Quietest "stealth" cam
02-19-2004, 10:12 AM
#21
Staging Lane
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 93
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What I want is a cam that will work with stock exhaust manifolds, and increase low and mid range torque. I don't care about peak rwhp numbers, or how much more I could get if I get long tubes.
My thoughts are that if GM can design a cam like the LS6 that will make 400 lb/ft through stock manifolds, while passing NLEV requirements, there ought to be more torque available for trading off on the emmissions side, while still remaining legal according to my states emmissions program.
My thoughts are that if GM can design a cam like the LS6 that will make 400 lb/ft through stock manifolds, while passing NLEV requirements, there ought to be more torque available for trading off on the emmissions side, while still remaining legal according to my states emmissions program.
02-19-2004, 11:00 AM
#23
Launching!
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 238
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've posted all I have to say on this topic ... my dynograph is here too. I personally think that having 350+ RWTQ is pretty good and it's from 3.5k to 6k on stock manifolds.
The cam is very mild and quiet. Most don't even know I have a cam until I open up a can of whoop a$Z and they ask ...
The cam is very mild and quiet. Most don't even know I have a cam until I open up a can of whoop a$Z and they ask ...
02-20-2004, 11:28 AM
#27
TECH Apprentice
iTrader: (6)
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 315
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have had the MTI Stealth I for about 10 months now, and it is totally undetectable thru Z06 Ti exhaust and FLP headers w/cats. I recently had the car re-dynoed and although the rwhp was down to 395 from 405 at 6200rpm, the torque went the other way, it was 382 ft.lbs. up from 374 after the install at 4400rpm. The torque curve was up 5-10 ft.lbs. all across the whole rpm range from 2000-6000rpm. The low-end torque around 2500rpm is 325 ft.lbs. so the cam makes good torque down low for excellent drivability.
The drop in top-end rwhp is due to some pinging occurring above 6000rpm. Since the Stealth install, I had added an LS6 intake and Hi-Flow air bridge which probably leaned out the AF ratio. Anyway, I'll get Jayson to re-tune the C5 and it will probably be over 405 after that.
My vote goes to either Stealth I or II, they are both good at what they were designed for!!
Randy
The drop in top-end rwhp is due to some pinging occurring above 6000rpm. Since the Stealth install, I had added an LS6 intake and Hi-Flow air bridge which probably leaned out the AF ratio. Anyway, I'll get Jayson to re-tune the C5 and it will probably be over 405 after that.
My vote goes to either Stealth I or II, they are both good at what they were designed for!!
Randy
Last edited by TTtop; 02-20-2004 at 03:07 PM.
