VINCE

iTrader: (1)

Now all of a sudden people want better idle quality.. Looking at the torque #'s how can you say the reverse splits are producing better low end? I think this depends..... As of now FULL GUESS MODE..

verbs

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by VINCE:
<strong>Looking at the torque #'s how can you say the reverse splits are producing better low end? I think this depends..... As of now FULL GUESS MODE..</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Who said reverse splits produce better low end??? I thought the whole point of the reverse split was to gain the following adavantages over a single pattern cam with an equal exhaust duration (i.e. the 230/224 vs. the 224/224):

to maintain low end/mid-range torque while gaining power on top, all without sacraficing drivability. Am I wrong?

Nine Ball

iTrader: (38)

Vince, the reverse splits DO help keep the midrange torque and improve higher rpm HP. I agree that these cam profiles are making up for our intake manifolds and nothing more. Once we have some well-designed intakes that can match our head flow numbers, these reverse splits may actually perform worse than the single patterns.

230/230 cams have been done plenty of times. They tend to produce peaky HP curves and concave torque curves at lower rpm. This is fine for a well-geared, huge converter type setup, but not as much *fun* to drive as a car with midrange torque.

As Patrick said, our exhaust ports/headers on these motors flow very well relative to the intake ports when compared to most heads on different platform motors. Personally, I've never seen any reason to have an extended exhaust duration on an LS1, unless you were building the motor to handle 300+ shots of nitrous perhaps.

An interesting comparison would be to see a 230/224 cam vs a 224/230 cam. I know which I'd rather have.

Nick, we will probably play with something like a 248/244 cam in my motor, give it a few months. Its not like my setup is a slouch right now with its 244/244 cam.

Tony

VINCE

iTrader: (1)

Tony I still have not seen any proof. Not one dynosheet on this board has shown me a direct comparison of same lsa cams with same intake duration producing better numbers. Who is running a 230/230 with the new faster ramps? I would like to see their dyno sheet. I am all for driveability secondary to not being a real racer, but I think it is more tuning than anything. Those #'s produced by the X1 cam are awesome, but not new. There are cars on this board with 224/224 cams running those same #'s with higher torque.

VINCE

iTrader: (1)

Oh Verb.. It was Nick that made the comment about the reverse splits producing better lowend..

TrahnZam WS6

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by VINCE:
<strong>Looking at the torque #'s how can you say the reverse splits are producing better low end? I think this depends..... As of now FULL GUESS MODE..</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Vince, there is only one torque number in this thread, and thats the peak torque occuring around 4800 rpms I am guessing. Look at the comparison graph of the 224/224 vs the 230/224 and you will see that the larger intake lobe is not giving up any lowend compared to the smaller cam. I guarantee a 230/230 with the same ramps would not make the same midrange.

Terry Burger

iTrader: (4)

Who needs midrange? I (and anyone else with either 4.10s, or a 3800+ stall) want top end!

VINCE

iTrader: (1)

Nick.. Was the lsa the same on both? Look again.. I think people are thinking about the old 230 cams and not the new faster ramp cams. If you are going to use faster ramp cams with the reverse split you have to use the same with the 230/230.. I personally think that the difference would go un-noticed. I would like to see someone actually tell me they feel a difference racing downlow with 4.10's and a big cam compared to a little cam. If you can actually tell with your butt meter then you need to work for GM. I thought some of us graduated from college with business degrees. I smell Marketing 101. Nick you need to get on AOL IM so I can gripe with you keyboard to keyboard..

TrahnZam WS6

LOL Vince, I have been trying to get on IM from work but NT doesnt like AIM. Any suggestions?

True, there have not been any comparison graphs of a 230/230 TR vs the 230/224, but the 230/230 is just too big for street use I think. Terry, you may have a big stall and gears, but the majority of the users on this board would not trade off midrange and drivability for minimal gains up top. A cam like that would fit your combo very well.

VINCE

iTrader: (1)

Nick I used AOL with NT with no problem. I am running Win2000 right now.. I would have AOL search for a free port to connect.. You might have firewall issues. I will send you my settings..

VINCE

iTrader: (1)

I have already chosen a cam. No 230/230 cam for me at this time. Maybe next year.

Patrick G

iTrader: (14)

Vince,

Saying all the gains on the reverse-split cams are coming from LS1 Edit tuning is flat wrong. I had Thunder Racing dyno tune my car to perfection with a wide-band O2 sensor when I was running my 224/224 cam (LSA was 111.7 by the way). Next, I dropped in a Thunder Racing reverse split cam 230/224 (111.4 LSA) and picked up everywhere above peak torque and lost nothing below. Notice that the LSAs were nearly identical, but the duration on the intake was the only thing that changed.

Finding a cam that will pick up in the high-end without sacrificing anything down low is nothing short of a revelation. Let me be blunt...it's the cam, not the tuning that gained me over 50 rwhp at 6800 rpms.

Patrick

Nine Ball

iTrader: (38)

Agreed with Patrick. Tuning isn't too magical if both combinations are tuned anways.

Tony

ShiznityZ28

iTrader: (11)

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by VINCE:
<strong>Nothing against anyone, but I think this is more ls1edit than anything. I keep hearing that the bigger intake duration is making up for the intake flow restrictions that we have. If that is the case.. A 230/230 would produce the same horsepower if not more, but idle a little rougher than the reverse split. A 230/224 is not going to flow more air than a 230/230.. I have not seen any new high dyno #'s than what we had before.. I have also noticed that the people who have access to a dyno to tune their cars are doing better with ls1edit than those who do not. I personally think Ed Wright was more on the conservative side before when he was tuning everyones car through mail order. I hear his wideband tuning has produced the same or not more than some ls1edit tuning. Until a vendor test out a 230/230 against a 230/224 with the same lsa in the same car,WE ARE IN FULL GUESS MODE.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">this is what i am thinking also. theres such a varience from car to car that we need someone to step up and do this for science.lol

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">
True, there have not been any comparison graphs of a 230/230 TR vs the 230/224, but the 230/230 is just too big for street use I think. Terry, you may have a big stall and gears, but the majority of the users on this board would not trade off midrange and drivability
</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">It's just funny how badly people misunderstand "midrange" and "drivability". If you have 4.10s and/or a 3800+ rpm stall, power below 3800 means nothing to you. As long as the cam idles within your parameters it will be very drivable.

ShiznityZ28

iTrader: (11)

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by VINCE:
<strong>Nothing against anyone, but I think this is more ls1edit than anything. I keep hearing that the bigger intake duration is making up for the intake flow restrictions that we have. If that is the case.. A 230/230 would produce the same horsepower if not more, but idle a little rougher than the reverse split. A 230/224 is not going to flow more air than a 230/230.. I have not seen any new high dyno #'s than what we had before.. I have also noticed that the people who have access to a dyno to tune their cars are doing better with ls1edit than those who do not. I personally think Ed Wright was more on the conservative side before when he was tuning everyones car through mail order. I hear his wideband tuning has produced the same or not more than some ls1edit tuning. Until a vendor test out a 230/230 against a 230/224 with the same lsa in the same car,WE ARE IN FULL GUESS MODE.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">this is what i am thinking also. theres such a varience from car to car that we need someone to step up and do this for science.lol

Colonel

Ok, midrange and drivability aside...

Let's say a person has an idle tolerance value of 5 on a scale of 1-10, 10 being like stock.

Now, let's assume that a 230/230 112 is a 5 on that scale.

What could the intake duration be and still maintain an idle value of 5 IF the exhaust duration were reduced to 6 degrees below the intake? Might we be able to run a 233/227 and still have an idle value of 5? This assuming like ramp rates and like LSAs of course. The total duration would be the same as a 230/230 so might it idle the same while having even greater high rpm power?

Hmmmm....thoughts?

MARO-KEEN

iTrader: (10)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by LG Motorsports:

The reverse split cams are only a band aid for a head that lacks flow in the intake port, or if the volume of the port is too large to help low lift velocity.
That is why the torque numbers are low. The port volume is too large to get low lift flow.
<img border="0" alt="[bullshit]" title="" src="graemlins/gr_bs.gif" />

The reverse split cam should work better with a bad intake port, ie a stock port, or a ported head with a less than perfect intake flow.

The low torque numbers illustrate this. "Torque wins races, HP sells engines".
<img border="0" alt="[boring]" title="" src="graemlins/gr_zzz.gif" />

So Lou, your implying that the MTI cylinder heads flow poorly or are ported incorrectly?! <img border="0" title="" alt="[Roll Eyes]" src="images/icons/rolleyes.gif" />

Doesn't MTI have 3 6-speed C5's and a N/A Z28 running 9s with their poor flowing heads?? <img border="0" alt="[jester]" title="" src="graemlins/gr_jest.gif" />

VINCE

iTrader: (1)

Patrick... That reverse split was obviously better for your combo. That does not mean it will be better for everyones combo.. Variances come into play as well. What is making me laugh is you yourself do not realize you put a bigger cam in your car and was surprised to get more horsepower. Go figure... Did you actually think you were going to lose power? I still see no proof. Back to FULL GUESS MODE.

VINCE

iTrader: (1)

Colonel you have a point..