Another_User

I looked already. I have found nothing that shows this cam being some magical cam that makes good power. I have a camshaft book sitting right next to me, and there is no mention of anybody gaining anything from a split variation like that. And by the way, my mods all compliment each other for my application. The hotcam sounds good, has good street manners (when tuned), works well with my shorties, and Flowmasters are just fine for a catback. I enjoy a nice broad torque curve that I don't need to rev to 7000 rpms to get any use out of.

And yes, a silly camshaft with some radical lift variance on the intake, that doesn't make any more power than most of the cams people are running is stupid. How can anybody justify selling a guy a cam with a .600 intake lift, which is sure to eat springs for breakfast, when he has no other major mods. I've looked at a lot of flow numbers. There is no reason to run that much intake lift on an otherwise normal LS1.

Another_User

Oh, by the way:
Head and flow comparison:
Looking at these numbers, why on an otherwise stock engine would you put some whacked out lift on the intake for 6 cfm. And a whopping 1 cfm if you have good heads.

The unmodified bare head comparison is even more weak, with only a 1 cfm difference between .550 and .600.

jrp

iTrader: (16)

who said it was magical, the cam works, what more do you need to know. the OMC peaks @ ~5800 and has a tq curve to match or surpass your HC. the premise behind the OMC was great power, stock poweband, and emissions friendly. i think TR hit it on the mark. guess LGM, TR, Cartek, TSP should all stop selling there .600 lift cams since they obviously dont work on stock heads

and yep your mods compliment each other; slow ramp lt1 era cam, minimal gain shorties, and one of the most restrictive catbacks out there.


https://ls1tech.com/forums/showthrea...&highlight=OMC

FASTONE

I don't really love the cam either but if you lift the valve past where the head peaks flow it will still make more power,with the fast intake ramp the valve is lifted more at lower durations as well so the intake flow benefits. I"m not trying to be difficult just explaining the idea behind the cam.

11 Bravo

iTrader: (3)

Another User, no offense, but you have no clue what you are talking about. This is a weak thread. Do some researching on reverse split LS1 cams. You are dead wrong. If you think this cam does not make good power, then you have not done your research. It's track proven. Throw your flow #'s that you got from wherever away and research what this cam does in real life.

FASTONE

Didn"t someone run in the 11"s with that small cam?

Another_User

Oh well, I'm done arguing. Show me a before and after of that cam compared to a hotcam in the same car, or even a Z06 cam, and I'll believe it. I scoured the Internet looking for anything remotely like that cam after this post got put up. I think they are the only people to make anything like that bastard cam. Do a search yourself. Show me the links to these proven cams. They don't exist. I looked. This thread is weak, I'm out.

CaptUSA

iTrader: (5)

Well, I certainly didn't think I'd be stiring the pot this bad when I asked my question. Yeah for me. Thanks for the concern "Another_User." Here is a link to the dyno TR used. http://www.thunderracing.com/catalog...&vid=3&pcid=51 (I would have copied the pic, but didn't know if that would be stealing or not) You had me rolling when you said "Cam=poop." I've talked to MANY MANY people about the 918 springs being an issue on the cam, and everybody say's not to worry about it. Not just the TR guys either, I'm talking about the brains on site here. To the rest of you guys (the one's who think it's an okay cam) should I try to get w/ TR and have a new cam ground a little closer to the 115 lsa? I really don't want any serging in my A4 car. When the car's payed off in 2 years, and I can really start throwing money at it, I'm sure the cam will go up for sale.... but for now, I want something reliable and trouble free. 20-30hp would make me a very happy camper indeed.

Another_User

So are you running long tubes? Because they were on that dyno graph. With an off road pipe and cutout. The exhaust has to get out somehow with that intake lift.

Notice the TR-224 cam made 80 horspower compared to 31 of your cam through longtubes, also stock heads, but no offroad pipe or cutout. I'm not bashing here. Just because they posted a dyno graph showing an improvement over stock does not make this a good cam. It isn't. With less mods the 224 made almost 25 more horsepower. And they both have near identicle curves. So anyways...anybody (jrp) who said I don't know anything, go re-read you dyno graphs.

jrp

iTrader: (16)

dude your a dumbass, the 224 dyno was w/ bolt ons, it didnt gain 80rwhp with the cam itself. the 318rwhp was obviously an old baseline. and how do you figure less mods

OMC: LT, ORY, Lid, cutout, TB, Pulley, intake
224: LT, ORY, Lid, TB, Pulley, intake, aluminum flywheel, carbon fiber drive shaft

the 224 makes 23rwhp/14rwhp tq more then the OMC as it should, considering it has 9* more intake and 4* exhaust duration.

you also seem to be missing the point of the OMC; stock idle, stock powerband range, emissions friendly, with very little tuning.

Another_User

You missed all my points. Both of the cars had the EXACT SAME bolt-ons. The torque curves look almost identicle. Everybody always says how great that cam idles (I have no idea, my hotcam idles great now that I have it tuned right...almost stock). And yes, the 224 does have more intake and exhaust duration. The point is you get the same benefits AND more horsepower from normal cams that are not a POS like that one. AND my other point is to benefit from that cam they used A LOT of extra exhaust mods, which nobody cares to pay attention to. Anyways, like I was saying, there are plenty of cams that make more power, have the same torque curve, idle well, don't require as much exhaust work, and don't eat springs. Well, I'd say that covers this round of your

jrp

iTrader: (16)

please tell me how LT's, ORY, and a cutout are "extra" exhaust mods that the average ls1'er doesnt have however fucked you think the specs are bottom line it'll make your HC its bitch at the track, thats all that really counts anyway.

the cam idles great with no tuning, that more then can be said about the HC.

bottem line its not your car or your money, he did his reseach and chose a cam that fits his particular application.

camaro98z28

I have the TR 220/220 114LSA running actually 113.6 LSA and I have Stock Heads and Intake. I just had a nice run with my Buddy Last night with a TR 224/224 112 LSA with pretty much the same bolt-ons. He's got Stick and 4.10 gears and From a Roll We stayed pretty much side by side. N/A Run of course.. Almost got Busted too.

Another_User, I think your lost about what your talking about. Remember, It's all about the Combo. That 215/220 cam was made for pretty much a stock engine and Highest gains..

Thunder Racing... YOU GUYS ROCK... I need to stop in there when I go to Visit my Brother. He lives not to far from you. Thanks For the Cam guys.

Another_User

Will a moderator please lock this thread? It is giving me a headache. I have explained why the cam sucks, I have backed it up with numbers. Their own dyno charts show it sucks. There is a REASON why none of the cam experts are in on this thread. Because the cam sucks and nobody wants to say it. Anyways, once again. Please lock this thread...or better yet delete it so I don't have to look at it anymore.

Both of the cams I used as examples were on stock heads, so don't argue stock head crap with me. And YES, ORY and a cutout make a HUGE difference when you are demonstrating a cam that obviously allows less exhaust out, and excessive intake in.

I have a headache. I would bash a sponser to lock this thing, but I would probably get booted for a week. Or worse, indefinitely.

My final thought: You asked opinions about the cam. My opinion. Lame...weak...poop...you could make a lot more power with something else.

The End.

bigdsz

iTrader: (1)

Guys I'm an old man 57 years old, and have been mess'in with engines since the early '60's. I'm no expert but I've always prided myself as being a reasonably competent weekend mechanic. For the LAST, LAST, LAST word on this subject I have never seen a cam with the exhaust port with a .077 lift smaller than the intake. I'm not saying it doesn't work power wise, but if the intake lift was much smaller I would almost guarantee similar results.

MNR-0

This thread has made me laugh. Keep it up.

CaptUSA

iTrader: (5)

Thanks for all the input guys. Soo...... Okay, should I try to get a new grind with the wider lobe seperation, or what?

CaptUSA

iTrader: (5)

T T T

Another_User

No. Not TTT. Down down down. Let the thread die!

Colonel

Thunder Racing really did their homework when designing this cam. It does what it's intended to do very well and will SMOKE a Notcam's *** while having a MUCH better idle, better drivability, and cleaner emissions to boot.

Another_User, sorry, but you don't have a clue on this one. TTT!