LG Motorsports

Part of the problem is that many, even vendors, feel that they can bash LGM and get away with it, even if it is not true. And I will not let a false statement that is directed at LGM go unchallenged. Then when I make an equal but opposite statement, the thread gets out of hand.

I never make any negetive statements about other vendors products, unless they make a direct derogatory statement about LGM or our products.

Brian,or Brent, or whoever is posting,
I came into this thread because you specifically said, "Don't buy a G5X-2 because they break springs". When in fact you broke a spring with a cam that was not a G5X-2, but a clone. Then you bash our cam based upon your experience with whatever cam you put in your car, whatever it was.

Please don't give me this altruistic reasoning that you are just trying to protect others. You say that your heads have made 440? but from what I remember there is low torque between 3500 and 5500, and if there is low torque in that range, there is low hp also.

I along with over 100 other G5X-2 cam owners do drive their cars every day, with no problems with the REV springs. You are making a leap of logic that is not warranted. I have almost 10,000 miles on the cam package in my car, and anyone who has come to my shop, or come to the road race track knows that I do not baby my car, or engine. I have not had any spring issues. I am trying my hardest to break a spring, so I can see what it takes to break one, but I can not seem to accomplish this feat.

JFWS6, You said,>>> "I will say in defense of Brian that ALL HE SAID was that large of a cam (the G5X cam) is hard on valve springs. That's it, nothing else".<<<

And I say, based upon what?

If that is what he said, and he based it on a couple of isolated examples, then I say he is wrong. Remember this, there are 200 REV springs that DO NOT break for every 1 that does. That is not a problem to worry about.
99 SS M6;
Here is the >>Quote from Brian<<
"I would not put this large of a lift cam in a daily driver. I put this cam in my C5 on a 114 LSA and broke a dual spring within 6 months of occasional driving. I have had several people call me with this cam".<<<
That is what Brian said after CamM recomended the G5X-2 cam.

And for R&amp;D...I guess our hard work at LGM saved Brian (and others) from having to try 8 different variation of cams with those specs to come up with his clone.

Bragging rights come with high hp numbers, that include high TORQUE numbers. 20 months ago we had 440rwhp with 425rwtq with our G5 cam 224/230. High tq numbers DO NOT come with a reverse split cams.

For the last year, until the G5X-2 cam came out, the reverse split was all the rage. Now there are more traditional split "big" cams that look alot like our cam, than ever before.

And with TEA flooding the market with their heads, that just means that there won't be as many high hp cars out there.

LG
PS, what some of you critics have to keep in mind is that I only responded to a false calim about our Cams/springs reliability. You can't have it both ways and expect LGM to be silent when false info is put out.

flynbludream

iTrader: (1)

Why is it that the only person that has said this is not a good daily driver cam is a competitor of LGM? What if someone had asked whether or not TEA heads flow well at high lift? From what Lou has seen they don't, so if he came on that thread as a competitor saying that TEA's heads suck at high lift wouldn't TEA have the right to be pissed?

The original question is will the G5X-2 work on stock stuff. The answer is since it is sold as a kit YES. No one asked if it would be a good daily driver, TEA offered that opinion when it wasn't requested. Everyone knows this is a big *** cam. If you want a big *** cam then this is a good one to go with. You probably also know that it is going to sound mean as hell, and that you will put out some serious numbers if you tune it right.

Doesn't it seems weird that none of the people that actually have the G5X-2 cam or heads/cam combo have come on here to say that this is not a good daily driver? In fact most that I have seen say they are suprised how streetable it is.

It seems like vendors should stay out of other vendors business and let the consumers share their real life experiences.

soundengineer

iTrader: (16)

ok so I have decided to stick with My X1....
(the recommended Kit)they send Manley 221423 nextek springs 1.255" single inst 115lbs at 1.750" open 350 lbs at 1.175" coil bind 1.100" should I get something a little more heave duty?? this is a daily driver...
the x1 is a 230/227 .591/.571 112lsa

I dont know what all the #'s on the springs mean...but I do have somebody else helping me on the install....
any suggestions???
If you can explain the spring #'s I would greatly appreciate it...

Like I said before.... on my hemi...it went into a shop for the cam and springs and heads.....

1999_SS_M6

Ok, You've got 10,000 miles on your car with the G5X2 and the REVs, and according to your own estimate, that makes you due for either a valve spring change, or a component failure.. not exactly the strongest position to be in when arguing about reliability of your setup. Does ANYONE feel that "10k valve spring replacements" and "reliable daily driver" have ANY place in a sentence together?? Maybe it's me, but internal engine component replacement EVERY YEAR does not constitute normal service for a street car.

No one is saying the cam doesn't make power. No one is bashing your products. All that was said was that cam is going to wear valvetrain components quickly. You admit this yourself, so why is everyone beating on their chest?

And as far as your claims to just be challenging false statements, that is complete bunk. You're mud slinging, period. It was your camp that began the "TEA low lift heads" name calling. It was your camp that started making direct negative endorsements of TEA's products, not the other way around. And it was you yourself, Lou, that said thanks to TEA there will be a lot fewer high HP cars around. That's just petty slander.

Again you site LGM's R&amp;D work, yet you still fail to give a definitive answer to a direct question. Does the G5X2 cam have a Comp Cams part number or doesn't it? Did you simply take a Comp Cams grind, label it with a new LGM part number and term it as secret? And before you deny this, let me also say that taking an off the shelf Comp Cams part, grinding 2 degrees of advance into it, and calling it a "custom grind" isn't what I would call R&amp;D.

I just hate to see it when a good shop with honest people gets railroaded with dreamed up claims by a competitor and his cheerleaders. TEA is a solid company, they stand behind their products, and they have a knowledgeable staff that will do whatever it takes to earn your buisness. There is no commentary as sorely needed in this thread as an apology from LGM to TEA.

soundengineer

iTrader: (16)

PLEASE STOP THIS PISSING MATCH.

Quit squabling and play nice....
Do not run with scisors.....
remember....we are all after the same thing.....POWER....
we all get there different ways....
and unless you are featured in some major magazine or on TV on a car show or at a major event....YOU ARE JUST LIKE ME....and I AM NOBODY.

PLEASE STOP PISSING AT EACH OTHER.

soundengineer

iTrader: (16)

also...
Does anybody have a success story for this cam and springs and heads.....Instead of what we've all been seeing here...

minivette

I have a question for the sponsors in this thread. Do any of you think that you win potential customers by coming in here and arguing and bickering back and forth? As much as you think you are right, take the high road and be the mature one. This is rediculous.

Godspeed

I agree, some of the statements in this thread are inappropiate, but we did not initiate it nor will stand by and let the integrity of our products be challenged. That being said, here are final remarks on the subject and this thread.

We offer a full line of cams (G2, G5, G5X-1, G5X-2) from mild to wild to meet our customers goals of performance, streetability, and reliability. A large G5X-2 cam for a hot rod f-body owner may be completely streetable, but may not be acceptable for others. Some people run full exhaust with cats and stock mufflers, others like no cats and cutouts. Some people want all out performance at any cost, others like a settle lope with better than average performance. When I say the G5X-2 is streetable, I mean exactly that. We are able to tune them to cold and warm start with no gas peddle or surging with or without A/C. They have passed emissions and we have even installed one for a female automatic Corvette owner who found it acceptable. The G5X-2 is a big cam, and is sold exactly as such. It can take more work to tune and make run right than the smaller cams on the market, but for those seeking all the power not wanting to leave anything on the table, this is what we recommend.

At the end of the day all that matters is that we have 115 of these cam package in daily service right now without any issues. Anyone who had a problem with a spring, even due to installation error, we have stood beside our product and supported.

Brian/Brent's situation is unique to the G5X-2 in that:

1. His cam is not a G5X-2, it's one of his own design with similiar specs
2. He revs the engine to 7000RPM - we recommend a rev limiter at 6800, with normal shifting from 6400-6600RPM.
3. He is spraying nitrous on top of it, which add wear and tear to the package.
4. He is using springs that we do not recommend and do not include with our kit.

It has been our experience that the TEA 5.3 heads are not optimized for the G5X-2 as they don't flow as well at high lift as our own. Our own heads are designed specifically to work with our cam, so as such we are not recommending TEA's at this time. This is not to discount the TEA's as we have seen other's achieve respectable numbers with them in the past. I am sure TEA is capable, so in the future if they produce a head designed to flow well at high lift, we would be happy to test it with the G5X-2. For TEA as a sponsor to come into a thread about LG products and say they are not suitable for a daily driver is inappropiate. LGM does not go into other vendors thread and recommend people not use their products. We have 115+ of these packages in daily use now, without any issues and have stood behind 100% of our customers having any problems.

For those that like to bandwagon and flame LGM and Lou, good luck with whatever products you choose and remember what goes around comes around. Before you are so quick to talk, keep in mind how you would react if you and your business were personally attacked in a public forum.

If anyone has any further questions or concerns regarding the G5X-2 feel free to give us a call at 972-272-7753.

distortion_69

iTrader: (20)

This is the second thread in a 6 month period that I've seen LG make an *** of himself on the forums. I was looking at the LG5X-2 cam myself for my car. However, it is more of an enjoyment car than transportation. I refuse to buy from such a jerk. Tea heads are offered at a good price, and even if they don't perform the best on the market, at least the guys not a jerk. The fact that Lou is having a pissing match against Brians statement proves that Lou is marketing this cam for a daily driver. He then states that he would too suggest changing the springs just like you change brakes. In that case, lets all drive solid rollers.


"I would not put this large of a lift cam in a daily driver. I put this cam in my C5 on a 114 LSA and broke a dual spring within 6 months of occasional driving. I have had several people call me with this cam that had broken REV springs, Comp 918 springs, Comp 987 springs, broken rockers and one guy with a broken engine as a result of rocker bearings in his engine. Get a cam with .570" lift or less, hope this helps.
Brian Tooley "

WTF is wrong with this? This is a perfectly legit response to the original question. And I agree. I run a mild cam myself, due to not wanting to have to worry about my my valvetrain. I've stopped driving the car lately, and thought about stepping up to a larger cam. It was very apparent by the posters worries that this was going to be a car that was meant to be driven. He even posted in the message after Brians "if its still reasonable to put in a daily driver".. Its very apparent that Brian was just defending his reasoning for all large cams in general. The first post wasn't even directed towards LG5X-2 cams, but just "this large of a lift" cam. You then totally took a hit on TEA, then he apologized and he wasnt' even in the wrong and yet you were still a dick. Then not only did you act like a dick, you then made yourself look like an idiot as 1999 SS m6 stated, by arguing a 10k mile spring change is a reliable daily drivable cam. I don't even know you, but I would suggest anger management classes Lou.

So as you can see my response to the question is that the LG5X-2 cam will make good power, as will any large cam.. but it will be rough on your valvesprings. There will always be risk involved. As stated by Brian on the 3rd post of the thread. This is the truth. And Lou even admits that valvesprings do break, and recommends all large cams changing them every 10k-15k miles. Which could reasonably be taken as the same thing Brian said.

J-Rod

I am not going to pee-pee on anyone, but here is some information use it as you see fit. I got this information from Walt Donovan who is senior design engineer with Jesel. He actually has a clue about valve spings unlike many of the folks out there who just grab X or Y spring. This discussion was about using 987s and other similar valve springs. I am not advocating 987s, but just trying to show that its important to take other factors into consideration, like coil bind....

http://forums.corvetteforum.com/zero...138#1544275138
http://forums.corvetteforum.com/zero...211#1544478211


Seat Open Mfg P/N Outer Outer Inner Rate Seat Open rate @ rate @ Lift OD ID ID 1.75 1.11 Coil Bind b4 coil bind 1.78 1.165 Crane 99893- 1.46 1.075 0.803 408 165 426 1.08 .085 152 414 I 0.615 99893C- 152 414 E 0.615 Seat Open Mfg P/N Outer Outer Inner Rate Seat Open rate @ rate @ Lift OD ID ID 1.75 1.11 Coil Bind b4 coil bind 1.75 1.135 Comp 987 1.46 1.075 0.803 378 138 380 1.1 .035 138 372 I 0.615 138 372 E 0.615




Quote:

Thank you for posting numbers. First time I've seen spring numbers on any of these forums. They tell so much more than the typical "ACME #1234 springs are good for .580 lift" and "I have the BOUNCER 695's and my motor runs fine". None of these subjective statements means anything other than that spring works in that particular combination of cam grind, valve and retainer weight, RPMs, pushrods, etc. Most of the time, these other related particulars are NOT listed. This kind of data should be archived Cam numbers too. I don't mean just lift, duration and LSA but any Cam Dr. or EZ-Cam info (velocity, accel, etc.).

Based on the data you posted, I'm gonna look at the Comp 987 for a motor with .588 net lift, slightly higher than stock velocity and accel, 6800 RPM chip. Putting this spring in at 1.720 installed ht. will give about 150# seat and 388# open @ .032" (plus deflection) from coilbind. This provided the 987 doesn't have a bad rep for breakage (anyone?). I think this spring looks good for less than .600 lift if set up tight. It's a little wimpy on seat pressure over .600 lift. The Crane you listed would certainly control this valvetrain but would put more load on the cam, lifter and pushrod. I wouldn't think of running this spring with any less than a 3/8 pushrod. In fact I'll use 3/8 x .080 with the Comp spring.

Enough rambling.... Anyone else got numbers, spring or cam... post 'em and ask the moderators to archive this stuff.


---------

In another post

Quote:

97C5

For instance,the 987's can be used with more lift, depending on installed height, but will not yeild great pressure numbers when set-up for a cam beyond .500 lift.
I changed to Crane #99893 - these springs set up with 150# seat and 425# open and with a .615 lift cam still have .085 to bind.

I urge you to speak with Richard at West Coast Cylinder Heads - http://West Coast Cylinder Heads


Walt Donovan

Read what '97 C5 wrote. This is the very first inkling of an understanding of valve springs I've ever read on this forum. Springs aren't made for a specific lift (or cam or rocker ratio) but..... When you add more lift you do two things to tax the ability of the spring to control the system. 1) You increase acceleration in the same proportion that you increase lift, and 2) you must set up the spring taller to account for the extra lift. Doing this naturally decreases the seat pressure.
You have one saving grace in that most spring manufacturers have their heads up their .... (well nevermind). Anyway, the spring makers mostly claim their springs should be set up at least .075 from coilbind. They are slowly pulling their heads out though. They used to cringe if you set up their springs less than .100 from coilbind. Have the laws of physics changed so that springs can be set tighter? Remember this, the further the open lift spring is from coilbind, the lighter the force over the nose, the more chance to slam the coils together. I set circle track springs at .035 from CB, prostock at .050 from CB. The only reason the PS springs need so much room is that these heavy triples get very tight just before CB and put extreme loads on prods.

If you get numbers on your springs you can estimate what difference shimming would make. Take the mfrs numbers of installed ht, seat pressure, rate, and distance from CB. If a given spring is 120# @ .085 from CB and you want to squish it to .035, you are adding .050 shim. This .050 times a rate of 344# per inch is 12#. Add this to the 120# seat and you see 132# on the seat. Same thing for adding lift while maintaining distance from CB. Add .050 to your installed ht DECREASES seat pressure by 12#. Anyway, all this means nothing unless you know what shims are and where to put them. In a year or so on this forum, I've NEVER seen a mention of spring shims.

Anyway

--------------

Now, as for cylinder heads.


Here was a very interesting bit of info that I came across. Just like a dyno, even flowbench results can be skewed. I am not going to name the two heads that were tested, as I am not interested in get into a peeing match with shops about their heads or a he said, she said argument. This information is being posted as that, information. Use information like this to educate yourself, and make informdecisions. For the purpose of this test I will refer to the same vendors a Brand X and Brand Y.
In a test of Brand X heads vs Brand Y heads. Brand Y flows as well on the bench (as good as a Brand X), but don't seem to make the same power on the dyno,etc. From discussing it with the head porter, he was mentioning that Brand Y removes material in areas that will show a gain on the flow bench, but will not make anymore power on the dyno. He says they are big in the wrong spots and too small in others.
A set of Brand Y stage 2s 5.3l heads on a car that had all the bolt ons and a TR224 cam. It made 379/370 or so before adding the heads. After the heads, the car did 413/385 after tuning. A week before, Another car had a set of Brand X stage 2 5.3l heads on a car that already had the TR224 cam as well and the IDENTICAL mods as the other Brand Y car (FLPs, LS6 intake, ASP, stock rear/4:10s,etc). Both dynoed the exact same before swapping heads on (the curves practically overlayed oneanother). This car pulled 443/418 with the Brand Xs!
On the flow bench, the Brand Ys actually flowed better from .100-.550, while Brand X flowed slightly better past this. Same thing on the exhaust side. This just goes to show that a flow bench is an excellent tool, but not something that should be used as the determing factor in how a head will perform when put on a motor. The CC volumes were identical on the two heads, so compression difference wasn't an issue.

LG Motorsports

Distortion69,

You missed the whole point. He didn't use a G5X-2 cam, nor did he use the REV springs that we recommend, but he blasted the LG cam.

If you do a search, you will find that our intake lift is only .595, and every 230+ cam out there that most are using are over .591 Brian could have referenced one of the other brands, like TSP, with 595, or MTI with .595 but instead, he pointed to the G5X-2?? What if he had said TSP cam breaks springs? Either way it was not an accurate statement.

Based upon what you are posting here, you would never have purchased a part from LGM anyway. So I doubt that pointing out someone's false or inaccurate statement about our cam is what changed your mind.

This is also what you said, ["Tea heads are offered at a good price, and even if they don't perform the best...] That statement says volumes.

As for changing the springs out at 10-15000, that is just a recomendation for those who are not afraid to do maintenance, just as a precaution. I don't think it is necessary since the REV springs have a 99.5% reliability rate.

It is false to say the cam, either LG or TSP or MTI or TR is the cause of any spring breaking. They are all about .600 lift+/- .

Right now the REV spring is the best performing spring out there for controlling the lifter to lobe contact, and not floating at high revs. The reliability rate is as high or higher than every other spring available. They have a real 99.5% reliability rate. That is documented.

The internet forums get real old listening to Props for underperforming packages, and doubts for the ones that do perform. When the hp is low, the excuse list comes out. And when they do perform, the naysayers come out and claim "Dyno Tricks". or Take it to the track.

Sorry if any of you feel that I should just let things slide, in the name of beign a "Good internet citizen"

Later,

LG

93LS1RX7

iTrader: (8)

""I would not put this large of a lift cam in a daily driver. I put this cam in my C5 on a 114 LSA and broke a dual spring within 6 months of occasional driving. I have had several people call me with this cam that had broken REV springs, Comp 918 springs, Comp 987 springs, broken rockers and one guy with a broken engine as a result of rocker bearings in his engine. Get a cam with .570" lift or less, hope this helps.
Brian Tooley "

WTF is wrong with this? "

I am not involved in this thread except as a bystanderd but I think what LGM is saying this statement is wrong because of this line "I put this cam in my C5". Bottom line LGM stated this ISNT their cam. It is similar but not the same and they arent using the springs LGM recommends.

Plus I want a business man that is aggressive. As a racer or person it just makes them more aggressive to try and be the best and make a better product. LGM has taken a lot of bashing and some praise in the year or so I have been on this forum but my limited experience is I called there a few months ago asking about a heads/cam package and I talked to Lou personally for over 30 minutes and I never spent a penny. THAT IS GOOD BUSINESS!!!

Mike

LG Motorsports

J-Rod,

Bingo!

LG

6-SpeedZ

iTrader: (1)

Brian, you sound like the biggest dick ever. And I have no doubt in my mind that the reason you are badmouthing, (and you are badmouthing) LG's cam, is because your heads dont work well it. Grow up. Go make some better heads or something........

1999_SS_M6

Have you ever noticed that when an idiot opens his mouth, nothing good ever comes out?

"Go and make some better heads or something.." Are you kidding me? Dude, you're so 3rd grade it's not even funny. What's next, mom jokes??

ne14a6t9

TEA-- The truth hurts

1999_SS_M6

There's a whole of things in here, but truth is what's in the shortest supply. And bandwagon carnival barkers like you are 90% of the problem.

soundengineer

iTrader: (16)

So I have just talked to MTI about these Manley springs they sent me...and they said these springs will be able to handle .610 lift...I feel safe about that...and so does MTI...as a matter of fact they said that they just had a freak come in and have an x1 done....said it was a 2000 with Longtubes and cam only and made 396 on the dyno with an x1 cam...and its going to be a daily driver...MTI feels this cam with the manley springs will hold up just fine for a daily driver...especially with a proper tune(which I already have scheduled...)they said they have done many of them and this is why they offer it...they have "field tested it" just by trying it on many many customers before putting it out on their list of stuff they sell... I have also done some spring research...So far it looks like the Manley springs in general have been holding up better than comp springs.....perhaps a different hardening process??? I dont know why...but I have read less percentage of "break" stories on the manley springs vs the percentage of "Break" stories on comp springs.....can anybody explain this????

cmon people..really....can any of you explain the physics behind this??? do you realize that the spring you use have to be stong enough to handle the cam??? not just able to handle the duration or the lift or the ramp rate. but strong enough material to handle the force of that repeatedly.... I think comp makes some good cams....but I now have my doubts about their springs....anybody have tensile numbers on the the metals in use??? that will tell more about the springs....

back to braekage story...You got too much othe **** happening on that motor and thats probably why the springs broke...the extrem cold of the nitrous does make it to the springs ever so slightly...and cold and heat do not mix well....it creates way more stress than necessary...and I'd bet without the nitrous your springs will be fine.....I have found a local guy with the exact same setup as I have that has been daily driving his for over 2 years now. most of the time I will be reular driving it...and every once in a while I will do what all camaro guys do....but not every day..and not all the time.... and because of my line of work...it sits at my parents house in their garage when I am out on the road for 3 months at a time.... so It really doesnt get mondo miles on it.... and usually the miles it does get are around town running errands...or on the highway with cruise control on....

JF WS6

Yeah, I can explain it. How many people do you KNOW that actually HAVE Manley springs??? Not nearly as many people have Manley or Isky springs compared to Comp springs. You're going to hear more breakage stories from a manufacturer who has more of their product on the market. And suprisingly you hardly ever hear of the Comp duals breaking, even though there's been a ton of aftermarket ported LS1 heads sold with these springs on them.

Regardless of what people want to think, Comp does make good springs and there sure are a hell of a lot more of them out there than many of the other brands....

J-Rod

MTI is about the only shop to use these springs. My understanding is they have had very good luck with them. Of course on e of the things is MTI is just a bit on the conservative side of things.

Now, if you want a lesson on why things break I will put on the "NDT hat" NDT is Non-destructive testing. My Dad and my uncle both are in the NDT field, so I have been around this all my life, and a bit of it has rubbed off on me.

Things like springs break for a variet of reasons, the heat treating process, the quality of the material, occlusions in the wire which may cause structural defects, and work hardening. Think about it this way. You have a batch of material you make wire out of, you wind that around a mandrel or a fixture of some sort, then you heat treat it, and boom you have a spring.

If anyhting along the way in that process goes bad, you can have a bad spring. If the heat treatment is incosistent, you will have spots int he spring where the spring is harder and softer. If you have any impurities in the actual steel, you can end up with places in the wire which are harder or softer. Fianlly any void (think of a bubble) inside the wire can lead to a weak point.

Keep in mind that you are rapidly accelerating a lobe up and down, and if the springs are cold, the material can be more prone to breakage if it is not up to temperature. Alos, the breka in procedure is often ignored by folks which does not help the process.

Work hardening is most easily understood when you take a piece of metal in your hand and bend it back and forth. It will get hot, and finally it will break at the bend. Think of your spring in the same way. Except instead of being a straight piece of metal it is a coil.

Now, nitrous will not break a spring. Nitrous and your springs never come in contact with one another. Ramps are getting more and more agressive, and lift keeps going up. I am amazed that the LS1 is able to do what it does with the stock spring as it is a piece of dog-doo.

If you have any questions about what works and what doesn't here is a thought instead of just taking a stab at it. Check with someone like Jason Reibert @ TR. Jason has access to a spintron. You might ask yourself, whats that. Its a device which spins the valve train of an engine with an electric motor. You can then observe how the valvetrain actually will work.

One of the things I found interesting is that Jason and TR through their testing have moved over to a new spring. Well, its not really new. It a very proved SBC design with a retainer designed to make it work twith the LS series head without having to cut the spring pockets. This spring has had really good success in the SBC program for a long time.

Look for many vendors to begin scanvenging their springs from other programs to fill this area. You'll probably begin to see springs destined for solids and tight lash street rollers end up in LS programs. The big issue is keeping the lobe under control while not collapsing the lifter.

Remeber, its not only about spring pressure....