J-Rod

Sean, I can understand and respect if the theories you are using are the ones that Brian Ebert at www.hitechmotorsport.com and Ed Curtis (www.flowtechinduction.com) use, then I understand. If those are in use by folks as part of a their companies "trade secrets" I can, as a I said understand and respect that. This discussion has up until this point simply been a few enthusiasts sharing some information. Again, I won't aks you to ruin your ties with folks over this. I would only ask that if you have information that you can share with the public @ large that can be discussed, I would invite you to do so. I think it would be to everyones mutual benefit.

Thanks for taking part in this discussion.

J-Rod

One question I do have. I have the Comp Cam master lobe catalog. You mentioned before copying a Ford Lobe onto an LS1 core. How did you go about determining how the lobe would look, once mapped onto a bigger core?

SSEUL8R

I know a little bit about LSA, like the wider the LSA the higher you have to rev a motor up to achieve max HP, but say i order a custom cam from Comp which would be something like a 232/228 .575/.571 on Comp High lift lobes. What would be the difference in getting this ground on a 112 LSA as opposed to like a 111 or 110? I basically just want a cam that i can shift at no higher than 6500 and make max power under 6500 and have a nice flat torque curve. Also, since these engines are a little more intake restricted would it be good to retard it any? Advance it?

93PONY

J-Rod,
The conversions for different lobes on different cores is not real difficult. I got this info from Comp & made a chart. I've yet been unable to make an actual formula for figuring out the actual growth. I was also working on a formula for finding ramprate given .006, .050 duration, and peak lift. A formula like this would allow me to find duration at any given lift point...which is VERY valuable...but a simple formula like this would assume symetrical lobes.

I'll give you the growth of a given lobe when placed on an LS1 core....so as not to confuse anybody with Ford, SBC, & BBC cores.

SBC lobe to LS1 core will grow ~6 degrees at .006 & .050, 3-4 degrees at .200
BBC lobe to LS1 core will grow ~4 degrees at .006 & .050, 2-3 degrees at .200
Ford lobe to LS1 core will grow ~2 degrees at .006 & .050, 1-2 degrees at .200

Once converted peak lift may change slightly, but generally no more then .010.

Ed Curtis

<font color="blue">
Be very careful Shaun....

The delta is not consistant and then there's always those "special" cases where you can get EXACTLY what you want. That's why I only give you verification on certain lobes and the rest remain under wraps.

As for those who doubt what is going on in Shaun's mind, well, I've yet to figure it out but he makes one hell of a student...

Shaun:
Didn't I warn you about those people who would slam your ideas because you don't advertize and hype it all up? Remember the Corral discussions and what I went through with all those Internet experts? Let the marketing people sell OTS cams as customs and let the 2% who know better, buy from the right sources. Works well for me.

Ask any of these "experts" how many records they set with their combos or how many Championships they've won lately. It usually quiets them down!

J-Rod:
Still awaiting the Patriot "welded" head thread to be reopened on Corvetteforum.com. I have a bunch of Tech questions on heat treat and head twist that need to be asked...

Ed<!--color--></font>

FTI

93PONY

&amp; the Master has arrived...
There goes the neighborhood.

ChrisB

Mr. Curtis - I am glad to see you post here - I do have great respect for what you have done in the Mustang circles - a friend in Waco has one of your packages in a 93 Cobra (Kyle McKenzie) and it is a good all around setup.

That said, I would like to comment on your comment, as I don't think it accurately frames what is going on here -
93Pony was not "slammed" - we simply questioned his theories. Would you expect for people to buy products from you if there were no results to back them up nor were you willing to share the theory behind the products? I would submit that in that case it is reasonable to expect some skepticism.



And my first question would be, in the LS1 arena, what are 93Pony's results? If there were records and championships I don't think we would be having this issue in the first place.

That said I still would submit that valid questions *were* asked. For instance the reason behind 93Pony's "theory" that ICL and LSA should always be equal. I think there were quite a few other large over-generalizations made, and was just asking for specifics.

If you make a statement/claim you are going to be expected to back it up - is that not reasonable? Since he doesn't have any results to back it up with I was curious as to the theory behind it.

I definitely have great respect for the packages I have seen from you in the mustang world, but that still doesn't mean I wouldn't ask to see some sort of backup in a LS1 context - and I don't doubt you would (as you have done in that arena).

93PONY

I never made that statement...nor would I ever.

Bowtieman4life

iTrader: (1)

His is by far one of the most informative post I have ever read. I don't know it this will help but here goes. I have a small smog cam that 93Pony spec'ed and installed. It's a 220/220 with a twist. My cars idles smooth at 750 rpms. It pulls hard and sounds almost stock. My car dynoed 395 RWHP and 378 RWTQ with no tuning and no dyno tricks. I have an M6 w/ 17" SS wheels. Here is the kicker. I ran it with the A/C on. I know, I know major brain fart but I hear it shuts off at 4,000 RPMS. You can see it on my dyno graph. Anyways, my A/F was 13.8 and dropped to 13.4 near the top. I think my car is pretty fast for a cam only car and a smog cam as that. Pony knows his stuff.

ChrisB

J-Rod posted that that seemed to be your "technique" in response to a question, and your next reply was



Or when you said, later, in response:


I believe the assumption was quite reasonable in that context.

But if that is not one of your theories, than excellent - I am not in as much disagreement with you as I was previously. If you see why that statement is absurd you can understand why I was quite incredulous when it seemed that was one of your theories.

I definitely have nothing personal against you, and apologize if it came out that way. I tried to keep my posts as "professional" as possible.

Anyway, best of luck and look forward to seeing results!

SilverSurfer

I've been reading this thread with great interest. I'm not as knowledgeable on this topic as some who have posted, but I do know a little about drag racing and engines.

93PONY, you mentioned the great E/I ratio exhibited by the Ford AFR heads. So then why does Ed Curtis recommend that these heads have the exhaust port cleaned up? They already flow very well out of the box. If the cams that you/he use with these heads alreay have a reverse split, what's the point of further porting the exhaust side of the head?

You also mentioned something about full weight Mustangs running 10.5s at 129 w/302-308 cid, and 5.0s w/your cam and stock shortblocks outrunning H/C LS1s, blown/sprayed Mustangs. I'm not doubting your knowledge or that your cams make good power, but these are very biased statements. Kinda like if I said, hey I just stop light raced this Mustang with a blower that ran 11.5s at the track and I beat him with my mid 12 second LS1. You kinda have to take my word for it.

A "full weight" Mustang is in the 3400 lb range and for it to run 10.5 at 129 with a N/A 302-308 would require in the neighborhood of 550 HP (going by the mph and weight) with a good working chassis. That HP would have to peak in the 7000 (probably higher) range. Not streetable, not pump gas and not a valid example in this discussion, where streetability is a great concern for most of us.

This is what I want:

A cam that idles like stock (I mean exactly)
does not set off any misfires
peaks at 6000
makes 400 RWHP (A4 with H/C/I/LTs/Borla)
requires no tuning

If anyone can do that, I don't care how they do it, I'll buy it. (As long as it cost no more than $500.00)

soundengineer

iTrader: (16)

arent you asking for an MTI STEALTH CAM???
sounds stock...doesnt need tuning....makes 400 with heads and exhaust and ls6 intake....
add an underdrive pulley and an electric water pump...


hell...with a GREAT set of heads almost any cam gets you up to that 400 point...
I dont claim to know much at all when it comes to cams...but even I have done my homework(to some extent)

SilverSurfer

Maybe, but I bet it doesn't sound "exactly" stock, and "never" causes any misfires at idle.

Bowtieman4life, I'm venturing that the twist you refer to with your 220/220 cam is that the LSA is tighter than what's available with the over the counter cams. Probably in the 108* to 110* range with no advance.

J-Rod

Ed, welcome to the board and the discussion! As for Patriot, they are a sponsor here, so you can post in any number of threads on the Patriot heads here, and I am sure that Terry will chime in with all the answers you could possibly want.

As for 93Pony. I don't think it has been our intention (at least not mine), to knock him or criticize him. But, I do think that any topic of this nature probably deserves some critical review, and perhaps a bit of healthy scepticism.

Along the same lines, the camshaft theories you and Sean are using, are new (relatively speaking) and unproven (in the LS series market for the most part). That is not meant as a slam against you or your product, nor your ideas. You may actually have the best ideas on some of the late model EFI cams in a long time. The only problem is, in this market, they aren't known, nor are any results. Hence a bit of healthy scepticism.

Right now in "street cars" the two most powerful "packages" are running conventional splits (Cartek and LGM). Am I saying that you can't design a better cam, nope.

I was part of a discussion about a year ago on conventional splits vs reverse splits with Paul @ Thunder. Thunder is also heavily behind the reverse split idea. Each side has their own ideas on why one is better than the other.

But, 93Pony is the first one to come on here and give me something factual that would help me challenge my own views about camshaft slection in the LS series. He provided some good information about the intake etc... that at least made me consider the possibilities of reverse splits, hence the reason for this second thread.

I think too often when folks call a cam company they get a guy who looks in the book and just pulls some general grind out and sends it to them. Sure it makes ok power, but what about if there is power still left on the table? I think everyone would like to make as much power as is reasonably possible. I also think that an educated consumer is a better consumer.

I welcome these type of discussions, an look forward to any input you may have in terms of educating those of us out here who are interested in learning the "hows" and "whys" of some of your camshaft theories. To be quite honest, I already know that I don't know everything, and I welcome the opportunity to learn more. Thats one of the reasons I enjoy my job is I literally have to learn new things and new technologies on a daily basis. The same goes with racing. I learn new stuff all the time. Sure, I have preconceived notions about what works, just like lots of other folks. But, I am also willing to listen, and give any well presented topic more than a passing look.

Again, I welcome you and anyone else to this discussion who can bring additonal insight into better camshaft selection/design.

Again, welcome...

J-Rod

Just another one to throw out there for discussion. This is a TR OMC2 "Old Man Cam 2" versus a 2002 Z06 Cam...

Quick and Dirty Cam Calculator Spreadsheet
0.050
Intake Duration - ID 215
Exhaust Duration - ED 220
Lobe Center Angle - LCA (also known as LSA) 115
Intake Centerline - ICL 117


Intake Valve opens - IVO -9.5
Intake Valve closes - IVC 44.5
Exhaust Valve Opens - EVO 43
Exhaust Valve Closes - EVC -3
Exhaust Centerline - ECL 113
Overlap -12.5


2002 Z06 Cam

LS6 Camshaft: Intake Comparison
(All lift figures are tappet lift)

year int. int. dur int. dur. int. open in. close in. open in. close int. int. int. area

PN lift at .004 at .050 at .004 at .004 at .050 at .050 CL area increase

MY01 13.34 m 270° 204° 9° 81° 18 42 118° 1862.9

12560950 .525 in BTDC ABDC ATDC ABDC ATDC mm/deg.

MY02 14.01 m 267° 204° 7° 80° 19° 43 120° 1936.9 4%

12565308 .551 in BTDC ABDC ATDC ABDC ATDC mm/deg.

LS6 Camshaft: Exhaust Comparison
(All lift figures are tappet lift)

year exh. exh. dur. exh. dur. ex. open ex. close ex. open ex. close exh. exh. ex. area

PN lift at. .004 at 0.050 0.004 0.004 0.05 0.05 CL area increase

MY01 13.33 m 275° 211° 65° 30° 37 6 114° 1914.6

12560950 .525 in BBDC ATDC BBDC BTDC BTDC mm/deg.


MY02 13.91 m

12565308 .547 in .547 in 282° 218° 69° 33° 42 4 115° 2046.6

BBDC ATDC BBDC BTDC BTDC mm/deg.
8%

93PONY

SilverSurfer,
Your expectations from a custom cam are too high...at least with stock heads. 400RW is no problem with 241 casting heads, LS6 intake, longtubes, off-road pipe, &amp; a smogable grind. But loping is a missfire. Bowtiemans little 220/220 cam even lopes slightly. (no, it is not on a 108 or 110, it's on a 112LSA....it's been posted somewhere on this board before, so I don't think he'll mind sharing what LSA it's on) IMO tuning is the last mod done &amp; is never skipped.

Ed has his reasons for porting the AFRs. I'm not about to dive into that one. 10.5 at 129mph is from a race car. Again, Ed knows WAY more about these combos as he builds them.

Our cars are giving the local LS1's a surprise. Typically an LS1 needs 40-50RWHP more then a Foxbody mustang to run the same ET/MPH. These 2 stock shortblock 5.0s we have will be going on the dyno for tuning at the end of the month. We're expecting 320RW minimum from one combo &amp; 360RW from the other. There aren't many 400RWHP stock headed LS1's in the area. The only LS1 to beat that 360RW Mustang has had ported 6.0 heads &amp; a healthy cam (10 degrees of overlap) There are other LS1's around that would kill these stangs at the track, but they're not M6's. I can't recall seeing an N/A M6 at the local track running better then 12.2. This is obviously due to driver &amp; gearing, but even from a roll there's only been that 1 LS1 that the 360RW 160K mile stock shortblock Convertable Mustang hasn't walked. My point is that this isn't even cube for cube. There's a local 347 mustang that I'm considering some projects on. Already no local N/A LS1's can keep up with it. &amp; it's only running in the mid 120's at the track.

I realize a major drawback of these cars is the 1st gear ratio. 2.66!?! Even with 4.10's out back a mustang with 3.27's &amp; stock 3.35 1st gear has a slight gearing advantage. This is most likely the reason why M6's trap high but don't ET for ****. Makes me wonder why more don't swap over to Z06 gears.

Pro Stock John

iTrader: (34)

Interesting thread for sure.

But let's avoid the Mustang comparo's because they don't really make sense, and they sound a little too "I know this guy and he goes fast" for me. Sure I know some 5.7+ ci Mustangs that go low 10's and high 9's but at 2900 lb raceweights and they run carb intake etc. and spin the motors up over 7500.

I have talked to Brian Ebert too.

I'd like to see someone with stock heads try a big reverse split cam and see what happens.

But stuff like the G5X2 cam does work well I have seen it run at the track and on the dyno.

Ed Curtis

<font color="blue">
Chris - JRod,

Thanks for the invite!

Smartass history class...

My LS1 experience was started while working with Division 1 NHRA Stock Eliminator racers as just as Brian has with Al Corda. I have not pushed my racing philosophy in the street/strip realm too much because "Stock" is a very specialized class and sometimes there's little to no real transference of valid data. How many street Corvettes do you know of run Jericho 5 speed transmissions in them?

Over the past four or five years, my LS1 street car applications have paralleled some of what my FOMOCO racers ask for, anonymity. After all, like you guys noticed, all I know is Fords...

Some of my better customers for "custom" cam profiles have been a few "LS1 specific" shops as well as some a select few direct customers. All have tried "other" people's "box" cams and all have seen more average TQ and HP. Note I said AVERAGE and not PEAK figures. Shaun can explain why I hate dynos (he loves to type more than I do) but suffice to say, they are only a tuning device like a timing light and are not Gospel!

How I hooked up with Shaun is kind of a strange trip. He seemed to have noticed a pattern of strong running street oriented cars which I had involvement with (through whatever sources he has) and called me for some advice. Now he needs to lose that number... He's a sharp kid and I hope he has the patience to do well in his ventures. I for one, am losing "that" as fast as I'm losing my hair!

If anyone wishes to try one of these "FTI" oddball LS1 grinds, I'm listening. I will not do any comparisons on dynos only but will consider track and dyno sessions. Dez Racing is a close buddy of mine so I know I can get that type of help. The local race track is over two hours away but hey, it's a street car right?

I will also offer the same deal as I give my Ford and LT1 camshaft customers. If I'm involved with a camshaft "shoot-out" you pay twice the cost if I win, or nothing if I loose. I've never had to give a free camshaft away if that's any hint.

Ed<!--color--></font>

J-Rod

I spent about an hour of Ed's time discussing this and other topics on the phone yesterday. My reason for the call was to talk about possible cams for a class based car I am currently involved with. Ed was more than helpful, and basically told me he would look at some of the things he has already done that are proven to work, and see if they can be applied. If they will work, great, if they won't then he'd let me know.

Some of the things I discussed with Ed were some things I have often considered. That is basically a method to the madness. Why this whole discussion even came to light is I saw some posts from 93Pony that piqued my attention. Whether or not you agree with his theories or not, 93Pony at least has a design methodology behind his cam grinds. Now, do I necessarily agree with him. No. But thats not to say I can't be wrong too. Unlike many folks out there, I am willing to entertain a good discussion, and if you can present me with good rational argument, I will give it a good hard look.

One of the things that 93Pony brought up and Ed echoed was a different way to look at camshaft design. For instance, folks get hung up on LSA. From Ed's point of view LSA is a byproduct of you VE and your lobe. I.E. You decide how big a lobe you want. You figure out your VE's, and the LSA is just a byproduct of those figures. To me that makes a lot of sense. If you get fixated that a lobe has to be so far apart (via the LSA) then you may totally miss your ideal time to open the valve. At that point you have your LSA, but your camshaft is going to be down on power. Again, whatever camp you are in reverse split, symetrical, or standard split this all works the same.

I may be wrong, but in following camshaft design it seems like folks went down a certain path. Quite simply when folks started modifying the LS1 there wern't a lot of lobes. On top of that, there wasn't anyhting you could do with the computer. So, folks tended to think inside the box to a certain extent. You can't have a lobe over a certain size, and the LSA has to be real wide. Boom, here is your cam. Now that cam makes decent power, but if you derived the cam from another method. Like the one I am referring to what would have happened? To be quite honest, I don't know. I don't know if the fact that the cam has some lope to it will set off the SES light or not. Heck a camshaft with the same size lobes as some of the earlier cams (T1, Hammer cam, etc...) might actually work better on a much tighter LSA. Wouldn't we all feel silly if car actually idled better on say a 108LSA for example instead of a 114. That isn't to say they don't lope, but that they have better manners, don't have the same idle issues, etc...

I'm not saying everyone needs to go pul out their cams tomorrow and replace them. But what I am saying is this does bear some investigation. If I didn't think it held some merit, I wouldn't have brought it up.

Now as for 93Pony. I think he has some interesting ideas. My own personal opinion (none of which is backed up by any facts, just what I have read in this forum and others is this. I think he has made some good observations. I think he has seen some stuff work well locally. Based upon that he has come up with some calculations that he bases his cam designs around. Where I think he is incorrect is I think he assumes far too much on his cam designs. I think he assumes a couple of things are unchangable absolutes when in fact they are not. With that said tough I think many of his theories may apply to almost every LS1 you run into. So, from that perspective they may be an absolute, but I don't think you can always assume anyhting, and thats the way I have read some of his comments. 93Pony correct me if I have mis-understood you.

Am I saying his cam won't work, or you shouldn't buy from him or Ed. Nope, not at all. Am I saying you should buy a cam from me. Nope, not that either. This is all about making those of us who are interested a bit smarter about how we do things. Although some folks will disagree there are two kinds of folks out there. There are the folks who want to understand, and go fast. Then there are the folks who don't care, they just follow the leader and call up vendor X and order cam xyz-pdq since their buddies, brothers friend did, and his car was bad.

Too many folks (I include myself in this) take the wrong things as gospel. Folks get hung up on a dyno number for instance. Or, folks get hung up on a flow number without asking what the port volume is. Ed was the first tuner other than John Lingenfelter who actually came out and said he designed his packages to maximize usable power.

One of the things John told us way back in the 80's about his packages is they might not have the biggest peak HP number, but in the area where your car spent the most ammount of time is where he would maximize power.

Bigger isn't always better. Anyone can get a stock LS1 head to flow 350 CFM. The fact that the port is 270+CC's might be an issue though. Remeber its not only flow, its velocity. Thats where the new AFRs are going to be interesting to look at. Again, looking at bigger we kep throwing bigger lobes at cars (now that we can tune them) and we keep making more pwoer. Ok, now why not only bigger, but better. Imagine if you could make 10-20 more HP with the same or less lobe than you have now, and the car would have better manners. Would yo be interested...

Back to the bigger thing. I am going to cite an extreme example here. Look at Supra guys. They are nice guys and all, but those guys really get hung up on peak HP in many cases, for all the good it does them. Who cares if your car makes 900RWHP but a 420RWHP car can clean your clock since the power isn't usable. Look at some of the import cars out ther ewith these hug turbos that take 2 weeks to spool up. Sure, they have a really amazing powerband of 100RPMs or so... What I am trying to say is a big fat powerband while maybe just a tad lower is a lot better than a razor thin peaky one...

Just to let you know Ed isn't a sponsor. I don't think Ed will ever be a sponsor, nor do I think he would care. He has folks lined up to do business with him in the Mustang world, and he doesn't advertise at all. So, don't ask about pricing, etc... since that stuff can't be talked about.

But, what I hope is that within the confines of what he can tell us that maybe Ed can shed some light on what makes a good VE vs a bad one. Maybe some of us can get smarter, and then we can make a more informed decision on what cams we need, and why we need them.

I think much of the advent in technologies has allowed many of us to not be blind sheep that buy an off the shelf Comp or Lunati grind since we don't know any better. Lets hope we can all learn a bit more...

Heck you never know I might even be tempted to try a reverse split one day if there is some good information I can get my brain around to convince me to try one...

The Juggernaut

iTrader: (7)

I have such a headache.