What about this TR rev. split 227/224 .569/.563 114
05-10-2002, 09:52 AM
#2
FormerVendor
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Baton Rouge, LA, USA
Posts: 1,954
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
3 Posts
Re: What about this TR rev. split 227/224 .569/.563 114 </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by NastyC5:
<strong>This would idle a lot better than the 111 LSA but what are we trading off here? Thanks.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Why don't you talk with Geoff about doing a 230/224 on a wider LSA? Maybe he can give you some insight on the pros and cons...
Shane
<strong>This would idle a lot better than the 111 LSA but what are we trading off here? Thanks.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Why don't you talk with Geoff about doing a 230/224 on a wider LSA? Maybe he can give you some insight on the pros and cons...
Shane
05-10-2002, 01:10 PM
#3
TECH Apprentice
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Evansville, IN
Posts: 353
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: What about this TR rev. split 227/224 .569/.563 114 Levi, that's the cam I'm going to put in my car. It is actually sitting at my apartment right now. You'll lose a little hp/tq with it but it will give you a better idle.
Checking with Geoff on getting the 230/224 on a 114 might be a good idea but it's also going to raise your max up the rpms by 200 or so. I'm not sure how much you are wanting to rev it.
Allen
Checking with Geoff on getting the 230/224 on a 114 might be a good idea but it's also going to raise your max up the rpms by 200 or so. I'm not sure how much you are wanting to rev it.
Allen
05-10-2002, 01:40 PM
#4
Re: What about this TR rev. split 227/224 .569/.563 114 I agree.. Your idle would be better, but your max power might be close to 7000rpm.. Thats a little high. I also think you would lose a little torque down low. Just a little. Nothing gears cant make up for..
05-10-2002, 01:48 PM
#5
Re: What about this TR rev. split 227/224 .569/.563 114 In case you missed it, Geoff from TR stated:
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif"> In my opinion doing a 230/224 with a 114 LSA is going to move the powerband up quite a bit. It would probably put the power in a range that isn't usable for the average street car.
Part of what we were trying to do by increasing the intake duration was to increase cylinder filling ability at higher RPM's in spite of the tuning affects of the intake. The catch to this is that normally you will lose low end torque in order to increase your top-end efficiency. By tightening up the LSA you typically boost midrange with a slight loss on the top-end. For the intended RPM band of Jason's motor (below 7000 RPM) we got what we wanted as far as no torque loss and a nice boost in the top-end power, but I must stress that the 230/224 cam with a 114 LSA in his motor would probably want to turn 7200 RPM or more and have signifigantly less midrange torque.
At least from the testing we have done my opinion is this: The 230/224 is a more powerful cam in the RPM range that most people operate their cars than the 224/224 but it definitely has a choppier idle and is less likely to pass emissions testing.
</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif"> In my opinion doing a 230/224 with a 114 LSA is going to move the powerband up quite a bit. It would probably put the power in a range that isn't usable for the average street car.
Part of what we were trying to do by increasing the intake duration was to increase cylinder filling ability at higher RPM's in spite of the tuning affects of the intake. The catch to this is that normally you will lose low end torque in order to increase your top-end efficiency. By tightening up the LSA you typically boost midrange with a slight loss on the top-end. For the intended RPM band of Jason's motor (below 7000 RPM) we got what we wanted as far as no torque loss and a nice boost in the top-end power, but I must stress that the 230/224 cam with a 114 LSA in his motor would probably want to turn 7200 RPM or more and have signifigantly less midrange torque.
At least from the testing we have done my opinion is this: The 230/224 is a more powerful cam in the RPM range that most people operate their cars than the 224/224 but it definitely has a choppier idle and is less likely to pass emissions testing.
</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">
05-10-2002, 02:55 PM
#7
TECH Addict
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Fort Worth,TX
Posts: 2,340
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: What about this TR rev. split 227/224 .569/.563 114 </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by Damian:
<strong>As stated before, you will have to rev that cam to AT LEAST 6800 rpm's to make max power. Thats a lot of stress on a stock shortblock, especially if you want it to last a while.
josh</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">What about 6600 <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="gr_grin.gif" />
<strong>As stated before, you will have to rev that cam to AT LEAST 6800 rpm's to make max power. Thats a lot of stress on a stock shortblock, especially if you want it to last a while.
josh</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">What about 6600 <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="gr_grin.gif" />
