It's a custom grind spec'd out by Grannyshifting (Tech member), he called it a 232/236. I don't remember exactly how it came back from the grinder, they all come out different. My TR224 wasn't exactly a 224,563 cam like the site says. I can go down to the garage and check the box if it'll make you feel better.




My graph is proof. What makes you the expert? Your post count?

 

pretty common knowledge that the smaller cams will give better under the curve power,and a nice fat power curve, whereas the larger cams will make more horse on the dyno, but when your not making power until 4000+ rpm whats the point? I mean ya the numbers are there, and sure a massive motor with a big *** cam will push you well into and past the 10 second mark, but most of the people here drive their cars, not just on the track.
also I may be fairly new to the cam scene, but your 224 seems like its got very mild lift, perhaps a newer 224 with something closer to 600 lift would make more power.
Either way Im happy with my cam, I think about going to a larger 230 ish duration cam but I will stick to my 224/228 for a while.

 

Link to said graph?
Also if you have a comparison between your 224 and new cam it would be cool

 

I don't have a scanner or I'd post it up. When I stop by my parents house next time I'll post it up. Perhaps the addition of my FAST 90/90 bumped up low torque, it was added with the new cam. If so I apoligize but but my results are legit.

 

Yeap, you got me there



How did I know there was a juvenile behavior?

See, that is called experience.

That is called ignorance


And that is called "not apples to apples"

 

anybody arguing against PREDATOR-Z on cam theory...will lose...and is obviously a being of no knowledge or experience.

 

Wonderful grammar there. Had to get out a kindergarten to adult dictionary to translate. I'm juvenile cause I don't have a scanner and my father does? He lives 4 miles away. Please elaborate...

 

Because a grown man doesn't run to Daddy to prove a point he will loose anyways !

99BlancoSS has a biz building motor combos, I have years of drag racing and run my own grinds, yet you are unnable to listen to facts proven a zillion times by poeple who are more experinced than Blanco or myself put together. why? because of 2 graphs you can't even read or understand correctly. If you did, you would'nt make statements like the ones you've been dishing out.

That reminds me of a sig I saw here before:

"Never argue with Stupid, he will sink you down to his level and ends up winning from experience"

or something along these lines.

 

I was asked by another in the thread to do so, so

Big deal. I'm sure my tuner has built and tuned as many LSx cars.
I see what you mean. If you like I'll try to get the graph up later unless you just wanna keep being a know it all di(k and talking about my family in which case I'll just unsubscribe.

 

Keep it on track guys

 

This is a damn good read,I read 10 pages of great info.

I'm looking into a cam and I wanna stay away from a MASSIVE cam...I rather run faster than make more power than a dyno queen...if that makes scene,also HP isnt everything. As Carol Shelby Said "HP sell's cars! TQ win's races"

 

Here's the graph. Please show me where the old cam made less torque.

All were done on the same extremely conservative Mustang dyno.

 

The FAST dosent add alot of tq down low, it adds hp up top as far as I know.
It would have been interesting to see what sort of gains you would have made without adding the fast, but oh well
So conservativly one could say that the fast added around 10-20 up top, not saying that your cam sucks but dude look at your torque curve you have 20 more rwtq with the new cam but it peaks at around 4600-4700 rpm, where your 224 peaked at what 3800?
To me this kinda just states the obvious and already known, smaller cams peak earlier and have more under the curve, and the bigger you get the farther up your peak goes. So what exactly is all the argument about?

 

You're looking at it wrong. The old/new curves do not intersect. There is a dip in the new curve at about 4,100rpms.There is no "more area under the curve". It shows exactly what I've been saying all along. I'll see if I can redo it to show the color differences better or resize it to show more detail.

 

Anyone running a 220/222 580-600 lift 112+4 (cam motion) cam with 225CC heads? Looking for street car power with occasional trips to the strip, this was recommended to me for several reasons. (I was thinking about the TR224 as well) My F14 HL cam runs like a raped ape from 4800 on, but being the sane not as young as most Fbody drivers out there, I'm HARDLY ever there for many reasons. And yes, it seems quite a few pedestrian automobiles get away from me at stops when I'm just rolling on it to 2500-3000 rpms. It also feels like I have to really step into it until 2500-3000 before I feel much. I guess I would appreciate better part throttle reponse. Wow, like I've been told, you can't have a daily driver and call it a street/strip car.

 

INMY01TA, Look at your Air Fuel Ratio in the low rpms on the 224. It is ridiculously fat (rich), Blanco was right, your tune was off. 12.4 AFR at 3200, come on.....Nitrous tune?
The only time your AFR is about right on the 224 is about 5800rpm, close to peak
Lord knows about timing.

That dip you are experiencing is still a tuning issue, it should not be there. Although I've seen it a lot with 90/90 FAST.
Also runs are starting at 3000+ rpms on a dyno, hardly what anyone calls down low.

Read this thread, this is a TR224 cam only on a Mustang dyno 370/361
You made 360/34x WITH HEADS

https://ls1tech.com/forums/dynamometer-results-comparisons/918457-01-ss-tr224-mustang-dyno.html

This one is a TR224 with heads look at the trq curve and the AFR

https://ls1tech.com/forums/dynamometer-results-comparisons/873630-h-c-results-tr224-tsp-2-5-s.html

welcome to reality, it is Ok, I hope you are learning something. If not at least others will see what Blanco and I are talking aout.

 

ummmm...well that aint right....i see what your saying though about the curves not intersecting but that hump shouldnt be there....heres mine



ive since done a few things and had to have the tune cleaned up and let me tell ya its making alot more now.

 

Well I've got another graph done with the same set up 2 months later on another shops dyno (little experiment to compare the two dynos) and there's no dip on it there. Also that tune on the 224s graph was prolly 3 years old when that run was done. I used the graph I did just cause it showed both cams on one. Leave it to Predator to find reasonable doubt. Maybe I'll post the others tomorrow, I'm tired of arguing with him over what I already know. Nice #s w/your h/c set up btw.

 

Wth is this supposed to prove? There's people on here who claim to have made 380rwhp with stock cams and usual bolt ons. All cars/dynos are different. Within 10 ain't bad I'd say.

 

Set up in my sig, H/C and !detonation mod.