Which cam would be best suited for a Z06 (stock LS6 heads) with an intake and longtube headers with cats? The application is 99% street.

222 226 .581 .585 113
224 224 .581 .581 113
226 222 .585 .581 113

 

the 224 is probably the most popular on your list, and many people have had lots of success with it, and are very happy with it

 

I had my set-up discuss in this thread, my car is a daily driver and is fine in traffic :

https://ls1tech.com/forums/dynamometer-results-comparisons/240174-dyno-224-220-581-581-116lsa-headers-intake.html

Christian

 

I would love to see a test showing the TR224/227 vs TR224 vs TR227/224. I keep hearing contradictory statements on traditional versus reverse split being the best.

 

On the average, a reverse split is going to give better peak numbers, but fall short under the curve. The standard split however ususally is pretty equal to the 224/224, while still acheiving higher peak numbers. In your case though, with that small of duration, I doubt any of those 3 would be at all different from each other.......just close your eyes, pick one, and enjoy!

 

They are all in the same power range, for 99 % streetability I would go with 224/224, .581/.581 113 for ease of tuning. (less overlap)

 

man this again. all you have to do is look for the same named thread. that was only about 10 pages long. after you weed through the 6 pages of agressive discussions, you'll get some good info and two graphs where two people tried a reverse,standard and single pattern cam.

 

i remember that thread

 

I assume you mean the one where people continued to disagree, a TR cam comparison graph was given with no traditional split, and incorrect info on GM cam specs was quoted.

Sorry, but I was hoping someone had some additional info. I still see contradictory opinions.

I did like Geoff's (TR) input as to the purpose of the reverse split in that thread though.

 

I run a TR224 on a 114 and its rocks!!!!!!!!
Check the sig

 

well still to this day, there is no new information about it. now we've moved onto custom vs shelf grinds. right JRP?

 

I agree. Whether agreed upon or not, it is good to see the manufacturer stand behind their products with a good ol' fashioned explanation.

 

if you want to call my cam "reverse" then yes

- AN1313 what ICL were you planninig on? give me that and i'll plot the VE's for you.

 

JRP,

I do not know what VE's would be optimal for me. The 113 LSA was based on the desire to have negative overlap. What do you recommend?

 

JS,

Wow, you are fast. Tell me about your heads.

 

if you give me the ICL you had planned on i'll give you the VE's of your cams so you can compare them.

 

I'm not sure what is ideal for me, maybe a 112 ICL. I'm open to suggestions?

 

Most LS1 cams are ground with 4° advance ground in. A 113° LSA with 4° advance would give you a 109° ICL .

 

While I'm running an F11(and making decent power), I've always been partial to single pattern sticks.

The less overlap(the length of time the int./exh. valves are open at the same time on any given cylinder) is a good thing N/A. Better low/mid range torque is made(most of the time). Single pattern cams = less overlap than the splits on N/A applications, BUT....... split grinds have and do show nice gains over single pattern cams of similar int./exh. lift #'s w/ LS6 intakes and good heads. FWIW, Cup cars utilize single pattern cams.

Geoff's explanation on the splits is right on the money though. The idea behind the splits having more duration on the exhaust side is to help get rid of exhaust especailly when a system is restrictive(with cats and/or stock heads)and motors on the hose respond very well to it...

These motors seem to like the intake valve to open @ 44* - 46* ABDC for "optimum efficiency"(again, most of the time). On an LSA of 112 w +4*, that puts your ICL @ 108, which is real close to the 44* - 46* ABDC theory.

Let JRP run the #'s based on a 108 ICL and see what the VE's look like.