Generation III Internal Engine 1997-2006 LS1 | LS6
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by:

a builder says the tr224-114 is too big for stock???

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 09-29-2008, 12:38 AM
  #41  
10 Second Club
iTrader: (11)
 
N4cer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Ashland, KY
Posts: 2,526
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post

Default

112 will have less low end and less top end but higher peak. Falls off faster.
114 will have more low and top end (carry longer), but lower peak.
Old 09-29-2008, 12:48 AM
  #42  
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (23)
 
GMCtrk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 9,853
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default

So why then are 112's always so much more popular? I'm assuming the 114 would be better since I'm in a truck then?
Old 09-29-2008, 12:53 AM
  #43  
10 Second Club
iTrader: (11)
 
N4cer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Ashland, KY
Posts: 2,526
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post

Default

That's up to you and where your torque converter kicks in.
The 112 is popular because the lemmings all think less is better, despite not understanding cams.
Old 09-29-2008, 12:56 AM
  #44  
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (23)
 
GMCtrk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 9,853
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default

I don't want to be shifting really much past 6000. I'm still on stock torque converter. From another member on PT.net who has 6.0, longtubes, and TR224, he said lowend is the same or better than stock. And it burns the tires off at a 30 punch.
Old 09-29-2008, 01:17 AM
  #45  
10 Second Club
iTrader: (11)
 
N4cer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Ashland, KY
Posts: 2,526
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post

Default

It surely is better than stock. No debating that.
Sounds like he needs to stop buying power mods and start buying traction mods.
Old 09-29-2008, 01:30 AM
  #46  
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (23)
 
GMCtrk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 9,853
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default

Will I have problems with brakes (vacuum) after installing the 224?
Old 09-29-2008, 01:59 AM
  #47  
10 Second Club
iTrader: (11)
 
N4cer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Ashland, KY
Posts: 2,526
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post

Default

People have no problem after installing a Trex, man. Why would you have a problem after a baby cam like this?
Old 09-29-2008, 02:31 AM
  #48  
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (23)
 
GMCtrk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 9,853
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default

http://performancetrucks.net/forums/...bad+brakes+cam
http://performancetrucks.net/forums/...bad+brakes+cam

that's just two with a quick search. I've read of others having problems.
Old 09-29-2008, 08:35 AM
  #49  
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (8)
 
SOMbitch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 6,881
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by N4cer
112 will have less low end and less top end but higher peak. Falls off faster.
114 will have more low and top end (carry longer), but lower peak.
Ummm... I think you mean:

112 will have MORE lowend (come in sooner), less topend but LESS peak. Falls off faster and earlier (for those who don't wanna spin to the moon with crappy rod bolts like me).

114 will have LESS low and MORE topend (carry longer) but MORE peak.

People want 112's because they have more lope, power comes in sooner and they don't wanna spin too high to get all the usable power outta the cam. On the negative side the lower LSA the harder it is to tune because there is more overlap.

Cam in sig has a nice flat torque curve and makes 350lbs. + from 3500-6300. It is a fun streetcar for sure

Last edited by SOMbitch; 09-29-2008 at 11:44 AM.
Old 09-29-2008, 09:51 AM
  #50  
10 Second Club
iTrader: (11)
 
N4cer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Ashland, KY
Posts: 2,526
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post

Default

Originally Posted by SOMbitch
Ummm... I think you mean:

112 will have MORE lowend (come in sooner), less topend but LESS peak. Falls off faster and earlier (for those who don't wanna spin to the moon with crappy rod bolts like me).

114 will have LESS low and MORE topend (carry longer) but MORE peak.

People want 112's because they have more lope, power, comes in sooner and they don't wanna spin too high to get all the usable power outta the cam. On the negative side the lower LSA the harder it is to tune because there is more overlap.

Cam in sig has a nice flat torque curve and makes 350lbs. + from 3500-6300. It is a fun streetcar for sure
Not at all. Here's a diagram from an earlier conversation on this topic.
Attached Thumbnails a builder says the tr224-114 is too big for stock???-lsayi0.jpg  
Old 09-29-2008, 09:53 AM
  #51  
TECH Junkie
iTrader: (30)
 
12secSS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 3,690
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post

Default

To the original poster, I have had a lot of customers with 224 cams on 112 LSA and have passed emissions with cats. I even had one customer with a 228 on 114 pass, but the tune needed to be as precise as possible.

Originally Posted by themack56
i live in cali, and anything that has 0 to - #s in overlap will pass smog, if u can get pass visual, i have a gm asa cam 226 236 110 lsa, when my tuner scans it it says 0 to -2 overlap
Gary, you can't scan the overlap. It is in the cam design, you basically take the intake and exhaust durations and based on the LSA (with some math) you will figure out the overlap. Based on the info you posted, the ASA cam has 11 degrees of overlap based on my math.
Originally Posted by KMS.1320
You have no idea what you're talking about. And if your tuner told you this, neither does he.

This post made me laugh pretty hard, so I'll give you credit for that.
I am his tuner, but I did not tell him that.
Old 09-29-2008, 10:17 AM
  #52  
11 Second Club
iTrader: (18)
 
thunderstruck507's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Northwest AR
Posts: 8,357
Received 22 Likes on 17 Posts

Default

Originally Posted by N4cer
It doesn't matter. If I'm going with a small cam that has no more ***** down low than a cam that is 234/242, then what's the advantage? None. If you are going 224, go with a TR224. The XE-R sucked.
well that depends on what the car is for...I can't help but guess lsx cars like sbc cars lose more mpg with a monster cam than a mild one, need more converter, sacrifice at least some driveability, passing emissions tests, ect

I'm not trying to be an *** or anything, I'm trying to learn. If I'm wrong about those assumptions I'd like to know. I'm just applying what I know to a whole new type of engine.
Old 09-29-2008, 11:44 AM
  #53  
10 Second Club
iTrader: (11)
 
N4cer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Ashland, KY
Posts: 2,526
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post

Default

You are right, but missed the point of the post. The point was XE-R 224 vs TR224. Go with the TR224 instead of the Comp XE-R grind.
Old 09-30-2008, 01:06 PM
  #54  
11 Second Club
iTrader: (18)
 
thunderstruck507's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Northwest AR
Posts: 8,357
Received 22 Likes on 17 Posts

Default

true but I'm also looking to see why you would recommend a tr224, but a comp 224 "sucks"
Old 09-30-2008, 03:50 PM
  #55  
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (8)
 
SOMbitch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 6,881
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by thunderstruck507
true but I'm also looking to see why you would recommend a tr224, but a comp 224 "sucks"
There is I think slightly more lobe intensity in XER lobe + higher lift so IDK why people say TR will make more power. IIRC XER are rated at 49 for lobe intensity and TR at 50. But i will readily admit there is a LOT about cams I don't understand
Old 09-30-2008, 04:37 PM
  #56  
TECH Regular
iTrader: (18)
 
TurboZ28408's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 492
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

your builder is smoking crack is 224 is too big
Old 09-30-2008, 08:13 PM
  #57  
On The Tree
 
formulaon18s's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: KCMO
Posts: 187
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by N4cer
Not at all. Here's a diagram from an earlier conversation on this topic.
Is this an actual diagram of two cams of the same size on diff LSA's in the same engine in the same car on the same dyno on the same day........or some crayola on construction paper?
Old 09-30-2008, 11:23 PM
  #58  
10 Second Club
iTrader: (11)
 
N4cer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Ashland, KY
Posts: 2,526
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post

Default

It was an explanation that was given in a more advanced discussion on cams. Are you going to argue against that?
Old 10-01-2008, 12:09 AM
  #59  
Staging Lane
iTrader: (1)
 
Turbo.TransAM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 52
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

slap him

then tell him to punchout and go home
Old 10-01-2008, 01:24 AM
  #60  
TECH Addict
iTrader: (5)
 
2000Hawk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Miami, Fl. - Hurricane Highway
Posts: 2,458
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

If your builder says the TR224 is to big for stock well then he might say my T/A with bolt ons and the MS3 defies the laws of physics. The TR224 will be a real good all around cam, better than stock and will drive like its stock.
-Joel


Quick Reply: a builder says the tr224-114 is too big for stock???



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:56 PM.