Jason 98 TA

iTrader: (4)

The car doesn't have a ls6 intake or tuning yet correct? Does it have a pulley? There are alot of customers that have been very happy with the 233/239 camshaft results. I've even pulled out other camshafts & replaced them to test the gains Get the tune & intake on this thing & lets see how she comes around.

I think it may be a little early to act like it's the end of the world, several other guys have had really good results with the 233/239 cam

Silverhawk_02TA

See my post above about the pulley/ported TB issue. Did I expect to make the same numbers as TSP, even though my car setup is the same (tuning aside) as what they posted for the dyno of the car that made 417/402? No. As a matter of fact, I think my HP numbers are pretty much where they should be with that cam and my setup. It's the TQ curve that baffles me. I bought this cam, as did many others, for the low and mid-range TQ that it had so much of. With my setup, I should be seeing more TQ with this cam. Others, with a more complete list of bolt-ons than myself, are seeing similar low TQ numbers. Why?

These are questions we need to ask. Here's a hypothetical situation: The Torquer, of course, is ground by Comp to TSP's specs. What if Comp mistakenly ground a batch of Torquer cams on a non-XER lobe? We who purchased the cams would install them, and see TQ numbers significantly lower than those posted by TSP. Now, I'm not trying to insinuate that this is what is happening here, but mistakes do happen, and if we are not here asking questions when we aren't seeing what we should, then these issues do not get addressed. For example, the first x-pipe I got with my TSP duals had no cross-over whatsoever. It was just two pipes welded together with no cutout in between them. I knew that this was not TSP's fault, since a third party makes the exhaust for them. I posted this on the boards here. Another board member took a look inside his x-pipe from TSP, and he had the exact same problem with his. Now, TSP took care of business, and 2nd day'ed us both new x-pipes, and this shows what a kick-*** operation TSP is. This also shows that mistakes do happen, and you have to keep an eye out and ask questions when things aren't right.

Silverhawk_02TA

The search button saves the day once again! I did a search on the P0106 code, and it is commonly thrown (especially on an 02 car) upon installing a large cam due to intake port reversion at idle. The TCS/ASR issues, along with the stumbling/stalling are also symptoms of this, along with the code. This code can of course be deleted with HPTuner.

So, it seems rather unlikely that you have a vacuum leak, so I think it's time to start looking elsewhere for reasons for your low numbers.

97bowtie

iTrader: (1)

I agree 100%. Please note that I have said the same thing numerous times. I didn't say the numbers were bad, but rather, right on for the mods I have.

The car does NOT have a LS6 intake, tune or a pulley. As I have said a few times, those few mods should be good for 20-25 rwhp and will put the car right about where it should be.

Silverhawk_02TA

Jason, what was the full mod list on the car that dyno'd 417/402 with the Torquer? I am very curious to know why my car (along with several others) have dyno'd with such low TQ numbers for our setups.

Here's an unrelated question fer ya on an issue I wasn't clear about: I know that the ramp rates on the 233/239 are more agressive than the 231/237 it is based off of, but are they up to the XER specs of the Torquer?

97bowtie

iTrader: (1)

Ditto.

Worm

iTrader: (2)

I agree that tq curve sucks, with a lid/catback I made 341rwtq SAE and made more tq @ 3000rpm than him?? Somethings up, I think its too lean.

97bowtie

iTrader: (1)

Please, tell me something I don't already know. I too made more torque with bolt-ons than I did w/a cam. Yes it was too lean, hence needing a tune. Nothing is wrong w/the car. Sounds like a bunch of broken records in here. It seems as if most of you in here expected 400 rwhp / 400 rwtq from an untuned, cammed car, w/a few bolt-ons....not me. I'll be sure to wait until I have optimized my setup in the future before posting dyno/track numbers here because there seems to be a lack of reading comprehension skills and/or a general misunderstanding of how guys are rolling 400+ rwhp w/cammed cars.

JOE02SS

iTrader: (1)

cars with big cams are pulling this code p0106 manifold absolute pressure. not sure exactly whats causes this or what effects other than asr or tcs.

i'm going to delete the air system later today if i get a chance. what did you do with the small vacuum line that goes from that black round thing on driver side to the sensor or whatever it is on the fuel rail? did you just cap it? what is it, if you know?

i'm changing the exhaust today. when i bought the car it came with slp lt, slp cats, and flowmaster muffler. i'm removing cats and going back to the slp dual dual muffler which came with the car also. hopefully this will help numbers some what.

what are your numbers? anyother mods?

NicD

iTrader: (7)

Dude, those numbers suck! What a bunch of crap! You are a bit lean! False advertising! I hope your car burns in hell! BLAH BLAH BLAH! People are funny.

Numbers aren't bad for arizona and no tuning with your mods.

Zach@Texas-Speed

iTrader: (7)

I put the TSP233/239 in my car and it made 17 rear wheel over the X1 cam that I had before it and thats on a stock headed, LS1 manifold 98 automatic car. This thread shouldnt have been started until the car had been fully tuned, pre-judging a cam without a tune is like judging a book by its cover and it shouldnt be done. I encourage the fact that dyno results are being compared but comparing two cars without the same mods is not the way it should be done especially when it looks like it is aimed to discredit a reputable and honest vendor such as TSP...a tune alone can gain 20rwhp, and the fact that you have no ls6 intake should throw this thread right out the window

Brian @ Texas Speed & Performance

iTrader: (1)

If I'm not mistaken, the car that did 417RW had LS6 intake, headers, duals, lid, pulley, ported TB, dyno tune, and I believe that's it.

Guys, we have A LOT of people call and ask about cams. The main question they ask is if they will hit 400RW, to which I always say with FULL BOLT-ONS it's possible(M6). The car that's mentioned and others we've posted are FULL BOLT-ON cars. I also like to ask what they've baselined at before the cam, because obviously a car that baselines at 330RW is going to end up with different numbers than one that baselines at 350RW. There are quite a few guys that want me to guesstimate what RW they will put down when I don't even what they baselined. I usaully don't guesstimate, but I will tell them that the Torquer cam an AVERAGE puts down 44-48RW in a car. So whether or not you baseline at 330 or 345, you're going to see the same gains, unless your bottle-necking the setup by not installing all of the bolt-ons. An aftermarket induction lid will pick up 10 RWHP on a BONE STOCK car. How much do you think the stock induction is limiting a cammed car? By finishing out all of the bolt-on mods, the car will hit its 400+ RWHP. You just can't leave a handful of important bolt-on mods off of the car but expect the same power. Those smaller mods will add up quickly!

Brian

NicD

iTrader: (7)

LMFAO! Holy **** I think I just about died over here.

97bowtie

iTrader: (1)

The thread was started to give some preliminary numbers...it's everyone else who turned this thread into what it is. I have no doubt the car will roll 400+ w/the mods I have mentioned. I was not comparing my car to any other cars...including TSP's cars. I was in NO WAY trying to discredit TSP. They are a good company to deal with and as far as I can tell, they make a great product. If you think that, your reading comprehension skills are far below par. Read the whole thread before responding or direct your posts to those they should be directed to.

97bowtie

iTrader: (1)

No ****. lol This thread has turned

Silverhawk_02TA

Here's my dyno graph as a comparison to the other. STD numbers, not SAE:



Maybe I haven't been explaining myself as eloquently as I'd thought:

1.) I do not expect to duplicate TSP's numbers with my current setup.

2.) I'm happy with my HP. It is pretty much where I think it should be with my current setup.

3.) My TQ is lower than it should be with my current setup. The TQ curve is what I would expect to see with a cam with normal ramp rates, not XER lobes.

4.) This low TQ is displayed by every third party dyno of the Torquer and 233/239 I can find, to include tuned cars with most bolt-ons.

5.) I want to know where this "missing" TQ is. Perhaps it's a simple explanation, such as: "it's in the tune because of the XER lobes". Maybe it's a combination of factors. Maybe my flux capacitor is turned up too high...

6.) I am not saying that the Torquer or the 233/239 is a bad cam. I am not calling foul on TSP. They have been and continue to be my #1 source as far as my T/A is concerned, and are good guys and great to deal with!

gomer

iTrader: (13)

Your A/F is fucked. Have it tuned. If it has already been tuned, take it back and make them do it right. I don't think you'll gain all the power you think you are missing by that.. but I will promise that if you'll add that pulley, lid, and ported TB you'll pick up a load.

gomer

iTrader: (13)

I can't belive you have the sack to be pissed about your numbers after making the above post with your brokedick UNTUNED combo Do you not realize that the reason you got "half assed" numbers is because you are doing this "half assed"??

Sometimes the level of stupidity on this board astounds me

97bowtie

iTrader: (1)

Silverhawk_02TA

I sincerely hope this statement is not aimed at me, as I have nothing but good things to say about TSP. As a matter of fact, I have yet to read anything negative about TSP at all in this tread...

I think that's a pretty ignorant statement. As 97bowtie stated, this thread was to post his preliminary numbers. We all know he needs an LS6 intake, a tune, etc. to start maximizing its power. I don't think anyone is saying "OMFG! Look at those numbers! The 233/239 sucks!" I am certainly not.

I do however think his TQ numbers are low FOR HIS CURRENT SETUP. I think my TQ numbers are low FOR MY CURRENT SETUP. This is a trend I've seen in all the Torquer and 233/239 results I've dug up. If I have to hazard a guess at this point I'd say that getting a GOOD tune will play the biggest role in bringing those TQ numbers up to where they should be. I think the stock tuning and so-so aftermarket tunes are not maximizing on the benifit the higher low duration lift of these aggressive ramp rate cams bring to the table.

I wholeheartedly agree.