Question: How did you get into LS powered cars?
Martin: LS engines in general have always intrigued me. Their capability to produce 500-600 flywheel HP N/A with relative ease and reliability is a testament to what GM was able to do with the LS family of engines.

Question: When did you get hooked on drag racing?
Martin: I've been hooked on drag racing ever since the first time I was taken to a race track by my Dad. He raced for years himself and his interest and time in the sport rubbed off on me from the time I was probably 6 years old.

Question: You have gained a tremendous amount of knowledge about racing and LS engines in a very short period of time. How have you learned so much so fast?
Martin: I have just tried to become a sponge to my surroundings. Working at Tick Performance is the biggest reason I have learned so much in such a short amount of time. I like to think of myself as a quick study. Being able to visualize exactly what is occurring inside of a running engine is one thing I feel I am very good at. Also, asking questions to the right people has helped tremendously as well. The other names you have me mentioned with in this thread are very humbling. The amount of experience they have reminds me just how much further I have to go in comparison to what they have accomplished

Question: You are consistently one of the most helpful people in the LS community.
What drives you to help others with their builds?
Martin: I think the main thing that drives me to help others with their builds is the help I've received myself. I've had help with not only my latest personal build, but a lot of what I have gained regarding my own knowledge can be attributed to other's in the industry taking the time to teach me and help me. I personally get a feeling of accomplishment knowing that someone is better informed about what they're buying for their engine after speaking with me even if he doesn't purchase a single part at that time. There's nothing wrong with paying it forward that's for sure.

Question: You have taken a particular interest in Carbureted and Single Plane LS combinations.
What is it about these combos that pique your interest?
Martin: I really enjoy working with single plane LS combinations. I felt like for a while single plane manifolds got a bad rap and to some extent they still do. Some people on the forums would say, "Single plane manifolds are only good for high RPM". I've personally had great results with single plane intakes in combinations that weren't 7000+ RPM screamers. I often recommend single plane manifolds to a lot of my more serious street/strip customers or those who are serious about N/A or nitrous performance. I'm also a big fan of the Holley High Ram. I think it has huge potential in the right hands. There is no magic intake manifold or camshaft by itself. It is about putting together the right combination for your intended application.

Question: What do you think is the most common mistake people make when building a single plane or short runner equipped LS engine?
Martin: Using off the shelf camshafts designed for the factory style EFI manifolds. Typically the person says, "This camshaft will work well enough". People assume that the camshaft profiles between two categories of fuel delivery methods (EFI vs. Carbureted) and two categories of intake manifold design (long runner vs. short runner) are identical. Unfortunately for them, I would say that 75% or greater of the more popular, readily available, off the shelf EFI camshafts have an intake valve close event that is at least 43-45*@.050 ABDC some even later. For the average stock bottom end combination that is utilizing a single plane intake manifold, a 43-45*@.050 ABDC closing event is much too late for their intended RPM range. In addition, an earlier intake valve opening event and a later exhaust valve closing event, results in added valve overlap which helps a short runner engine. This added overlap is not needed in long runner EFI manifolds and may be detrimental. That is why an off the shelf EFI camshaft does not allow the single plane intake manifold combination to perform to its highest potential.

Question: There is a lot of talk about custom cam lobe selection. How do you determine which lobe is appropriate for a particular engine combo?
Martin: The main thing I look at is the weight of the valve train, the operating range of the engine and intended use. First I will look at the rocker arms the customer is utilizing, the material the valves are made out of and their corresponding weights, stock OEM lifters or aftermarket and the operating range of the engine. Finally, I look at how the customer uses their car. Take for example a customer who drives his car thousands of miles per year versus an application that might see a maximum of 1k miles a year. The lower mileage, race application might best utilize a more aggressive lobe, while the heavily street driven combo might appreciate a less aggressive lobe

Question: You have been a very vocal advocate about evaluating camshafts based on the valve events as opposed to duration and lobe centers. Why should a racer care about this?
Martin: Great question. A racer should care about the actual valve events of their camshaft so that they can truly understand what is going on inside their engine. We've all been told by our elders for our entire lives, "You can't judge a book by its cover," and that is 100% true when it comes to camshafts. While two camshafts may appear to be very similar to one another, they might have very different valve events. When you look at when the intake valve opens (IVO), when the intake valve closes (IVC), when the exhaust valve opens (EVO) and when the exhaust valve closes (EVC), you are looking at the actual valve events. With this you can visualize what effect each event has on the performance of an engine. ICL, LSA and durations are just mathematical interpretations of these event’s relationships to one another. Comparing camshaft valve events can at least allow one to determine how close the cams truly are to one another or just how different they really are.

Question: There are a lot of differences between the LS3/L92 square port heads and the LS1/LS6/LS2 cathedral port heads. How do you change the cam design to accommodate for this in a given engine combo?
Martin: The main thing about a LS3/L92 square port head versus a LS1/LS6/LS2 cathedral port head is the difference in intake port cross sectional area between the two cylinder heads and the difference in valve area. The minimum cross sectional area of a LS3 head is roughly 2.78 in^2. The minimum cross sectional area of a LS1 head is roughly 2.32 in^2. The main thing I do with square port camshafts is close the intake valve earlier due to the head having a larger intake port MCSA. With a cathedral port camshaft I will close the intake valve later due to the head having a smaller MCSA. The other main difference between a square port head and a cathedral port head is the intake to exhaust flow percentage. The larger intake valve and larger intake port of the square port head is able to flow more CFM than a cathedral port head. More air and fuel into the cylinder means there will be more spent exhaust gas created as a byproduct. This means I need to open the exhaust valve sooner in relation to my intake events to give more time for that added spent exhaust gas to evacuate the cylinder. This always necessitates a wider intake to exhaust duration split in the camshaft profile.

Question: The LS community seems to be particularly willing to push piston to valve clearance. How close will you push it? And, do you think some cam lobes are better than others if one is pushing piston-to-valve clearance to the edge?
Martin: When it comes to piston to valve clearance I like to see at least .050"/.100". I've personally run my own engine at .030" intake clearance and .050" exhaust clearance. That engine never gave me a bit of trouble, but that still doesn't mean that everyone should do it. We've measured our Polluter cam to have between .045"-.050" intake clearance and to my knowledge have not had a customer hurt something because of it. Whenever I sell a customer a cam that will be that tight on P to V I fully disclose the clearance it will most likely have and what could happen in a worst case scenario. This discourages a lot of people, but still some choose to go forward with it. Some customers, after hearing what could happen, end up fly cutting valve reliefs. I will say, fly cutting pistons with a single plane combination opens up the doors tremendously to allowing a cam with the proper timing events for the combination.

As far as some cam lobes in relation to P to V, yes there are. A cam lobe that has less tappet lift@TDC will have more P to V at TDC when P to V is tightest. If you can reduce the amount of lift the lobe has while the piston is at top dead center you will increase the amount of P to V available.