dan98z

I was thinking of going with the 224/224 thunder cam on 112 LSA + stage 2 MMS heads with tuning from MMS. Now I just heard the 230/224 and it has some great numbers on the dyno, cam sounds great Jason99T/A <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="gr_grin.gif" /> . Are there any downsides to this style of cam compared to a typical 224/224?? Any major differences to the 111 vs 112 lsa with split duration?? I thought the engine had to be reved higher to take full use of the larger durations, is this true when it is only much larger on the intake side??
Thanks!
-dan

XtraCajunSS

iTrader: (2)

The only downside I can see (hear) is the rougher idle. Personally I love it. It has a little of that 'old school lope' sound, not alot, but just enough...

Onyx LS1

iTrader: (5)

the 230/224 will make its peak power a few hundred rpm over the 224.
downsides are a choppy idle, and I'm not sure about how it will do with emissions if that is a concern.

<small>[ May 08, 2002, 11:47 PM: Message edited by: Onyx LS1 ]</small>

ChrisB

I would also submit the 111lsa is a large contributor to the idle quality (or lack therof) in the cam of topic.

Chris

JPR

The only downside I see so far would be more wear on tires and cluthes! seriously, I will find out soon and let you know how we like it.

jimmypop13

iTrader: (17)

I'm wondering if you could pass emissions like you could with the TR224 112lsa by raising the idle as high as you can, running it hard and getting the cats hot and putting in RXP. Does anyone know if you could pass with this cam like that? also, what about this cam with Stage 2 Heads? It makes awesome power on stock heads but would it on stage 2 heads? thanks
Chris

Patrick G

iTrader: (14)

Maybe you missed it, but I was the first one to try the reverse split TR 230/224 111LSA cam. I have stage II ported heads (2.055/1.60 valves). I picked up an enormous amount of hp and tq compared to my TR 224/224 112LSA cam when the rpms rose above 6000 rpms...on the order of 35 rwhp at 6600 and over 50 rwhp at 6800. Check out the link for proof: www.converter.cc/230-224dyno.jpg

Same dyno, same day. It was only after seeing the gains on my car that Thunder Racing thought about trying the cam on a stock headed car. The results on an LS1/LS6 with ported heads will be equal or better than those with stock heads in my opinion.

<small>[ May 09, 2002, 01:45 PM: Message edited by: Patrick G ]</small>

Terry Burger

iTrader: (4)

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">
on the order of 35 rwhp at 6600 and over 50 rwhp at 6800
</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I agree the cam makes more power, but I suspect you had a valve control issue with your 224 112 ls camshaft that was contributing to these apparent "huge gains".

BadMonkey

iTrader: (1)

What kind of out come could you expect if we lowered those numbers to like 228/222 or even 220? With maybe a .560ish lift? Lower numbers with a similar reverse split. I really want to try this but I don't want to go 230/224, i kniow very little of cams so no flames I just wonder how this would work. I only know enough to get myslef into trouble but not out <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="gr_grin.gif" />

Patrick G

iTrader: (14)

LOL Terry...no more valve control issues! Solved those gremlins a couple of months ago. With 145 lbs at the seat and 360 over the nose my springs are stout...my lifters are fresh...my lifter preload is perfect...and my rocker to spring retainer clearance is now huge.

The 224/224 cam just flat ran out of steam where the 230/224 cam does not. Turning the motor tighter is going to make my ETs a lot lower.

Patrick

Gag_Halfront

The emmisions question is a great one. Has anyone TRIED to pass emissions with any of these cams? This is a real issue for folks who want their daily driver to be legal without swapping cams for the emissions test.

XtraCajunSS

iTrader: (2)

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by Gag_Halfront:
<strong>The emmisions question is a great one. Has anyone TRIED to pass emissions with any of these cams? This is a real issue for folks who want their daily driver to be legal without swapping cams for the emissions test.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I know it is a pain, but I guess I'm so used to swapping cams on gen I SBC's the LS1 is cake... 3 hours for a cam swap!!!

I don't know about most, but I would give 6 hours a year for that kind of power.

dan98z

Thanks for the replies. One other question though..Would piston to valve clearance be an issue with stage 2 heads and a 230/224 cam setup? I heard that it was less of an issue with the smaller valves used in stock heads/stage 1 heads. Maybe the 227/224 cam setup would clear the pistons just a little better.. Any thoughts on this?
Thanks

Jason99T/A

iTrader: (21)

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by dan98z:
<strong>Would piston to valve clearance be an issue with stage 2 heads and a 230/224 cam setup? I heard that it was less of an issue with the smaller valves used in stock heads/stage 1 heads. Maybe the 227/224 cam setup would clear the pistons just a little better.. Any thoughts on this?
Thanks</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Yes, this would be an issue depending on valve size, amount milled off the heads, advance/retard on the cam, ramp rates,etc.

We will be checking the piston to valve clearance very soon (maybe this weekend) on this cam and will know something defintite then. You need a minimum of ~80 thousandths for the intake valve and ~100 thousandths on the exhaust.

Damian

iTrader: (89)

I spoke with Paul @ Thunder about milled heads paired up with this cam, and he was not very confident at all about doing this. Being on a 111 lsa, it's going to be TIGHT. After what I have been told, I personally wouldn't even try it unless you notched the pistons...

Josh

Trevor @ Texas Speed & Perf.

iTrader: (3)

What about a set of the 5.3L heads w/ bigger valves, say 2.02/1.57's?

Patrick G

iTrader: (14)

Trevor, you'd probably be OK with unmilled 5.3L heads featuring smaller 2.02 valves. I notched my stock pistons for safety though since I've got the larger 2.055 intake valves and heads that have been milled .050". <img border="0" title="" alt="[Eek!]" src="gr_eek2.gif" />

Patrick

CRASH 02

iTrader: (3)

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by Patrick G:
<strong>Maybe you missed it, but I was the first one to try the reverse split TR 230/224 111LSA cam. I have stage II ported heads (2.055/1.60 valves). I picked up an enormous amount of hp and tq compared to my TR 224/224 112LSA cam when the rpms rose above 6000 rpms...on the order of 35 rwhp at 6600 and over 50 rwhp at 6800. Check out the link for proof: www.converter.cc/230-224dyno.jpg

Same dyno, same day. It was only after seeing the gains on my car that Thunder Racing thought about trying the cam on a stock headed car. The results on an LS1/LS6 with ported heads will be equal or better than those with stock heads in my opinion.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">So with stage II heads you are making the same power he is (Jason) with stock heads? <img border="0" title="" alt="[Sad]" src="gr_sad.gif" /> And yes I see that you are an A4

<small>[ May 10, 2002, 12:42 PM: Message edited by: CRASH 02 ]</small>