The Ultimate Small Street-Cam Stackup - Help in Choosing....
Perhaps they want to shift at only 6300-6400 RPM? There could be alot of reasons that more people don't run this cam but it doesn't mean that my statement holds no water.How many Stealth II cam's have hit 400rwhp cam only? How many cam only Stealth cams are even out there? Any? I don't know that anyone has even tried. Maybe they have. I don't know. Seems to be the best kept secret in cams. What's more important is not what peak HP numbers are made but rather the numbers they put up at the track. The SSII cam FAR exceded my expectations at the track.
How many people other than you are running a Stealth II cam? Again, there doesn't seem to be many possibly for the reason I mentioned above. It's certainly not because the cam doesn't work and work well. My numbers speak for themselves.
423 RWHP with an A4, 11.20 at 121.5 MPH with a 3525 lb raceweight, 3.23 gears, and heavy stock wheels. I haven't seen ANY other 224 heads/cam package claim exactly that. Oh, almost forgot...it idles like stock.
So, one question for you Linear Velocity since you had a few for me. What 224 112-114 cam would have performed substantially better in my car and by how much, in your opinion? Would I have scored 440+ RWHP on the dyno? More imporantly would I have seen 10.9s insead of 11.20 at the track perhaps? I'm just wondering by how much you believe my statement to be false.

And I'm an MTI leghumper because I recommend a 224 cam that I came up with the specs on (never mind the fact that MTI will sell you ANY 224 cam you want. Not like mine is the only one they'll sell.)? I know, maybe MTI is a Colonel leghumper for selling it!?
[/b]I was about to back you up on that one. Stealth is a good name for it, it seems to make killer power, similar to the tr224 and others. But like you say, the lope is what most want. Which is understandable. But it's a well designed cam. From what the original poster said he was looking for in a cam, the Stealth seems to meet all requirments.
I suppose an additional question to also ask would be.... "Is the new cam a worthwhile upgrade over the LS6-cam (for MY application), to go thru the expense and time of swapping them around?"
(My guess is a resounding YES!)
We run 388 rwhp on the LS6 engine through STOCK mufflers.
Tuning needed? The fuel, ignition, VE, and idle settings were left alone if that's what you mean. Shift points and rev limits were raised of course.
It peaked at 5900 and pretty much held that to about 6400 (it carries near peak power through a very wide range which is why it performs so well, IMO.) I shift at 6600-6700.
2-4K TQ? Seems to pull fine to me when the converter is locked. Hard to say with the 4000 stall unlocked though. A wide LSA helps the extreme lowend power (say 1K-3K in this case I'd guess), hurts the midrange (say 4K to 5.5K) before the peak a bit, and holds the power after HP peak longer.
I posted an idle clip fairly recently and dyno graphs quite some back in this forum.
The Best V8 Stories One Small Block at Time
Perhaps they want to shift at only 6300-6400 RPM? There could be alot of reasons that more people don't run this cam but it doesn't mean that my statement holds no water.How many Stealth II cam's have hit 400rwhp cam only? How many cam only Stealth cams are even out there? Any? I don't know that anyone has even tried. Maybe they have. I don't know. Seems to be the best kept secret in cams. What's more important is not what peak HP numbers are made but rather the numbers they put up at the track. The SSII cam FAR exceded my expectations at the track.
How many people other than you are running a Stealth II cam? Again, there doesn't seem to be many possibly for the reason I mentioned above. It's certainly not because the cam doesn't work and work well. My numbers speak for themselves.
***423 RWHP with an A4, 11.20 at 121.5 MPH with a 3525 lb raceweight, 3.23 gears, and heavy stock wheels. I haven't seen ANY other 224 heads/cam package claim exactly that. Oh, almost forgot...it idles like stock.***
So, one question for you Linear Velocity since you had a few for me. What 224 112-114 cam would have performed substantially better in my car and by how much, in your opinion? Would I have scored 440+ RWHP on the dyno? More imporantly would I have seen 10.9s insead of 11.20 at the track perhaps? I'm just wondering by how much you believe my statement to be false.

And I'm an MTI leghumper because I recommend a 224 cam that I came up with the specs on (never mind the fact that MTI will sell you ANY 224 cam you want. Not like mine is the only one they'll sell.)? I know, maybe MTI is a Colonel leghumper for selling it!?

I could probably count the number of people on this board with an MTI Stealth II Cam on one hand. One I know was Cannibal's brother who had it for like 2 weeks then got rid of it because it wasn't stealthy at all.
As far as your dyno numbers you have big $$$ LS6 heads and very little drivetrain loss. A4 (albeit thru a locked efficient convertor), stock rear with 3.23 gears, a carbon fibre driveshaft, and I recall you saying those Fiske's were pretty damn light

I also agree that it's about track times, not peak HP. But again if you look at his post he's not going to take it to the track
. And when it comes to racing, you are definitely the exception, not the rule. You were running like 11.5 stock internals like 2 years ago. Heck there are many with heads and cam that haven't run that fast at the track, that doesn't that they wouldn't kill you in a street race. Track times are more about suspension, torque, gearing, weight etc than all out power. Also having great track prep and -1000000 DA doesn't hurt either.The reason why you don't see any 224/224 heads/cam setups run that low? Simple. If people want to run around your numbers they get a bigger cam because it's that much easier. It'd be nice to be rich like to you and wake up one day and say, "hey I'm going to build a max effort stealth heads and cam car."
Do I think your car would have hit 10.9 with a 224/224 cam? It's impossible to say for sure but I firmly believe you would have run faster. How much faster and would it have been worth it are again up in the air.
But again if you want to help this guy out he doesn't care it if gains .1 at the track, he wants power without comprimising driveability and I again believe the TR 224 is better suited than the Stealth II. Just pointing out that that's my opinion (and obviously many of people's on this board)
Last edited by Linear Velocity; Jul 8, 2004 at 01:27 AM.
https://ls1tech.com/forums/generation-iii-internal-engine/187121-recommended-cam.html
I am looking for the cam that will deliver the best street driveability & mannerisms, idle-quality, torque, and horsepower. The cam will need to work in conjunction with a set of mildly-ported LS6-Heads.
Since its used on the street to/from work, I need it to have near-stock behaviors - in idle quality, driveability, cruising, etc.
I will gladly give up HP to retain stock-like driveability & mannerisms , but still want to get an increased kick-in-the-pants dose of power.
............................... Duration ........ Lift ........... LSA
Baseline:
'02 LS6......................204 / 218 ... .551 .541 ..... 117.5
The Contenders:
Futral FM-F2-114....... 224 / 224 ... .586 .586 ...... 114
Futral GM-F5-114....... 224 / 228 ... .586 .581 ...... 114
MTI Stealth II............ 224 / 220 ... .576 .581 ...... 116
TSP 4-224114............ 224 / 224 ... .566 .566 ...... 114
TSP 4-224114R.......... 224 / 224 ... .581 .581 ...... 114
TR 220/220-114......... 220 / 220 ... .553 .553 ...... 114
TR 224/224-114......... 224 / 224 ... .563 .563 ...... 114
LPE GT2-3................. 207 / 220 ... .573 .580 ..... 117.5
others?
TSP now has a stealth cam that you may want to consider. It is a 220/220 cam on a 115 cl. If this cam was available when I bought my TR220-114, I probably would have bought it instead. Just something for you to look at.
If you are wondering more about the TR220 check with GOMER here on LS1tech he ran the TR220 for a while with very good results (380 rwhp) and then added some PP heads and made 415 rwhp. What is more impressive were his torque curves. I think he was making 350 rwtq from 2700-ish rpm all they way to 5500 rpm (cam only). That is impressive on the street.
I personally believe the 224/224-114 cams are a little large for street only use. I don't think they will fit your needs well. They are great street / strip cams but the idle characteristics are not stock like.
The LPE GT2-3 is the king of stealth, but I don't think you will see much gain moving from the LS6 cam you have.
Good luck.
Last edited by equandt; Jul 8, 2004 at 07:57 AM.
If he's looking for a stealth performer, I would go with a CC 216 on an XE-R lobe ... but then again, I'm biased.
TSP now has a stealth cam that you may want to consider. It is a 220/220 cam on a 115 cl. If this cam was available when I bought my TR220-114, I probably would have bought it instead. Just something for you to look at.
If you are wondering more about the TR220 check with GOMER here on LS1tech he ran the TR220 for a while with very good results (380 rwhp) and then added some PP heads and made 415 rwhp. What is more impressive were his torque curves. I think he was making 350 rwtq from 2700-ish rpm all they way to 5500 rpm (cam only). That is impressive on the street.
I personally believe the 224/224-114 cams are a little large for street only use. I don't think they will fit your needs well. They are great street / strip cams but the idle characteristics are not stock like.
The LPE GT2-3 is the king of stealth, but I don't think you will see much gain moving from the LS6 cam you have.
Good luck.
Appreciate the insight. I'm starting to think that a 220 may be as big as I want to go; and that CC 216 sure sounded good from Soliari... Decisions Decisions....

Seriously though; I would like to make an additional 15-20hp over the LS6 cam for the cam-swap to really be worth my while. Then, tack on the Stage-I/II LS6 heads to whatever cam should suit me best... I hope to add an honest 45 hp to the setup, using a mild cam + heads. At a minimum, I want to be 400+ rwhp & 400 rwtq. Is this do-able?
Hmmmm... Thinking 220, 224, S-II, or the CC216... Aaargh, this is killing me....
Last edited by 02RedHawk; Jul 8, 2004 at 09:00 PM.

Seriously though; I would like to make an additional 15-20hp over the LS6 cam for the cam-swap to really be worth my while. Then, tack on the Stage-I/II LS6 heads to whatever cam should suit me best... I hope to add an honest 45 hp to the setup, using a mild cam + heads.
The cars running like it would from the factory, passes the emission sniffers out in california testing and you would barely tell there's a cam in the car..until you put your foot down.
Nice stealthy product that I would strongly recommend if you want a power increase over stock LS6 cam.
Good luck in your decision..as I doubt there's a bad one in the bunch.

Here's a little breakdown on my LS6-cam dyno results:
3000 RPM: 185rwhp/323rwtq
3500: 225hp/338tq
4000: 270hp/355tq
4500: 315hp/363tq
5000: 348hp/367tq
5500: 370hp/354tq
6000: 378hp/330tq
6500: 374hp/302tq
It makes over 370rwhp from 5500 up thru redline; rear-wheel torque hits 350 at ~3900rpm and stays above 350 until 5600rpm. Very nice looking curves, but I want....no, I *need* more. There certainly is some hp/tq lacking in the lower RPMs....
I do appreciate everyone's input. What sort of rpm peak does the CC216/220 have?



