WizeAss

iTrader: (5)

Don't trust the big names...... go with conventional wisdom.

My car kept loosing signal at 5200/5300 rpm and backfiring.... replaced the pcm, crank trigger, cam signal trigger, wiring, and a few other things..... as well as changed the cam while the shop was at it.


car picked up 5rwtq and over 23rwhp after the tq and hp curve crossed.

Previous cam from Synergy Motorsports: 236/236 made 455rwhp
New cam from Real Performance Motorsports: 236/248 made 478rwhp

Graph to come soon...

My advice is make damn sure you have a nice split... I am also sure it will work better on the bottle now too! 6.0's in the 8th here I come!

1.8t

You did a lot more than just change the cam. How do you know it was the cam that caused the increase in hp and tq?

WizeAss

iTrader: (5)

all those changes where not problematic after the previous cam was installed.... also the tune did not change significantly. the AVG tq and hp both went up with the swap. The issue cam into play much later. I didnt get a chance to find out what the problem of the loss of signal was..... but they said that the cam was fine and it was something else.

No tricks..this was an improvement from cam selection alone.

Sales2@Texas-speed

iTrader: (5)

What other changes did you make??

WizeAss

iTrader: (5)

nothing.... wheels where lighter on the 455 pull with the 236/236 Synergy cam....

wheels where heavier on the 47X pull ( i don't have the graph in front and forgot the X number) with the 236/248 RPM cam.

All the mechanical problems started happening when I went down the track on the bottle and I thought it was a backfire... nope.. it was the signal problem. It plagued me for awhile... I thought it was the battery hitting the AC dryer and the car cutting out. It only seemed to do it at WOT. It was not an issue on the dyno after the 236/236 cam install.

Hindsight now says why recommend a square cam? It is easy to say that now... but conventional wisdom months ago would have said the same thing... I know Synergy wouldnt give me the specs over the phone on what he was recommending, but I was shocked just a bit when I saw the cam card.

WizeAss

iTrader: (5)

Here is an overlay of one of the pulls vs the old cam....

Didnt fish thru to match the two best pulls... just random avg numbers here.... again..no tricks!




Matt, I forgot... we did change converters... from a lighter Neil Chance to the Vigilante converter for the TH400...... doubt that made a difference if anything it hurt the numbers.

Sales2@Texas-speed

iTrader: (5)

So the power was virtually identical up to 5500rpm, and then has a funny jump about 5600rpm (not as smooth, starts climbing quickly instead of a steady climb you normally see.)? Can we all agree that's what we're seeing? What timing were you all seeing on the old setup from 5500+ rpm and what is it now? A/F in the same range before and after?

I'm not questioning the gains, they are clearly there. And I'd expect to pick up some power at the very top end of the graph from a big split, it happens all the time even on small cubed cathedral port headed cars. I am just trying to clear up some possibilities that could account for some of that power.

TA1364

iTrader: (11)

You bought a cam without knowing the specs?

Sales2@Texas-speed

iTrader: (5)

LOL! For some off reason, people do that all the time! Crazy IMO!

WizeAss

iTrader: (5)

Timing was 28 degrees on the old cam and same on the new one. AFR was 12.4:1 on the old and 12.6:1 on the new setup. On the old cam it made more power at 12.4: than it did at 12.6... I dont know if they added fuel or not to the tune for the new cam. Like I said, the only change was the converter and that is why the old dyno didnt read under a certain RPM well.... it flashed different and is a non lockup since it is a TH400.

Mechanically everything is the same.... both times the plugs were new. I do have a different maf since the old one blew up on us... Dyno is a drive-on lift DynoJet.

As far as specs..... I don't recommend buying something without knowing what you are getting for this very reason. I trusted that Rick at Synergy had a knack for this L92 stuff... this comparison proves that to be incorrect and I would have been better off with the 236/248 cam from the get go. Driveability and idle have not been compromised and I will make more power with the bottle now. WIN WIN here. What else can be said? He shipped me the cam specs based on the info I shared with him... and the local shops cam made significantly more power on my L92 headed car..... now before.

WizeAss

iTrader: (5)

Sig material.... Everyone needs to read this..... I guess it is too keep the keyboard warriors from talking smack about what folks are doing or that being all helps sell more parts for some. No offense to Rick at Synergy but this is proof that a split would have been much better for my L92 Headed car and that a square cam is not the way to go!

Beaflag VonRathburg

iTrader: (176)

Those are definetly some good results. Why did you change the converters? How do they compare to each other stall wise, size, etc..?

firefighting1101

iTrader: (48)

i had a cam spec'd for me by a very well known cam specialist and he recommended a 238/250 on a 114 for my l92 head setup

the_merv

iTrader: (88)

Mine was spec'd at a 243/247, 114+3 LSA by a person also known on here to spec some good Cams.

Shifting at 6500RPM it ran 7.1's in the 1/8th, 11.19 in the 1/4 N/A, 32* Timing, running a little rich too..that was with the old Auto setup, the new M6 setup is more for street use..not setup for the 1/4 mile that much really. Stall was a Yank SS3600.

Full-Force

iTrader: (11)

changing converters just blew this entire thread, sorry, thats not apples to apples

the_merv

iTrader: (88)

I just want to know more specs on the Engine..

Nwmembr19

iTrader: (21)

I would like to hear how that cam works out. Alot of people on here with l92 heads have all these secret cams. I am still trying to figure out if i should go through the trouble of changing mine.

I'm running 238/242 605/615 113.

JonCR96Z

iTrader: (33)

Haha, this is his most retarded thread to date. He changed the cam, converter, MAF and fixed a signal problem by replacing a bunch of stuff. You could have lost power from the cam and gained enough from the other things to show the same results. That's not necessarily the case, but you can't rule it out.

AaronR

iTrader: (8)

Where did you even get the idea Synergy would be a good choice to spec you a cam?

PowerTalk

So you replaced the pcm, crank trigger, cam signal trigger, wiring, torque converter and cam....

And you are putting the gains just down to the cam? Right?
Which made identical power and torque to 5500rpm

Let me guess, you put a more efficient converter in it didn't you?