TableLeg

My understanding of a sleeper cam is one which on the whole behaves like a stock cam but offers an increase in HP and Torque.

I have a stock 5.3 L33 and am looking at a cam change. I have researched this extensively via the internet and think that something like the Comp XR265Hr-15 (or alternative) 212/218 0.55/0.63 with a 115 LSA (there seems to be 2x versions of this cam, a High lift and Low lift).

It would seem to me that this would be a better option in terms of performance over the old standard of using an LS6 cam.

I will be using new springs and had planned to use PAC 1218's.

I do not want all out Power/Torque, I would just like an increase in the region of 20-30.

However the cost of using a aftermarket cam like the 212/218 with new springs compared to an LS6 cam and springs is quite a lot different.

I have a number of people refer to the 212/218 cam as 'the LS6 upgrade cam'.

I want to have road manners similar/same as stock but most importantly I need to make emissions testing and can't increase the power too much as the chassis will then struggle to put the power down hence why I only want 20-30
The engine is utilising a fully remappable Ecu.

The cost of getting my heads ported (they are 799's) v's a cam change is practically the same.

If anybody has any experience on a cam change in a 5.3 that is purely as a 'sleeper' cam I would be interested to hear their thoughts.

Thanks in advance.

1_MEANZ28

iTrader: (4)

You can do a 220 from tsp or a ls1 hot cam..or just a stock ls6 cam is a good upgrade for the 5.3 and it will sound like stock just have alil burble

Exidous

iTrader: (11)

The above listed are great choices. I will be going to one of TSP's emission friendly cam's. They have two with about 10* of overlap which will idle smooth and pass the sniffer.

Gunslinger09

I'd try an LS9 cam.

speedtigger

iTrader: (16)

http://www.carcraft.com/techarticles...n/viewall.html

Check out this car craft article. You will find a lot of answers there.

Also, is your car a manual or auto trans?

TableLeg

Thanks guys

I should have added that I've already got an Ls6 intake and a ported Tb.

As I have the engine in bits I'd really like to change the cam now as it'd be a lot easier.

I saw the Carcraft article from this year 'Ultimate Ls cam test' and that's what steered me towards the 212/218.

The Ls6 doesn't perform brilliantly against the other stock cams but it is a cheap alternative.

Plus the engine is going in a car as opposed to a truck like the engine came from. I'd like to raise the Rpm slightly from the truck setup to around 6k.

TableLeg

Thanks you replied whilst I was typing my last response.

In answer to your question I'm running a manual 5 speed.

99Bluz28

iTrader: (35)

There's also the Lunati VooDoo #20540710(212/218 113lsa+4, lift .531"/.531").
http://www.ws6project.com/user_stor/...oducts_id=4626
Along with the Cam Motion #C33-676 , which is also a 212/218 113lsa+4, lift
.544"/.544"..

Both of these cam have -11* overlap.

TableLeg

Thank you 99Bluz28 for the reply,

Looking at the data you supplied both of those cams are almost exactly the same except the extra lift on the Cam Motion cam. Would the latter cam be too close in lift for LS6 springs?

I presume that aside from the other differences in those cam the extra lift would yield some more power/torque?

You also mentioned that both cams have -11* overlap. Is that important and if so why?

I have read the 'Cam discussions' on here but a lot of it still has gone over my head.

Essentially I'd like to get a good bump in hp/torque but need to ensure I am able to have the engine mapped to emission testing requirements. Cam choices are such a difficult area for the novice.

TableLeg

Just to add, I am sure you'll understand my apprehension over my cam choice as I only want to change it this once. I really want to try and avoid any feeling of 'I should have got a slightly bigger cam' but I have to balance this with a cam which will be able to be mapped to meet emissions testing and hopefully one who's profile is not so aggressive that I have to keep changing springs.

TableLeg

Thanks for the reply.

I have just looked at the LS9 cam,

Intake Duration at 050 inch Lift: 211
Exhaust Duration at 050 inch Lift: 230
Duration at 050 inch Lift: 211 int./230 exh.
Intake Valve Lift with Factory Rocker Arm Ratio: 0.562 in.
Exhaust Valve Lift with Factory Rocker Arm Ratio: 0.562 in.
Valve Lift with Factory Rocker Arm Ratio: 0.562 int./0.562 exh.
Lobe Separation (degrees): 122.5

It seems lift is comparable to many of the other cams, Duration is different however at 211/230 as is the LSA at 122.5.

Can anybody please tell me what the likely effect of these differences would be over the other similar 212/218's with 113 to 115 LSA?

TableLeg

Thanks again for the reply.

What effect would that have on the engine rpm? Like I say I would really like the RPM a bit higher at around 6200 rpm as opposed to 5500.

TableLeg

Furthermore I have just compared the 212/218 cams with a set of suitable springs which will cost circa $560 compared to an LS6 cam with springs for $355. That is a big cost difference.

TableLeg

Thanks again,

4.11 gears? Is this referring to the diff ratio or something else?

Headers I can see would be a benefit. Any particular type you would recommend?

I will probably have to use the block hugger 4 into 1 type due to body space restrictions.

99Bluz28

iTrader: (35)

You can get a CompCam 54-424-11(212/218 115lsa+0 , lift .558"/.563") and a set of PAC1218 valve springs for $475 shipped. For $120 more you're getting noticeably better valve springs and performance. IMO, well worth it over spending $355 on a cam(ls6) and springs(ls6) barely larger/better than a stock cam. If all you can afford right now is to spend $355 on a cam and valve springs then wait until you have more money to make it more worthwhile.
http://www.ws6project.com/user_stor/...-lift-212-218/
http://www.ws6project.com/user_stor/...valve-springs/

Gunslinger09

It's going to idle super smooth with that LSA and no overlap. It will make good power without having to give up much low end torque and its a great choice if you want to throw. Turbo or SC in the car at a later date. It will work well with spray too and can be had cheap too.

speedtigger

iTrader: (16)

If he had an LS1 cam to start with like most people on here, that would be one thing, but he has a stock 5.3 truck cam. Which, according to that Car Craft test is over 30 HP weaker than even the stock LS1 cam. If it were me, I would absolutely do a cam. But with a stick shift, I would have a 220 cam without a doubt. 220 on 114 will idle pretty smooth and make some excellent power with a good set of gears. Oh, and whatever you chose, I would get some PAC 1218 or 1518 springs.

TableLeg

Thanks for that, great links and a great price too.

TableLeg

Thanks for the reply.

I'll definitely consider the 220 as well but it also just occurred to me that I'd need some hardened pushrods wouldn't I as well. All extra cost.

Russ K

iTrader: (1)

Stock pushrods are fine with a mild cam/valve spring combo.

Russ Kemp