Why reverse split stealth cam is better?
03-29-2004 | 10:54 PM
#41
TECH Regular
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 430
Likes: 0
From: Pasadena, CA
Originally Posted by DenzSS
Just as a bit of advice, keep the stock pushrods. It is a lot easier and cheaper to replace a bent pushrod than to take out a valve or a lifter.
03-30-2004 | 11:37 AM
#43
TECH Senior Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 9,246
Likes: 2
From: Troy, AL
"Colonel, with my mods listed below, what approximate RWHP can I expect??"
Stock manifolds? I don't care to guess. One of those things you'd just have to try.
Iv, I have thought of almost exactly that (I was thinking 227 on the intake and a 117.5 LSA.) I'd like to know. I'd also like to see it with no advance. The problem I have with this for my application is that even with some advance, it might put me needing an even higher SE. I also think that at some point, the increasing of LSA may start to hurt the mid-high power more than it's worth. Jayson and I had discussed this when choosing the 116 LSA for the II. We felt confident that it would work well. 117-118? I dunno. It's a gamble. It would be interesting to see.
Stock manifolds? I don't care to guess. One of those things you'd just have to try.
Iv, I have thought of almost exactly that (I was thinking 227 on the intake and a 117.5 LSA.) I'd like to know. I'd also like to see it with no advance. The problem I have with this for my application is that even with some advance, it might put me needing an even higher SE. I also think that at some point, the increasing of LSA may start to hurt the mid-high power more than it's worth. Jayson and I had discussed this when choosing the 116 LSA for the II. We felt confident that it would work well. 117-118? I dunno. It's a gamble. It would be interesting to see.
