Should I go MS3 cam in DD CTSV?
01-26-2016, 11:28 AM
#21
My issue is more about the weight of the car. In an F-Body, an MS3 is still a turd down-low, but with gears it's "ok." But add a few hundred pounds to the F-Body and see if you think the same thing.
Tuning-wise. It'll drive fine. It'll just feel weak where you actually drive the car... say 2k-4k RPM on the street. And you don't give up enough uptop to warrant giving up a lot more down-low with a better balanced cam... like a 228/232 111 from Ed Curtis. You really need more compression, more headflow, a FAST, etc etc to support something like an MS3.
Tuning-wise. It'll drive fine. It'll just feel weak where you actually drive the car... say 2k-4k RPM on the street. And you don't give up enough uptop to warrant giving up a lot more down-low with a better balanced cam... like a 228/232 111 from Ed Curtis. You really need more compression, more headflow, a FAST, etc etc to support something like an MS3.
01-26-2016, 01:31 PM
#22
My roommate went from a 230/238 113+2 cam which had a lobe failure to a Cam Motion Titan IV 227/232 113+4 (similar to the street sweeper mentioned by JakeFusion) and he likes it a good bit better. Has more nuts where he drives the car but still feels good up top.
Car is a DD t56 Trans Am with 4.10 gears and bolt ons.
Car is a DD t56 Trans Am with 4.10 gears and bolt ons.
01-26-2016, 05:26 PM
#23
My issue is more about the weight of the car. In an F-Body, an MS3 is still a turd down-low, but with gears it's "ok." But add a few hundred pounds to the F-Body and see if you think the same thing.
Tuning-wise. It'll drive fine. It'll just feel weak where you actually drive the car... say 2k-4k RPM on the street. And you don't give up enough uptop to warrant giving up a lot more down-low with a better balanced cam... like a 228/232 111 from Ed Curtis. You really need more compression, more headflow, a FAST, etc etc to support something like an MS3.
Tuning-wise. It'll drive fine. It'll just feel weak where you actually drive the car... say 2k-4k RPM on the street. And you don't give up enough uptop to warrant giving up a lot more down-low with a better balanced cam... like a 228/232 111 from Ed Curtis. You really need more compression, more headflow, a FAST, etc etc to support something like an MS3.
01-26-2016, 10:51 PM
#24
had an ms3 a long time go, back in like 2006 or so. was a complete turd down low, tsp tuned as well. i daily drove my 346 m6 ss with 3.42 gears and it was miserable. switched to 4.10's and it was only okay. power was good after 5k rpms but @ 2500k and below it was a dog and felt weak and wrong. this was only a 3300# car. put in a much smaller cam (224 cam) and was much happier.
01-27-2016, 03:55 AM
#25
Had an MS4 in my car way back when, car bucked like hell even with 3 sponsors on this board tuning it, there's only so much you can do 4.10's might make it suck less, but I'd rather spend $400 on another cam that does everything better, you can even sell the MS3 to recoup some costs. I put a Futral F13 in my LS6 and it laid down 420/400 at the wheels with the worlds shittiest exhaust, I'm definitely apart of the had a big cam and switched it to a smaller more usable cam camp.
01-28-2016, 10:10 AM
#29
Of course that is part of it... A MS3 in a LS2 would be like running a 230-232 duration cam in a LS1. Which is about max of what I would run in a full weight Fbomb that is mainly street driven...jmo! In a heavy CTS-V I would be looking at something with better mid range power. Again a 228/232 would be a sweet cam for the OP's car. There are plenty of other areas to make up that 5-10 peak hp that he "might" be leaving on the table.
