Thunder 224/224 vs. 230/224
10-03-2002, 12:13 AM
#21
Launching!
iTrader: (32)
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Detroit area
Posts: 215
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Thunder 224/224 vs. 230/224 Jason,
I noticed that you advanced the installed position of the 227 cam by 2 degrees.
I also noticed the LSA on your 230/224 cam is tightened up to 111 vs. 114 LSA on the others.
Did you try advancing or retarding the the 224 and 230 cams to see if any improvement was made?
When you ordered the 230/224, why did you decide to deviate from the 114 LSA that was ground into the other cams. It would have been interesting to see a graph of a 230/224 on a 114 LSA for a more direct comparison.
I noticed that you advanced the installed position of the 227 cam by 2 degrees.
I also noticed the LSA on your 230/224 cam is tightened up to 111 vs. 114 LSA on the others.
Did you try advancing or retarding the the 224 and 230 cams to see if any improvement was made?
When you ordered the 230/224, why did you decide to deviate from the 114 LSA that was ground into the other cams. It would have been interesting to see a graph of a 230/224 on a 114 LSA for a more direct comparison.
10-03-2002, 12:14 AM
#22
Re: Thunder 224/224 vs. 230/224 Ok, maybe i'm wrong. But that cam just seems so freaking huge! My buddy has one and his car seems to fight to stay started. Maybe that has to do with programming. He also has TEA Stage 2 heads and LT's and he's drilled out the TB. He only had the package for about three months when 'something'... he still doesn't know what, started ticking. He says there is a loss of power as well. And I'm not downing the cam or saying it is troubled. It makes great power. But I've read a couple other posts where people who have that cam are having problems. They weren't posting that the cam did it, just that the car was broken and they did have that cam. And sorry, I DON'T remember what it was. They described what the car was doing, nothing specificly broken. I think I might just have it in my head that the cam is winding the crap out of the engine. Apparently, it's not too much different than the 224 but maybe it is 'the last straw' so to speak and pushing it a little too far putting a crapload more stress on everything, especially the little guys in the engine.
What I want to know is according to Jason TA's car, the difference between the 224/224 and the 230/224 is about ten Top-end hp. The dyno's were practically identical until 5200 rpm. So why would Thunder even build three cams like the 224, 227 and 230 that are so alike? I know the 230 is pushing piston to valve clearance so that is why I was leaning more towards the 227. According to the dyno it should only be about 5hp...
Farad.. Huh?
<small>[ October 02, 2002, 12:31 PM: Message edited by: SStolen ]</small>
What I want to know is according to Jason TA's car, the difference between the 224/224 and the 230/224 is about ten Top-end hp. The dyno's were practically identical until 5200 rpm. So why would Thunder even build three cams like the 224, 227 and 230 that are so alike? I know the 230 is pushing piston to valve clearance so that is why I was leaning more towards the 227. According to the dyno it should only be about 5hp...
Farad.. Huh?
<small>[ October 02, 2002, 12:31 PM: Message edited by: SStolen ]</small>
10-03-2002, 12:23 AM
#23
Re: Thunder 224/224 vs. 230/224 </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by gto69judge:
<strong>Jason,
I noticed that you advanced the installed position of the 227 cam by 2 degrees.
I also noticed the LSA on your 230/224 cam is tightened up to 111 vs. 114 LSA on the others.
Did you try advancing or retarding the the 224 and 230 cams to see if any improvement was made?
When you ordered the 230/224, why did you decide to deviate from the 114 LSA that was ground into the other cams. It would have been interesting to see a graph of a 230/224 on a 114 LSA for a more direct comparison.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I think TR went to the lower LSA on the bigger cam to pull the power band down more into the usable rpm range. I think a 230/224 on a 114 LSA would need to rev even higher than a 230/224 on a 111 LSA.
Jason or Paul can say for sure.
<strong>Jason,
I noticed that you advanced the installed position of the 227 cam by 2 degrees.
I also noticed the LSA on your 230/224 cam is tightened up to 111 vs. 114 LSA on the others.
Did you try advancing or retarding the the 224 and 230 cams to see if any improvement was made?
When you ordered the 230/224, why did you decide to deviate from the 114 LSA that was ground into the other cams. It would have been interesting to see a graph of a 230/224 on a 114 LSA for a more direct comparison.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I think TR went to the lower LSA on the bigger cam to pull the power band down more into the usable rpm range. I think a 230/224 on a 114 LSA would need to rev even higher than a 230/224 on a 111 LSA.
Jason or Paul can say for sure.
10-03-2002, 12:30 AM
#24
I can shift faster than you.
iTrader: (21)
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Baton Rouge, LA
Posts: 5,133
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Thunder 224/224 vs. 230/224 99 Black Bird is exactly correct. We didn't want to rev the motor much past 6800 with the stock bottom end still in place.
It would have been a better comparison if we would have left the LSA and advance ground in the same. I feel the 114lsa would have carried out a little better up top at the expense of some midrange.
Jason
It would have been a better comparison if we would have left the LSA and advance ground in the same. I feel the 114lsa would have carried out a little better up top at the expense of some midrange.
Jason
