the450r

iTrader: (1)

I bought this engine from a wrecked 01 camaro. watched a video of it running before i got it and it was pretty lopey.
I replaced the oil pan and timing cover gaskets noticed that it had a double roller timing chain and got it going the pcm was stock.
it has a cold air intake, stock maf, and tb, ls6 intake, 241 heads, long tube headers, 2.5 dual exhaust dumped after the flow master mufflers. M6 and 3.70 gears in a 9inch with street tires.
now that i have it running with a quick tune it purrs like a kitten about 1000 rpm. I want to keep it a N/A street car. occastional strip/ auto cross. not a dd.

looking for more lope and more torque/power.
Had a cam kit in mind and replacing the springs, push rods, and upgrading the rocker trunions.
are their part identification numbers on cams? so i know what i have when i pull it out?
ive had people tell me to keep my ls6 intake and forget about the fast intake setup?

usnfenix

iTrader: (11)

far as the intake is concerned, IMO and some other people on here is that the FAST intake bolted on to a stock motor will give you upwards of 15hp, something youll never notice on the street ever. now if you start building more actively and hunting down those high hp numbers thats where the FAST begins to show its colors. but on a mid level hp street car its not using its full potential and the ls6 intake is perfectly fine.

Fbodyjunkie06

iTrader: (10)

If you would like I can do an off the shelf cam or a custom grind for the same price that will do what you want.

We have a cam package that comes with dual springs, push rods and cam for 689 and gives the option of adding a new timing chain(or katech dual roller) and either a standard volume pump or high volume pump. New OEM chain and standard pump brings it to 819.

the450r

iTrader: (1)

https://ls1tech.com/forums/dynamomet...424-396-a.html

this was the thread i found that got me thinking my setup didnt need much more than a cam to make decent power.

99Bluz28

iTrader: (35)

IMO, a 227(lsl .614")/231(lsl .617") 111+2(7* OL), or a 227(lsl .614")/230(lxl .609") 111+3, 6.5* OL, or if you want to stick with the XER lobes then a 228/232 111+3(8* OL).
I'd lean towards the 227/230 with the decrease in valve train noise compared to the 227/231 or 228/232. The lower lsa will give lower and stronger powerband and as a side benefit the cam sound you desire

SJFGTO

You are on the right track. Give Josh a call at Spartan and he can set you up with the right cam/valvetrain for your car.

Cody Strife

iTrader: (1)

I run a tsp 228r cam with 112 LSA (.588 lift on intake and exhaust) Good lope, great idle, 20-25 mpg.

Made 450 rwhp on my 2002 c5 vette. Of course it has PRC stage 2.5 ls6 heads and full bolt-ons.

Detoxx03

iTrader: (14)

Futral Motorsports F-11 works great

the450r

iTrader: (1)

i thought the lsl were noiser and harder on valve train than the XER

mark21742

If you really want to have a lot of lope, you could even go tighter lsa with a custom grind more like a 108-110lsa....power will come on quicker, and drop off faster, but might help keep you under the intakes flow ceiling

F-bodyjunkie 06 has proved his knowledge to me in some of our previous debates and knows what he is doing, and I'm pretty sure he could make you happy

the450r

iTrader: (1)

Im not putting a cam in only listen to it idle. i want useable power. I dont want to over cam it.
Id like a little more aggressive idle than stock sound i have now but thats not at the top of my list.

Fbodyjunkie06

iTrader: (10)

I have a couple cams in mind for this if you would like to call the shop or email me and talk about it.

martin@tick-performance.com is my email.

Number is in signature.

Fbodyjunkie06

iTrader: (10)

Noisier no.

Harder, no, but they are equal.

XER is one of if not the most aggressive hydraulic roller lobe for SBC's, SBF's and big blocks that they offer in a hydraulic roller. Notice I said for SBE's and big blocks as the XER, XFI, extreme rpm, high energy, magnum, extreme marine etc. etc. were all designed for the older pushrod engines like BBC's, SBC's and SBF's and not LS1's.

What they did was take those lobes and grew them to fit on a 55mm cam journal and then deemed them "LS1 lobes". When really they weren't designed from the start for the LS1 valve-train.

Do they work and perform very well when specified right for the combination? Of course, but are they ideal and specified exactly for the LS1 valve-train? No, and that is where the HUC, LXL, LSL and LSK lobes come in.

I listed the LS1 specific lobes in order from least aggressive to most aggressive so you can get an idea.

Sales@Tick

iTrader: (3)

I responded to your email this afternoon.