Did you buy that off here Dave?

 

Hey man once tax refunds comes in in 2014, im hitting you up to do those upgrades for sure!

 

Martin, I'd like to know what you'd recommend for the following......it's a little different application These are the parts that are available to use, but he's not necessarily against something else. Main goal is bump in power from the stock 5.3 but reliability is super important as it sits on the limiter a lot......

Parts already owned by person:
current GM 5.3 stock parts if needed
lq9 short Block
L92 heads
professional products intake

The 4500lb vehicle is a locked 4wd manual NV4500 trans (1st 5.61:1,2nd 3.04:1,3rd 1.67:1, 4th 1:1, 5th .73:1, R 5.04:1) through a 1.96:1 NP205 Transfer case through a 4.11 gear set at the axles. Final drive ratios in low range are (45:1, 24:1, 13.5:1, 8:1, 6:1) Tires are 45" tall.

He normally holds 2nd gear WOT to climb which is 5500 rpm @ 30mph or about equiv to a 28" tire in 1st with a T5 except he has ~375lbs of rotational mass(wheel/tire)

So what would you recommend for him. He wants power low because of the manual. Should he look at 5.3 heads on the LQ9 with a custom cam or some PRC/AI heads with cam ect?

Bouncers want to know what they can put together that's going to hold up decent (6Kish limiter) and not come apart every third time out.


Some of what he'll be using it for:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ChKkj4c1JyQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YBAtDZOKGyc
He trail rides more than comp stuff so driveable/broad TQ is more important than peak HP. I told him to give you a call, just wanted to get some info to you about what he's doing before he calls.
Edit: sorry to spam youtube vids in, just wanted links and it popped vids up

 

^^^ That thing is beyond awesome.

 

This is a good one!

Mild lobes. Proper distance from coil bind, proper seat pressure and good push rods will do the trick.

I would certainly put 5.3 heads on it and leave the square ports at home for now.

I would specify this camshaft which is a custom grind:

218/226 .598"/.570" 110+3

 

Thanks Martin, I'll have him give you a call still.

 

I didn't read the whole 38 page thread, but do you have a line of 5.3 cams and/or truck cams? The Tick website doesn't show any yet.

Basically looking for an updated version of the 10 + year old highly recommended 212/218 cam.

2010 5.3... 9.9 static compression and 799 heads. Has vvt and not opposed to keeping it.

I like the idea of SDPC's 214/218 111+3 shelf cam. The lift is also blue ls6 spring friendly.


My thoughts were always something around 214 on the intake side, and a bunch of advance ground in on a vvt cam that could be retarded to get the top end power of a bigger duration cam. But if a non vvt cam could get me there I would go that direction

Low end torque is important and I've always had the goal of putting down 300 ft lbs of torque to the wheels at 3000 rpms with a 5.3.

Sorry for the rambling thoughts but I would appreciate the input

 

I understand 100%. Here is what I would recommend:

216/220 .561"/.564" 109+3

This is non-VVT.

What phaser options do we have? In terms of ICL movement if we did go VVT.

 

From what I understand, the comp vvt phaser allows up to 20 degrees of movement. And that is all retard, with no ability to advance the cam from where it starts . That's why it's recommended to grind all the advance you need in the cam, and just retard from there. Hope that makes sense given my very crude understanding of how it works.

I like your non vvt recommendation. But it is a lot different than the old standard 212/218 114 or the the 220/220 112. The cam you specced has 0 degrees overlap vs -13 for the 212/218. Everything I read says that should indicate a huge advantage in low end power in favor of the 212/218. Yet I understand at the same time that a slightly bigger intake allows the cylinder to fill better and the smaller LSA brings the power down in the rpm band for the 216/220. So what gives? Which train of thought is right? (I am not doubting you or questioning you, only trying to wrap my head around it)

Where would you expect the 216/220 109+3 to peak?

A quick side question... why don't you see many shelf cams with an ICL like the one you came up with? It seems like everything you used to see from comp etc for ls engines was on a 112 or 114 LSA with maybe a couple degrees of advance. The only way more overlap was achieved was through a bigger intake duration.

Again I apologize for the rambling train of thought and the added questions.

 

Martin - Previously I asked you about changing from the Street Heat Stage 2 to the SNS Stage 2 of which you replied above. I haven't been able to break 114 mph. Close at 113.9, but just am not finding any additional horsepower and nothing is holding it back. My new goal for next year is 11.50 in the heat, probably 2500 DA.

What about changing to the polluter V2? Much difference in power? I have not added a CAI or underdrive pulley yet, but I want to shed off 0.02-0.03 without considering those additions. Thoughts?

Here is my current set-up. (Let's see what I can recall!)
SLP Lid
LS6 intake
Ported throttle body
799 heads, stock ports, decked .012
Tick Street Heat Stage 2 cam with BTR springs & Lifters
Used Hooker Headers, TSP Y pipe, Magnaflow cat back
A4, FTI 4000 converter
3.73 gear 12 bolt, 26" tire

Previously made 374 on a Mustang dyno with a 3.23 gear 10bolt.

 

Martin your stupid SNS2 killed my poor ol Ram clutch today at the track on the first hit! Measly little 4k dump and she was toast. Guess Ill be calling Tick again soon! lol

 

What I would do then, is find my ideal IVC event for maximum low end torque. Say a 30-32 IVC event, possibly even earlier. Much like the 216/220 109+3 cam has which is a 34 IVC event. Then retard the camshaft's ICL from that IVC event onwards.

The IVC event controls torque peak for a given piston speed. From what I've found through trends and testing it controls 75% of the engines torque production under the peak of the torque curve.

So if we utilize a 30-32 IVC event(or earlier) at full park(full advance) we can then pull the cam back as RPM's increase and broaden the torque curve while not losing any under the curve.

We also don't have to utilize all 20 degrees of phaser movement and can limit this in the ECU.

I kind of like this idea actually being the valve event nerd I feel I am.

As far as added overlap is concerned, this is a good one to discuss I feel.

Whenever you add valve overlap to a camshaft profile and don't adequately adjust the cylinder pressure accordingly to account for the added overlap, yes you will lose torque. Whether adding that cylinder pressure back via static compression or via dynamic compression and valve events it needs to be added back for strong low end torque production.

You have to think about this in terms of piston speed. At low piston speeds, the valve is still open for the same amount of time it would be at higher piston speeds. This creates pumping losses. When we add valve overlap we are adding to the amount of time the valve is open for. This will account for a loss in cylinder pressure.

Do you know what ICL those camshafts you mentioned were ground on? Even though there durations are small, they are closing the intake valve later. I don't think you realized that you answered your own main question about low end torque and overlap when you asked, "why do your grind you cams with a tighter ICL and not the 110-112ICL the old stand by cams are ground on"?

Cylinder pressure. By closing the intake valve sooner, I'm gaining the cylinder pressure back that was lost from adding valve overlap to the profile.

Anyone who has ever pumped an engine for cranking compression after adding valve overlap, but leaving the IVC event alone can tell you that cranking compression will go down. If you try to punch this in an online dynamic compression calculator the added valve overlap will not register, but it will in real life in terms of cylinder fill and air mass.

This is why I crank the ICL over so far. This does lose some top end from closing the intake valve sooner, but we're not really concerned about top end in this application. I will say I have found that the added overlap does help to carry torque past peak in lieu of closing the intake valve earlier which does seem to keep top end power production very strong.

The scavenging benefits of the added valve overlap and a valve event combination that works together(overlap in the end is just valve events) creates a strong torque curve.

This is my opinion on how to make a great torque cam. The results from the SNS Stage 2 and 3 should show my methods to work well when put into practice from theory.

As mentioned above, I believe the main thing to be killing your E.T. is density altitude.

When we have higher DA we cannot fill the cylinder with as much air mass as we can at a lower DA. This loses cylinder pressure and torque.

If the DA average where you race is going to be above 1500-2000 for most of the racing season we need to adjust your valve events accordingly to make the most of cylinder fill.

I think the Polluter would just be a step backwards. If you changed to a 5000rpm+ stall converter that would be a different story, but then the driving manners suffer.

Shoot me an email and lets go over some options. Whether they be adding compression via milling the heads and fly-cutting or changing the cam profile.

We'll make it faster.
LOL! Great example of a strong torque curve is bOb's car. Didn't lose any torque to the stock cam at 2000-2500rpm and pulled away from the stock cam at 2500rpm like no tomorrow. That 400rwtq@4000rpm is really nice!!!

 

Wow. What a great reply Martin. I can say this for sure.... you just locked me in as a customer for when I do buy.

For Reference a quick comparison of the 212/218 114+2 old standard comp cam vs Martin's specced 216/220 109+3.

IVC for 212/218: 38.... IVC for 216/220: 34

DCR for 212/218: 7.93:1.... DCR for 216/220: 8.15:1

This discussion has kind of blown my mind. The 212/218 has forever been labeled as the "go to" low end torque cam that also adds power all the way through the rpm range. Someone wants a daily driver cam for a 5.3 truck? That cam would be recommended 9/10 times by internet enthusiasts.

Yet I think the 216/220 you specced sounds like the better cam. It has an earlier IVC event, and a higher DCR. Pretty cool stuff. (Not to mention it will have a lot more of the lope that a lot of guys want) In theory your cam has better low end, with the overlap to carry it in the upper rpms. Where do you expect this cam to peak? 5800 rpm? Shift at 6100?

This sir is a seriously intriguing daily driver cam for a 5.3 that I think would would interest a ton of truck guys...


When we go back to the vvt discussion after learning what I did above... the possibilities are even greater. I completely agree with how you would do it. Starting with that earlier IVC and then retarding it even just 5 degrees to broaden the curve in the higher rpms would make a big difference. (something like a 30-32 IVC retarded to a 35-37 IVC)
The vvt talk sounds great in theory, but I wonder if we would see the results when applied. I keep reading, and have had people tell me that vvt just hasn't really shown the results to be worth it, but I am not sure anyone has done it like you just explained above.

Which leaves the question of: to rid of vvt and use the damn good 216/220 cam? Or to have a go at the "ideal" vvt cam? The vvt cam might require a little more tuning and dyno time, but it sounds like it might be worth a few horsepower up top and down low... This has given me a lot to think about as I try to force my cam swap fund to grow faster. Hell i'm just excited that there is another great option for a daily driver truck cam than the 212/218.

 

I wouldn't be so quick to throw the baby out with the bathwater so to speak. That cam will make for a great DD in a 5.3 no doubt about it. In a rock crawler though, are we really that worried about driving manners?

I would expect that cam to make peak torque around 4400-4600rpm and peak horsepower around 5400-5600rpm. Shift at 6000-6200rpm.

The lobes it would be ground on you could bounce of the limiter all day long at 6400-6500rpm with no issues. I'd like to see you shim the springs some as well to get seat pressure up and keep spring oscillation down to control those rev limiter beatings.

I would honestly start with a 30 IVC event at full park. Make sure there is enough advance in the cam that the EVO event at full retard that we'd utilize in the ECU is still early enough evacuate the cylinder at higher RPM's.

I have lobes at my disposal that offer more P to V at TDC for VVT combo's so lift at TDC is reduced.

I think VVT is great, but I still like to stick to my guns. I'd love to try it in this application though.

I'd grind this camshaft:
216/216 108+5

This gives us these events at full park

5 IVO
31 IVC
41 EVO
-5 EVC

At a ECU limited retard of 8 degrees:

-3
39
33
3

I honestly believe that will give you the broadest torque curve.

 

I may be misreading here, but are you saying that the 216/220 109+3 wouldn't have great driving matters? While I want the rock crawling torque, the truck is a daily driver.

 

Your vvt cam seems like a great design and I have often found myself trying to dream up a combo like you just did... the potential of a cam set up like that is the best of all worlds for torque. I still can't figure out why someone else hasn't done this yet and taken advantage of the vvt in this way. It seems awesome to me but I haven't found that thought process or reaction elsewhere yet other than this thread.

I'm surprised by the single pattern though, and getting away from the 4 degree split?

 

I was saying the 212/218 114 cam would drive very well. I even feel the custom cam I spec'd will drive well, but it will be more of a street/strip set-up than DD/cruiser.

I must of misunderstood the usage of this vehicle? Is it a rock crawler or a DD?

I'm just thinking out loud here as I've never tested a VVT camshaft before.

I don't want to open the exhaust valve too early down low. I would think this could cause reversion at low piston speeds if opened too soon. More split will exasperate this.

At least IMO. Exhaust pulses gain energy with piston speed and of course added cylinder pressure and air mass. At low piston speeds I'm afraid if I open it too soon, it won't have enough energy to keep from back washing into the cylinder during overlap while the exhaust valve is still open on it's closing ramp.

More split would make this worse.

This could be totally wrong though. I'm talking RPM's of 1000-2500rpm.

Need to test some VVT cams!

 

Wow, I realized you're not the same guy with the rock crawler!

I need my eyes checked

I'll spec something more appropriate for a DD.

 

Hi all I'm a self confessed cam aficionado with my first LS1 doing my full homework as we do before I jump in and take a dive. I really want to see somebody's testimonial on the street heat stage 1 as I believe that is the cam for me. Surely someone has this cam installed ? I have been lurking here for a while on this forum before joining up but I can't find a razoo of info apart from the advertising claims....All the other grinds look way to big for my daily driver, stock stall A4 4dr sedan.....can anybody enlighten me please ?

 

Looking for recommendations. I was impressed with the knowledge you dropped in denmah's truck build thread a while back and told myself I would get a cam from Martin when the time comes. Well I just swapped a 5.3l into my '81 Volvo 245 wagon. Onto the specs:

- 2002? 5.3l
- 799 heads
- LS1 intake
- Hooker Cast Manifolds
- 2.5" exhaust through an x-pipe into a Cherry Bomb turbo dual in single 3" out
- T56
- 3.73 gears
- Vehicle weighs ~3200lb

I want something aggressive, but that will take daily driver duties in stride. I drive this car to work everyday. Not concerned with lope at idle, I would rather have a steady idle. Would like to see some solid gains though. Willing to put springs in, but don't want to have to worry about PTV clearance.

Thanks in advance! Hoping there is something off the shelf that will work.