Originally Posted by TXSilverV

I currently have a 228/232 duration .588/.595 Valve lift 114 Lobe!
What cam should I go with and how much HP do you think I would gain?
the local shop told me to put in: 238/244 duration .586/.612 Valve lift 114+4 LSA!
What do you guys think about that cam?
I have ported heads already! With the current set up I'm at 427 RWHP

Originally Posted by obZidian

how choppy would you tolerate your V when idling? There are few different combinations that would yield a sweeter mid range.

DO you have a current graph?

Lately, folks have been using lsk (old school big block ) cam lobes in these ls1's. When match correctly, they have yield'd a strong power boost with less duration when compared to a xe-r lobe. (However, since those weren't truly designed for a roller hydraulic lifter, more for a flat-tappet hydraulic lifter, and with their slow valve closing events, they are more **** to valve float than a snapier xe-r. That is not to say that they are not a good cam selection, however, it should be noted, or at least implied, when dictating valve spring vs. rpm vs. cam events of your cam card)

What i would do is first have mygraph in hand, then search around and see what graphs you might find with the swell in mid range power or which everone fits your style or driving technique. Consider the combo's being used including heads, valves, springs, rockers, intakes, exhuast type, short block materials, drivetrain, etc.

Note, more pwer isn't related to more cam. Sometimes ppl have over camm'd their packages and lost power. Average power is where its at. Some have used a ms3 cam, for example, to get peak power while trading a bit, not much though, in the midrange. However, since most of the time we race is at high rpm, this trade off is practical since the gains on top are generally evil!! Termin8r's car is a good example, cam-only, though recently he went with a set of ported heads and 90mm fast, with a wet-shot, absolutely cleans house with or with out the spray. My buddies firehawk is really nasty, drives slicky smooth with the tune that was applied useing ls1edit, mid0range is strong but when he gets up top, its just nasty on motor. With the direct shot he just added, well, it should be unstoppeable. He runs a magic-stick 237/242 cam. 112 or 114lsa (not sure but i think it a on a 114, installed straight up!)

What kind of application would you yeild this to? meaning, streetracing/drag, road course/autoxn', cliff jumping?

Originally Posted by obZidian

why dont you ask that program of yours, im sure it will help you dish out your factual information and experience you rely on Sir Knight of the LS1.

with your age, im sure you would of know where the lsk can from, right?

Originally Posted by obZidian

Lately, folks have been using lsk (old school big block ) cam lobes in these ls1's. When match correctly, they have yield'd a strong power boost with less duration when compared to a xe-r lobe. (However, since those weren't truly designed for a roller hydraulic lifter, more for a flat-tappet hydraulic lifter, and with their slow valve closing events, they are more **** to valve float than a snapier xe-r. That is not to say that they are not a good cam selection, however, it should be noted, or at least implied, when dictating valve spring vs. rpm vs. cam events of your cam card)

?

Originally Posted by V-seriesTech

Bro.....you really need to stop. Seriously. Get over yourslf as The Knight in Shining INTERNET armor. Relax. I'm getting tired of this ****.


If it's of any worth to anyone on here or not, i'll be asking for 2c5's opinion for my next motor setup. The guy does a cam swap every other weekend just about. Just a thought. Just spec's.....not speculations.

J

Originally Posted by SilveradoSS500

I have done a fraction of what 2c5s and Obzidian have done to there V's but they only have 10 more pounds of torque than me.... They have great advice but call John from SSP...

Originally Posted by 2c5s

O.k., Mr. Experiance. Please tell me which lobe is the XER and whick one is the LSK. Also, please list the similarites to the flat tappet lobe vs. the LSK lobe. To me, they don't look very similar at all, but by the bullshit you typed earlier, you apparently know something I don't, so please school me.

Valve float..... maybe you should install a LSK lobed cam before you try and explain the intricate workings of the design. That way, you actually will have a bit of fact behind your ramblings. With fact and experiance comes credibility, something you're sorely missing and you continue to make obvious.

The computer program I was referring to will show TexasV what happens when you play with cam size. It will show that in fact to increase his mid range, he could go to a smaller cam, not bigger. The loss of power up stairs is minimal, but the gain down low and in the mid range, where he most likely drives 99.9% of time, is dramatically improved. But hey, you already know this stuff don't you. From all your years of experiance and testing different combo's out.




[IMG][/IMG]


[IMG][/IMG]

Originally Posted by 2c5s

I would venture to say I have over 20 ft. pounds of TQ at peak from the sliver of a dyno sheet you posted. The meat is what's under the curve.
Obzidians V is stock.

Originally Posted by obZidian

Well, do you have a larger pic of the second cam?.... i smell a rat!! That first one looks out of place here, maybe it would fit better in a different section?

Click the picture........ here is what you said:

"Lately, folks have been using lsk (old school big block ) cam lobes in these ls1's. When match correctly, they have yield'd a strong power boost with less duration when compared to a xe-r lobe. (However, since those weren't truly designed for a roller hydraulic lifter, more for a flat-tappet hydraulic lifter, and with their slow valve closing events,"

So which one is the LSK and XER lobe. The other picture is a flat tappet lobe........ do they look similar?????????? You said the LSK was designed from a flat tappet.
There is no rat to smell. I don't need to resort to B.S. to expose yours.


I never said that they HAVE floated valves, just that they are more **** than a xe-r lobes cam to smack a piston with higher rpm's. The LSK lobe has a quicker valve opening and longer valve closing events compared to the snapier xe-r cam.

"Lately, folks have been using lsk (old school big block ) cam lobes in these ls1's. When match correctly, they have yield'd a strong power boost with less duration when compared to a xe-r lobe. (However, since those weren't truly designed for a roller hydraulic lifter, more for a flat-tappet hydraulic lifter, and with their slow valve closing events"

So which is it, LSK = faster or slower ramps. You seem to be contradicting yourself...... again.



Also, what is the BASIC difference between of a lsk cam and a xe-r of similar dynamic power levels? In general, the lsk will swell in the mid range and fall off a bit at top versus a xe-r cam that might have a silightly weaker mid range but take off up top. So, theoretically, the lsk lobed cam is design to have a stronger, faster swell of power and not be at so high of an rpm. Well, BBC's makes goobs of power but dont REGULARILY/COMMONILY see the type of RPMS we are throwing at these ls1's to make the powe we want them to make, they do it sooner if the added ci those motors have. The more you push a BBC out of its REGULAR/COMMON designed parameters, the more you might run into problems with valve control.

Pure bullshit here. You have no clue what your talking about. This paragraph once again reinforces that you are as ignorant as the day is long on how cams work, how these particular lobes work, how and what dictates power peaks in any engine AND how and where BBC make power.


*disclaimer, please take my comparison as just that, a hypothetical experiment. Not all lsk and xe-r cams act as i have stated, this is just for comparison purposes.

*disclaimer.... are you ******* stoned??*

Thus, as you increase rpm, you increase the likeliness that if you dont spec your cam correctly with your head design, valves size, gasket size, CC, if you milled the heads... etc.....that you might smack a valve if the valve isn't under complete control from the cam lobes.

That's just brilliant, but are sure it just a function of RPM????Is it just LSK lobes you have to watch out for???

This is based on My understanding on what a lsk lobe is, with rpm, it has less valve control, though not by much, compared to a xe-r lobe. So, if this is true, then a cam that closed lazy and opens earlier, and also have a likelyhood to control a valve less with RPM, will have more of a chance to smack a piston when compared to a cam that snaps quick and open a bit later.

Your understanding, is that what you call it?? I call it ignorant bullshit.

What i find interesting is that sometimes the differences between a lsk lobed cam and a xe-r lobes cam is basically where you want your peaks to be.

More ignorant ****.

The difference in HP isnt' much, enough to make me go, "yeah, thats new and improved, i need to get it on that." I know what i want from my V, for example, ya'll can and will make your own educated decisions. I have mine.

You meant to say uneducated guess.

Whenever is see something new like this, i like to know where it came from, where has it been, so on. There are factors that i do and dont like about those lsk lobes, and for one is that this isn't a new lobe design, its been around for a bit and now being applied to ls1's or have gotten recent exposure.

What does that have to do with anything????

They have good early power making charactertics but have high lift versus duration.

That makes no sense at all................... AGAIN!!!


all in all, pic your posion. Kind like the cam your are imply in your post, right. Less cam, more swell in the mid-range, typical slight drop off at higer rpms... sounds like a lsk cam to me.

ROTFLMFAO...Oh does it? Dude, you have no ******* clue at all what you are talking about.

2c5, let me see a larger pic of that second cam and you'll have your answer.

I could FedEx you the cam, but it does not change the fact that you have never seen an LSK lobe, used an LSK lobed cam, and as of a few months ago, never heard of an LSK lobe. BTW, they have been used on LSx's for well over a year and a half. Hardly new. Just new to you.

Originally Posted by 2c5s

I would venture to say I have over 20 ft. pounds of TQ at peak from the sliver of a dyno sheet you posted. The meat is what's under the curve.
Obzidians V is stock.

Originally Posted by SilveradoSS500

I agree, i did not know wise old obzidians V is stock! What is your tq at around 3500rpm....re-post a dyno sheet for me