SMOKINV8

iTrader: (6)

Jason- Are those the recommended spring pressures for this cam? I'm running more spring pressure than that, and I'm wondering how much power it could be costing me.

Jason99T/A

iTrader: (21)

Colonel, the springs had 10k miles of pretty hard driving on them.

We normally set the 918s up around 135lb on the seat. I wouldn't be too concerned about how much hp you are losing due to the extra spring pressure because it really isn't costing your any (1-2hp MAX) and, I would prefer to err on the side of having to much than too little.

SStrokerAce

iTrader: (2)

Yeah, the sad thing is that there is a big myth that too much spring pressure will lose you HP. I've never seen a motor lose HP when you go to more spring pressure, in fact I've only seen them pick up power. The reason behind this is you are controlling the valve better, less seat bounce and such. On top of that if you think about the cam and valvetrain, if one valve is opening another somewhere on the cam is closing so they off set each other. The only way that too much spring is bad is when you have too much for a hydraulic lifter and it colaplses. With lifters like the Comp R's you can run 177lbs on the seat and 440 rate springs and not have to worry about them.

Bret

Jason99T/A

iTrader: (21)

Bret, I agree 100%.

LS1 BU

iTrader: (13)

Does any one have a dyno comparing with other cams, tr224/tr230. I have a comp 228/228 and was thinking of switching. I would like to see how much hp/tq I would loose to gain a better idle and driving habits. How would this cam work on a 150 shot. I'm not worried about springs I have dual springs on my TEA heads.

SStrokerAce

iTrader: (2)

I don't think you would loose to much HP to your cam. Maybe 10hp if you are running the .571 lift lobes and 15hp if you are running the XE-R .588 lift lobes (on the 228/228), but not a large amount. As for the TQ I would imagine that you would make the same if not more TQ with the Old Man cam. That cam looks to be a TQ monster. Since there is alot of LSA the 150 shot would be o.k. with it, but it's probably not optium.

To me it looks like they have used a very aggressive intake lobe on the TR Old Man cam, which means it could benefit from a larger more heavy duty valve spring. If the 918's worked then your 987's should be fine but a even heavier spring wouldn't be too bad.

Bret

LS1 BU

iTrader: (13)

I run the XER lobes. I thoought this cam would rock on the jug. It's a split duration on a 115 lobe sep. If I do the cam I might change the specs a little. I think I will wait untill I see more dyno's on this cam. I know the LS6 cam rocks on nitrous.

My current 228/228 make 402rwhp/377rwtq through an a4 with a ford 9inch. I think I might pick up some torque. I would be willing to give up some hp for a better idle and driveability.

SStrokerAce

iTrader: (2)

Yeah with that A4 the added TQ might help you out. The big LSA usually does help, but this cam has a very low amount of overlap so a tighter LSA might even help that out a little on the bottle. All in all it's going to suprise people to see what kind of power it makes. I'd like to see this cam in a 450rwhp car just to compare the power curves.

Bret

FaztLT1

iTrader: (8)

With the specs on this cam would it work well with N20?

Ireland31

I finally got the results back. I'll forward the graphs over to Jason and he can post them. I gained 10.2 RWHP and 7.2 RWTQ over the '02 LS6 cam. I gained about 10 RWTQ all the way through the RPM band. I'll let the graphs do the talking. Overall Im very pleased considering my mods. 2002 SS A4, DirectFlo lid, TR ported TB, and the TR Old Man Cam...366.6 RWHP and 346.1 RWTQ. Stock manifolds, cats, no tuning, etc. Let me know if there are any questions.

InsomZ

iTrader: (1)

Ireland31: is the cam noticably more powerful driving around? i just got the LS6 cam installed and there is a definate increase in power

Ireland31

To me it felt a lot stronger on the bottom end driving around, so I was suprised to only see about a 10 RWTQ difference.