H/C/I build need validation on cam choice
Well I took advantage of Goeff's holiday special pricing and went with his 226/230 113+3 .604/.604. After discussing with Geoff I also decided to go with the stock MLS head gasket. I should be right around 11:1 for the compression ratio. I'll probably start a build thread on here for anyone that cares, and to share all the part numbers I got for a full H/C/I swap.
I agree.
Gears will do more to make this a fun car for Z-camaro to drive than worrying about which 222/226 sized cam vs 228/232 sized cam. For fun driving in a six speed 4th Gen LS1 car 4.10's are nearly perfect in my experience. 3.73's are also excellent. I would think 3.90's would be very good too.
While there might be a rare six speed 4th Gen F-car with with a 220/220 plus size cam that drives OK with 3.42 gears, there is no doubt those same cars would be even more fun to drive with 3.73's or better gears.
I've rode in several six speed 4th Gen's that were lousy drivers with 224ish sized cams and stock 3.42 gears. These cars needed to hit 75-80 mph to stay in 6th gear and not buck/surge. Some of it could have been mediocre tuning but for the most part these cars just needed to turn more rpm to drive 'nice' in 6th gear at 60 mph.
My TA drives very 'nice' shifting to 6th gear around 45 mph with the 4.10's and the H&C in sig. The with the 4.10 gears the TA drives better and easier than stock in all traffic situations except when creeping along under a 1000 rpms going uphill in a parking deck/garage.
A good set of gears will easily make up for any power lost under 3000 rpms for about any of these low 230ish sized cams.
Gears will do more to make this a fun car for Z-camaro to drive than worrying about which 222/226 sized cam vs 228/232 sized cam. For fun driving in a six speed 4th Gen LS1 car 4.10's are nearly perfect in my experience. 3.73's are also excellent. I would think 3.90's would be very good too.
While there might be a rare six speed 4th Gen F-car with with a 220/220 plus size cam that drives OK with 3.42 gears, there is no doubt those same cars would be even more fun to drive with 3.73's or better gears.
I've rode in several six speed 4th Gen's that were lousy drivers with 224ish sized cams and stock 3.42 gears. These cars needed to hit 75-80 mph to stay in 6th gear and not buck/surge. Some of it could have been mediocre tuning but for the most part these cars just needed to turn more rpm to drive 'nice' in 6th gear at 60 mph.
My TA drives very 'nice' shifting to 6th gear around 45 mph with the 4.10's and the H&C in sig. The with the 4.10 gears the TA drives better and easier than stock in all traffic situations except when creeping along under a 1000 rpms going uphill in a parking deck/garage.
A good set of gears will easily make up for any power lost under 3000 rpms for about any of these low 230ish sized cams.
Thanks everyone for the help on the cam decision. I already have the motor partly torn down with the rest of the required parts in the mail.
Teching In
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 48
Likes: 0
From: Alaska
Great cam choice! Exactly what I would have done if I was in your shoes, but would have went with a 112 LSA! Let us know what you think!
I went with a 115LSA, Geoff recommended a 114 LSA or even a 113 LSA for my car because I wanted the torque down low as well... Wish I would have listened, but I was scared with an auto on the stock stall with a 113/114 LSA and tuning it to idle correctly.
I am not disappointed, but I imagine I could have gained some better torque lower in the rpm range if I kept my stock stall and went with a 112/113 LSA "if i could get the car to idle correctly". Since I moved to a higher converter, I think I will be tickled. He recommended a 115 LSA for my small cam if I got a converter. I figured I was going to get a converter at some time, I just didn't think it would be a few months after putting the cam in.
Your in VERY good hands.
I went with a 115LSA, Geoff recommended a 114 LSA or even a 113 LSA for my car because I wanted the torque down low as well... Wish I would have listened, but I was scared with an auto on the stock stall with a 113/114 LSA and tuning it to idle correctly.
I am not disappointed, but I imagine I could have gained some better torque lower in the rpm range if I kept my stock stall and went with a 112/113 LSA "if i could get the car to idle correctly". Since I moved to a higher converter, I think I will be tickled. He recommended a 115 LSA for my small cam if I got a converter. I figured I was going to get a converter at some time, I just didn't think it would be a few months after putting the cam in.
Your in VERY good hands.
Last edited by silvershark; Nov 30, 2016 at 01:31 AM.
That advance in the cam helps shift things down lower too. I learned that many years ago when I drove a friends Altima with the 3.5 V6 and the timing was off (something failed) it was advanced and that car ran its *** off from idle to about 4500 or so rpm and then it would fall flat on its face. It was a torque monster, it was hilarious, wish I had video.
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 24,241
Likes: 89
From: Turnin' Wrenches Infractions: 005
That advance in the cam helps shift things down lower too. I learned that many years ago when I drove a friends Altima with the 3.5 V6 and the timing was off (something failed) it was advanced and that car ran its *** off from idle to about 4500 or so rpm and then it would fall flat on its face. It was a torque monster, it was hilarious, wish I had video.
Great cam choice! Exactly what I would have done if I was in your shoes, but would have went with a 112 LSA! Let us know what you think!
I went with a 115LSA, Geoff recommended a 114 LSA or even a 113 LSA for my car because I wanted the torque down low as well... Wish I would have listened, but I was scared with an auto on the stock stall with a 113/114 LSA and tuning it to idle correctly.
I am not disappointed, but I imagine I could have gained some better torque lower in the rpm range if I kept my stock stall and went with a 112/113 LSA "if i could get the car to idle correctly". Since I moved to a higher converter, I think I will be tickled. He recommended a 115 LSA for my small cam if I got a converter. I figured I was going to get a converter at some time, I just didn't think it would be a few months after putting the cam in.
Your in VERY good hands.
I went with a 115LSA, Geoff recommended a 114 LSA or even a 113 LSA for my car because I wanted the torque down low as well... Wish I would have listened, but I was scared with an auto on the stock stall with a 113/114 LSA and tuning it to idle correctly.
I am not disappointed, but I imagine I could have gained some better torque lower in the rpm range if I kept my stock stall and went with a 112/113 LSA "if i could get the car to idle correctly". Since I moved to a higher converter, I think I will be tickled. He recommended a 115 LSA for my small cam if I got a converter. I figured I was going to get a converter at some time, I just didn't think it would be a few months after putting the cam in.
Your in VERY good hands.
That advance in the cam helps shift things down lower too. I learned that many years ago when I drove a friends Altima with the 3.5 V6 and the timing was off (something failed) it was advanced and that car ran its *** off from idle to about 4500 or so rpm and then it would fall flat on its face. It was a torque monster, it was hilarious, wish I had video.