no problem. anytime.

 

No need to get defensive

With 113 mph they ran 12.07. Im guessing auto car? I ran a fully optioned, full weight T/A, with headers, a six speed and on Eagle F1 stock tires. An auto trapping 113 should be capable of 11.70s If your running 11.9s at 118 I say thats M6 car too, otherwise, your not hooking.

All I want to know is if there is any of this theory that is actually working producing power to move a car down the track. I think you confuse a converter flashing for some of that low speed torque. Looking at an auto cars dyno is about the biggest waste of time, unless your comparing on the same car, same gears, same converter. Ive put stock bottom end cars that read 500 lb ft on the dyno... garunteed the motor didnt actually make any more then 410 lb ft

Ive had my hands in a stock bottom end, 218 cam car with a 150 shot that ran within .5s of the two stage nitrous superstroker motor, heads cam cars that are half a secodn faster then 11.44, and 6 speed cam only cars full weight quicker then 12.0s

Lets not throw rocks people, just seeing if it computer sims and dyno charts or this thing makes mph at the track. I prefer the later

 

Speaking of VHP Trq oriented cams, do they make something big enough for a stroker, like 383 or 402/408 ??

 

yes the car is an auto. my 11.97 @ 118 is in my 00 formy which is an auto also. http://www.stealthram.com/2000pontiacformula.html only mods at the time i ran that number was SLP airlid and 200 n2o. and believe me i'm hooking. no spin hit the bottle at 2k rpms. the wife's 99 formy runs 11.84 @ 121. auto also. with a 175 shot. click the pink banner for her mods. the single biggest reason why either car doesn't do better ETs is because they both still have the stock converter in them.

auto tranny with better converters make more torque due to their ability to multiply. so,the motor may not have made that 500 lbs/ft of torque. but because the converter MULTIPLIED it, i'm sure that's what hit the rear wheels. the problems with autos over manuals is the fact the torque curve drops off quicker. hence the ability for a manual to trap better mph.

were those cars corvettes? it's not easy to lauch a IRS car vs a solid axle car. geee all i need is a converter and i'll beat the VHP car also. a converter is usually worth about another .5-.7 in most cases.

i prefer to have the lowest ET. mph is nice. but not need to produce the lowest ET. evidence of the VHP corvette running right with me with less mph.

 

just like everyone else here, just call them and they'll match you up with a cam for the motor. they just finished joe vinci's 409 Z28. they put the 055 cam in it. they haven't dyno tuned it though. with the moving of the shop, they still haven't got the dyno in place yet. http://www.vincihighperformance.com/...AINPARENT.HTML

 

Tell the vette guys cutting 1.4s with heads/cam cars and runnign 10s they cant 60 ft.

 

that's great for them. i'm sure they are on slicks as well. i was refering to all those cars you mentioned here. and i also sure the VHP Z06 was cutting 1.4s also. and it was 10s without the bottle.

so what's your point in all of this? is it one of those i know somebody quicker than you nanny nanny boo boo things? you trying to discredit VHP? there is always someone who will be quicker and can do it cheaper things. right now i'm quicker than their c5 is by a tenth. cost? maybe $600. but i rely on lots of n2o to do it.

 

I cut a 1.72 60' on the stock F1SC's on a z06 and ran an 11.60 with just the airbox lid off. 1.81 60' all stock and ran an 11.783.

I have driven a H/C Z06 that 60's between a 1.42 and a 1.47 and runs mid 10's@ 127-128mph with a slipping clutch.

 

ok. great. wish i could. this is getting off the whole cam topic this thread is about.

 

alright. hey j-rod. thats your Z, correct? What head/cam package are using?

thanks.

 

well it's switched from cam talk to who's car is quicker now.

 

mrr23.

do you think with any of the information some of the guys here have lent you about flow percentages, might sway your opinion of reverse splits?

just curious on where you stand.

 

i'll quote myself from this thread:

 

i'll quote myself from this thread:

 

My point was that what is predicted by a computer dyno sim and torque numbers from a converter flashing, dont mena jack about the power a vehicle is really going to make

 

a chassis dyno will show what the wheels are getting. only an engine dyno will show you what the engine is producing. again i'll state i don't live or die by the DD2003 i was referencing. i don't believe the numbers it tells me. i look at the projected hp and tq curves it shows.

 

I'm just curious why you think a reverse split is a race only cam when actually the opposite is true. Here is the whole deal.

Most folks overcam engines, its a plain simple fact. They all seem to come from a bigger is better, so it must be faster school of thought. Reverse splits are actually used in most cases to improve drivability as you cut down on exhaust lobe. Especially in the LS1 we saw that with the intake system some cars worked better when you didn't put ahuge lobe on the exhaust. I'm not saying it always works. It application specific.

Alot of folks went towards thinking of Reverse splits when Al Corda ran one in a stock eliminator and broke the 9 second barrier.

Lets just say if you overscavenge the exhaust you end up blowing power out the tailpipes. I am not a stunch advocate of reverse splits. IN most cases with the combos I am running a positive split is actually what probably going to be what makes the best power IN MY APPLICATION.

The reason Chris and I and others are arguing with you is that you are citing things that are simply incorrect. I can't state it any other way. You cite that a reverse split is a race only cam, and that just not true. You don't seem to understand that a long runner FI manifold with something like a 15" length is way differnet than a Victor Jr. with a 5" runner length. Just because something isn't a restriction on a flow bench doesn't always mean it doesn't take some TIME to get that air moving. If you look at the first order wave for ram tuning a 346 you only need 5" of runner length. Why is the runner so long? To boost torque. Look at the cams the mfgs like Ford and GM are using reverse splits in several cases.

You get in here and say a Vette can't 60'. I say B.S. on that too. I know several other guys who would say the same thing.


I'm not pro reverse split, symetric, or positive split. I'm for designing cams based on all the information, and the results are what they are. This is about like arguing over LSA. LSA is B.S. LSA is what you get after you select the right valve events...

Split is determined by intake to exhaust flow, efficency of both the intake tract and the exhaust tract. For instance, I'd design a cam for drag car with open headers differnet than I would a car with headers and a full exhaust system in many cases as exhaust efficency is different.

I like positive splits on my race cars for various reasons that work FOR ME. But, I won't say that that is all I will use. I use WHAT WORKS.

As for the car I'm driving. I'm driving my Z06 which I'm testing speed density on. Its my stocker (well, as soon as I put the stock tune, and lid back on, its stock).

I'm also driving another Z06 which is a H/C car from LGM. 503rwhp/455rwtq LS6.


Anyhow, my mantra is not split or LSA, it valve events plain and simple. The rest is what falls out the bottom.

I can show you cms that look like a positive split, but when you look at the other part of the cam (other than .050) you'll see that are reverse splits based on lobe area. Most folks can't seem to look past the .050. What about .006, .200, etc????

You can't say a certain split is best. You can only say good valve events and proper lobe sizing is critical to maximum engine power....

 

Thanks JRod, didnt have time to type a whoel speil, but you pretty much summed it up. Not enough FACTUAL talk in here is what I was gettign at

 

Good post J-ROD!

As stated, ve's are over looked and aren't even thought abotu when most pick a camshaft. Could we talk a bit more on valve events? All I have is Sean's theories, which I truly look up to. Do you have any more information, on correct picking of VE's?

Thanks.

 

so far only one dyno has been shown. it plainly shows a power gain above 5500 rpms. that's great if you plan on using that rpm band. go back. take your time in reading my posts. i brought sportside 5.3 in on this thread to show him the LS1 intake just isn't as restrictive as he kept saying it was in the comp 216/220 thread. he kept insisting it is and was telling the guys in the truck board a reverse split is the way to go. i said no it's not. tell why why it's so restrictive. as he has posted in this thread he's too lazy to try and prove his point. now start showing me some dynos where the reverse split is favoring the low end of the spectrum. stop showing me where all these RACERS are breaking the 9 second barrier with them and i'll stop saying it's great for a RACE application. so far all i see for information is all these RACE applications breaking new sub 10 second barriers.
see above statement.

and yes i know about aver scavenging an exhaust system and pulling too much fresh charge out the exhaust. huge cams with low LSA have this problem. that's why you need to raise compression to compensate for the fresh charge going out.

until you show me dynos of reverse splits doing better under 5500 rpms, i can only conclude that they are for RACING applications. unless you want to drive around town in the 4000-7000 range, a guy in a truck pulling a boat will get highly pissed off he put a reverse split in his truck. are you getting my point yet? i'm opening someone's eyes to the fact that a reverse split just isn't the definitive answer to a so called intake restriction that so far is only above 5500 rpms.

again i'll just have to clarify something here. GrannySShifting was trying to make VHP's cars looking bad by saying looky at all these other cars i've done something to that do so close or sometimes better than theirs. he didn't specify what kinds of cars they were now did he? if you put 2 identical drivetrains in one car with a solid axle and one with IRS, which one will be able to 60ft better? why are ford racers taking their IRS out from under their cobras and putting solid axles under them? the reason VHP got rid of the Z06 was they kept breaking the transmission output shafts. they exceeded it's limits. and at the time no better units were available.


and so am i. remember what i just wrote above. sportside 5.3 kept harping on the LS1 intake being so restrictive that he was spouting the reverse split was the way to go to the truck guys in the comp 216/220 thread. why? because he read it somewhere on this board that we are so restricted we need to help the intake.