, everything else is just generic. But I will say this, with my generalization I can design and correctly cam all 3 engines, 5.0/LS1/SBC, without a doubt. So if being Generic is what it takes. . .so be it.
Anywho.....A point that none of the cam experts have touched upon is this. Have you ever designed a "custom" cam and it didn't perform as expected? Maybe fell short of even what a "shelf" cam could do? Hmmmm......? Like the song goes "It happens all the time......". Go on, say it isn't so. Hey, I can admit my car's not all that fast for what's done to it, why can't you guys admit it's not all cut and dry?
Yeah 2 to date. Thats why I don't guess on flow figures anymore and when you tell me the engine is 14 to1 then don't come crying to me after a dyno session and tell me well, its really is only 11 to 1. But on the on the flip side when Al Parker ask your customer where the F#@& did you get this camshaft. . .that makes the day worth it. If you have to ask who Al is, then you don't know who really builds PS engines.
Thoughts on Mr. Rawls response?
I agree. 5 years ago when Buddy called, he did not have the test bed that I had behind me in dyno sheets/flow sheets/ and designed cams. Today Buddy is very respected by many and I will speak for Ed. . .both of us also. He has learned to tweak his sticks to the customers goals and has become quite good.
I have no idea why you guys are singing the praises of the LC2 (GN engine). It was a decent V6. Current V6 engines make more power
I don't understand either. Its a Y block just like the FE Ford and oooppss.. . the LS1 block is too. I guess some "old school" guy must have revised and signed the final prints on the LS1. Bottom line, the future is nothing more then the past revisited.
Bottom line, J-rod and Denzss have posted some of the best threads on this board to get the public to think out of the box and get that tissue mass between the shoulders thinking. That's the reason these post are here.
Off the soap box, I have an outdrive to pull tommorrow afternoon so I can go boating this weekend.
Chris
Silver, actually not. The intake comes from Mercedes as explained to me. It so happens the company that manufactures the manifolds for several OEM's is in Frankfort, KY. A good friend of mine is head of QC. Ford and Chevy both based the new modular engines off of it.
I think that generalizations like many in this thread comparing genIII stuff to SBC's and 5.0's are interesting but fall short. Cylinder heads are a major key and they are being glossed over.
PSJ, by far the Ls1's have good heads, but after modifications they all are quite close. Now give me a set of SB2.2's or a set of Yates and yeah you are right, everything else is just generic. But I will say this, with my generalization I can design and correctly cam all 3 engines, 5.0/LS1/SBC, without a doubt. So if being Generic is what it takes. . .so be it.
Anywho.....A point that none of the cam experts have touched upon is this. Have you ever designed a "custom" cam and it didn't perform as expected? Maybe fell short of even what a "shelf" cam could do? Hmmmm......? Like the song goes "It happens all the time......". Go on, say it isn't so. Hey, I can admit my car's not all that fast for what's done to it, why can't you guys admit it's not all cut and dry?
Yeah 2 to date. Thats why I don't guess on flow figures anymore and when you tell me the engine is 14 to1 then don't come crying to me after a dyno session and tell me well, its really is only 11 to 1. But on the on the flip side when Al Parker ask your customer where the F#@& did you get this camshaft. . .that makes the day worth it. If you have to ask who Al is, then you don't know who really builds PS engines.
Thoughts on Mr. Rawls response?
I agree. 5 years ago when Buddy called, he did not have the test bed that I had behind me in dyno sheets/flow sheets/ and designed cams. Today Buddy is very respected by many and I will speak for Ed. . .both of us also. He has learned to tweak his sticks to the customers goals and has become quite good.
I have no idea why you guys are singing the praises of the LC2 (GN engine). It was a decent V6. Current V6 engines make more power
I don't understand either. Its a Y block just like the FE Ford and oooppss.. . the LS1 block is too. I guess some "old school" guy must have revised and signed the final prints on the LS1. Bottom line, the future is nothing more then the past revisited.
Bottom line, J-rod and Denzss have posted some of the best threads on this board to get the public to think out of the box and get that tissue mass between the shoulders thinking. That's the reason these post are here.
Off the soap box, I have an outdrive to pull tommorrow afternoon so I can go boating this weekend.
Chris
08-19-2004, 11:23 PM
#355
LS1Tech Co-Founder
iTrader: (34)
I still detect something from you Chris... it's like you can't give a simple single pattern 224 cam some props... Back in 1999 we considered a 224 cam big. We're still evolving.
And I don't think you can generalize with 5.0's and LS1's personally.
And I don't think you can generalize with 5.0's and LS1's personally.
08-19-2004, 11:41 PM
#357
John,
Actually that 224 is not bad for the guy with stock heads, stock CID, and a target rpm of 6500. Now since I gave it credit, give some of the non sponsors like Ed, Denszz and J-rod credit for "alternative thoughts on making power".
5.0 and LS1
Call BHJ and get a cylinder hone plate for a SBF. Bolt it on your LS1. . .it fits. Most of you who have had bore and hone jobs I will bet the shop used a Ford Hone plate. Actually we can generalize most production engines today. . .its all been done and re done. Now if you want NEW, go to www.coatesengine.com thats new.
John, I do thank you for this site. It is something you should be proud of. I mean that.
Chris
Actually that 224 is not bad for the guy with stock heads, stock CID, and a target rpm of 6500. Now since I gave it credit, give some of the non sponsors like Ed, Denszz and J-rod credit for "alternative thoughts on making power".
5.0 and LS1
Call BHJ and get a cylinder hone plate for a SBF. Bolt it on your LS1. . .it fits. Most of you who have had bore and hone jobs I will bet the shop used a Ford Hone plate. Actually we can generalize most production engines today. . .its all been done and re done. Now if you want NEW, go to www.coatesengine.com thats new.
John, I do thank you for this site. It is something you should be proud of. I mean that.
Chris
08-19-2004, 11:46 PM
#358
Merlin,
Tuning runners and headers for pulses is critical. Upon design of the combo, desired rpm range, and camshaft, header lengths and intake lengths for tuning either torque or HP can calculated...note they are different. I have found for max effort drag to tune both for HP. For street tune for torque. I was 17 at the time when I learned a hack saw was an important tuning tool in a dyno room.
Chris
Tuning runners and headers for pulses is critical. Upon design of the combo, desired rpm range, and camshaft, header lengths and intake lengths for tuning either torque or HP can calculated...note they are different. I have found for max effort drag to tune both for HP. For street tune for torque. I was 17 at the time when I learned a hack saw was an important tuning tool in a dyno room.
Chris
08-19-2004, 11:59 PM
#360
TECH Enthusiast
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Foley, Alabama-southern Alabama
Posts: 743
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The ls1 has a lot of advantages over the sb Chevys and Fords,lets see great heads even stock,better valvetrain such as beehive springs and a large cam base circle,longer connecting rods,better oilpump and route design.much better individual coil per cylinder,better block and maincaps(6bolts)better cooling system(no water thru the intake) and great reusable o-ring gaskets, better firing order( 4-7 switch,)better front cover(don"t have to drop the oilpan to change cam),what about those lifter trays to make cam swapping easy.Not to mention lightweight and compact design.
The ls1 responds well to most all cam changes compared to other motors,it depends on what you want.I believe that J-rod and Denzss(what happened to him?)got us all thinking more about cam choices and the design of such,J-rod has got me curious about LDA and how each would accelarate with a given load say a drag car that turns 4500 t0 7500 in a 5 second 1\8 strip.Hp is not just hp, some cars run quicker with less then others with more hp(explain that).Thats the fun of this stuff it keeps you thinking of new ways to do something.
Hey Chris, would explain how a motor can be 103%ve without a blower or turbo? You mentioned this 2 days ago about the 500 ci (600hp)marine motor you are building.
The ls1 responds well to most all cam changes compared to other motors,it depends on what you want.I believe that J-rod and Denzss(what happened to him?)got us all thinking more about cam choices and the design of such,J-rod has got me curious about LDA and how each would accelarate with a given load say a drag car that turns 4500 t0 7500 in a 5 second 1\8 strip.Hp is not just hp, some cars run quicker with less then others with more hp(explain that).Thats the fun of this stuff it keeps you thinking of new ways to do something.
Hey Chris, would explain how a motor can be 103%ve without a blower or turbo? You mentioned this 2 days ago about the 500 ci (600hp)marine motor you are building.