TR227/224 and 241 heads install 56K NO WAY
01-20-2010, 12:00 PM
#62
If you were right then all 50 would have changed wouldn't they? And saying you know I have changed gears says you know I speak from at least some 1st hand experience and not just hear-say. And you have no idea what my car runs currently, but you seem pretty proud to have ran a 12 second pass I presume. I shall edit my previous posts to preserve this man's thread. And later I will come back and delete this one as well.
Good day
Also, let me clarify, this advice during this whole thread has been going towards an A4. I believe 3.23s are a decent gear in those to start with for a street car on street tires with the super aggressive first gear of the 4l60e. You claim to be an M6, which I believe was under-geared from the factory, with the exception of the GTO's M12 T-56 which has more aggressive 1st, 2nd, and 3rd gears. Had he been an M6 I likely would of adviced him to do a gear change given the known differences. On a street car with street tires, it wouldnt have helped at the track much if any. It would have made his car feel a hell of a lot faster though. You suck at giving advice btw. Face it, you know **** about ****.
Good day
Also, let me clarify, this advice during this whole thread has been going towards an A4. I believe 3.23s are a decent gear in those to start with for a street car on street tires with the super aggressive first gear of the 4l60e. You claim to be an M6, which I believe was under-geared from the factory, with the exception of the GTO's M12 T-56 which has more aggressive 1st, 2nd, and 3rd gears. Had he been an M6 I likely would of adviced him to do a gear change given the known differences. On a street car with street tires, it wouldnt have helped at the track much if any. It would have made his car feel a hell of a lot faster though. You suck at giving advice btw. Face it, you know **** about ****.
Yep, you're an idiot. People change gears for a reason and almost EVERYONE does. Thanks for proving my point. You are the one who sucks at giving advice. 90% of the cars on that list swapped out gears. Why? To be FASTER! Once again, if you can hook, you will be faster. I'm not just saying in an M6 either. I have plenty of friends with these cars, both autos and manuals, and many of them know a **** ton more than you CLAIM to know. Also, I am proud to have run a 12 sec pass? I think not, I am actually disappointed. Now you on the other hand must be with your bolt on mph. Thought your car was cam'd? Ha. Anyway, this is my last post acknowledging you and your stupid rationale. I just wish more people would see this thread and see how stupid you really are.
KingNothing, nice job on the car man. It sounds great and looks awesome. Hope everything goes well for you with it!
01-20-2010, 12:13 PM
#64
Launching!
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Mt.Prospect IL
Posts: 216
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Im getting around 13 or 14 mpg around town and over 20 on the highway. You can get away with decent mpg's with gears, stall, and a cam if you drive it easy. My car was running 12.6 with no tune then after speed inc tuned it it went consistant 12.0-12.1 Na. Your going to be dissapointed if you do not do gears and a stall, it makes auto's fun.
01-20-2010, 12:17 PM
#66
Im getting around 13 or 14 mpg around town and over 20 on the highway. You can get away with decent mpg's with gears, stall, and a cam if you drive it easy. My car was running 12.6 with no tune then after speed inc tuned it it went consistant 12.0-12.1 Na. Your going to be dissapointed if you do not do gears and a stall, it makes auto's fun.
11-14-2017, 07:03 PM
#67
Almost 8 years later talk about being back a thread lol well update on the car: I sold it to a guy in SoCal in 2012 with a stock engine in it, he did a build on it and put maybe 500 miles on it in the 4 years he had it. I bought it back from him a year ago and it’s almost back to being stock, with the exception of the almost full suspension and power steering cooler. I might start acquiring the parts to do a build on the engine. I might even go with the same exact cam I started this thread with.
11-18-2017, 11:08 PM
#72
TECH Senior Member
You might be right, but cams have come a long way.... if reverse splits were the deal you would still be hearing about them more than you do now...
11-18-2017, 11:23 PM
#73
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Howell & Fenton MI
Posts: 11,145
Likes: 0
Received 15 Likes
on
15 Posts
Reverse split cams are in general more suitable to setups with restricted intake flow such as a LS1 intake for example. With good intake and induction flow along with good flowing exhaust a more traditional type cam is definitely better
11-21-2017, 08:23 AM
#74
Intakes have gotten better, there hasn’t been any breakthroughs in the exhaust department though.
11-28-2017, 02:23 AM
#77
Looking for options on the reverse split cams. I want to keep as much low/mid range power as I can with my LS1 build. Ported heads, UD pulley, carbureted setup, LT headers, good exhaust, 3:73, Manual transmission, 1970 Camaro for autocross/weekend toy. I like what I read about the thunder racing 230/224 high .500s 111 cam. What company is making some I can check out?
11-28-2017, 12:08 PM
#78
TECH Senior Member
Unless your intake is restricted, which does not seem to be the case, why use a reverse-split cam?
11-28-2017, 02:50 PM
#79
Honestly I just started reading about them and I like what I see. Guys make great mid range grunt and also HP. Just seems like it fits the bill for what I'm wanting to do with my car. I was set on the new ws6stores high lift ASA cam 226-236 .600 110 but then I found the Dyno graphs of the 230/224 and started reading up on them.
11-30-2017, 10:19 AM
#80
Honestly I just started reading about them and I like what I see. Guys make great mid range grunt and also HP. Just seems like it fits the bill for what I'm wanting to do with my car. I was set on the new ws6stores high lift ASA cam 226-236 .600 110 but then I found the Dyno graphs of the 230/224 and started reading up on them.
