The Ultimate Small Street-Cam Stackup - Help in Choosing....
07-07-2004, 06:46 PM
#21
Originally Posted by Colonel
If your statement was true then everyone would be running these cams. Is that so? Then why aren't they? No, I believe that my statement can be 100% true and still people would not choose to run my cam. It could be that some people WANT a little lope. Perhaps it's because they're closed minded like you and believe that a 112-114 LSA magically means subtantially lower ETs? <snicker>
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]
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.
07-07-2004, 06:48 PM
#22
TECH Fanatic
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Corona CA
Posts: 1,324
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by 02RedHawk
Hmmmm.... Lots of differing opinions (which is fine, BTW). KEEP THEM COMING!!!
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!)
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.
07-07-2004, 06:56 PM
#23
TECH Senior Member
The heads are stage II.
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.
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.
07-07-2004, 07:44 PM
#27
12 Second Club
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Santa Clarita, CA
Posts: 931
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Great thread! I'm looking for the exact same thing as you 02RedHawk. I'm leaning towards the GT2-3 or the Stealth II. I have an A4 and idle quality and drivability is very important to me. Just like you I want the thing to start and idle fine if I have just beat on it in 110 degree heat or if I'm starting it up in -10 degree weather. No hints of stalling or rough idle, and don't really want the idle set at 800-900 rpm if it can be avoided either. Which is why (trying to learn here) that the higher LSA cams seem to be more forgiving in this department. I like the GT2-3 because I think it will idle the best, but from reading here it seems its design moves its power into the higher rev range for the most part (like you, low and mid-range is more important to me). The concern I have with the Stealth is the duration, will the sucker really idle that good (and at what RPM), and does it have enough vacuum for brakes and everything (probably a stupid question, but thought I'd ask). I'm sure the Stealth makes more power, just wondering what the trade-offs are over stock. Thank you Colonel for your insights on this cam! What if we added a custom one to the list say a 218-218 0.59 0.59 116.5 with the same "lobe" design or whatever as say the Stealth II, would much power be left on the table with that compared to the Steath.
07-07-2004, 09:34 PM
#29
Teching In
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Out by the bridge again, TampaBay
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm looking at the Stealth I 220/220 .581/.581 115 with springs, retainers, and pushrods on a '98 Z28 M6 with stock heads, longtubes, lid etc., and a complete tune. What are the rpm ranges and torque curve like for this cam?
07-08-2004, 01:21 AM
#30
TECH Resident
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Huntington Beach, Ca
Posts: 813
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Colonel
If your statement was true then everyone would be running these cams. Is that so? Then why aren't they? No, I believe that my statement can be 100% true and still people would not choose to run my cam. It could be that some people WANT a little lope. Perhaps it's because they're closed minded like you and believe that a 112-114 LSA magically means subtantially lower ETs? <snicker> 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!?
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; 07-08-2004 at 01:27 AM.
07-08-2004, 02:20 AM
#32
Banned
iTrader: (45)
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: NC
Posts: 2,556
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Um, <uncle leo> Hello! </uncle leo>
https://ls1tech.com/forums/generation-iii-internal-engine/187121-recommended-cam.html
https://ls1tech.com/forums/generation-iii-internal-engine/187121-recommended-cam.html
07-08-2004, 07:49 AM
#33
TECH Resident
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Wish-consin
Posts: 756
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by 02RedHawk
"The Ultimate Small Street-Cam Stackup"
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?
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; 07-08-2004 at 07:57 AM.
07-08-2004, 09:16 AM
#34
Launching!
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 238
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I thought the whole idea behind this thread was a power increase over the LS6 cam. I too didn't think most of the other stealth cams would provide much of a difference and that's why my first thought was the F5 ... it should have very good street manners and have a decent power increase over the LS6.
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.
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.
07-08-2004, 06:22 PM
#35
TECH Enthusiast
Thread Starter
iTrader: (17)
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Michigan
Posts: 652
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by equandt
I had the exact same requirements as you. I chose the TR220/220-114 cam. I looked hard at the CC216/220 on XE lobes and also at the LPE GT2-3. From the research I did on this board and the other board the TR220-114 looked like it suited my goals best. I am happy with my choice, the cam fits my requirements very well(which were the same as yours).
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.
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; 07-08-2004 at 09:00 PM.
07-08-2004, 07:11 PM
#36
TECH Resident
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Wish-consin
Posts: 756
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by 02RedHawk
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.
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.
07-08-2004, 07:25 PM
#37
Launching!
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: ..
Posts: 297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm extremely pleased with the civility and power that the 224/224 .563 114lsa cam I had TTP George install and tune for me.
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.
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.
07-08-2004, 08:53 PM
#38
TECH Enthusiast
Thread Starter
iTrader: (17)
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Michigan
Posts: 652
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by equandt
The thing to remember is that the CC216 the Solari is using, the CC216/220 or TR220 (or the like) will all really shine in the low end and mid-range torque vs. the LS6 cam you currently have. Your sig. shows 378 rwhp w/ the LS6 cam...that is pretty respectable peak numbers. Look at the above cams for what they can do for you under the curve. Very rarely does a street car hit that 378 rwhp @6200 rpm, a street car operates at 2000rpm - 4500 rpm...look for a cam that will have the best torque curve in this area....that is the perfect street cam. Note that it should meet your other criteria of idling well, ect...
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?
