DieseLife

What type of spring life can be expected on a daily driver with above said cam? Please mention what springs you are referencing as well. I'm tempted to have comp grind this xfi cam on an xe-r lobe for a 2002 5.3 getting bored for Ls1 pistons and stock heads.

kinglt-1

iTrader: (26)

Just curious why you want a XE-R lobe for a daily driver?

JoeNova

Lol. That small of a cam on an XE-R?

DieseLife

Guess I'm getting mis information about what to use on my setup. I was told the xe-r love would be better for under the curve power, which is valid but I suppose they forgot about the daily driver aspect.

That aside, what comp lobe would you suggest? This is for a truck not a car also.

I was also under the impression a 216/220 is about the biggest you would want on a daily with stock 02 heads. To keep from losing to much low end or requiring a relatively high stall to the point it kills mileage.

MuhThugga

Take a look at the offerings from Cam Motion. Their lobe profiles are known to produce power without beating the hell out of the valvetrain. They have some shelf offerings designed specifically for trucks.

JoeNova

Trick flow sells a 216/220 on a 114 that has a lot more lift than the comp. Only $275 at Summit, in stock.

kinglt-1

iTrader: (26)

XE-R is a race lobe...it use to be use to be the craze 10yrs ago before further research yielded results showing that smoother lobes made more power and offered a much more stable valve train in your typical LS setup.

I am not saying you can not run a XE-R but it does not make much sense when there better options today. If you want to run a older Comp lobe then stick with the XR...

Part #54-424-11

212/218 .558 .563 115

any bigger then this and you will be trading low end tq for more mid range and upper rpm power.

Part # 54-426-11

222/224 .566 .568 112

This will still work with a stock stall and gears.

Forcefed86

iTrader: (4)

I wouldn’t run an XE-R lobe on a daily. The HUC COMP lobes have super mild ramp rates.

I’ve run the Trick flow 216/220 @ 114. Price is right on that cam ($260ish), but I think it would be lazy on an NA 5.3… It was lazy on my 6.0 anyway. I’d want a much tighter LSA on a small bore NA SBE personally. 112-110 LSA would be much more responsive. Pretty hard to beat the 212/212 @ 112 .565 lift triple 12 from JFR for overall performance.

If you want a snappier cam with a more aggressive sound, 220/220 @ 111 .510 from edelbrock (PN:2215) sounds amazing IMO. It had better throttle response than either of the cams I mentioned above. It only pulled 10psig or so of vac at idle, but that’s not horrible. Also the Howards version of the GM hot cam would be another “mean sounding” low lift cam that wasn’t super hard on the valve train. I just picked up that grind to try on my new 5.3.

DieseLife

I'm partial to running comp since I get cams directly from them at below dealer cost.

Is there a comp lobe comparable to the ones you guys mentioned offered by other companies?

JoeNova

Don't worry about lobe profile for such a small cam.

Forcefed86

iTrader: (4)

Ask them to use a mild ramp rate lobe.. like the HUC.

This cam could be decent form them... and has a mild ramp rate with healthy lift.

http://www.compcams.com/Company/CC/c...csid=1399&sb=0

DieseLife

If I didn't worry about lobe profile I would have ended up with the xe-r. Lol Since it's not a good choice for a daily, I need to look at lobes that are.

JoeNova

If you didn't worry about lobe profile you would just buy a shelf cam and be done.

My point is that with a cam that small and that low of a lift, even an aggressive lobe isn't going to be very aggressive, and gains are going to be very small, im talking counting on one hand small. You're overthinking this.

Once you get into cams with 230+ duration and .600+ lift, then you can worry about lobe profile.

Sales3@Texas-Speed

iTrader: (2)

We offer two versions of the 216/220 cam on our TSP lobes which are much more stable and valve spring friendly. We offer a low lift version (.550) that can be used with GM LS6 springs and a higher lift version (.600) that can be used with PAC 1218 springs. Personally I would run the 212/218 cam vs the 216/220 on a 5.3. I have dyno graphs between the two that I can send you showing you the power differences and where one gains over the other. If you have any questions give us a call at 512-863-0900. We would be happy to help.

Lonnie

kinglt-1

iTrader: (26)

I believe The op's 5.3 block was bored to a 347.

Sales3@Texas-Speed

iTrader: (2)

You're right I missed that part. We have several options for your build. We offer low lift lobes all the way up to 228° of duration and our .600 lobes are amazing in power and stability.

Lonnie

1FastBrick

iTrader: (16)

Would you mind posting those dyno sheet so future thread searches can see the difference?

Also curious myself.

Jenson

iTrader: (32)

Thats an LSL lobe. Smallest HUC us a 231 @.05". I'd go with an LXL if I was the OP, 218/222 on 112. I did one on the LSL lobes before (219/221 on 112) in a 4.8L. Reacted the same as a stock LS6 cam but had more power up top. I'll be doing the LXL version in an 01 LS1 fbody this winter. Lobe #13157 and 13158 for reference.

kinglt-1

iTrader: (26)

There is a thread in the dyno section.

1FastBrick

iTrader: (16)

I only saw one that shows there 212/218 Vs. stock. https://ls1tech.com/forums/dynamomet...51hp-gain.html

I would like to see the dyno sheet comparison between the 2 listed cams as mentioned.