LTX355

iTrader: (15)

The more I think about it. It seems to be all about how well you set up a combination. Example a street set up. Say a car with a 3200 stall and 3.42 gears full bolt on with el toro cam. The cams torque allows it to take full advantage of the smaller stall and gears. Still allowing a really healthy 60ft and et. a bigger cam with a traditional split given the same circumstances will suffer greatly at the line and will spend all its time trying to make up for it on the big end. The bigger cam would have been better suited with 4.10 gears and bigger stall. granted a bigger forward split cam will make more peak power but I think what mark is trying to get after is that the rs cams have there place and under those circumstances they work great. U cant say they dont work cuz there are some really fast car running rs cams....

PREDATOR-Z

^^ bingo ^^

PRE-Z06

FWIW I went from MTI stealth II 224/220 116+0 XER to my custom 218/230 116+2 XFI and gained 10-15hp/tq from 3k-6800 with PRCstage2.5 5.3l heads, tuner bet it would make less power because of smaller intake lobe. I attribute the low end gains to the earlier IVC and the top end to the more efficient combustion process

Paint_It_Black

iTrader: (1)

The earlier IVC definately helped low end. The top end gained because you allowed the engine time to clear exhaust and didn't contaminate the incoming charge. Like Tony said, you can't burn exhaust a 2nd time.

PREDATOR-Z

LOL contaminate incoming charge on a -10* overlap intake biased valve events??
Perhaps a bit more reading on the subject will clear up the smoke fogging your thoughts.

Paint_It_Black

iTrader: (1)

You can contaminate the incoming charge with 10, -10, or -20 overlap simply by not clearing out the cylinder before EVC. Reversion is not the only culprit. Stop assuming you have the right valve events.

PREDATOR-Z

Stop assuming you know it all. I speak from experience. I ran this cam 10 years ago when "The Colonel" first speced it out. It has a late IVC and likes a bit of compression . I used to trap 120+ by using a .040 gasket and milling the heads a tad.
I even used 100 shot dry on it with favorable results, so intake charge contamination is not th issue here.
We know nothing of the exhaust setup

Sicko

iTrader: (1)

El torro Hands down! Coming from the torquer v2 & tr224, I am very much impressed, especially when you get a comment from a veteran tuner like "this thing pulls like a fat chick chasing down an ice cream truck".
It's kinda funny when I saw this thread I started to laugh because I too was torn between a RS and PredatorZ's El Torro cam. After contacted PredatorZ he steered me in the right direction. I couldn't be happier.
I will be writing my full review as soon as I get it on the dyno on April 24th.

P.S. PredatorZ obviously knows his ****, id let him build me a cam any day.

LTX355

iTrader: (15)

many variables with that cam swap its not a very good comparison. lobes, lift, tuning... It would b nice to c some graphs laid on top each other to c the curve differences. I like the rs torque curves and what they r capable of, this coming from a guy thats always run a forward split. Makes me wanna try one in my truck.

PREDATOR-Z

Correct, the 218/230 cam is actualy a 220/232 once cut with above .600 lifts (XFI lobes). I would be curious to see how much improvement if any, that cam would have had over the 224/220 if it had been cut on XER lobes.

PRE-Z06

agreed the higher lifts prolly helped since it has ported heads, it was the same tuner and dyno...I was really impressed with the StealthII originally(trapped 119), went 122 after head swap, but felt a traditional split would favor the I/E ratio better and I'm only running 10.9 SCR, also thought the port velocity would be better with smaller intake lobe since it has a 220cc intake runner(kinda like with l92) I would have been happy to make the same power, but was glad to see it go 124mph now and most would never guess it's cammed as I'm running cats and stock exhaust

johnnyboyweber

iTrader: (3)

I am by no means an expert, but don't NACSAR motors run in excess of 8k? I know they are different motors, but it seems like RS cams are better suited for non-modified bottom ends that don't need to wind up beyond 7k.