: 
Cam for L92 Heads: Lessons Learned
TECH Fanatic
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 1,979
Likes: 3
From: Upstate NY
Sorry for the typo guys. It was a 234-240 112 +0 XE-R cam.
The JT cam is really just calling BS on people who buy cams based on names and "I want it to lope hard at idle" mentallity regardless of whether it makes "good" power. I couldn't think of a more rediculous name for a cam.
The JT cam is really just calling BS on people who buy cams based on names and "I want it to lope hard at idle" mentallity regardless of whether it makes "good" power. I couldn't think of a more rediculous name for a cam.
Custom little BRE "Justin Timberlake" cam. Smaller than you think and unassuming but able to go around F'ing anything it wants to.
Thats what I thought, and I'm now convinced that you are a pretty comical dude. I'm with you guys on the "named" camshafts. Give a brotha some hard numbers or a polar chart. Some of them work pretty well, but damn that gets old. G6x3LMNOP means less than nothing to me, and that is the only reason I won't run one.
LS1 Tech Stories
The Best V8 Stories One Small Block at Time
Retro Modern Bandit Pontiac Trans AM Comes With Burt Reynolds' Autograph
Verdad Gallardo
Top 10 Greatest Cadillac V Series Performance Models Ever, Ranked
Pouria Savadkouei
Top 10 Most Powerful Chevy Trucks Ever Made!
Hennessey's New Supercharged Silverado ZR2 Has 700 HP
Verdad Gallardo
Coachbuilt N2A Anteros Is an LS2-Powered C6 Corvette In Italian Clothes
Verdad Gallardo
Awesome K5 Blazer Restomod Comes With C7 Corvette Power
Verdad Gallardo
10 Camaros You Should Never Buy
10 LS Engine Myths That Refuse to Die
Verdad Gallardo
Five Reasons the Camaro Was the Most Pivotal Player in the Pony Car Wars 2.0
Brett Foote
Teching In
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
From: Overland Park, KS
Not exactly happy with the numbers my engine is putting down, was looking for about 25 more hp.
244 250 dur @ 050" .644" .644" lift on a 114 LSA in @ 110 ICL
418ci Forged LS3 (or is it 416ci
)
11.7:1 compression
Ported L76 intake and LS2 TB (LS2 Portworks)
Ported L92 heads
AR 1 7/8 headers, no cats, stock titanium exhaust
500 rwhp/465 tq
Drives great, breaks loose shifting 1st-3rd. No tracks times yet 4k miles on the motor.
244 250 dur @ 050" .644" .644" lift on a 114 LSA in @ 110 ICL
418ci Forged LS3 (or is it 416ci
)11.7:1 compression
Ported L76 intake and LS2 TB (LS2 Portworks)
Ported L92 heads
AR 1 7/8 headers, no cats, stock titanium exhaust
500 rwhp/465 tq
Drives great, breaks loose shifting 1st-3rd. No tracks times yet 4k miles on the motor.
Not exactly happy with the numbers my engine is putting down, was looking for about 25 more hp.
244 250 dur @ 050" .644" .644" lift on a 114 LSA in @ 110 ICL
418ci Forged LS3 (or is it 416ci)
11.7:1 compression
Ported L76 intake and LS2 TB (LS2 Portworks)
Ported L92 heads
AR 1 7/8 headers, no cats, stock titanium exhaust
500 rwhp/465 tq
Drives great, breaks loose shifting 1st-3rd. No tracks times yet 4k miles on the motor.
244 250 dur @ 050" .644" .644" lift on a 114 LSA in @ 110 ICL
418ci Forged LS3 (or is it 416ci
)11.7:1 compression
Ported L76 intake and LS2 TB (LS2 Portworks)
Ported L92 heads
AR 1 7/8 headers, no cats, stock titanium exhaust
500 rwhp/465 tq
Drives great, breaks loose shifting 1st-3rd. No tracks times yet 4k miles on the motor.
We used a good bit less cam in this one -->https://ls1tech.com/forums/dynamomet...z-l92-gto.html
Too much cam in that one. And, depending on who ported the heads, you can actually make them worse. The intake needs little to no work.
We used a good bit less cam in this one -->https://ls1tech.com/forums/dynamomet...z-l92-gto.html
We used a good bit less cam in this one -->https://ls1tech.com/forums/dynamomet...z-l92-gto.html
Have you guys done any cammed L92 setups on a LS2 stock bottom without flycutting? Im in the mist of trying to buy a pair of L92s and you guys seem to be making some kickass numbers with them and your custom cam(s)
Teching In
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
From: Under the Bonnet SYDNEY Australia
Any thoughts on a
230/230@.50 115LSA
anyone?
A bloke recommended these specs to me for a 6L with L92's...
From all the posts I've read on this forum, these specs are way different. (esp. in regards to the LSA?)
230/230@.50 115LSA
anyone?
A bloke recommended these specs to me for a 6L with L92's...
From all the posts I've read on this forum, these specs are way different. (esp. in regards to the LSA?)
Last year, I put a 416" L92 with ported L92 heads and L76 intake / injectors in a 2001 Camaro. 11:1 CR w/hollow LS3 intake valves. Car is an M6. Basically, I wanted a motor with more power and a little better low RPM manners than the LS1 with 224 cam / LS6 heads / LT headers.
I read enough to know that cam selection for L92 heads is different than cathedral port heads. The problem is that nobody is posting cam specs, and there continues to be much secrecy about the cams for these heads. So I wanted to relate my cam experience for those who are still searching.
After literally months of searching and speaking with several "pros", I was finally convinced that a 228/232 114+4 Comp XER would fit the bill. Everyone told me that even this was a tiny cam for a 416, and it would be tamer than the 224 cam / LS1 setup I had before.
After tuning for a couple months with a wideband, I had the VE and spark tables nearly perfect, yet in closed loop, it wouldn't stop surging until ~2200 RPM. (And yes, I scaled proportional fueling to the L92 injectors, had idle settings and IAC counts good, did CASE relearn, copied all injector values from L76, adjusted transient fuel, etc. )
I finally gave up on closed loop, and ran OLSD and OLMAF for a couple months. It ran much better at low RPM's in open loop, but despite numerous wideband sessions, the motor still didn't really stop running slightly uneven under light load until 2000 RPM and didn't truly start to purr until 2500 RPM. (Under higher load such as when going uphill, it ran great down to ~1200 RPM, in OL.) I probably did 50 flashes adjusting fuel and spark, and no combination fixed the low RPM / light load surging.
I finally found that I could improve the low RPM behavior by making the injectors fire later than stock (end of injection target table). Apparently, the reversion pulse of the 228/232 cam was pushing the fuel back out the big and lazy L92 intake ports at low RPM's. Even with the injection timing adjustment, it still wasn't perfect even in OLSD, and it really annoyed me that it behaved worse in OLSD at low RPM than my LS1 w/224 cam in CLMAF!!!
I finally got pissed and speced out a cam most would think is ridiculous. 216/224 116+2. Now here is the crazy thing: this tiny cam pulls harder than the 228/232 all the way up to 6000 RPM. Above this the 228/232 had an advantage, but not much (probably because of the 1.75" headers and L76 intake acting as a restrictions).
I don't have dyno numbers, but it pulls way harder than the cammed LS1, which I did get dynoed at 425 RWHP. I can't get traction in 2nd gear even when I roll into the throttle on good pavement. Even in 3rd gear, traction is iffy if there are any bumps at all, and I am running stock 3.42's. Shift point for best time is right around 6100 RPM, and the thing can lug to 1200 RPM in 6th gear no problem without setting O2 sensor insufficient switching codes.
So, what I gather from this is that even with 400+ cubes, when you are running L92 / LS3 heads, cam it the same as you would a LS1, and you can expect about the same results as far as how 'cammed' it is. I think with cathedral ports on a 416", the 228/232 cam would have been better, but with ported L92 heads, it was enough of a hog that it simply could not be ran in CL without surging below ~2200 RPM's.
I read enough to know that cam selection for L92 heads is different than cathedral port heads. The problem is that nobody is posting cam specs, and there continues to be much secrecy about the cams for these heads. So I wanted to relate my cam experience for those who are still searching.
After literally months of searching and speaking with several "pros", I was finally convinced that a 228/232 114+4 Comp XER would fit the bill. Everyone told me that even this was a tiny cam for a 416, and it would be tamer than the 224 cam / LS1 setup I had before.
After tuning for a couple months with a wideband, I had the VE and spark tables nearly perfect, yet in closed loop, it wouldn't stop surging until ~2200 RPM. (And yes, I scaled proportional fueling to the L92 injectors, had idle settings and IAC counts good, did CASE relearn, copied all injector values from L76, adjusted transient fuel, etc. )
I finally gave up on closed loop, and ran OLSD and OLMAF for a couple months. It ran much better at low RPM's in open loop, but despite numerous wideband sessions, the motor still didn't really stop running slightly uneven under light load until 2000 RPM and didn't truly start to purr until 2500 RPM. (Under higher load such as when going uphill, it ran great down to ~1200 RPM, in OL.) I probably did 50 flashes adjusting fuel and spark, and no combination fixed the low RPM / light load surging.
I finally found that I could improve the low RPM behavior by making the injectors fire later than stock (end of injection target table). Apparently, the reversion pulse of the 228/232 cam was pushing the fuel back out the big and lazy L92 intake ports at low RPM's. Even with the injection timing adjustment, it still wasn't perfect even in OLSD, and it really annoyed me that it behaved worse in OLSD at low RPM than my LS1 w/224 cam in CLMAF!!!
I finally got pissed and speced out a cam most would think is ridiculous. 216/224 116+2. Now here is the crazy thing: this tiny cam pulls harder than the 228/232 all the way up to 6000 RPM. Above this the 228/232 had an advantage, but not much (probably because of the 1.75" headers and L76 intake acting as a restrictions).
I don't have dyno numbers, but it pulls way harder than the cammed LS1, which I did get dynoed at 425 RWHP. I can't get traction in 2nd gear even when I roll into the throttle on good pavement. Even in 3rd gear, traction is iffy if there are any bumps at all, and I am running stock 3.42's. Shift point for best time is right around 6100 RPM, and the thing can lug to 1200 RPM in 6th gear no problem without setting O2 sensor insufficient switching codes.
So, what I gather from this is that even with 400+ cubes, when you are running L92 / LS3 heads, cam it the same as you would a LS1, and you can expect about the same results as far as how 'cammed' it is. I think with cathedral ports on a 416", the 228/232 cam would have been better, but with ported L92 heads, it was enough of a hog that it simply could not be ran in CL without surging below ~2200 RPM's.
I too have a 416/L92 setup, and with the 230 XFI / 242 XER 114 LSA cam in the car, I can certainly relate to your experiences.
After reading this thread, I am now thinking about switching to:
218 XFI / 224 XFI, 112 LSA
or
224 XFI / 230 XFI, 114 LSA
right now i have a 232/246 115+4 and down low it is very choppy. if im in 6th gear and below 2200 rpm, its surging and bucking a bit. makes me hate the car and just want to buy a new z06 and leave it alone. maybe I should try a smaller cam like you all have. Should i run alot or little of overlap
i currently run a 416 with ported L92 heads
i currently run a 416 with ported L92 heads
Im a fan of low duration and high lift. Giving me drivablity, ease of tuning, and lots of area under the curve on the cam.
Thread Starter
Teching In
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
From: Pennsylvania
GM High-Tech Performance did a dyno comparison for several different cams installed in a stock cube LS3 in their Nov 2009 issue. The data along with cam specs are posted in the table. What I find most remarkable is that the 215/231 cam on a wide 118 LSA makes only 19 less peak horsepower and 1 more foot pound peak torque than the much larger 236/240 114 cam. The difference in driveability between these two cams is night and day. So again, more evidence that bigger is not always better for LS3/L92 heads.