Just to claify Angie, the back of the TR cams will have the Thunder Racing part # (TR224-114) like she mantioned. The serial # will be either one or two letters, followed by a 4-digit number (example: Z3145 or UE3456,etc...)

Jason

 

There ya go, answers from everybody you could possibly want at Thunder Racing. Bowtie Man, unless you've got some sort of solid proof, we'd all appreciate it if you steered clear of this thread.

 

So their modified SBC XE lobes?...makes sense that they would be. If the LS1 lobes were not out when you guys made your cams the only real choice would be to convert already available lobes for the LS1. The SBC, BBC, & Ford XE lobes are very aggressive...some more aggressive then the XE-R line...although when converted to the larger base-circle of the LS1 the difference is minor.

 

I've seen the profile of my 224 XE-R on a cam doctor vs a TR-224...as I said before they looked almost the same except the XE-R had more lift and a little more are under the curve as a results 1-2 percent. The profiles overlayed so nicely it was hard to tell the TR and XE-R apart. That proves to me TR does not use an XE lobe. Based on what I saw the TR-224 is very similar to the XE-R.

less aggressive.....more aggressive
224 XE........TR-224........224 XE-R

Exactly, like the other person said.

 

Look at what Comp does. They engineer a lobe based upon known things like how much they can accelerate the valve and the lifter, they check this sort of thing on a spintron and they come up with a forumla for lobe design in a certain platform. This oversimplifies it greatly but I am simply making a point.

Is TR using an XE-R lobe? I certainly doubt it, as their design was out long before the XE-R came on the scene. But, what TR did do is find a similar ammount of acceleration lift versus duration, etc... that comp did, only they (TR) did it before them. They came to similar conclusions based upon the same data. What a friggin' suprise...

Did you know that you could engineer a lobe more agressive than an XE-R. Look at the cam the Super Stock guys are running if you doubt this. Look at the OMC and the OMC2 from TR. The lobes on those cams are FAR more agreeive than any XE-R lobe you've ever seen. In fact thats why they are limited to about 220 degrees of maximum duration. You really couldn't get away with much more than that safely. Also, a hydraulic lifter won't take much more than what is out there now unless you start modifying them.

If someone has definitive proof (Cam pro) of a TR cam being a XE-R lobe then post it. If you want to say cams are identical based upon the .050 numbers then blow it out your ear...

As for your "sources" at Comp. I have "sources" @ Comp too. BFD, folks there specialize also. I deal with guys there on "launcher cams" which is mostly folks who deal with NASCAR. Are they fluent in LS1 stuff? No, not really. If I need LS1 stuff there are other guys for that. Sure, htey have general knowledge. But some folks have that hardcore knowledge that you need sometimes. There are guys that are hot in one area, and not in another... Just because someone works @ Comp doesn't mean they are the be all end all of LS1 technology.

Come up with some facts not a bunch of inferences based upon assumptions and speculative data.

 

I have had the cam pro data for both the TR 224 and the Comp XE-R and what Geoff said is correct.
The TR's lobe profile is very agressive like an XE-R and it is a much faster ramp than the XE lobe.

I will also add, that I have run the TR 224 112 cam and it was amoung my favorites and that cam is highly recommended for street & strip, especially with single springs.

 

It costs $300+ to have comp make a lobe to your specifications....one lobe. I highly doubt anyone at TR had this done...maybe 1 or 2 lobes, but definately not the entire line.
What is more likely is that they had Comp convert some existing XE SBC, BBC, or Ford lobes to the LS1's larger core. This is free....I do it all the time. Some of my best Ford cams have SBC lobes. They are all XE's. XE simply means the aggressiveness of the ramps. The most aggressive profiles Comp offers are XE's. TR uses lobes that fit in this catagory.
Jugding by what people have said in this thread the TR lobes & XE-R lobes are very similar from .006 to .050....but that's it. Like I said before, ramprate is a by-product of lift & duration. So, above .050 the XE-R lobes are more aggressive & provide more area under the curve then what TR uses. This is why they have less lift.
All XE lobes will be very close to one another when compared on a graph. The difference between the XE-high lift lobes & XE-R's is a mear 3 degrees at .200 lobe lift. This is hardly measurable....but it does add significant power.
Some Ford XE lobes when converted to the LS1 core will have 1-2 degrees more at .200 lobe lift.

The LS1 XE lobe line has some of the finest lobes available from Comp for a street driven motor.

I've always said TR uses good lobes on their cams.....just not good VE's & lobe combinations (1 or 2 are quite good actually). There is only 1 TR cam I'd recomend.....& even then with a cam of the similar size (within 2 degrees duration at .050) you could easily out-power it (15HP+).

& for $50 extra what you're gaining from the TR cam over the Comp may be worth it to some.... (according to the lobe info in this thread) The difference is the TR has less .006 overlap which will result in slightly better idle (very slight) & a little less airflow during the overlap phase which will reduce torque slightly (very slight).

 

93Pony,

Give it up dude. You are obviously fishing for the specs on our cams. You don't know of what you are talking about. In a nut shell we have never publically stated who grinds our cams. If you think that you know who is grinding our cams why don't you call them up and try to order whatever lobe that you imagine that we are using. Good luck because you aren't going to duplicate our exact lobe on any of our cams. As far as the cost of having a truly custom lobe made why don't you think we could have had that done with our entire line of LS1 cams? For the size of our business it's not that much money.

As I said in the e-mail that I sent you, if you really want to sell cams then why don't you buy a Cam Pro Plus and a dyno to see what really works, instead of just reading Comp's catalog, second guessing other real tuners, and trying to make false statements about your perceived competition.

 

93 Pony. Can you post the math on one of your good cam designs showing us the VE calculations, and how you derive that one cam is better than another, or how to optimize the cam profile. Also can you illustate what designs you would feel would be better than another.

I am interested in your claims, and would like to see the data you are using to arrive at your conclusions, along with the math to support them.

Here is the Comp spec sheet for XE and XE-R if you'd like to use it as a reference. Thanks.

 

Geoff,
As I stated before. Your lobes are not bad at all...in fact they are quite good.....but I don't need your lobes to make power. I've already proven that. The list above is all I need to make killer LS1 profiles.

J-Rod,
Sorry...I no longer post all that valuable info.
Do some searches on past threads I've posted in here & on Norcal-LS1 for some good info. Too many I have given great tech too....only to be burned by them ordering cams with my specs from another company. My knowledge of camshafts is highly sought after..by not only the average Joe. Giving it away in posts does not make buisness sense...

I give my knowledge to those who order cams from me. Answers to all the questions they could possibly ask. What they walk away with is a cam with no comprimisses...& in return they take my cam to the track & prove my theories once again.

 

93 Pony. I registed on Norcal-ls1 and read the majority of your posts. I really didn't find any specific information about how you are making the determinations. I am interested in hearing how you are coming up with your lift numbers when comparing XE to XE-R lobes. I did see one post where you made a few recommendations about 3 specific grinds using XE-R lobes.

Just a couple of quotes from you:

http://www.norcal-ls1.com/forum/show...threadid=17085

For instance:
218/218 112LSA has -6 degrees of overlap & should pass smog with no problem....on a good tune of course!

The TR 224/224 114LSA has -4 degrees of overlap....yes, more overlap & will be harder to smog. But it too should still pass on a good tune.

Too bad TR doesn't have a 220/218 109, 110, & 111 LSA's. They'd work great with stock heads. The 109 pulling the hardest up top (almost as much as the TR 224/224 112LSA) & the 111 being the easiest to smog. All with excellent low-mid range power.

-----
Dot-to-dot....this cam has 4 degrees of advance built in right?

Intake to exhaust ratio is ~70-75% before the exhaust is bolted on....& the intake will definately restrict the heads. So, figure about 80% ratio is what you'll end up with.

The single patter TR 224 will work quite well, but I'd retard it to a 116ICL for these valve events:

Intake opens @ 4 ATDC
Closes @ 48 ABDC
Exhaust opens @ 40 BBDC
Closes @ 4 ATDC

If you wanted something more 'wild' I could do some research. I think a few more degrees of overlap would give a nice boost up top.
Too bad TR doesn't make that 227/224 on a 111 or 112LSA. That'd really work well w/your motor. Hmm....I could probably find the lobes they use (or better) & get back to you.
----
The small reverse TR 227/224 will work just as good as the 224/224 w/a 150 shot. w/a 200, the single pattern would probably work just a little better. But, the 227/224 will make more power on the motor then the 224/224. & likewise with the 150 shot. On the 200, the 227/224 will still make more power, but the power gap between the 2 cams would be closer.

High compression (11 to 1) would benifit both cams.

I believe the TR 227/224 would work quite well on a 111LSA. If you want even MORE umph, then tighten it up to a 109!

The 111 will have 3.5 degrees of overlap @ .050 lift. (not much really) The 109 will have 7.5 degrees. If installed correctly (so the valve overlap is directly over TDC & slightly biased to ATDC) idle should not be too much of a concern.

---
Here are a few LS1 cams I've speced out from Comp's lobes.
Comp charges $400 for a custom LS1 cam BTW.

Small smog grind:
212/210 109LSA .571/.566 w/1.7's. Deceptively small lobes that will make significantly more power then the stock cam. -7 (negative) degrees of valve overlap @ .050 for easy smogging.

Large smog grind: (For spdfreakls1)
218/218 111LSA .578/.553 w/1.7's. Small reverse grind @ .200 lift. Great for N/A or N2O. Fast ramp-rates. -4 degrees of valve overlap @ .050 that should pass smog without problems. LSA can be tightened up to a 109 for those that don't require smog. Great for stock heads.

Ported heads grind: (For GR8WHITE)
226/224 111LSA .590/.561 w/1.7's. Reverse grind ment for N/A applications & small nitrous shots (150). Definately gonna go fast with this puppy! Duration @ .200 lift (were heads really flow) is easily 40 degrees more then stock! A little large for stock heads. 3 degrees of valve overlap @ .050 lift for high rpm power. LSA can be tightened to a 109 for even more upper RPM power.


I can make just about any cam for any application.
---
No smog worries right....

Go with the 218/218 109LSA. Performance is nearly the same as the TR224/224 112LSA, but with better valve-events so low-midrange power will be substantially higher. Upper rpm power will be nearly identical.

The TR 224 lobes have 145 degrees of duration @ .200 lift. The 218 intake lobe I chose has 142. Set on a 109 will give identical valve overlap as the TR224 (so peak power will be at nearly the same RPM) but with faster ramp-rates which will help idle & low-midrange throttle response. The reverse split will also help low-midrange power.

You'll need a free-flowing exhaust. Longtubes, etc. With that, you're car will probably be the fastest stock headed N/A LS1 around. Couldn't really tell you the power gains will be. I have no idea what the stock LS1 cam looks like.

BTW, the 224 lobe I used on that hotter cam is identical to the TR 224 lobe. The 226 lobe I chose is just a bit larger then the TR 227. (9 degrees larger!) Actually the TR 227/224 is not a real reverse split. The intake lobe is significantly softer then the exhaust. Duration at .200 lift looks like this 141/145.


http://www.norcal-ls1.com/forum/show...threadid=16928


Turbos are limited in exhaust duration. Let me clarify... For a STREET driven turbo car where low-end is important, the exhaust lobe is limited.

Because of the pressure in the exhaust manifold, turbo motors have a longer 'power stroke' then N/A, SC, & Nitrous cars. These motor's power stroke is from 0 to 90 degrees. Turbo motors continue to push for another 45 degrees of crank rotation. Hard one to follow, but true.

Stock cams work so well with turbos becuase of the lack of overlap & small lobes. Aftermarket cams are setup for N/A & SC's for the most part & open the exhaust inside the power stroke of a turbo motor. Average spot to open the exhaust valve is ~45 degrees BBDC @ .050 lift, which is ~ 70-80 BBDC @ .006 lift (depending on ramp-rate). So, the exhaust lobe on a turbo motor *should* be opened late to avoid bleeding off power. At roughly 60 degrees BBDC is were you can open the exhaust valve. Add this to the lack of overlap on a turbo motor, because exhaust manifold pressure is ALWAYS higher then the incoming intake charge (by 1.5-2 times depending on compressor efficiency) & you can see why large cams don't work so well with these motors.
So, if you're following me, a street turbo motor is limited to ~ 260-270 total duration on the exhaust side. & that's WITH ~40 degrees of overlap @ .006. (nominal stock overlap)

Track turbo motors use more traditional N/A grinds as they stay in the upper RPM band were overlap will actually help the turbo make power. But it KILLS the low-end.

Turbos make full boost by ~3000rpm & therefore make tons of torque, so most don't notice that the N/A cam they're using is bleeding off power.

I'm going for the most efficient combo as possible.... This new cam will open the exhaust @ 60.5 degrees BBDC. As opose to 69 BBDC w/the stock cam in there now.

---
The tech guys at Comp think I'm crazy. I orded this cam with 6 degrees of retard ground in!

http://www.norcal-ls1.com/forum/show...threadid=18958

I see you are learning Grasshopper.

Try this one on for size:

Intake 3727
Exhaust 3725
113LSA
113ICL (straight up)

Or

Intake 3727
Exhaust 3726
114LSA
114ICL (straight up)

Or

Intake 3727
Exhaust 3726
113LSA
114ICL


Thanks for the lobes! I now have them saved for sure! (I hope)

----
TR uses Comp XE lobes.
For instance, the TR 224 lobe is Comp lobe # 3313
---
They might just be blowing smoke up your ars.... Judging by advertised duration & peak lift, you can find the lobes they use in the Compcams catalog. I highly doubt Comp would make an agreement that no one else could use those lobes. In fact, my buddies Ford cam has the TR 224 lobe on it.

Hey, my new cam showed up this week too! God I love getting bumpsticks in the mail!
----
I've actually seen another company that has the exact same specs as the TR 224/224....but I don't remember what site it was on. I normally don't pay much attention to aftermarket cams anymore.

Most of Comps lobes are on their website.
http://www.compcams.com/catalog/
pages 226-248
The good Hydraulic roller lobes are on pages 229-231. Mind you, these are not all the lobes Comp offeres.....the list is outdated & they have many more lobes. But this is a good list.
Also one thing to note. You have to convert lobes when they're put on larger/smaller cam cores.
SBC has the smallest cam core, followed by BBC, Ford, & the largest is the LS1. These lobes will grow & shrink depending on what they were made for & what core they're put on.
For instance, SBC lobes grow ~4 degrees at .006 & .050 when put on a Ford core. The same lobe will grow ~6 degrees when put on an LS1 core.

Something else that I didn't really claify.....those XE-R lobes are very nice. They are more aggressive then the majority of the XE lobes, but there are a few XE lobes that are more aggressive then the XE-R lobes. As peak lift goes up, the lobe gets more aggressive. So, the XE lobes that measure .600 & up are more aggressive then the XE-R lobes. It's not a lot, but it is significant when you're extracting every last bit of power out of the combo.

For instance. The TR 224 lobe (lobe # 3313) when corrected for the LS1 cam core measures 276 @.006, 224 @.050, & ~141-142 at .200.
A comparable XE-R lobe is the 3715, yet a more agressive XE-R lobe is the 3722. Same .050 duration as the other 2 lobes, but measures 4 degrees larger at .200. Also notice lift increased. The higher the lift for a given lobe, the more .200 duration it has.

Another comparison is Comp lobe # 3634, when converted for the LS1 core measures 284/234/155-156 (closer to 155.5 @.200).
A comparable XE-R lobe is the 3727 which measures 283/234/155. these lobes are VERY close in performance....as is peak lift. In this case the Ford lobe being slightly more aggressive.

Compare some of these lobes & you'll see what I'm talking about.


Ok, we've been through the TR discussion already. So lets no re-hash that... But, you have piqued my interest with your discussion of VE which I am going to assume you mean valve events rather than Volumetic Efficency.



Ok, so using the recommendations you made off the XE-R line of lobes

Intake 3727
Exhaust 3725
113LSA
113ICL (straight up)

So, you end up with a 234/230 .598/.592 113 0

Or

Intake 3727
Exhaust 3726
114LSA
114ICL (straight up)

234/232 .598/.595 114 0

Or

Intake 3727
Exhaust 3726
113LSA
114ICL

234/232 .598/.595 113 -1

Ok, now this is my understanding of things. There are four timing parameters that define how your engine will operate. These are intake valve opening (IVO), intake valve closing (IVC), exhaust valve opening (EVO) and exhaust valve closing (EVC). It is relatively easy to derive these parameters from the specs supplied by camshaft vendors (lobe center angle (LCA), intake centerline (IC), intake duration (ID), and exhaust duration (ED)) assuming all these parameters are specified.
IVO = ID/2 – IC
IVC = ID – IVO – 180
EVO = ED – EVC – 180
EVC = ED/2 – 2*LCA – IC

To really appreciate how an engine works, and how to get the most performance, we must talk about wave dynamics. But I should warn you that even this discussion is a simplified view of engine operation. As gases move in and out of an engine, they are constantly compressed and expanded, heated and cooled, with laminar and turbulent flow. Each valve edge, bend in a pipe, gasket, fitting, thermal change, etc. has an affect on how these gases flow and will affect the behavior of the engine. Even complex computer simulations cannot fully predict engine behavior, but they can come pretty close. When valves open in an internal combustion engine, gases don’t just flow smoothly into or out of the cylinder. There is usually a significant pressure differential between the two sides of the valve when it opens. This causes a sudden acceleration of gas molecules that form a pressure wave. This is similar to an acoustic wave caused by clapping your hands, but the pressure waves have thousands of times higher pressure differentials.
But the pressure waves still behave in much the same way as acoustic waves. Pressure waves can be positive compression waves, or negative expansion waves (sometimes called rarefaction waves). The behavior of these pressure waves in a pipe is very important to understanding engine performance.
When a pressure wave traveling down a pipe encounters a closed end (such as a closed valve), it will be reflected back in its original form (i.e., a compression wave is reflected back as a compression wave). But when a pressure wave encounters an open end (such as open headers), it is reflected back “out of phase”, so the reflected compression wave becomes an expansion wave. These reflected waves can be used to great value in optimizing engine performance.
Valve timing events are referenced to TDC (top dead center – the piston is at the top of its travel) and BDC (bottom dead center – piston at the bottom). If a valve event is specified as 20 degrees ATDC, this means that it occurs when the crankshaft has rotated 20 degrees past (after) when the piston was at TDC. Likewise BBDC means crankshaft degrees before bottom dead center.
In a simple engine model, we’d expect the exhaust valve to open at the end of the POWER stroke when the crank was at BDC. The piston would then force the exhaust our of the cylinder during the EXHAUST stroke. It turns out that this valve timing is very inefficient. By the time the crank has reached 25 to 30 degrees past TDC during the POWER stroke, almost all the power has been transferred to the crank. By opening the exhaust valve (EVO) during the middle of the POWER stroke, we can take advantage of the residual pressure in the cylinder to start to blow the exhaust our instead of forcing the piston to pump the exhaust out. Of course, there’s a delicate balance between the power wasted by opening the valve too early and the power wasted by forcing the engine to pump out the exhaust.
But there’s an added benefit of early EVO. The high pressure in the cylinder when the valve opens will cause a strong compression wave to be generated out the exhaust port. This compression wave will reach the end of the headers and reflect back as an expansion wave. If this expansion wave reaches the cylinder before the exhaust valve closes, and can further assist in removing the last remnants of exhaust from the cylinder and even assist in starting with the intake of fresh fuel/air mixture as we’ll discuss below.
A mild street cam generally sets EVO at 65 to 66 degrees BBDC, while an aggressive racing cam might set EVO as much as 85 degrees BBDC (although keep in mind that this is when the valve just starts to open, not when significant flow can occur).
The next valve timing event to occur is the intake valve opening (IVO). Note that this occurs before the exhaust valve is closed. IVO is the least sensitive of the valve timing events, but an earlier valve opening can benefit from a broad expansion wave from the exhaust system to help accelerate the air/fuel mixture. If an expansion wave is not present, early IVO timing will allow exhaust gases to flow into the induction system since the cylinder pressure will almost certainly be higher than the intake pressure. This is called reversion and will have a damaging effect on performance by contaminating the fresh fuel/air mixture and heating it up (making it less dense).
A typical mild street cam will open the intake valve around 10-12 degrees BTDC. The IVO for an aggressive race cam will be as early as 50 degrees BTDC. For a high performance street engine, the benefits of going beyond 20-25 degrees BTDC do not seem to outweigh the risks of reversion at lower RPM.
The next valve timing event is EVC, exhaust valve closing. This determines the end of the overlap period (when both valves are open) and, of course, the end of the exhaust cycle. If a strong scavenging wave from the exhaust system is present, a later EVC can provide significant help in drawing in the gasses from the intake. With properly tuned headers, the scavenging expansion wave will be at its peak at the RPM that delivers maximum power, further increasing power. But at lower RPMs, this expansion wave will arrive early and will be followed by a positive compression wave. If this compression wave arrives before EVC, reversion will result, significantly affecting performance. This is why “hot” cams that are designed to maximize high RPM horsepower have such poor idle characteristics.
Exhaust valve closing typically occurs around 10 degrees ATDC with a mild street cam and can occur as late as 50 degrees ATDC on a hot race cam. Typical high performance street engines will have EVC at around 30 degrees ATDC.
The final valve timing event is the intake valve closing. This is probably the most important valve event and the most sensitive to the induction system used on the engine. The more fuel/air mixture that can be forced into the cylinder, the higher the performance will be. So IVC is normally delayed until well into the COMPRESSION stroke. But if IVC is delayed too far, the building pressure in the cylinder due to the piston upswing will exceed the induction systems ability (through pressure waves and gas molecule momentum) to hold back the pressure and fuel/air will flow back out of the cylinder.
As with the exhaust, a pressure wave will be generated in the intake as well. In this case, an expansion wave is generated although will less amplitude than the exhaust pressure wave. The strength of this wave will be determined by the amount of suction that can be created in the cylinder resulting from the piston downswing and the exhaust scavenging wave.
When the expansion wave reaches the end of the intake runners (or the top of the air horns in they EFI system we’re using), it is reflected back as a compression wave. By the time this wave reaches the cylinder, the intake valve is closed and the wave bounces back out. This wave continues to oscillate in the intake system until the next time the intake valve opens. Since the length of the intake runners are typically significantly shorter than the exhaust headers, the frequency of the pressure wave is considerably higher – usually two to three times higher – so by the time IVO occurs, the wave has bounced back and forth several times.
As with headers, the intake system must be tuned for a particular RPM to deliver the most benefit from this pressure wave oscillation. The air horns on some induction systems (Webers, TWM, Kinsler) are designed to spread the reflection wave so that it will provide benefit over a broader RPM range.
Intake Valve Closing is typically set at around 60 degrees after BDC on a mild street came, and as much as 85 degrees ABDC (almost to TDC) on a very hot race cam. An engine with this kind of hot cam will have a very narrow power peak and be designed to run at very high RPMs. For a high performance street engine with a well tuned induction system, IVC should be 65 to 70 degrees ABDC.


Just wondering if you agree or disagree with this? If you have any specific information that you'd like to share in terms of your personal views on ways to determine those optimal valve events.

Also, here are two cams from the "strongest" LSx packages out there. The Cartek IIx package, and the LGM G5X2.

Cartek
224/228 .581 .588 +2(not sure) on a 113 LCA installed at 113 icl
G5X2
G5X2:232/240 595/609 112

Both are making around 450+. The best I have seen are around 475RWHP. Using your calculations would you expect to make the same power, all things being equal with a camshaft of your design. If so, what would you do....

 

You have a solid grasp on what's going on in the 4-stroke internal combustion engine.
I tend to approch things a little differently with these EFI intake restricted motors. Due to runner length & the current lack of cost effective shorter runner intakes, the LS1 is limited to a 4800rpm torque peak....& thus 6200-6400rpm HP peak (due to the wave of the incoming intake aircharge as it bonces between the closed intake valve & open air plenum). When I do a cam for a setup like this, I go for max cylinder pressure under 6200rpm.
The area most cam companies error on is the exhaust. This causes problems with these limited intake designs. The exhaust VE's are the most important on these setups.
Simply put, on an N/A motor the intake aircharge is not assisted. (leaving wave dynamics of the aircharge out for a moment).
After the combustion stroke there is tremendous pressure in the cylinder. As soon as the exhaust valve cracks open it flows a LOT of air. It's basically boosted out of the cylinder if you want to look at it like this. Having the exhaust valve open too early not only costs heat (power) & velocity through the exhaust runners, it also empties the cylinder before the intake valve is open enough to take advantage of the pressure differential. (in a limited overlap/smogable camshaft this is especially true) This causes exhaust reversion & is one of the key factors in surging problems. By the airflow reversing course it is loosing a lot of it's inertia. Typically this is overcome before peak torque however. So only low-speed issues are present. At the track these motors are always above 4500rpm so this does not affect track times too much. Stilll....there is significant power lost by allowing reversion. So it makes sense to open the exhaust valve a little later & increase the overlap a bit. By adding advance into the camshaft this makes the problem even worse as now you're opening the exhaust a few more degrees earlier.....& shortening the effectiveness of the intake unless you have significant overlap flow to over come this.
Simply put, advancing a cam makes it more exhaust bias relative to TDC. Retarding a cam makes it more intake bias relative to TDC.

For those 2 cams listed the only thing I would do to increase power would be to reverse the lobes. Intake for exhaust.

Instead of typing more I'll just leave a link to some more good cam info.
http://www.wighat.com/fcr3/

 

It's so funny when you see someone make statements like this and spout utter BS like it's Gospel. It just shows you what an idiot they really are. Sorry 93 Pony you are wrong and a loser.

 

Thanks for the link. Now, you said that what you would do would be to simply reverse the lobes. So, on a G5X2 for example, you'd change the cam from 232/240 .595/.609 112 to 240/232 .595/.609 112. Ok, since you explained why you feel that EVO is important (and it is), would you in fact leave the cam specs this way. Would you advance or retard the camshaft or the exhaust events? You really seemed to have spent a lot of time thinking about some of your smaller cams. I am wondering if you have given any consideration to larger profiles...

As an example several car equipped with a G5X2 and ported LS6 heads make between 450 and 470 RWHP. A car equipped with one of the new TR 236/230 .597/.582 cams made 426hp/392tq. Now there are a lot of variable like one was in a Corvette, and one was in an F-Body. Also the rear gears affect things. KH24's Cartek Vette is the cartek car that comes to mind, as his car dyno'd 472RWHP with the Cartek X pkg.

I understand your philosophy about surging and low speed drivability. And in fact on the small smogger cams you appear to to have made some good numbers. Ok, take yourself away from the smogger cams and look at folks who want to make good power. To do so in a strictly NA application you will need a lumpy cam, and your bottom end will get a bit soggy. Its the nature of the beast. Using the methods you have described, can you design a cam that will make as much power as some of the cam packages I have specified, or do those simply stop being quite so critical when the cam get larger...

Also, on the manifold side, there is a quick and easy way to get a short runner intake with a nice fat plenum on it. You take an ls1/ls6 intake turn it over and cut the floor out of it. Then you remove the length out of the "ram tubes" you wish. As a side note, doing so drops performance across the board. Also, except for big stroker motors short runner manifolds at this point have really killed bottom end on LS series motors. No one to date has made "good" power down low with them.

 

I see your professionalism is up to par with the best of the highschoolers.

J-Rod,
For those 2 cams I'd reverse the lobes & keep the LSA/ICL the same.
Yes, I do have larger profiles available...with just as much thought put into them. As of yet, nobody has wanted one.

Basically I can make a cam that makes the same power as a larger cam, but idles/drives much better. Simply making a more efficeint combination.
Peak power with the larger cams won't differ much with one of mine. What will differ is AVG power & drivability. When you look at the larger exhaust bias profiles they have so much overlap that they don't get nearly as much reversion as the smaller exhaust bias cams. These larger profiles with lots of overlap will actually jump-start the incoming air-charge. But....the way I see it, the intake lobe determines how much airflow you can squeeze into the cylinder. A larger intake lobe will make more power up top. With an exhaust bias cam what this means is a MUCH larger profile due to the exhaust lobe being that much larger. With a reverse-split you can use the same big intake lobe with a much smaller exhaust lobe...add in the same amount of overlap & the reverse-split will make just as much power as the standard, but idle/drive nicer. Of course this is assuming both cam profiles have good VE's.

That's the first I've heard of being able to modify the runner length of the LS1/LS6 intake. Interesting.... I do know of an 11 inch runner plastic intake that will be available soon after the AFR's come out. It'll probably be a stip-only intake....I wonder how it'll respond.

472RW is DAMN impressive! Can't wait to see what the new AFR heads & shorter intake will do in a combo like that.

 

There are actually 3 intakes in the works right now. Futral is one the Wilson/FAST manifold is the other, and there is talk of another intake (I forgot off the top of my head who it was). The Wilson/FAST manifold look promising. Right now there are several aluminum short manifolds out there. But as I said, they don't seem to gain on the 346s, only on big motors.

Now, in dyno tests with standard splits vs reverse splits. Namely a G5X2 vs a BIG reverse split. The reverse split made better power down low (0-3900) at 3900 the HP and Torque peaks crossed. The G5X2 made more power all the way from 3900-7000. It also made more peak torque (almost 20 lb ft) right after the two came together @ 3900. But the Reverse split made 30 lb ft more torque @ 3200 and 20 more HP.

Again, I recognize that in many applications the reverse splits make drivability better. They make tuning easier. They in fact may make more HP and torque in some applications. I just as yet have not seen a reverse split amke the smae power as any of the standard split cams.

As for the new manifolds, I expect a lot to be done when those hit the market. It will be interesting to see which manifolds respond best to the addition of the mainifold.

My reason for asking about the big cams is really quite simple. You spent a lot of time explaining why you felt your 220 cam was superior than the similar TR grinds, and why you designed it the way you did. Most of the cams I have seen you site are smogger cams for you local Cali folks.

Are there any cams larger than the ones I have seen you post about on Norcal-ls1 or here that you have postable results of? As in actually in car dynos especially a dyno of before with brand X cam vs yours, or from stock vs yours. I just wanted to see the gains you are making.

 

Also, you made mention of one of the TR grinds that you felt was better than most since it was closer to what you felt were more ideal design specs. Can you share which grind that is, and why you feel it is superior in design.

 

Sorry man but I see no reason to be professional to someone like you!!!!!

Since you want to bring up professionalism, how professional is it to bast someone else's product, spread total bogus information, and flat out unsubstantiated lies? Please tell me where your professionalism is?

.

 

I love my TR224-112 and I love good customer service. I have no new times on the 224 but it blows away mt ole T1(sotp). I could use a little tuning though(Geoff). Also how mant cars are there out there with 400rwhp or more just cam only? I feel that figure speaks for its self. Not many shops come close to that. When I do my heads the only cam Ill upgrade to is the also proven Tr230. You guys keep buying those other cams and Ill keep seeing you at the track, if you actually go. Keep up the good work THUNDER RACING. Jason

 

My, my, somebody got a little stired up again. Thunder Racing would do well to keep Paul away from the forums. Just not the way a sponsor should conduct himself.