MikeD.

2006 GMC Sierra with an 05 lq9. Truck had longtubes, 3200 stall, airaid MIT and KN drop in. Before cam my numbers were 343hp/375rwtq. Switched the stock can for a tsp tv2 and single beehives. Truck was retuned and lost 20rwtq at peak making 373rwhp/353tq. Truck feels really strong though. I realize that number are just numbers, but this is the same dyno and tuner. I didn't think I would lose 20ftlbs over all. Going to track it soon and see what it does down the 1/4. But is this common with this cam?

HCI2000SS

iTrader: (2)

Hmmm...U can see losing low end torque but not peak. Very odd

MikeD.

Yeah 20 across the board

Hamrdown

iTrader: (25)

^^ agreed. Low end yes, but not at peak. You have some other variable going on. That cam has been a proven performer for many years. A few things I'd check off the top of my head is pushrod length (use a checker tool), if it's too long it could be holding the valve slightly open. Check timing (tune). Double check to make sure it wasn't installed a tooth off on the timing chain, & check all of your plugs etc. Either there's a change in the dyno from your previous pull to now such as weather conditions, calibration & so on or something else is going on for it to lose torque at peak. All I can say is start checking.

ViaBellator

iTrader: (2)

Something certainly seems off. Was the TC locked on the before dyno, but not the after?

thunderstruck507

iTrader: (18)

are you sure the old peak wasn't a dyno spike as opposed to a true number?

MikeD.

Well the truck runs good, and pulls much harder through the rpm range IMO. The pushrods are 7.400 but I will double check to make sure they are closing all the way. Wouldn't that cause the truck to run very poorly though? I think as long as I pick up a few mph at the track I can chock it up to an inconsistent dyno.

01ssreda4

iTrader: (96)

If your valves arent closing your motor will not run because you will bleed off too much compression. As for the torque loss, it doesnt surprise me, though its a highly favored cam around here the v2 has never impressed me, and I also know the v3 was created to combat the lackluster bottom end the v2 has. I think there are lots better choices.

redtan

iTrader: (5)

No way a cam like that will lose torque throughout the range.

Although I do question the initial numbers more so than the end result. 375rwtq from a bolt-on LQ9 through a stalled auto seems a bit generous. Was the 2nd run done on the same dyno?

And numbers are just numbers, I would put more weight on how the car runs now vs. pre-cam. Have you ever taken it to a track (assuming not since this is a truck)?

KCS

iTrader: (20)

The torquer cams use an XER lobe, don't they? I wouldn't think a beehive spring would control the valve very well with that lobe, even at low engine speeds. Dual springs or even a conical may help.

JakeFusion

iTrader: (7)

I'd be leery of a beehive with that cam. XE-R are aggressive lobes. I'd swap to some BTR duals or a single spring with a lot more spring pressure (145 seat, 370 open or more).

MikeD.

Yeah I'm coming to the conclusion that the dyno was way high before. I did track the truck before cam, and went 13.4 @ 101 w/ 1.91 60ft. Track times will tell me the truth.

01ssreda4

iTrader: (96)

I wanna say the v3 uses one LSK and one XER lobe.