Keep up the great work Martin. Always impressive!

 

Just think this set-up has:

-As Cast cylinder heads
-LESS than .600" exhaust lift LESS! Less is MORE in this case!
-UN ported Fast 92!
-STOCK TB, YES A STOCK TB!
-Still has FULL exhaust on the car!
-NO EWP!
-Bolt on's are full exhaust, a Vararam intake and an UD pulley...that's it!

This set-up can be replicated VERY easily people!!! 500rwhp on a stock bottom end used to be a dream to most people. Only guys with names like Mamo, Gigliotti, Curtis, Tooley, Pat G and the likes have crested 500rwhp with a cathedral port 3.622" stroke engine. Even though Tick Performance is the name behind this build, you guys that do this in your garage on the weekends can put together a package like this just as easily and do the same.

We are not trying to re-invent the wheel. We are not trying to say we are the only ones to ever achieve this power, BUT it's not as hard to obtain as it once was thought to be. With the right camshaft, compression and simple little parts it can all be done again.

We have a few more new customers that are going to be doing set-ups just like these very soon with our 112lsa V.2 Polluter cam to boot. Should be interesting to see how they fair as well!!!

 

What a bad *** goat !!! ,congrats to the owner.

Well done Martin and all the crew at Tick performance .

 

Thank you sir!

 

I see what you did there, very nice For the price those heads are killer!!

 

Since there has been such a big stink made lately about aggressive lobes and chewing up valve trains, I felt compelled to let guys know that they don't need the most aggressive lobes in the catalog to make great power.

 

Back from the dead.
Martin I am looking at almost the same combo and was just undecided on the cam. This may be the ticket. How well do you think it would perform with
Tms370 forged pistons
Prc 225 heads
Ls6 intake ported tb. Will upgrade to fast down the road not soon
1 3/4 headers with true duals may step up to 1 7/8
M6 ls7clutch and flywheel
I have searched for hours and this tread is closest to what I want to do. What kind or mileage do you think it would get?
I hope you are still watching this tread lol

 

Did this car ever make it to the track?

 

I believe it would perform excellently. I would assume your engine will produce similar numbers utilize the same heads, intake and camshaft. Your LS6 intake will obviously hold your engine's power output to a lower amount than this engine.

Mileage I assume you're referring to gas mileage?

 

Thanks for the reply.
Yes fuel mileage. Wile it is not the most important thing I would like to be able to keep it in the 20's on the highway. Stock 3.42 gears.
Do you happen to remember the size injectors this combo used?
How long after ordering would the cam take to come in?

Kind of shocked that this tread only got two pages of attention. It's an awesome build with great numbers and fairly budget friendly. Great combination.

 

The 225's are pretty tough to beat for the money. They have become some of our most popular cathedral heads because of their ability to make big power on a budget.

 

That's what I have found with research so that's why I am going with them.

 

What kind of power difference would we expect with everything being the same except the heads being the cnc 227s instead of the as cast 225s

 

I know this is reviving a thread from the dead, but does anyone know what this car ran at the track? I have a similar setup on my 06 GTO but with a stock intake instead of a fast. I had mine dyno'd with heads that flow very similar numbers (Stage 3 ls6 Patriot Performance heads), except with the new version of this cam that has .631/.610 lift, and I only made 450whp and 387tq and I have a hard time believing an intake and a .5 bump in compression will make that much more power. Now I know that all dyno's read different, but the best I can do at the track was a 12.4 at 113mph with an albeit shitty 2.996 60'. I know an intake will definitely help my car breathe a lot better, but I feel like my mph should definitely be more up there. I mean hell, my cam only (torquer V2) with bolt ons (factory short block) ran a 12.4 at 115. can anyone provide any insight to this? My current short block is a thompson motorsports forged internal stock cube ls2 motor with -2cc pistons as well, but running around the same compression as stock (due to the +.006" piston to deck height) from my calculations. I've also got full bolt ons with 57 lb injectors as well. Thanks for anyones help!

 

Your numbers seem pretty close to be honest. The intake is 15-20rwhp easily and the extra compression is another 10 or so. That's not 50 but that puts you in the ball park of variance, tuning differences, and slight part differences. The weight difference in your rotating assembly might also equate to a little power difference as well.

 

If your 60ft is really 2.99 then that is a lot of your low trap speed. Some people say spinning equates to a higher trap but my car always traps higher with a lower 60

 

Just curious, doing a similar build/setup to this. While I have not broke down the engine and installed my Polluter v2 yet, [happens in end of april] I was wondering if you recall what pushrods and lengths/walls that were used?

 

That is strong package from stock stroke of 6.0 LS2

 

Just now saw this, sorry for the late response. I now have a fast 102 and have modified my tune a bit. I haven't had it redyno'd yet, but I hope to be around 470 at least now. Come to find out that when I pulled my intake to swap it out, my stock one was already ported... I managed to pull off a 12.1 at 115 mph with a 1.8 60', but that still seems like a low mph for what power I should be making with my combo. I am getting ready to put 4.11s in so that will help for my track times and help the power come in faster, but one thing that has bothered me since that dyno day was how low the torque was. A peak of 387 with ported 243s and a ported stock intake seems extremely low even if I did tune it myself. I'm planning on going around 12-12.5:1 compression over the winter to bring it up along the entire rpm range, but it just stuck with me that it was almost 65 lower than the one in this post, even with the half a point lower compression.

 

My bad meant to put that it was a 1.996 lol Still low, but definitely not as shitty as a 2.996 lol