Anyone still use sloppy stage II?
03-09-2018, 08:50 PM
#21
I recently installed the E1839P cam into my LQ9. The operating range is definitely a misprint. That cam pulls right off idle, all the way through 6K easily.
This cam has a great rumble at idle. It is making MORE power-EVERYWHERE-over the LS9 cam (on a 115.5 LSA) that I pulled out.
I debated on going with the E1840P but was dissuaded from doing so by wise people on this forum. I'm glad I followed that good advise. The -39 cam sounds and runs great.
This cam has a great rumble at idle. It is making MORE power-EVERYWHERE-over the LS9 cam (on a 115.5 LSA) that I pulled out.
I debated on going with the E1840P but was dissuaded from doing so by wise people on this forum. I'm glad I followed that good advise. The -39 cam sounds and runs great.
Did you change pushrods? If so what length did you use? Don't recall if the LS9 cam has same base circle size as the Elgin. The Elgin has a 0.050 smaller RADIUS than stock LQ4/LQ9. I fired mine up a few days ago with the stock pushrods and agree the sound is great.
03-11-2018, 10:18 PM
#22
I'm running factory length 7.4" push rods. I used an adjustable push rod checker and it came out that I needed a 7.390" length. I just ran the factory length, and it is nice and quiet. However, I also have milled heads, and .041" Cometic head gaskets, and LS7 lifters.
03-12-2018, 10:42 AM
#24
We just paid for these using the 20% off sale they had going last weekend... Also got some pac1218 springs to go in too. Budget boosting baby!!
I bought one too even though I am not doing a build right now lol
I bought one too even though I am not doing a build right now lol
Last edited by KCS; 03-13-2018 at 04:38 PM. Reason: Non Sponsor Pricing Info Removed
03-12-2018, 01:09 PM
#25
Idk guys, Risking an engine to possibly cheap Chinese steel of unknown origin with incredibly lazy lobe design? If it was a cheap beater than yes I would swing for a cam like this, but I wouldn't want that cam anywhere near my engine. If it's a car you care about then do it right or leave it alone. Just my .02 I guess. Not hating on anyone's decision, purely an opinion.
03-12-2018, 01:36 PM
#26
Idk guys, Risking an engine to possibly cheap Chinese steel of unknown origin with incredibly lazy lobe design? If it was a cheap beater than yes I would swing for a cam like this, but I wouldn't want that cam anywhere near my engine. If it's a car you care about then do it right or leave it alone. Just my .02 I guess. Not hating on anyone's decision, purely an opinion.
03-12-2018, 02:14 PM
#27
Idk guys, Risking an engine to possibly cheap Chinese steel of unknown origin with incredibly lazy lobe design? If it was a cheap beater than yes I would swing for a cam like this, but I wouldn't want that cam anywhere near my engine. If it's a car you care about then do it right or leave it alone. Just my .02 I guess. Not hating on anyone's decision, purely an opinion.
Not sure if what you say about lazy lobe design is accurate, but a lazy lobe design is a good idea unless you are building an all out race engine. A lot easier on parts in a dual purpose street/strip car.
I accept your opinion for what it is..........just an opinion without any facts to support it.
As a matter of fact I am seriously thinking of putting the Elgin 216/220 in my stock 5.3 cruiser. Works with cheap made in Mexico blue valve springs......lol
Last edited by slarsen47; 03-12-2018 at 02:26 PM.
The following users liked this post:
Joe Dollor (01-11-2022)
03-12-2018, 05:08 PM
#28
I recently installed the E1839P cam into my LQ9. The operating range is definitely a misprint. That cam pulls right off idle, all the way through 6K easily.
This cam has a great rumble at idle. It is making MORE power-EVERYWHERE-over the LS9 cam (on a 115.5 LSA) that I pulled out.
I debated on going with the E1840P but was dissuaded from doing so by wise people on this forum. I'm glad I followed that good advise. The -39 cam sounds and runs great.
This cam has a great rumble at idle. It is making MORE power-EVERYWHERE-over the LS9 cam (on a 115.5 LSA) that I pulled out.
I debated on going with the E1840P but was dissuaded from doing so by wise people on this forum. I'm glad I followed that good advise. The -39 cam sounds and runs great.
03-12-2018, 08:09 PM
#29
FWIW Elgin is a giant company that has HUGE production runs which allow cheap pricing. And while the lobe “know it alls” may giggle at the specs, ramp rates, lift, etc. I’ve never had one fail. I’ve used at least a hundred Gen I flat tappets in Street hydraulic SBC and solid lifter stock car engines. All ran well and did what they were intended for.
03-12-2018, 08:10 PM
#30
Please note that is why I put the 115 in parenthesis. The Howards version uses a tighter LSA for a NON super-charged version. It is a "torque" cam for all intent and purposes. Designed for off-idle to about 5500 ONLY. Right where my factory LS2 intake seems to fall off anyways if you can believe all of the dyno reports.
03-13-2018, 03:24 PM
#31
Please note that is why I put the 115 in parenthesis. The Howards version uses a tighter LSA for a NON super-charged version. It is a "torque" cam for all intent and purposes. Designed for off-idle to about 5500 ONLY. Right where my factory LS2 intake seems to fall off anyways if you can believe all of the dyno reports.
03-13-2018, 04:42 PM
#32
Some of you need to read the Non-Sponsor Soliciting Policy. It's okay to discuss products made or sold by vendors that do not support this site, but do not post contact or pricing info. It's unfair to the vendors that do pay for this site.
03-13-2018, 06:59 PM
#33
Restricted User
Idk guys, Risking an engine to possibly cheap Chinese steel of unknown origin with incredibly lazy lobe design? If it was a cheap beater than yes I would swing for a cam like this, but I wouldn't want that cam anywhere near my engine. If it's a car you care about then do it right or leave it alone. Just my .02 I guess. Not hating on anyone's decision, purely an opinion.
The Lobes on the 228/230 cam are similar to the BTR Stage 2 Truck cam in aggressiveness (the truck cams have the mildest lobes of the BTR cams).
03-16-2018, 09:53 AM
#35
Restricted User
03-18-2018, 09:49 PM
#36
Teching In
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Houston, Tx
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm running that cam and I dig it a lot. It's basically the sloppy build, part for part. 4.8, sloppy stage II cam, 76 china turbo, p01 2 bar flex, decapped injectors, Wally 450. I specifically copied his build because I wanted to tune it myself. Little did I know, that's not how tuning works. I bought HPtuners and tuned for that cam and built trans/stall first, then once I got the hang of tuning I did the turbo. The cam was a breeze to tune, and overall, everything went great. I have no idea how much power I make since I tuned it on the street myself, but most people I talk to think that at 16#, 18* advance (on corn), 4.8 with a 76 I should be in the low-mid 500s rwhp.
03-18-2018, 10:43 PM
#38
Teching In
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Houston, Tx
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That seems like a fantastic question for the sales reps at jegs. If you go to their website, and go to “contact us,” there’s a phone number listed. Call that number, and ask them the exact same question you asked here, and they’ll give you a laundry list of cams you’d be interested in.
03-19-2018, 06:19 AM
#39
Restricted User
