Torque coming out of my EARS! (cam change)
04-12-2006, 12:30 PM
#141
oh yeah soorry i ment a 40 gasket i have stock pistons im not sure if i wanna change them or not for the head cam swap im gonna put new rings and bearings but im not sure if i wanna put pistons in also or not and with that cam i wouldnt have to . but i run between a 150 and 200 shot so im not sure
thanks for the reply
thanks for the reply
04-15-2006, 03:01 PM
#143
Originally Posted by augiedog77
would it be hard to get a 110 lsa cam to pass emissions?
210/216 110LSA +0
That would squeak by emissions testing with a 110LSA and would have mega torque down low!
04-16-2006, 12:25 PM
#147
TECH Regular
iTrader: (16)
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: michigan
Posts: 483
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by DuronClocker
I'm curious too! I just ordered this cam and should have it by end of this week and hopefully installed teh following weekend, and then dyno tuned the week after. Let's see some numbers! 
04-16-2006, 12:58 PM
#148
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: DFW
Posts: 1,284
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Patrick G
I've been experimenting again!
As many of you know, I ran the first Thunder Racing TRak Cam to great success. The cam specs are 233/235 .644/.598 112LSA (+2). This is a very mean cam and a bit of a bear to tune, but the effort was worth it. Made the numbers in my signature. The TRak cam is bigger than its numbers will lead you to believe.
About a month ago, I had an opportunity to try out a Comp XE-R lobed cam: 234/238 .598/.605 114LSA (+2). This cam had much better street manners than the TRak cam and was within 5 rwhp in the 6000+ rpm range, but was down about 20 lb ft of torque in the 3000-4000 rpm mid-range. I wanted my torque back.
Since I liked the street manners of the 114LSA cam, but I wanted lots more torque, I asked Thunder Racing to grind me up a Super Torquey cam that would have excellent street manners. Here's what they came up with:
224/228 .637/.639 110LSA (+0).
I'm absolutely in love with this cam. It feels like I picked up 50 lb ft of torque in the 2000-4000rpm range over the 234/238 114LSA cam.
Here's why: My dynamic compression has risen from 8.34:1 to 8:73:1! We even saw a huge increase in cranking compression. The 234/238 114LSA cam had 200psi and the new Torque cam has 245psi! Holy smokes!! No wonder my throttle response is instantaneous.
This cam proves that you can have a 110LSA cam and still have excellent street manners and the .637/.639" lift will really compliment my high flowing AFR 225 heads. I will spend this week tweaking my speed density tune, then I hope to go to Houston and put it on the rollers! Torque, Torque, Torque!!
New sig.
As many of you know, I ran the first Thunder Racing TRak Cam to great success. The cam specs are 233/235 .644/.598 112LSA (+2). This is a very mean cam and a bit of a bear to tune, but the effort was worth it. Made the numbers in my signature. The TRak cam is bigger than its numbers will lead you to believe.
About a month ago, I had an opportunity to try out a Comp XE-R lobed cam: 234/238 .598/.605 114LSA (+2). This cam had much better street manners than the TRak cam and was within 5 rwhp in the 6000+ rpm range, but was down about 20 lb ft of torque in the 3000-4000 rpm mid-range. I wanted my torque back.
Since I liked the street manners of the 114LSA cam, but I wanted lots more torque, I asked Thunder Racing to grind me up a Super Torquey cam that would have excellent street manners. Here's what they came up with:
224/228 .637/.639 110LSA (+0).
I'm absolutely in love with this cam. It feels like I picked up 50 lb ft of torque in the 2000-4000rpm range over the 234/238 114LSA cam.
Here's why: My dynamic compression has risen from 8.34:1 to 8:73:1! We even saw a huge increase in cranking compression. The 234/238 114LSA cam had 200psi and the new Torque cam has 245psi! Holy smokes!! No wonder my throttle response is instantaneous.
This cam proves that you can have a 110LSA cam and still have excellent street manners and the .637/.639" lift will really compliment my high flowing AFR 225 heads. I will spend this week tweaking my speed density tune, then I hope to go to Houston and put it on the rollers! Torque, Torque, Torque!!
New sig.
04-17-2006, 10:30 AM
#149
Lsk lobes are going to make more power by simply holding the valve open more in the midlift points. There will be more TQ by virtue of more lift too.
Can someone explain what is different about increasing DCR by having the effective stroke increased by closing the intake valve sooner (110) vs. raising the static CR on a 112 or 114? One by-product is top end loss for the 110lsa I suspect. On the street more Tq at 2500 is impressive but a drag car only sees it during the launch and operates only high in the rpm band. Area under the curve is more important but only the part of the curve that applies to your application.
Someone please explain.
Can someone explain what is different about increasing DCR by having the effective stroke increased by closing the intake valve sooner (110) vs. raising the static CR on a 112 or 114? One by-product is top end loss for the 110lsa I suspect. On the street more Tq at 2500 is impressive but a drag car only sees it during the launch and operates only high in the rpm band. Area under the curve is more important but only the part of the curve that applies to your application.
Someone please explain.
04-17-2006, 11:47 AM
#150
Originally Posted by Spinmonster
Lsk lobes are going to make more power by simply holding the valve open more in the midlift points. There will be more TQ by virtue of more lift too.
Can someone explain what is different about increasing DCR by having the effective stroke increased by closing the intake valve sooner (110) vs. raising the static CR on a 112 or 114? One by-product is top end loss for the 110lsa I suspect. On the street more Tq at 2500 is impressive but a drag car only sees it during the launch and operates only high in the rpm band. Area under the curve is more important but only the part of the curve that applies to your application.
Someone please explain.
Can someone explain what is different about increasing DCR by having the effective stroke increased by closing the intake valve sooner (110) vs. raising the static CR on a 112 or 114? One by-product is top end loss for the 110lsa I suspect. On the street more Tq at 2500 is impressive but a drag car only sees it during the launch and operates only high in the rpm band. Area under the curve is more important but only the part of the curve that applies to your application.
Someone please explain.
A 11.5 SCR motor with a 237/242 114LSA +0 cam might only make 8.00 DCR, but with a 224/228 110LSA +0 cam, it will make 8.8 DCR. The smaller cam will kick the other cam's *** for average power under the curve if it's put in a 346 LS1.
Problem with advancing cams comes from what happens to your overlap. Take the same 237/242 114LSA cam. Advance it 4 degrees. Now the DCR comes up to around 8.40:1, but you've now placed your overlap more to the exhaust side of TDC. This means the motor will run out of breath sooner. The 110LSA cam with 0 advance actually has the overlap centered a degree to the intake side of TDC, which means it will rev better past peak hp.
04-17-2006, 12:31 PM
#152
I know we talked the other night but I have always thought....
110LSA will make more power top end than a 114lsa due to overlap and the ability to "overfill" the combustion chamber...A couple of months ago one of the Engine Masters magazine tested 106,108,110,112,114 and the 108lsa made the most horsepower under the curve. Surprisingly the 106 and 110 made almost identical power under the curve but the hp figures were different. The 112 and 114 were both down @ peak and under the curve.
110LSA will make more power top end than a 114lsa due to overlap and the ability to "overfill" the combustion chamber...A couple of months ago one of the Engine Masters magazine tested 106,108,110,112,114 and the 108lsa made the most horsepower under the curve. Surprisingly the 106 and 110 made almost identical power under the curve but the hp figures were different. The 112 and 114 were both down @ peak and under the curve.
04-17-2006, 01:21 PM
#153
6600 rpm clutch dump of death Administrator
Originally Posted by gollum
Why are MOST ALL aftermarket LS1 cams ground at 112-114LSA? Is it because they are easier to tune if using MAF (less exhaust reversion)?
Easy one. There are actually a couple of answers.
Because most cam grinders do it by default
Most cams come ground +4 because people always put too much cam in their car. The +4 helps to overcome the car being "overcammed" and helps wake up what would otherwise be a "soggy" bottom end. +4 is just what most of the mfg's (Comp and Crane) do by default, thus it trickled into most "shop" cams. People think they need some super huge cam in their cars. Mfg's realized to save folks from their own mistake thought that "bigger must be better". So, they adance the cams to help try and pick up the bottom end of what would be pig without it. Hence the reason why properly selected events with more moderate lobes will often make less peak, but have more average power, and why a 410-415RWHP car can beat a 450RWHP car...
When you see a cam come in +0 or ground -3 or something like that, it usually means someone actually put some thought into what they were doing and why. Its not to say +4 is bad, its just folks seem to get hung up on a certain number and not the events behind them.
Simply put, advancing a cam makes it more exhaust bias relative to TDC. Retarding a cam makes it more intake bias relative to TDC.
https://ls1tech.com/forums/advanced-engineering-tech/396093-what-affect-does-advance-ground-into-cam-have.html
04-17-2006, 07:21 PM
#155
TECH Enthusiast
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Blairsville, GA
Posts: 555
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good input, J-Rod. I had almost caught myself falling prey to the masses till I caught this thread. Though, I'd always heard/read that wider LSAs would yield better power down low and up high... a flatter curve, so to speak, whereas tighter LSAs would build more power, but at more of a peak, with less on either side of that peak.
Guess it pays to think outside the box... glad I'm still stock(can still do more R/D).
Guess it pays to think outside the box... glad I'm still stock(can still do more R/D).
04-18-2006, 12:43 AM
#157
TECH Addict
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Miami, Fl.
Posts: 2,890
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Subscribing....
Hey, will this cam have PTV problems? Interested in dyno and tuning results? Pat, all of your tunes are done in SD, may i ask why? I have read a fw disadvantages while tuning in SD and want to know why you tune like this over a maf-tune.
It seems that we can all get carried away with the cam selections and bigger is better. Well, bigger is better IF it is well matched to your current combo. Im looking to add a h/c package to the V and this is quite interesting. THe car is quite the heavy and this much power productivity, matched with the stock 3.73'z, will be quite nice. I would be happy to make 450-470rwhp with a nice 425-430rwtrq for this car.
I might go with a set of ported ls6 stage three heads or maybe a ETP or AFR 215/225 head with fast 90mm. Now, i would love to keeop the stock exhaust or just add headers, all depending on how the sound of hte car will change. What to keep is as stock as possible at idle.
PAt, here's another one, how will that specific cam handle under a FI 370 motor or even an/a 370 motor?
Hey, will this cam have PTV problems?
Interested in dyno and tuning results? Pat, all of your tunes are done in SD, may i ask why? I have read a fw disadvantages while tuning in SD and want to know why you tune like this over a maf-tune.It seems that we can all get carried away with the cam selections and bigger is better. Well, bigger is better IF it is well matched to your current combo. Im looking to add a h/c package to the V and this is quite interesting. THe car is quite the heavy and this much power productivity, matched with the stock 3.73'z, will be quite nice. I would be happy to make 450-470rwhp with a nice 425-430rwtrq for this car.
I might go with a set of ported ls6 stage three heads or maybe a ETP or AFR 215/225 head with fast 90mm. Now, i would love to keeop the stock exhaust or just add headers, all depending on how the sound of hte car will change. What to keep is as stock as possible at idle.
PAt, here's another one, how will that specific cam handle under a FI 370 motor or even an/a 370 motor?
04-18-2006, 08:11 AM
#158
12 Second Club
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Earth, I hope...
Posts: 572
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wow! Great info and new stuff to some of us that arent quite versed in some of this advanced tech. My brain hurts from reading some of this stuff! BTW, I sent ya a PM Patrick.
Ski
Ski
04-18-2006, 08:30 PM
#159
Are the 600+ lift LSK lobes OK for the everyday driven street car? I am worried that the increased spring pressures required and the increased valve travel will cause premature valve guide and valve stem wear. Especially when using non roller tip rockers?
04-18-2006, 08:54 PM
#160
TECH Junkie
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: TEXASS
Posts: 3,202
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by gollum
Are the 600+ lift LSK lobes OK for the everyday driven street car? I am worried that the increased spring pressures required and the increased valve travel will cause premature valve guide and valve stem wear. Especially when using non roller tip rockers?
Thats why we have the innovators....