Any help picking out a nice Lopey cam for my c10? LQ9 stock with holley mid ram 90mm dbw 1 7/8" long tubes with 3" exhaust. 4l80 with Circle d 278mm 3000-3200 converter. 3.73 gears Holley EFI so tuning is not an issue. Looking for a nice lopey sound that will make good power, will probably never see the track but will be driven a lot of miles. Thanks in advance.

 

I recommend you look into btr stage 3 truck cam..... Specs are 218/224 .553/.553 113+3
By it not having so much lift it'll last lots of miles and be easy on your valve springs. Also it'll have a nice chop to it.

 

Thanks for the reply, I have looked at that cam so it's an option. I see a lot of people use the 224 and 228tsp cam

 

Don't worry about buying a "truck cam" as your truck weighs little more than an f-body.
Lope is a function of overlap.

If you asked the same question and said it was a say GTO you will get a completely different answer despite the same weight.

People hear truck and think huge and heavy like modern trucks.

 

Problem is with that most of us don't drive our camaro/firebird daily or lots of miles...... we all know bigger the cam the more wear it puts on other components and it brings the "sweetspot" in later in the powerband.
Sounds like he really wants to drive thus truck everywhere and have fun with it and not work on it all the time.

 

Update on what I have.. Not my dd but I have went on power tour the last 2 years at 3k miles each and I like to drive it a lot through the summer. I'm looking for a good lopey sound that will have gains. It makes 310rwhp now with stock converter.

 

http://www.gm-efi.com/tech/btr-bumpstick-wake-call-blue-magic-finds-groove/

Read this!! Very interesting to say the least.

 

Thank you for proving my point.
That article you linked was for a 5.3l they repeatedly talk about compression compression compression but the OP here has a LQ9 which is half a point up on compression bone stock vs. a stock 5.3l of that era and the extra cubes will soak up more duration.
Not to mention weight, this thing weighs less that the truck in the article, new vehicles are heavy they began gaining a LOT of weight in the 90s, base curb for a 1964 Impala and a 2004 Impala is within 50lbs or so and depending on which trim package the 2004 is heavier.

Oh went and looked it up and the LQ9 has the SAME compression ratio as an LS1 at 10:1 and again still has a little extra displacement to soak up some duration. Bottom line, the same cam in this engine will be very slightly tamer than it would be in an LS1.

With the LSA down around 113 I am thinking intake duration in the mid 220s.

 

What's the weight difference between a 84 C10 vs a 04 single cab 2wd Truck?
I agree with you on cubic inches eats up duration but I also have called around a couple of times especially to Vinci cause I plan on soon getting a 73-79 truck myself and eat I recommended the OP isn't far off what they recommend me for putting a 6.0 in a older square body.

 

The 1984 was something like 3,700lbs with iron heads and iron intake, now he used a 4L80E which is certainly heavier that the stock tranny so let's call that a wash. Realistically by the time you figure the radiator construction, iron waterpumps etc. he may well have still saved weight.

Best I can find for base curb on the 04 is 41-4200. So this truck is likely closer to f-body weight than newer truck. LOT less wiring, no ABS, no airbags, crank windows, not even a headliner in an '84, bench seat. Maybe I m demonstrating how old I am when I say I owned several 80s pickups. There is nothing to them.