Hey people jus curious to know wut are some advantages and disadvantages to a reverse split cam...any info would be appreciated

 

Most of us have come to agree - match it to your setup. The benefits of that will be substantially greater, than guessing on which lobe to fatten up.

 

I tried a reverse split cam didn't like it, then switched to straight split with better results. I think the LS1/LS6 really wakes up with a cam with more exhaust duration than intake. Look at the variety of cams out there for the LS1 and most are like this; in fact even the GM LS6 cams have more exhaust duration.

 

You only want a reverse if you have substantial exaust flow and your intake flow is hendering. I haven't really seen a use for one in LS-1/6 applications, but who knows, they might be useful to someone???

 

It is my understanding that a reverse split will raise the peak torque and hp speed, raise peak power slightly, lower peak torque, and lower low end torque.

It is also intake/head/valvetrain/exhaust dependent. If you have a restrictive exhaust and a free flowing intake your result would be different than if you had a free flowing exhaust and a restrictive intake.

 

cons: not recomended for nitrous!!!

 

do some searches under my user name to see my results with the reverse split cams. If you don't find what you want, PM me an email addy and I'll mail you some graphs.

Short version... Reverse split sux.

 

There was a graph up a while back that showed the results from 3 thunder cams. The test was with the 224/224, the 227/224, and the 230/224. The final results were that nothing changed between any of the cams until 5k up. The HP and TQ curves were exact till 5k, then the HP grew a little bit, but not much.

Personally, I believe I have the freest flowing exaust avalible, (TEA nitrous exaust port on heads, stepped kooks headers, into a 3" true dual X-set-up), and I still run a foward split cam. I really see no reason for them.

 

Yeap do a search and read how much crap Gomer got from making such a comment.
All we came to know is that his heads didn't like reverse splits.
X1 in he 10's with stage 2E's, my Stealth II (cam only) in the 10's with nitrous, 11.64 N/A,
So where does reverse split suck???

A comment like that is utter ignorance

Instead of such blame comments why don't you give examples of combos where different patterns work.

I'm sorry Gomer, but i think you are too wrapped up in dyno queen racing numbers.

A cam is chosen to complement a certain combo (intake/heads/exhaust). Not because of it's pattern.

 

I like my TR227/224 (stock heads)

 

Some people praise dual pattern cams, some praise reverse split and others like me can't make up their mind so they go traditional cam.

Some find great results with reverse as they claim the exhaust flows to god on an LS1 and the intake is the restriction.
Other claim the exhaust is always the restriction a dual pattern cam gives more power.

But I've seen 220/224 vs 224/220 and there pretty much identical all the way, but it seems the LS1 likes a split either way on the dyno and numbers seem to be a touch higher then normal cam, but what looks good on the dyno is not always as good on the road. Even if the 2 have curves identical, on the road it might be a little bit different.

 

depends on the setup, I have seen great results on stock headed cars, TR230, every car I put one in makes ~400 rwhp with good exhaust.

 

Works pretty good in my car.

Bruce

 

I think what the people in here with revese splits are missing, is the performance you could have if you went traditional. I don't think you guys are looking at the whole picture. Sure the cam you have might make good power, but they have a 99.9% chance of performing better, mostly in the middle where it counts, with a traditional split. Like I said before, the reverse is only good for a better peak, over 5k, number.

 

well said....every application is different

 

I'm not quite sure why anyone would want one?

 

Off topic, but that graph shows how awesome of a cam the 224/224 is. The 224/224 114 is hanging right with the 230/224 111 until 5500+ rpm, and is probably 10x more driveable, idles 10x better, etc. It looks like (finally) more and more people are beginning to understand that small cams and packages that actually work together will ALWAYS work better than putting the biggest cam with the biggest (peak) flowing heads.

Shawn

 

hmm, and why would this be?

 

Is that the way it goes? How come it can't show how poorly the other cams perform? With the other cams being so close in split and LSA, the 230 had to have the LSA dropped to keep overlap up. It pretty much makes all the cams equal in overlap and truely shows how you need more exaust flow to overcome restrictions. Each graph shows that every cam was hindered by the 224 exaust duration. If the graph was of the same cams with 4 degrees of foward split,224/228, 227/231, 230/234, I believe the graphs would be no were close to the same. Each should show a substantial increase in power across the board instead of being hindered by a low exaust flow. You are correct in saying that the 224 is a great performer though, and should drive much better than a 230/224.

 

Look at the graph I posted. No power was gained until almost 5500 rpm's. They could be good for certain applications, but I'm not sure where.