226/230@.050 .585/.592 107+2 Lsa
#21
LS1Tech Sponsor
iTrader: (12)
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Originally Posted by GOaT Cheese
Not trying to be an ******* here, but you are wrong about how the numbers affect torque. The wider LSA traps more cylinder pressure and generates alot more torque across the curve. The reason aftermarkets still use tight LSA's is for one simple reason...To sell camshafts. The tighter LSA have a radical idle, which sounds cool, but is killing low end performance, if you spend $600 on a new valve train, and it sounds exactly like the stock cam, despite huge power gains, you as a consumer will not be happy. The "lopey" idle that you hear with a tight LSA camshaft is the engine running so poorly at low RPM it can barely stay running, the cylinders are firing at erratic power levels.
![Happy](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/smilies/LS1Tech/gr_stretch.gif)
![The Judge](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/smilies/LS1Tech/gr_judge.gif)
#22
LS1 Tech Administrator
iTrader: (14)
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Originally Posted by GOaT Cheese
Not trying to be an ******* here, but you are wrong about how the numbers affect torque. The wider LSA traps more cylinder pressure and generates alot more torque across the curve. The reason aftermarkets still use tight LSA's is for one simple reason...To sell camshafts. The tighter LSA have a radical idle, which sounds cool, but is killing low end performance, if you spend $600 on a new valve train, and it sounds exactly like the stock cam, despite huge power gains, you as a consumer will not be happy. The "lopey" idle that you hear with a tight LSA camshaft is the engine running so poorly at low RPM it can barely stay running, the cylinders are firing at erratic power levels.
__________________
![](https://ls1tech.com/forums/signaturepics/sigpic210_1.gif)
2013 Corvette Grand Sport A6 LME forged 416, Greg Good ported TFS 255 LS3 heads, 222/242 .629"/.604" 121LSA Pat G blower cam, ARH 1 7/8" headers, ESC Novi 1500 Supercharger w/8 rib direct drive conversion, 747rwhp/709rwtq on 93 octane, 801rwhp/735rwtq on race fuel, 10.1 @ 147.25mph 1/4 mile, 174.7mph Half Mile.
2016 Corvette Z51 M7 Magnuson Heartbeat 2300 supercharger, TSP LT headers, Pat G tuned, 667rwhp, 662rwtq, 191mph TX Mile.
2009.5 Pontiac G8 GT 6.0L, A6, AFR 230v2 heads. 506rwhp/442rwtq. 11.413 @ 121.29mph 1/4 mile, 168.7mph TX Mile
2000 Pewter Ram Air Trans Am M6 heads/cam 508 rwhp/445 rwtq SAE, 183.092 TX Mile
2022 Cadillac Escalade 6.2L A10 S&B CAI, Corsa catback.
2023 Corvette 3LT Z51 soon to be modified.
Custom LSX tuning in person or via email press here.
![](https://ls1tech.com/forums/signaturepics/sigpic210_1.gif)
2013 Corvette Grand Sport A6 LME forged 416, Greg Good ported TFS 255 LS3 heads, 222/242 .629"/.604" 121LSA Pat G blower cam, ARH 1 7/8" headers, ESC Novi 1500 Supercharger w/8 rib direct drive conversion, 747rwhp/709rwtq on 93 octane, 801rwhp/735rwtq on race fuel, 10.1 @ 147.25mph 1/4 mile, 174.7mph Half Mile.
2016 Corvette Z51 M7 Magnuson Heartbeat 2300 supercharger, TSP LT headers, Pat G tuned, 667rwhp, 662rwtq, 191mph TX Mile.
2009.5 Pontiac G8 GT 6.0L, A6, AFR 230v2 heads. 506rwhp/442rwtq. 11.413 @ 121.29mph 1/4 mile, 168.7mph TX Mile
2000 Pewter Ram Air Trans Am M6 heads/cam 508 rwhp/445 rwtq SAE, 183.092 TX Mile
2022 Cadillac Escalade 6.2L A10 S&B CAI, Corsa catback.
2023 Corvette 3LT Z51 soon to be modified.
Custom LSX tuning in person or via email press here.
#23
TECH Enthusiast
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: San Diego
Posts: 638
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Originally Posted by Patrick G
You must not pay attention to the Engine Masters competitions over the past few years. In case you don't know, they take an average hp reading from 2500-6500 rpm. HP under the curve is king. Killer heads rule. This year they imposed a 10.5:1 maximum comrpession ratio. Guess what cam LSA was in the winner engine this year? 106LSA in a small block Ford running CHI Cleveland heads. Last year's winner ran a 108LSA cam. Kinda throws your theory out the window, huh?
#24
TECH Veteran
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: dudley mass
Posts: 4,156
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/ranks/ls1tech10year.png)
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Originally Posted by LS1Formulation
Try a 140K stock shortblock with marginal rod bolts. I am not rich. If my engine comes apart, I am screwed. .
![The Judge](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/smilies/LS1Tech/gr_judge.gif)
#25
TECH Veteran
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: dudley mass
Posts: 4,156
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/ranks/ls1tech10year.png)
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Originally Posted by GOaT Cheese
Not trying to be an ******* here, but you are wrong about how the numbers affect torque. The wider LSA traps more cylinder pressure and generates alot more torque across the curve. The reason aftermarkets still use tight LSA's is for one simple reason...To sell camshafts. The tighter LSA have a radical idle, which sounds cool, but is killing low end performance, if you spend $600 on a new valve train, and it sounds exactly like the stock cam, despite huge power gains, you as a consumer will not be happy. The "lopey" idle that you hear with a tight LSA camshaft is the engine running so poorly at low RPM it can barely stay running, the cylinders are firing at erratic power levels.
![The Judge](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/smilies/LS1Tech/gr_judge.gif)
#26
TECH Enthusiast
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: San Diego
Posts: 638
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Originally Posted by pdd
i hope to prove you wrong with my cam ![The Judge](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/smilies/LS1Tech/gr_judge.gif)
![The Judge](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/smilies/LS1Tech/gr_judge.gif)
#28
TECH Enthusiast
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: San Diego
Posts: 638
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Originally Posted by s346k
you don't know much of the 97-99 ls1 engines, do you? ![1poke](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/smilies2/1poke.gif)
![1poke](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/smilies2/1poke.gif)
#29
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Pdd, there's a difference between mindlessly whacking the rev limiter every time you drive and having solid control over how you drive. I don't think I even hit 5000 RPM on that burnout. I don't want my engine to spin a rod bearing or come apart but that doesn't mean I'm going to baby the car.
Goatcheese - I know my engine is not RPM limited. That's proven by the scores of people running 7K + cam only. What I'm saying is, and what I am sure others will tell you, is 97-99 LS1s are notorious for having weak rod bolts. What stresses rod bolts the most? High RPM. If I keep the RPM at a reasonable level, I am less likely to have a catastrophic failure. And to anyone who says to just change the rod bolts - I took a few high performance engine maching classes in college, enough to know that changing rod bolts without resizing the big end of the rod is a BAD idea. So the bottom end has to stay bone stock for now.
Goatcheese - I know my engine is not RPM limited. That's proven by the scores of people running 7K + cam only. What I'm saying is, and what I am sure others will tell you, is 97-99 LS1s are notorious for having weak rod bolts. What stresses rod bolts the most? High RPM. If I keep the RPM at a reasonable level, I am less likely to have a catastrophic failure. And to anyone who says to just change the rod bolts - I took a few high performance engine maching classes in college, enough to know that changing rod bolts without resizing the big end of the rod is a BAD idea. So the bottom end has to stay bone stock for now.
Last edited by LS1Formulation; 01-01-2007 at 10:48 PM.
#30
TECH Senior Member
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
With regard to changing rod bolts, what you learned before is correct on "old School" motors. However the LSx has cracked rods and you can change the bolts one by one with the motor in car with no effect. The bolts to use are the Katech high tensile bolts which are a carbon copy of the original, just much stronger.
Some poeple use ARP as a swap but those can alter the roundness of the rod due to their thicker bolt head design.
I've changed and used Katech bolts, they 0 side effect on 2 motors I've used them in.
Some poeple use ARP as a swap but those can alter the roundness of the rod due to their thicker bolt head design.
I've changed and used Katech bolts, they 0 side effect on 2 motors I've used them in.
#31
TECH Resident
iTrader: (7)
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
LS1Formulation,
Just an FYI. I ordered a 224/228 .581/.588 110+0 from CompCams (through Thunder Racing), and my grind was actually 225.5/229.8 .579/.587 110.5-0.7, so essentially a 226/230. As you may know, and which I just recently found out, CompCams tends to grind large on duration. I probably will not have my car on the road until the weather is nice. That assumes winter actually arrives in MI. If you do indeed go with an actual 226/230 grind, let me know how it turns out for you.
Just an FYI. I ordered a 224/228 .581/.588 110+0 from CompCams (through Thunder Racing), and my grind was actually 225.5/229.8 .579/.587 110.5-0.7, so essentially a 226/230. As you may know, and which I just recently found out, CompCams tends to grind large on duration. I probably will not have my car on the road until the weather is nice. That assumes winter actually arrives in MI. If you do indeed go with an actual 226/230 grind, let me know how it turns out for you.
Last edited by bsf; 01-07-2007 at 03:41 PM. Reason: oops
#32
TECH Junkie
iTrader: (4)
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Originally Posted by GOaT Cheese
On the contrary. I shifted my '00 SS at 6800
your implication that this guy is "ok to spin 7k+ rpm" on a stock 98 shortblock is a very ill-informed statement. should you research these engines more, you will know that an ls1 is not an ls1 is not an ls1...
#33
TECH Enthusiast
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: San Diego
Posts: 638
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Originally Posted by s346k
there you go, your 2000 block. the 97-99 have poor oil return (try searching, you will see what i am talking about) thanks to an oil return slot in the back of the block that is obviously inadequate for high rpm use. that is why it was enlarged on the 00+ block. then through more road racing gm realized with proper oiling that the rod bolts became the weak link, so they redesigned them and replaced them on the 01+ shortblocks.
your implication that this guy is "ok to spin 7k+ rpm" on a stock 98 shortblock is a very ill-informed statement. should you research these engines more, you will know that an ls1 is not an ls1 is not an ls1...
your implication that this guy is "ok to spin 7k+ rpm" on a stock 98 shortblock is a very ill-informed statement. should you research these engines more, you will know that an ls1 is not an ls1 is not an ls1...