TRex Cam
Thread Starter
TECH Fanatic
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 1,049
Likes: 0
From: Newport News, Va
So Colonel, when you say your cam is "small," what do you mean duration? Lift?
So, If I want a cam that makes good power all through the powerband, what should I look into?
Thanks
So, If I want a cam that makes good power all through the powerband, what should I look into?
Thanks
TECH Senior Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 9,246
Likes: 3
From: Troy, AL
It is small in duration compared to what people mean nowadays when they say "big cam" in regards to the LS1. It's a 224/220. Compare that to the T-rex for example. It's not really so big on lift (.581/.581) either compared to alot of what I see people using lately.
Well, you need to define to yourself what "all through the powerband" is to you. What is the powerband that you are trying to optimize? You can't have it all.
For example, when I designed the SSII cam I already knew that I wanted an SS4000 stall. I knew that a converter any looser than this would be outside my design criteria for this project. I knew to expect a shift extension of about 5300 with this converter so the cam was designed with this in mind. What power the engine was to make below 5300 was of only minor importance. Below 4000 (the stall speed) the power was of practically NO importance to me. So, all I had to do was optimize the power for 5300+ while keeping the idle stealthy (that was the other design criteria.) The results speak for themselves. A quarter mile ET of 11.20 with a raceweight of 3525, stock gears, and stock (heavy) wheels. Expectations exceeded.
Well, you need to define to yourself what "all through the powerband" is to you. What is the powerband that you are trying to optimize? You can't have it all.
For example, when I designed the SSII cam I already knew that I wanted an SS4000 stall. I knew that a converter any looser than this would be outside my design criteria for this project. I knew to expect a shift extension of about 5300 with this converter so the cam was designed with this in mind. What power the engine was to make below 5300 was of only minor importance. Below 4000 (the stall speed) the power was of practically NO importance to me. So, all I had to do was optimize the power for 5300+ while keeping the idle stealthy (that was the other design criteria.) The results speak for themselves. A quarter mile ET of 11.20 with a raceweight of 3525, stock gears, and stock (heavy) wheels. Expectations exceeded.
Thread Starter
TECH Fanatic
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 1,049
Likes: 0
From: Newport News, Va
When I said throught the powerband, I mean NO higher than 6500 RPMs.... So, like what would be a good cam that makes good power from around 2k to 6.5k??? I havent thought about what you said until now about PEAK HP is not as important as "under the curve power"
TECH Fanatic
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 1,839
Likes: 0
Bah, you, Mr. Weight Reduction, riding around in a full weight car? How DARE you?
I say, do both and go for mid 10's.
Then spray for 10 flat.
I know the guys at my local track who run 9.xx would **** a brick if a stock looking/sounding f-body was posting low 10 second time slips.
The look on their face when you pull up next to their 70's chevelles/novas/1st gen camaros with the big block and the blower sticking out, fully tubbed running 31"+ slicks would be priceless!
I say, do both and go for mid 10's.
Then spray for 10 flat.
I know the guys at my local track who run 9.xx would **** a brick if a stock looking/sounding f-body was posting low 10 second time slips.
The look on their face when you pull up next to their 70's chevelles/novas/1st gen camaros with the big block and the blower sticking out, fully tubbed running 31"+ slicks would be priceless!
