TSP torquer vs2.....Not impressed
11-18-2007, 05:41 PM
#41
stock valve size? i wouldn't see that being the issue, i am running STOCK 241's with a MS4(which everyone knows is HUGE) LS6 intake M6 12 bolt blah blah blah. car made 404whp and 376wtq. There is such things as too big a cam, but I am not seeing this problem on LS motors.
TSP-you guys rock, you know your LS1's and i will be coming to you guys for my heads and intake!
I read through the whole thing, maybe i missed something, but what heads are you running anyways?
TSP-you guys rock, you know your LS1's and i will be coming to you guys for my heads and intake!
I read through the whole thing, maybe i missed something, but what heads are you running anyways?
The same as you stock 241s just ported and polished with a five angle valve job. I think I have finally come to the decision that I just can't afford to fix anything right now. Don't get me wrong I need to fix it but money...A new motor will have to be the answer someday 408.....
11-18-2007, 06:12 PM
#43
I had a TR224 on a 114 all the bolt ons and stock heads. I upgraded to the TSP228R on a 114 and AFR heads. I lost a alot of power down low, but picked up power up top. I gained about 10 RWHP from the cam change.
I had to end up adding 3.90 gears to make up for the low end. I wish I just stayed with the TR224 and added the heads.
I had to end up adding 3.90 gears to make up for the low end. I wish I just stayed with the TR224 and added the heads.
11-18-2007, 09:04 PM
#45
TECH Apprentice
iTrader: (13)
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: indiana
Posts: 349
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
hey highlife i run the same size pushrods you got with prc duals and .40 mil gasskets for ablut 2 years now no problems so i dont know if thats were your problem is but im no pro just curious on your whole setup what size injectors and rails are you runing did you put a bigger pump in what is your timing at i just find it hard to belive your car trq is peaking at what i make at 3000 rpm this cam will scream if set up proper just like any other cam but dont bash yourself and park it and just buy a new motor its probly something simple double check everything and research if this was easy everybody would have a 10 second camaro or honda iv put a 12 bolt in this year finally broke and had to tear it down the block twice this year to check **** cause i had issuies feals like its never going to end more high mataince than a big titty blond idk peace
11-18-2007, 10:49 PM
#46
I had my car on F Body Centrals dyno about two weeks ago. 231/236, 613/613, 111 custom grind cam only with a Fast 90/90 here. Made 390 corrected on their dyno. There is no way a 224 would put down those kinda #s on their dyno. Must have been recalibrated recently or something. Be happy.
11-19-2007, 01:21 AM
#47
TECH Resident
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: AUSTIN TX
Posts: 855
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Are any of the techs/owners of "F Body Central" members of this board? If so, can you answer the question of whether or not some calibration changes have been made since Xtnct00WS6 (9/05/2006) and LS1HIGHLIFE's first dyno (4/11/2007) and his last one on 11/16/2007? It sure looks to me like they were using cal factors to mimic Dynojet numbers before, and if they are not now that would explain some of the discrepancy though still not all of it.
11-19-2007, 01:48 AM
#48
Launching!
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: San Jose CA
Posts: 266
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have the TR224 with the LPE 420HP package with extras and it put down over 440 the the rear. I love this cam
Last edited by PREDATOR-Z; 11-19-2007 at 07:37 AM. Reason: cursing and talking like a juvenile
11-19-2007, 06:05 AM
#50
Are any of the techs/owners of "F Body Central" members of this board? If so, can you answer the question of whether or not some calibration changes have been made since Xtnct00WS6 (9/05/2006) and LS1HIGHLIFE's first dyno (4/11/2007) and his last one on 11/16/2007? It sure looks to me like they were using cal factors to mimic Dynojet numbers before, and if they are not now that would explain some of the discrepancy though still not all of it.
11-19-2007, 11:28 AM
#52
I have read the first post several times, but still can't figure out exactly what was changed between the two dyno sessions. Was it only the cam and injectors? Sounds like there were other changes as well and until all the variables are identified, it will be hard to pick through and rule out things.
11-19-2007, 02:59 PM
#56
TECH Regular
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Mi
Posts: 491
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'd say it's close to being right. The TR224 doesn’t not act like a small cam. The tv2 was never a screamer hence the 3rd and 4th versions of it is my take. TSP torquer cams weren’t very torquey in the beginning.
As far as the 430 with a tr224 and heads yes that’s possible and very do able. You need to go quite a bit bigger to beat out the TR224.
The TR224 is the quintessential off the shelf cam
As far as the 430 with a tr224 and heads yes that’s possible and very do able. You need to go quite a bit bigger to beat out the TR224.
The TR224 is the quintessential off the shelf cam
11-19-2007, 03:14 PM
#57
the Torquer 2 is a GREAT cam.. theres is NO reason why you should have lost power swapping from a 224 to a 232/234. it doesnt make sense. PERIOD. something is not right.
Dyno numbers arent EVERYTHING.. after i swapped heads & 90/90 (still on the T2) i jumped on a mustang dyno and made 350rwhp and 325ftlbs.. obviously this was way off... something could have been off with the dyno. people make mistakes. how does the car feel? slower?
Dyno numbers arent EVERYTHING.. after i swapped heads & 90/90 (still on the T2) i jumped on a mustang dyno and made 350rwhp and 325ftlbs.. obviously this was way off... something could have been off with the dyno. people make mistakes. how does the car feel? slower?
Last edited by sidewayz28; 11-19-2007 at 03:20 PM.
11-19-2007, 06:43 PM
#60
TECH Resident
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: AUSTIN TX
Posts: 855
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
