Generation III Internal Engine 1997-2006 LS1 | LS6
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by:

Who is using TSP Torquer 2 cam???

Old Jun 30, 2005 | 07:15 PM
  #1  
SideStep's Avatar
Thread Starter
TECH Fanatic
20 Year Member
 
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 1,946
Likes: 1
Default Who is using TSP Torquer 2 cam???

I am interested in performance, idle, part throttle low-rpm response... blah blah blah...

Specs 232/234 .595/598 lsa113+1 ???


Last edited by SideStep; Jul 2, 2005 at 08:00 AM.
Reply
Old Jul 1, 2005 | 05:15 PM
  #2  
DWillTA's Avatar
Launching!
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 299
Likes: 0
From: Fairmont, WV
Default

I am also interested in a similar spec'ed Comp Cam. PN 54-446-11 Specs 232/234 595/598 LSA 112 ICL 110 (I think)
I think it is comparable to a F14 but have yet to see any cam card specs to validate that speculation. Any info would be great. Thanks

Dave
Reply
Old Jul 2, 2005 | 08:01 AM
  #3  
SideStep's Avatar
Thread Starter
TECH Fanatic
20 Year Member
 
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 1,946
Likes: 1
Default

Reply
Old Jul 2, 2005 | 08:45 AM
  #4  
HavATampa's Avatar
TECH Addict
iTrader: (49)
 
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 2,128
Likes: 1
From: Louisiana
Default

You guys do know there is a search feature on this board....right? If you look down about 12 post from this one on the first page there is a poll with about 18 replies comparing the Torquer 2 to the F13. Plus in the Dyno Forum you'll find tons of info and specs on this cam.
Reply
Old Jul 2, 2005 | 08:57 AM
  #5  
SideStep's Avatar
Thread Starter
TECH Fanatic
20 Year Member
 
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 1,946
Likes: 1
Default

Originally Posted by HavATampa
You guys do know there is a search feature on this board....right? If you look down about 12 post from this one on the first page there is a poll with about 18 replies comparing the Torquer 2 to the F13. Plus in the Dyno Forum you'll find tons of info and specs on this cam.

Did a search before only found 2 results that were the new Torquer 2 and had dyno-graphs... Everyone is still using the old one, very few on the new specs with dynos to prove it... All I find there is conjecture and discussion about what it might be like. I want data and experiences from those that have it installed. I called Jason at TSP and was told there are simply not that many of them out there yet...

Last edited by SideStep; Jul 2, 2005 at 09:08 AM.
Reply
Old Jul 2, 2005 | 11:33 AM
  #6  
co.6z28's Avatar
TECH Enthusiast
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 738
Likes: 0
From: huntingtown ,MD
Default

i just ordered one, so i can post my results when i get her in. i know it is ground on a 113 and 112.
Reply
Old Jul 2, 2005 | 12:05 PM
  #7  
SideStep's Avatar
Thread Starter
TECH Fanatic
20 Year Member
 
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 1,946
Likes: 1
Default

Originally Posted by co.6z28
i just ordered one, so i can post my results when i get her in. i know it is ground on a 113 and 112.

What did you get, 113???
Reply
Old Jul 2, 2005 | 01:21 PM
  #8  
co.6z28's Avatar
TECH Enthusiast
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 738
Likes: 0
From: huntingtown ,MD
Default

Originally Posted by SideStep
What did you get, 113???
nope 112
Reply
Old Jul 2, 2005 | 01:41 PM
  #9  
-Joseph-'s Avatar
LSxGuy widda 9sec Mustang
20 Year Member
Photogenic
iTrader: (12)
 
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 3,043
Likes: 0
From: Texas and Qatar
Default

I installed one of the new ones about 2-3 weeks ago although I didn't get a chance to drive it (I hardly even road test customers cars). All I've done since then has been MS3's, for some reason... The owner has remarked that he was surprised by how drivable it was. I think Jason posted that particular dyno graph in the dyno forum also. I don't keep track of what cams/quantity go out, but I'm sure there are many more results out there that'll show up. The search may not be fully working yet, It was acting up on me the last few days also.
Reply
Old Jul 11, 2005 | 07:43 AM
  #10  
KB99WS6's Avatar
TECH Resident
iTrader: (6)
 
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 947
Likes: 0
From: Long island, NY
Default

Why was the original revised? The original is a 233/233 .595/.595 correct?? What were the reasons they changed it to a 232/234 .595/.598??
Reply
Old Jul 11, 2005 | 11:34 AM
  #11  
co.6z28's Avatar
TECH Enthusiast
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 738
Likes: 0
From: huntingtown ,MD
Default

to make more power
Reply
Old Jul 11, 2005 | 12:35 PM
  #12  
KB99WS6's Avatar
TECH Resident
iTrader: (6)
 
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 947
Likes: 0
From: Long island, NY
Default

but there wasn't any problems with the first one, right? I'd like to see a cam swap of the first and revised and side by side dyno comparisons. Probably not much of a difference though.
Reply
Old Jul 11, 2005 | 04:04 PM
  #13  
Kennedy98z28's Avatar
Launching!
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 279
Likes: 0
From: Proctorville OH
Default

I have the original 233/233 .595/.595 in my car. It helped my car out alot.
Reply
Old Jul 11, 2005 | 05:00 PM
  #14  
-Joseph-'s Avatar
LSxGuy widda 9sec Mustang
20 Year Member
Photogenic
iTrader: (12)
 
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 3,043
Likes: 0
From: Texas and Qatar
Default

Originally Posted by KB99WS6
but there wasn't any problems with the first one, right? I'd like to see a cam swap of the first and revised and side by side dyno comparisons. Probably not much of a difference though.
V1 was Lunati lobes and V2 is ground by Comp. Although the specs are similiar the V2 seems to make a little more power down low, about the same peak power.
Reply


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:51 PM.