blkZ28spt

If those cams are in my car, the TR224 loses. At WOT it'll never be below 4000 rpm, and essentially never below 4.5-5k.

PREDATOR-Z

That is why purpose and COMBO are very important.

blkZ28spt

Let me highlight the important part here for you........

PREDATOR-Z

COMBO

Gotcha

SsZERO

The #4 for $2.99 is a good deal, super size it for 39 cents more!

Felix C

Pardon for the long quote but wanted to verify the 230deg duration reference meant irregardless of cylinder heads used or otherwise. I mean is 230deg fine for stock as well or are improved heads required?

blkZ28spt

Improved heads not required.

Felix C

Ok. And optimal lift for stock LS1 heads would be what number? Assuming LT headers, high flow cats, and reasonable exhaust piping and configuration.

Also, considering manual trans, 3.42 axle and capable tuning... What would be a good LSA for this combo?

Cal

iTrader: (1)

Felix,
LS1's come stock with "improved heads," LOL. Stock LS1 head flow is better than a lot of expensive ported heads were for the SBC. One reason LS1's respond so well to a cam change.

There really is no optimum lift; the more the better. But with much over about .600" you need to flycut the pistons. It really depends on other factors in the cam design though, as well as how much the heads have been milled, if any.

You can run any LSA you want, but there are trade-offs. A narrow LSA is more fun, with the power coming on at lower rpm and hitting harder when it does. Widder LSA's give the engine a smoother idle and a wider rpm range; also better emissions.

For you I sugest a 230 duration, .600 lift, and 112 LSA, LOL! The LOL is because everybody has a different idea of what the best cam is. It's pretty subjective really.

PREDATOR-Z

I agree ......

JL ws-6

iTrader: (50)

One thing to remember is that the stock gearing, much like the stock converter in a auto car, is meant to keep teh car at low rpm for fuel economy. Once you add a cam to a car.. the entire operating range, where you can drive around without running into low power for slight inclines, etc. etc changes. Factory gearing on a M6 car.. should probably have been 3.73 from the factory, 4.10 preferrably. With that said.. I would just plan on making that change when you do decide on whatever cam that you wanna go with... leaving the 3.42's in the car really isn't gonna allow too many cams to perform the way that they should. 4.10's.. do them, preferrably in a 12 bolt or a 9 inch, or 8.8 if you want.

As for the cam size.. think about what you might do down the road, think about what you want from the car now.. and once you have a VERY clear picture of those 2 things.... call a sponsor of your choice, maybe even a few, and go with what tehy are reccommending. They do this for a living.. probably be able to give you better info then we can. That's what I did... and Eastside had a cam ground for my car knowing where I am headed with it, and it worked out pretty damn good for now, and I know that it will work for the next few waves of mods for sure.

Felix C

I admit, I was fishing.

BTW, I meant improved heads as in reworked heads as available from the sponsor list or GM. But I know what you mean about LS1 heads outflowing old SBC ones.

Bryan @ Speed Inc.

iTrader: (19)

i'd go with a cam between 212/218 to no more than a 222/222... and make it on a 114-115 lsa. you'd pick up a ton of low end torque and gain a noticeable amount of top end. but if you say your car is a garage queen... i'd stick a HUUUUUUUGE cam in it!

blkZ28spt

Too small.

TR224/114 with a good tune would be better for virtually anybody, IMO.

patSS/00

iTrader: (6)

Since I'm also looking for the "best" l.e.t. cam... I've seen these conflicting views in this thread: (a) No cam will give that much more low end torque than the stock cam; someone said +/- 5%. Or (b) the right smaller cam can be a "torque monster". So which is it? If smaller = more l.e. torque, wouldn't the stock cam have the most? Most of the dyno graphs don't go below 3K rpm, so not that helpful. I had decided on the Comp 212/218, but now not sure at all.

Cal

iTrader: (1)

Yep, you're right. For someone that absolutely wants the most low rpm torque possible, the stock cam is best. After all, it's a truck cam and low rpm torque is what trucks need. Now if you want great high rpm torque, time to change the cam!

You are seeing conflicts in this thread because of differing views. I threw a monkey wrench in here becasue I hate to see internet myths mislead people. The truth is, a motor with this displacement is just not going to give you "monster" torque at very low rpm no mater what you do, unless you can figure out how to convert it to a diesel! LS1's make good torque for a 346 cube engine, but you really need more displacement for "monster torque." These are factory race motors, and they need to spin and breath to make real power. GM designed the LS1 to opperate at 7000 rpm, and put it in a Corvette. Then they threw in a part here and there to hold it back a bit, and threw the same motor in cheaper fbodys. One of the parts thrown in to hold it back is the cam. Stock cam and heads are not matched at all.

Cal

iTrader: (1)

Very true. I had that cam and I agree 100%.

Felix C

O.K. Here is my take on this. I am an LS1 rookie and so excuse me if I am being redundant.

My point of reference deals with LS1 equipped GTOs since I own one and have been keeping a database of those who have already modded their cars. Seems an LS1 with typical bolt-ons(Air filter, LTs, decent exhaust config, pulley, hi-flow cats, and optimal tuning), stock 3.42 gears. manual trans, OEM LS6 intake and IRS generates about 34X rwft/lbs at 4800pm with the stock camshaft. These engines will peak at 4800 rpm due to the intake runner length. Peak hp is on/about 345.

Same engine with a bit of a hotter camshaft-LS6, GT2-3, etc. makes 36X rwft/lbs, again at 4800rpm. Peak hp is about 360 hp at higher rpm.

The same engine with a TR224 or similar shelf camshaft peaked at similar or less torque, but achieved more peak hp(375-380) and rpm.

Engines with custom ground camshafts have made 37Xft/lbs of torque. And made a bit more hp at rpm.(380-390)

Considering the above, would it be correct to state that a stock head LS1 is unlikely to produce more torque than 360-370 rwft/lbs?

BTW, torque nos./curves broaden quite a bit with improved heads.

Another GTO owner noted that the more aggressive the camshaft, the higher the peak tq numbers but there appeared to be the same torque baseline. The factory camshaft tends to be 300ft/lbs at 2000/2500 rpm and up, whereas the more aggressive ones tend to less at 2000rpm(little data at this rpm), 300ft/lbs at 2500rpm and the curve to 4800 rpm depends on how aggressive the camming and how capable the tuning is.

Result is...Damned if I know or would presume to state with absolute confidence. I guess that is why 30% of this folder's posts are cam related and with good reason. My view, improve the heads, especially the compression for more torque and cam up to 22X or 23X but watch the remainder of the alphabet soap combo.(LSA,LCs, VEs)

Will someone with Excel kindly develop a camshaft generator!

You do not realize how happy I am to not currently be in the market for a camshaft upgrade.


Kind Regards,

FC
Ex 5.0 rider, ex 403 Olds driver, Ex 455HO Pontiac fanatic.

nuzee

iTrader: (2)

The 206/212 cam that I am running makes more torque than the stock cam. The improvement can felt from right off-idle. Although the duration specs at 0.050" appear larger than a stock cam, the seat-to-seat duration is much less. IIRC 280ish@0.006" for stock cam intake vs. 259@0.006 for the 206/212 cam.

I chose this cam because I wanted to boost my low end without losing anything on the top end. I gained 3 mph in the 1/8 mile, but only gain 1 mph in the 1/4. So, if my analyses is correct, I did lose a little bit on the topend vs. the stock cam. I then added 1.85 rockers and regained another 2 mph in the 1/4. So with the rockers, I netted a 3 mph gain both in the 1/8 & 1/4.

Based on my experience with this cam, I believe a 212/218 would give you an across the board increase (low-high). The increase wouldn't be huge in any one particular range, but more evenly spread out. To me, that is the characteristic of a good street performance cam for an AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION car.

For a manual transmission, where you'll clutch past the very lowend rpm range, find a good midrange cam that performs in the 2000-5000 range and you'll be very happy. Good luck!

blkZ28spt

I disagree. With an automatic transmission and the higher stall torque converter the power made down low is even less important than in a manual, where you MUST drive through the lower rpm on the street.