224/230 .609/.604 112lsa 106icl
11-27-2005, 08:09 PM
#22
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (14)
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Salisbury,MD
Posts: 1,729
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by JS
The split is good for fair flowing exhaust...
I would just put it in 112+4 or 110+4
I would just put it in 112+4 or 110+4
Forgot, the 110 +4 would put his IVC at the same point but it would increase the overlap drastically which Rob would not be interested in
Last edited by DAPSUPRSLO; 11-28-2005 at 06:31 AM.
11-28-2005, 06:47 AM
#23
Why the more lap will make it sound mean
I think a 111+4 might be the best choice,u have me intregued with cam thoughts
I'm running a 214-222 559-566 115+4
I also have a 3000 verter,cai,pulley,ptb and shorties with stock exh.
What do u think of this cam,I wanted stock sounding and good power all threw the rpm range?
I think a 111+4 might be the best choice,u have me intregued with cam thoughts
I'm running a 214-222 559-566 115+4
I also have a 3000 verter,cai,pulley,ptb and shorties with stock exh.
What do u think of this cam,I wanted stock sounding and good power all threw the rpm range?
11-28-2005, 06:51 AM
#24
TECH Resident
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Working in the shop 24/7
Posts: 848
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Originally Posted by DAPSUPRSLO
That's the cam i actually originally suggested but since I wanted to use XFI lobes for his cam I was stuck with the 230 exhaust lobe.
Oh, also I orignally suggested a 224/228 on a 111, not a 112 like you have. Put it back on a 112 to keep the overlap down a little.
Why not a 220*-228*-112* +2*???
Makes great average power with the "right" lobes...
"BTW".... I didn't want to step on your toes by answering Rob through direct Email. To keep above board I thought it would be best to do this publically. Didn't want you to think I was stealing your customer.
Ed
11-28-2005, 07:06 AM
#25
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (14)
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Salisbury,MD
Posts: 1,729
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by EDC
Not necessarily...
When Rob Emailed me, I was wondering where all this came from...
Why not a 220*-228*-112* +2*???
Makes great average power with the "right" lobes...
"BTW".... I didn't want to step on your toes by answering Rob through direct Email. To keep above board I thought it would be best to do this publically. Didn't want you to think I was stealing your customer.
Ed
When Rob Emailed me, I was wondering where all this came from...
Why not a 220*-228*-112* +2*???
Makes great average power with the "right" lobes...
"BTW".... I didn't want to step on your toes by answering Rob through direct Email. To keep above board I thought it would be best to do this publically. Didn't want you to think I was stealing your customer.
Ed
No Way Ed, I appreciate you sharing thoughts and suggestions in all honesty. I'm in the office right now reviewing some documents but will be back to have a discussion on this publically with you around lunch
11-28-2005, 07:12 AM
#26
Originally Posted by DAPSUPRSLO
No Way Ed, I appreciate you sharing thoughts and suggestions in all honesty.
Since it'll be my car, I want all the opinions/facts as I can get
11-28-2005, 12:06 PM
#27
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (14)
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Salisbury,MD
Posts: 1,729
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ok Ed, here are my thoughts. First off we will only discus .050" events unless you'd like to provide .006" and .200" as well. The cam you've suggested closes the intake valve 3 degrees later then my cam and provides 2 less degrees of overlap then my cam i've spec'd for Rob. The whole point in this excersize was to maintain the same power band that my old 224/224 110lsa 106icl cam had which was a power peak of around 5800-5900 and hella torque down low (380rwtq by 3000rpm) but do so with his restrictive exhaust (I had open headers when I dynoed). I figured the best way to do this was to maintain the same IVC with similar overlap (1 degree less at .050 then my old cam, 3 degrees less at .006 then my old cam) but open the exhaust valve much sooner to acount for his "fair exhaust setup" and to avoid pumping losses created by the "fair exhaust setup". What "I think" will result is a similar power band but with just a little less power everywhere then my old setup cause of the earlier opening of the exhaust valve not allowing the full power of the power stroke to be realized by the cylinder. Thing is though a compromise has to be made somewhere, either the exhaust system must be changed to one with no cats and hardly any restriction and the EO can be pulled back accordingly (3" pipes with bullet type muffler, although the wave tuning effects may not be realized as they were with my 36" long collector extensions this is a much free-er flowing setup then the one Rob Has) or you have to run a cam with a little more exhaust timing to account for the poorer flowing exhaust as compared to my setup and loose alittle BMEP through the exhaust system.
Now as you know without figures at .006 and .200 to compare these cams, they can act very similar or very different all though .050 numbers are very similar. In other words our at .006" events could be the same when the .050 events are different which will make the cams act more alike or our .006" events could be different further contributing to even more difference in the way the cam acts. Also, the .200 numbers come into play as well.
What are your thoughts Ed?
Now as you know without figures at .006 and .200 to compare these cams, they can act very similar or very different all though .050 numbers are very similar. In other words our at .006" events could be the same when the .050 events are different which will make the cams act more alike or our .006" events could be different further contributing to even more difference in the way the cam acts. Also, the .200 numbers come into play as well.
What are your thoughts Ed?
11-28-2005, 12:16 PM
#28
TECH Resident
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Working in the shop 24/7
Posts: 848
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Originally Posted by DAPSUPRSLO
Ok Ed, here are my thoughts. First off we will only discus .050" events unless you'd like to provide .006" and .200" as well. The cam you've suggested closes the intake valve 3 degrees later then my cam and provides 2 less degrees of overlap then my cam i've spec'd for Rob. The whole point in this excersize was to maintain the same power band that my old 224/224 110lsa 106icl cam had which was a power peak of around 5800-5900 and hella torque down low (380rwtq by 3000rpm) but do so with his restrictive exhaust (I had open headers when I dynoed). I figured the best way to do this was to maintain the same IVC with similar overlap (1 degree less at .050 then my old cam, 3 degrees less at .006 then my old cam) but open the exhaust valve much sooner to acount for his "fair exhaust setup" and to avoid pumping losses created by the "fair exhaust setup". What "I think" will result is a similar power band but with just a little less power everywhere then my old setup cause of the earlier opening of the exhaust valve not allowing the full power of the power stroke to be realized by the cylinder. Thing is though a compromise has to be made somewhere, either the exhaust system must be changed to one with no cats and hardly any restriction and the EO can be pulled back accordingly (3" pipes with bullet type muffler, although the wave tuning effects may not be realized as they were with my 36" long collector extensions this is a much free-er flowing setup then the one Rob Has) or you have to run a cam with a little more exhaust timing to account for the poorer flowing exhaust as compared to my setup and loose alittle BMEP through the exhaust system.
Now as you know without figures at .006 and .200 to compare these cams, they can act very similar or very different all though .050 numbers are very similar. In other words our at .006" events could be the same when the .050 events are different which will make the cams act more alike or our .006" events could be different further contributing to even more difference in the way the cam acts. Also, the .200 numbers come into play as well.
What are your thoughts Ed?
Now as you know without figures at .006 and .200 to compare these cams, they can act very similar or very different all though .050 numbers are very similar. In other words our at .006" events could be the same when the .050 events are different which will make the cams act more alike or our .006" events could be different further contributing to even more difference in the way the cam acts. Also, the .200 numbers come into play as well.
What are your thoughts Ed?
I've got to get some stuff shipped out before we fly to PRI. Maybe tonight we can discuss all this through emails???
EdCurtisFTI@***.net
Ed
11-28-2005, 12:22 PM
#29
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (14)
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Salisbury,MD
Posts: 1,729
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What time do you have in mind? Unfortunately I don't have access to internet at my house so i'll have to come here in the office or to my parents house but I wouldn't mind doing so for a furthering of my edumucation
