</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by DevilBird:
<strong>Why is the tq lower with a reverse pattern than single pattern and split pattern?</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Its not.

 

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by 99RamAirTA:
<strong>I recently installed a reverse split cam and a set of cnc heads in my car and I have been nothing but impressed. The car idles like a beast and sounds incredable. It makes wicked power above 3 grand all the way to 7. I plan on putting a shot on the car soon to see how it does.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Have you gotten this car to the track? Just curious <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="gr_stretch.gif" />

 

That is true.. I have not seen any track times for the reverse splits.. Hmmmm...

 

No track times my ***...I ran 11.70 at 116 mph in my 3800 lb ragtop a couple of weeks ago. Full street trim. This was over 2 tenths and 2 mph faster than when I ran with the Lunati 221/224 113 LSA cam I previously had. In my case, the reverse split cam really woke up my car...even with ported S2 heads and running through a closed factory dual dual exhaust.

My ETs could have been even quicker, but I was only running Nittos and had to baby it off the line. 60' times were 1.68 on two runs. Had I been able to nail the throttle from the line, I would have run in the 11.50s without a doubt. Just needed the traction. My car 60s in the 1.55 range with traction.

 

Sorry about that Patrick.. I forgot about you. That is pretty quick.. I should be running that with the same weight in my M6 with the cam you were going to go with a while ago.. 226 XE-R.. My apologies...

 

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by Pro Stock John:
(1) So if the reverse split cams are compensating for our stock intake restrictions, does that mean if you go with ported heads and bigger valves that a split cam starts to loose it's value?</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">no it shouldn't, it will help. Just because you are getting more air into the bigger doesn't mean the cam loses meaning, remember the longer intake duration is compensating for the actual INTAKE not the intake port on the head itself

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">(2)S/E cars can play with duration. Cannot run ported heads. So are they probably running reverse split cams?</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">more than likely, they are trying to cram every little bit of air into the combustion chamber to make maximum power

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">(3) Reverse split LIFT vs DURATION cams, thoughts? I had a reverse split LIFT cam last year, Comp 585/560 lift.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">John this type of cam is more for a nitrous motor that doesn't have a well enough breathing intake flowing port. For example, before i switched gears and decided to build my boost motor this year i was very close to having my 406 engine built. It was going to be pretty much a track car so i had the cam built around it that way. I got cam reccomendations from Comp, Lunati, and Cam Motion. All had the same idea except for Comp.

Since my fully ported track 1s weren't making an extreme amount of flow on the intake side but the exhaust was good and the motor was made to shoot the gas into...the cam specs cam out like this:

282/294 @ .050 and .706/.646

The cam was designed to make peak power around 7200-7500 and the lift on the intake was higher to try and cram as much air/nitrous into the motor but still had more exhaust duration so it could get it all out effectively.

Does that help?

 

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by TrahnZam WS6:
<strong> </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by DevilBird:
<strong>Why is the tq lower with a reverse pattern than single pattern and split pattern?</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Its not.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Well...isn't it just a little lower than average?

 

i think the torque might be a little lower but higher up in the rpm band and that means more horsepower to be gained on the top end

hp is a function of torque and rpm

 

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by JimmyKash:
<strong>i think the torque might be a little lower but higher up in the rpm band and that means more horsepower to be gained on the top end

hp is a function of torque and rpm</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Thanks...thats what I was wanting to know

 

Most of the gains I've seen have been over stock cams or smaller cams in the 221-224 range. Seems like adding more total duartion...and keeping the lsa down in a usable range.....is going to add power whether its traditional or reverse....if you don't mind a choppier idle.

Has anyone seen any actual testing as far as the ls6 intake goes? How far can you go before it becomes a restriction. If i remember correctly...i think there was an article written by nick and during the course of the article he says the intakes aren't actually as bad as many have been led to believe.

If i'm wrong nick correct me on this....i'll try and look for that link and post it.

 

Has anyone been able to effectively explain why added intake duration is better than added intake AND exhaust duration? I.E. why a 230/224 cam is better than a 230/230? If so, what prevents someone from trying a 230/230 cam?

 

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by RAGEman:
<strong> I.E. why a 230/224 cam is better than a 230/230? If so, what prevents someone from trying a 230/230 cam?</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Idle quality, Assuming no power adders, the answer would be Idle quality, Idle quality....

Assuming a Turbo on the car, reverse split would be better....the turbo makes the bottleneck the intake, where the opposite can be said about a blower/N20

The point of a 230/224 cam on a n/a car is that it behaves like a 224/224 cam, but addes extra oomph up top without sacraficing low end. The 230/230 will not behave as well as a 230/224, and will probably put down more power..how much??? Not a ton...

Going from a 230/224 to a 230/230 with simliar LSA, etc....is a sacrafice. Do you want better idle quality or better power??? Eventually you have to decide how beefy your cam is going to be vs. how much driveability you want....

And in my case, I have a dual 3" exhaust going through Grott long tubes, so I don't need the extra exhaust duration, that isn't my bottle neck. I want the streetability of a 224/224 cam, but the top end of a 230/230 cam, and a great compromise is the reverse split 230/224.

<small>[ June 13, 2002, 02:12 AM: Message edited by: verbs ]</small>

 

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by 02 Silver Z:
<strong>I was talking to a guy with a wicked fast `89 Turbo T/A and he told me that turbo motors love a cam reverse split cam. Must be some truth to it cause that car flew!! <img border="0" title="" alt="[Eek!]" src="gr_eek2.gif" /> </strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I agree. Turbos like SINGLE or more INTAKE biased cams. I don't think they like Bigger exhaust splits as much, but a few on this board seem to recomend them as turbo cams for some reason.

If you talk too shop owners and turbo racers, buick guys ect(people with turbo knowledge). They will mostly agree with the turbo guy you talked with. Intake biased, or single for a turbo car.

<small>[ June 13, 2002, 04:18 AM: Message edited by: Rpm2800 ]</small>

 

I think the main reason turbo cams are reverse split is that the exhaust still has a job to do when it leaves the cylinder ie turn the turbo , less duration = more velocity to turn the turbo. As far as se cars go with RACE open headers not just long tubes, a 5500 converter and 5 seares gears i do not think that mid range tourque is in there vocabulary. I personally do not think a split of 3-4 degs makes that much of a diference either way so i would worry about more about the number of degs ,the ramp speed ,the lift and the lsa. just my 2 cents.

 

Someone is trying the 230/230 from what I hear.. I just hope the tuners tune it the same way they tuned the reverse split. Another thing.. The advertised duration on the New 230/230 XE-R would idle better than my old T1.. My T1 with programming idled almost like stock in my car. You only heard the lope. You did not feel it..

 

What about dynamic cylinder pressures? Let's use the TR 230/224 and 224/224 on the same lsa as an an example.

I was thinking that the 230/224 would have greater cylinder pressures than the 224/224. But I am by no means an expert, just making an educated guess.

Mike

 

I would asume the cylinder presure would be higher as well , i would also think that more cylinder presure same exhaust= more reversion and more exhaust gas remaining in the cylinder especially on a car with any backpresure in the exhaust system. I am no expert either but a good lt1 cam is the cc306 and it has 230/244 i know the ls1 is totaly different but it is still an engine just the same. It would be nice to see someone try a direct comparison with cams with more of a split say 230/220 220/230 230/230 i would try them in that order as well because i think the last one will be the best, but i could be wrong.

 

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by RAGEman:
<strong>Has anyone been able to effectively explain why added intake duration is better than added intake AND exhaust duration? I.E. why a 230/224 cam is better than a 230/230? If so, what prevents someone from trying a 230/230 cam?</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Its called the MMS 229 that Terry runs. I'd be interesting at how much vac at idle the 230/224 pulls, and what the advertised duration of the MMS 229 is to see how it compares to the 230 Thunder lobe.

J.

 

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">what prevents someone from trying a 230/230 cam?</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Nothing.....Hint Hint!!!---> https://ls1tech.com/ubb/cgi-bin/ulti...c;f=1;t=005602 <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="gr_grin.gif" />

<small>[ June 13, 2002, 01:46 PM: Message edited by: Raging Motorsports ]</small>

 

Stay tuned everyone I will be trying a 230/230 cam very very soon <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="gr_grin.gif" /> and I dont think it will idle like sh*t either.