Street Cam Choice - LS1TECH - Camaro and Firebird Forum Discussion

Notices
Generation III Internal Engine 1997-2006 LS1 | LS6
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by:

Street Cam Choice

 
Old 01-21-2019, 02:16 AM
  #1  
Staging Lane
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 95
Question Street Cam Choice

I'm getting a different tune and intake from a new shop so now looking at a new cam to replace my Cam Motion Torque Titan 218/226 .595/.587 116+3 while I'm at it. This is a good cam, you could not get that much closer to factory while still making good power IMO. It delivered on my initial desire for a very smooth and quiet cam with no lope but I have found that replacing my previous 216/220 .600/.600 112 cam with this bigger cam I lost too much low down and responsiveness which would not be as noticeable in an F body but is important on the street in a manual car of the weight of my 2004 Monaro (2004 Pontiac GTO equivalent). Surprisingly I also lost top end power, dropping from just under 400 rwhp to under 380 rwhp (lower reading than US dynos though) but its the responsiveness I miss.

Originally I was just going to go back to a 216/220 like my old cam but since I'm starting again with a new shop anyway I thought I would look at options. I know you guys in the US don't believe in baby cams for a 5.7 but you guys know your LS obviously so does anyone want to recommend a replacement? Its only a street car, not raced at the track any more and doesn't do much freeway running. I understand that I will probably not be able to get as good manors as the current cam I will need to shorten the LSA/ decrease overlap which is ok within reason but I want to achieve the following:


- Excellent low to mid range to support my heavy car
- Responsive and not laggy (sharp under 3000 rpm)
- Smooth and not too much lope
- Hopefully regain some of my lost power

I'm guessing I will also need to replace the valve springs with duals to support .600 lift and over and the pushrods I fitted with this cam.


The current combo is as follows:

Higgins CNC Ported 241 heads
Pac 1218 single valve springs
LS7 Lifters
Manley Pushrods
Stock rockers with brass trunnion upgrade
Rollmaster Double Row timing chain
25% underdrive pulley
Ported stock TB with stock LS6 manifold
OTRCAI with 85mm MAF
1-5/8 short headers with 100 cpi cats
Twin 2.5" Stainless exhaust
3.91 Diff Gears with TrueTrac



Thanks in advance!
Pulse Red is offline  
Old 01-21-2019, 10:15 AM
  #2  
LS1Tech Sponsor
 
Summitracing's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Ohio, Georga, Nevada, Texas
Posts: 456
Default

The events on your cam are currently I/O -4 ATDC, I/C 42 ABDC, E/O 52 BBDC and E/C -6 before TDC. The two events you want to change are Intake opening and exhaust closing. Just changing those two events to -1 ATDC on the intake and -1 on the exhaust closing would drop overlap to -2 degrees. The other specs become a 221/231 114 + 2.5 advance...or Awfully close to the Stage 1 Ghost cam (222/233 115 + 3 .600/.575) p/n SUM-8715. See what I did there LOL?

Utilizing the same intake closing point maintains your torque and powerband....you're just getting more air in their on the downstroke for more power/torque across the range. Idle will still be mild. Thank you for your consideration.
__________________


800-230-3030
www.SummitRacing.com

Last edited by Summitracing; 01-21-2019 at 10:22 AM.
Summitracing is offline  
Old 01-21-2019, 10:19 AM
  #3  
"I MAID THEESE"
iTrader: (3)
 
Mavn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Houston
Posts: 1,394
Default

SUM-8715 seems like a good fit! Check out my Build Thread in this Sub Forum. Made 450+ rwhp and Have been 11.13 @122 At my very First Track Outing.
Mavn is offline  
Old 01-21-2019, 10:44 AM
  #4  
TECH Apprentice
 
tberg725's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Michigan
Posts: 336
Default

I know youre asking about a new cam choice but you're not happy about the power you lost when you went to that little bit bigger cam i noticed in your mods that you got an exhaust on the smaller side, maybe the exhaust is choking the bigger cam out but was efficient for the smaller cam personally i would look into long tubes but im just throwing anther perspective out there, good luck with everything
tberg725 is offline  
Old 01-21-2019, 03:25 PM
  #5  
TECH Resident
iTrader: (6)
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: AZ
Posts: 778
Default

In my non-expert opinion, manual street cars have different requirements for cam and tuning than auto cars. For smooth takeoff when changing gears you want instant low rpm torque under high load. That's why I put a baby cam in mine, 212/215 111+0. I went for higher dynamic CR, 8.14, which is not super high but knock has always been a problem. Stock DCR is around 7. My overlap is -8.7, it does have a slight lope, just the right amount.
patSS/00 is offline  
Old 01-21-2019, 05:28 PM
  #6  
TECH Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Central Cal.
Posts: 8,993
Default

Originally Posted by patSS/00 View Post
In my non-expert opinion, manual street cars have different requirements for cam and tuning than auto cars. For smooth takeoff when changing gears you want instant low rpm torque under high load. That's why I put a baby cam in mine, 212/215 111+0. I went for higher dynamic CR, 8.14, which is not super high but knock has always been a problem. Stock DCR is around 7. My overlap is -8.7, it does have a slight lope, just the right amount.
Looks like you did the right thing. Too many here are afraid of using a "baby cam" because of the reactions of those who think they need a donkey d*** cam to look cool
G Atsma is offline  
Old 01-21-2019, 09:46 PM
  #7  
Staging Lane
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 95
Default

Originally Posted by Summitracing View Post
The events on your cam are currently I/O -4 ATDC, I/C 42 ABDC, E/O 52 BBDC and E/C -6 before TDC. The two events you want to change are Intake opening and exhaust closing. Just changing those two events to -1 ATDC on the intake and -1 on the exhaust closing would drop overlap to -2 degrees. The other specs become a 221/231 114 + 2.5 advance...or Awfully close to the Stage 1 Ghost cam (222/233 115 + 3 .600/.575) p/n SUM-8715. See what I did there LOL?

Utilizing the same intake closing point maintains your torque and powerband....you're just getting more air in their on the downstroke for more power/torque across the range. Idle will still be mild. Thank you for your consideration.
Thanks for taking the time to make those calculations and for responding, I find your post very interesting. I had seen the posts about that cam and it seems good. However Im not sure about moving from -10 to -2 overlap and my experience is telling me while it will make good power, it wont deliver the responsiveness or low down I am looking for. I feel I may need to go smaller rather than larger to deliver what Im after?

Originally Posted by Mavn View Post
SUM-8715 seems like a good fit! Check out my Build Thread in this Sub Forum. Made 450+ rwhp and Have been 11.13 @122 At my very First Track Outing.
Thanks for your reply. I have been watching your thread. Very impressive results and with that MPH its certainly making the power! However I'm not sure that would translate to my heavier car with its current combo and thus deliver what I am chasing for this car? Is your combo not quite different from what I can see?

Pulse Red is offline  
Old 01-21-2019, 09:49 PM
  #8  
Staging Lane
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 95
Default

Originally Posted by tberg725 View Post
I know youre asking about a new cam choice but you're not happy about the power you lost when you went to that little bit bigger cam i noticed in your mods that you got an exhaust on the smaller side, maybe the exhaust is choking the bigger cam out but was efficient for the smaller cam personally i would look into long tubes but im just throwing anther perspective out there, good luck with everything
Thanks for the response and well wishes. I have thought about this. While the short headers didn't seem to hold back the smaller cam, perhaps they are holding back the bigger cam. Unfortunately I cant change them easily due to ride height restrictions and my driveway but its something I am investigating still.
Pulse Red is offline  
Old 01-21-2019, 10:04 PM
  #9  
Staging Lane
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 95
Default

Originally Posted by patSS/00 View Post
In my non-expert opinion, manual street cars have different requirements for cam and tuning than auto cars. For smooth takeoff when changing gears you want instant low rpm torque under high load. That's why I put a baby cam in mine, 212/215 111+0. I went for higher dynamic CR, 8.14, which is not super high but knock has always been a problem. Stock DCR is around 7. My overlap is -8.7, it does have a slight lope, just the right amount.
Very interesting post, thanks for putting it up. Your thoughts do seem to match what I have experienced with this car and my original thoughts when choosing cams. What you describe is exactly want I want in my M6. With the old cam it came on hard, obviously aided by the 3.9 diff gears.

Your cam choice is very interesting too, custom cam? I had considered the 212/218 .600/.600 111 cam which is quite close but wasn't sure if it was a backwards step compared to my previous Comp custom 216/220 .600/.600 112 cam. -8.7 overlap is still pretty smooth I would imagine, the 216/220 had -6 from memory and it was noticeable to me but still decent. I think I could probably go to -5 or -6 overlap and still be happy with the right tuning but I'm not sure about going to the -1 or -2 overlap, I need to think about that.

Originally Posted by G Atsma View Post
Looks like you did the right thing. Too many here are afraid of using a "baby cam" because of the reactions of those who think they need a donkey d*** cam to look cool
I must admit, I was heavily influenced by what I read on here when I chose the current cam, bigger had to be better! I'm not sure that is always the case and wasn't for me this time but I have to consider that it may be more than that too, I also chose to to make the car very factory like and probably when too far in that direction and there was an affect on performance. Still, without trying I would never have known. Its only my wallet that suffers, ha!

Pulse Red is offline  
Old 01-21-2019, 10:12 PM
  #10  
TECH Fanatic
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Coast of San Mateo County Between Pacifica & HMB
Posts: 1,458
Default

Adding 1 7/8" LTs with ideally a true dual exhaust with a Ported Fast 92 with a good tune to
your current cam would add at least 35 Perhaps as much as 45 RWHP and the response you are seeking throughout
your powerband. Changing cams with your current exhaust and Intake will be pointless
and frustrating IMO.
NAVYBLUE210 is offline  
Old 01-21-2019, 11:13 PM
  #11  
Staging Lane
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 95
Default

Originally Posted by NAVYBLUE210 View Post
Adding 1 7/8" LTs with ideally a true dual exhaust with a Ported Fast 92 with a good tune to
your current cam would add at least 35 Perhaps as much as 45 RWHP and the response you are seeking throughout
your powerband. Changing cams with your current exhaust and Intake will be pointless
and frustrating IMO.
Thanks for the post. Its fascinating. This is not at all meant to be an argument against what you've said but actually shows the difference between what is done down under and in the US. I'm asking on a US site so of course I heed the advice offered here vs in my country.

No one uses FAST manifolds on normal builds here. I have researched this extensively when I was changing the cam from the 216/220 to the current 218/226 after reading up on this site and shops here often don't want to fit them because they cant show any tangible benefits from them over an LS6 (which the vast majority of our 5.7s came with) and end up with angry customers who have shelled out often over $2500 on the full FAST combo. Ive seen 102s on some big cube builds but Turbos and Top mount blowers are huge down here so not often seen. The FAST 92 is nearly non existent down here, seen only a handful of times that I can recall and no one spoke highly of the mod. Going down this path would mean I was on my own like I was when I imported the Cam Motion cam rather than going local.

I'm not sure what a true dual is as far as my car goes (Monaro - Pontiac GTO equivalent) but while some people use twin 3" exhausts on our cars its usually for sound, they have generally not shown to deliver much power improvement over a twin 2.5, maybe a few HP and is said to push power higher in the rev range, the opposite of what I want. Headers though, it would be expected to pick up around 7 - 15 hp over shorties with 1 3/4 versions. People usually only fit 1 7/8 to strokers and supercharged cars with the 5.7 motors, more common with the 6.0 and 6.2 motors and even then not all shops support going that big. However I'm a bit stuck with this on my car as mentioned above.

Another difference is tuning, everyone here goes Mafless, surprisingly even on the bigger engined LS cars with their larger MAFs. This originally started in the late 90s/ early 2000s with the early LS1 MAF being small and restrictive but also because of the desire to use Over The Radiator CAI. I'm bucking the trend and flicking SD tuning and going back to a MAF. Ill be a social pariah though, HA!

On the cam, just keep in mind that I dropped nearly 25 RWHP just from changing cams. Nothing else was changed with my combo other than the cam, valve springs, lifters and tune. So it cant be a complete waste of time changing as in theory I could gain 25 RWHP. However as I tried to put forward initially, its not about top end power, the car wont see a race track, I am trying to return the low to mid range performance/ power that I had before for use on the street.

Lots for me to think about, that's for sure!

Last edited by Pulse Red; 01-21-2019 at 11:24 PM.
Pulse Red is offline  
Old 01-21-2019, 11:20 PM
  #12  
Staging Lane
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 95
Default

If anyone is interested, here is a shop posting on their testing with 1 7/8 headers and FAST Manifolds but on the larger LS engine. Its interesting reading and matches what my research showed me on the 5.7 with a factory LS6 as opposed to the LS1 manifold:

Headers: http://www.streetquick.com.au/news/p...peed-continues

Manifold: http://www.streetquick.com.au/news/p...icle-continues
Pulse Red is offline  
Old 01-22-2019, 09:49 AM
  #13  
TECH Apprentice
 
NSFW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Posts: 371
Default

Interesting results, especially in the second article.
NSFW is offline  
Old 01-22-2019, 12:04 PM
  #14  
Staging Lane
iTrader: (2)
 
cula8r's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: East Aurora, NY
Posts: 56
Default

Your heads flow 9 cfm more from .550- .600, then 3.5cfm more from .550-.600. I don't think you need really high lift above .550 since you're more concerned down low.
How about increasing the LSA slightly from your original cam. Maybe this one for consideration?
http://www.lunatipower.com/Product.aspx?id=2023&gid=288
cula8r is offline  
Old 01-22-2019, 05:38 PM
  #15  
Staging Lane
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 95
Default

Originally Posted by NSFW View Post
Interesting results, especially in the second article.
Yeah, matches everything else I found when asking around. I find the results on the intake change in the different countries fascinating, very different attitude to this mod. I opened a thread asking people about the FAST because I couldn't understand why the US forums said it was a must do mod and the Aus forums said waste of time.

I actually was going to test this out myself but didn't chase it up in the end as I was looking at going down the Supercharger path.
Pulse Red is offline  
Old 01-22-2019, 05:42 PM
  #16  
Staging Lane
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 95
Default

Originally Posted by cula8r View Post
Your heads flow 9 cfm more from .550- .600, then 3.5cfm more from .550-.600. I don't think you need really high lift above .550 since you're more concerned down low.
How about increasing the LSA slightly from your original cam. Maybe this one for consideration?
http://www.lunatipower.com/Product.aspx?id=2023&gid=288
Interesting suggestion, thanks, I will check that out as no one here chooses Cams with that low lift as seems common in the US, I was always of the mind that LS engines love lift so go close to or even above .600. Especially since the heads were setup for .600 and above I was told.
Pulse Red is offline  
Old 01-22-2019, 06:27 PM
  #17  
Staging Lane
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 95
Default

After the advice from Summitracing above I was looking over their site at their LS cams and noticed this one:

https://www.summitracing.com/int/par...make/chevrolet

Ive not ever seen a cam like this myself. 210/.214 .598/.598 108. It says " High-lift, short duration design. Great throttle response."

This is meant for a 4.8 or 5.3 truck I assume but it matches the style of cam patSS/00 uses but with -4 degrees overlap it would have a bit of thump I would imagine.

Ive never looked for cams this small before so its quite interesting that they are out there.
Pulse Red is offline  
Old 01-22-2019, 07:18 PM
  #18  
TECH Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Central Cal.
Posts: 8,993
Default

Originally Posted by Pulse Red View Post
After the advice from Summitracing above I was looking over their site at their LS cams and noticed this one:
https://www.summitracing.com/int/par...make/chevrolet
Ive not ever seen a cam like this myself. 210/.214 .598/.598 108. It says " High-lift, short duration design. Great throttle response."
This is meant for a 4.8 or 5.3 truck I assume but it matches the style of cam patSS/00 uses but with -4 degrees overlap it would have a bit of thump I would imagine.
Ive never looked for cams this small before so its quite interesting that they are out there.
I'm surprised to see this small a cam with that narrow an LSA. It would lope some, but should still have good low and midrange, I would think.
G Atsma is offline  
Old 01-22-2019, 08:35 PM
  #19  
Staging Lane
iTrader: (2)
 
cula8r's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: East Aurora, NY
Posts: 56
Default

Originally Posted by Pulse Red View Post
Interesting suggestion, thanks, I will check that out as no one here chooses Cams with that low lift as seems common in the US, I was always of the mind that LS engines love lift so go close to or even above .600. Especially since the heads were setup for .600 and above I was told.
Keep in mind that the LS/480 crate engine from GM has a cam with .525 lift on both the intake/exhaust, even the 525 crate motor, only more duration.
Coming from the SBC platform I'm finding that LS heads flow a ton compared to the original small block stuff. In my post I erred in the last flow specs....should be .600-.650".
I'm building a 6.0L iron LS3 & the cam I've selected is Comp's .566/ .568, .222/.224- 112, probably tame to some but I'm good with it.
Cheers mate!
cula8r is offline  
Old 01-22-2019, 08:55 PM
  #20  
TECH Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Central Cal.
Posts: 8,993
Default

The reason GM puts that cam and the ASA cam(also .525 lift) in their crate engines is one word- WARRANTY. This way they can use the LS6 springs with the .525 lift and never worry about valvetrain problems. This is why you're better off getting the std. LS3 engine and put in a better cam of your choice.
G Atsma is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

About Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

© 2019 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands

We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.
 
  • Ask a Question
    Get answers from community experts
Question Title:
Description:
Your question will be posted in: