Ls3 418 hates the street Help
09-25-2015, 03:26 PM
#43
Quiet as it's kept, the cubic inches of an engine is MUCH LESS important in determining cam specs than the compression ratio of said engine 
.
Often times, people step into a huge pile of crap because they put a big-assed cam into a stroker just because it was a stroker.
KW
.Often times, people step into a huge pile of crap because they put a big-assed cam into a stroker just because it was a stroker.
KW
Now if the car was an auto with a 4000 rpm stall convertor, then you can use a much larger cam compared to a manual trans.
For the OP's car, I would go with a Cam Motion 226/242/.620/.600 115+4 cam. This cam will make very good power in a LS3 418, and have very nice manners.
Russ Kemp
09-30-2015, 08:42 AM
#44
Teching In
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I had an expert motor and tuner builder design me a cam. He first tweeked the tune for the cam in the car. Made it much better, just to show me, Then swapped the cam for a custom one he made. And what a difference for street power . Power starts off much much stronger at low rpm. Feels like the car has way more power because it's always there!! Drives just like my stock 2001 camaro, until you put your foot into it lol However peak hp was lost by 11. Much happier But then again I am just an idiot with my money 
09-30-2015, 11:48 AM
#45
I had an expert motor and tuner builder design me a cam. He first tweeked the tune for the cam in the car. Made it much better, just to show me, Then swapped the cam for a custom one he made. And what a difference for street power . Power starts off much much stronger at low rpm. Feels like the car has way more power because it's always there!! Drives just like my stock 2001 camaro, until you put your foot into it lol However peak hp was lost by 11. Much happier But then again I am just an idiot with my money
10-01-2015, 10:19 AM
#46
I had an expert motor and tuner builder design me a cam. He first tweeked the tune for the cam in the car. Made it much better, just to show me, Then swapped the cam for a custom one he made. And what a difference for street power . Power starts off much much stronger at low rpm. Feels like the car has way more power because it's always there!! Drives just like my stock 2001 camaro, until you put your foot into it lol However peak hp was lost by 11.
Much happier
But then again I am just an idiot with my money
Much happier
But then again I am just an idiot with my money
Have fun! Be safe!!
KW
10-02-2015, 07:13 AM
#48
TECH Fanatic
I had an expert motor and tuner builder design me a cam. He first tweeked the tune for the cam in the car. Made it much better, just to show me, Then swapped the cam for a custom one he made. And what a difference for street power . Power starts off much much stronger at low rpm. Feels like the car has way more power because it's always there!! Drives just like my stock 2001 camaro, until you put your foot into it lol However peak hp was lost by 11. Much happier But then again I am just an idiot with my money
I went through a similar swap and only lost peak HP, but gained 50 ftlbs of torque in the bottom end going from a 241/251 112 to a 231/239 115:
10-02-2015, 09:35 AM
#49
Looking at the graph, I would keep the bigger cam regardless. Yes, more torque below 3000 rpm with the smaller cam, but I don't think you'll be driving under 3k to have fun.
OP, I would suggest keeping the bigger cam and OPTIMIZE tuning. I guarantee it will be more fun to drive, as well as it will keep pulling on the big end revving from 2500-6500 rpm. Just my 2 cents, but what do I know.GL
OP, I would suggest keeping the bigger cam and OPTIMIZE tuning. I guarantee it will be more fun to drive, as well as it will keep pulling on the big end revving from 2500-6500 rpm. Just my 2 cents, but what do I know.GL
10-02-2015, 09:59 AM
#50
TECH Fanatic
Looking at the graph, I would keep the bigger cam regardless. Yes, more torque below 3000 rpm with the smaller cam, but I don't think you'll be driving under 3k to have fun.
OP, I would suggest keeping the bigger cam and OPTIMIZE tuning. I guarantee it will be more fun to drive, as well as it will keep pulling on the big end revving from 2500-6500 rpm. Just my 2 cents, but what do I know.GL
OP, I would suggest keeping the bigger cam and OPTIMIZE tuning. I guarantee it will be more fun to drive, as well as it will keep pulling on the big end revving from 2500-6500 rpm. Just my 2 cents, but what do I know.GL
I had drivability issues out the *** with that larger cam and hated driving the car. The car is 100% more fun to drive with the cam I have now.
10-02-2015, 10:03 AM
#51
TECH Regular
iTrader: (21)
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Colorado
Posts: 432
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I had TSP build me a similar long block with almost the exact same cam a few years back and had some of the same issues. My tuner just kept working on the tune and after a couple of hours he got the car driving like stock. I have a few thousand miles already on this set up with no issues. I have no issues with low end torque.
My car made 565 RWHP and 510 RWTQ NA thru a M6, 12 both 4:30 gear, 28' MT drag slick.
Message me if you have any questions
My car made 565 RWHP and 510 RWTQ NA thru a M6, 12 both 4:30 gear, 28' MT drag slick.
Message me if you have any questions
10-11-2015, 09:39 PM
#55
10-17-2015, 07:30 AM
#59
But it's all so opinion-based. One guy's "drives pretty much like stock" could mean unacceptable bucking to another. I read a post where a guy said his big-cam car drove "like stock". Someone went for a drive with the guy and he never had the thing under 2500 rpm LOL. Ya, it probably drives like stock under those conditions.
10-17-2015, 04:44 PM
#60
This falls under the same flawed theory that says; 'with essentially no other changes except cubic inches, a 'bigger' cam can be used....and the more cubic inches, the 'bigger' the cam'.
That's a good method for NOT optimizing and engine.
KW