Mild "Stealth Cam" Recommendations For Chevy SS Sedan (LS3)
04-29-2017, 01:36 PM
#21
04-29-2017, 01:39 PM
#22
I'm looking for additional recommendations for a stealth cam for my 2016 Chevrolet SS. I don't want anything that really compromises road manners or reliability for power, I'm just looking for whatever bump in power I can get without ruining the cars drivability. Currently the car has ARH long tubes, high flow cats, x-pipe etc to stock mufflers, intake and tune. The car trapped 114 mph with these mods last time out. I'm looking for a mild cam that will get the car to trap 117 mph or so. Two cams I've been looking at are the Livernois 1C cam that they designed for the G8 GXP, and my tuner recommended the Lingenfelter GT2-3 cam, which seems like it was mainly used on smaller displacement LS engines, but he says he likes that cam as a mild "stealth" cam very much, and it's lift being less than .600 makes it somewhat easy on the valvetrain, which is something else I would like.
What other recommendations would you guys have?
What other recommendations would you guys have?
04-29-2017, 01:42 PM
#23
04-29-2017, 03:32 PM
#24
TECH Veteran
Get with Pat G
04-30-2017, 04:53 AM
#26
TECH Veteran
04-30-2017, 02:28 PM
#28
TECH Senior Member
Jake, what would be a guesstimate on power increase on an otherwise stock LS3?
Is this a custom grind?
Is this a custom grind?
04-30-2017, 03:45 PM
#30
TECH Senior Member
Cool! Thanks Jake! (SUCH a cool forum!)
04-30-2017, 04:17 PM
#31
Would that be hard on the valve train? I'm sure the power is fantastic, but would you put that cam in a car that you would take on long road trips and possibly romp around a track/road course with it?
04-30-2017, 04:25 PM
#32
TECH Senior Member
He hasn't said which lobes would be used for this, though someone who really knows cams (NOT me! lol) might be able to tell from the specs given. Could this spec be ground on a "gentle" lobe?
04-30-2017, 05:07 PM
#33
There are so many ways to even have a lobe, youd need to know adv, .050, .0100, .0200 to really see.
Even on closing because of asymmetric lobe design.
Comp has like 9 ro 10 diff hyd roller lobes no one uses for a few reasons. Mostly either because they dont know they are there or they just like the ones they are using anyway.
Thats just comp. Not to mention the other big 4 and the 3 hardly anyone mentions.
Even on closing because of asymmetric lobe design.
Comp has like 9 ro 10 diff hyd roller lobes no one uses for a few reasons. Mostly either because they dont know they are there or they just like the ones they are using anyway.
Thats just comp. Not to mention the other big 4 and the 3 hardly anyone mentions.
04-30-2017, 05:47 PM
#34
TECH Senior Member
Yeah, it is so tempting to use a lobe that has a fast open and close rate for max effective duration with a lot of lift, only to have it be so rough on the valvetrain. Life is full of tradeoffs......
04-30-2017, 09:43 PM
#35
It's using Cam Motion lobes. They ramp up and ramp down in a controlled manner. The lift number has jack **** to do with how a lobe behaves.
In the Comp catalog... the LSL, LXL, LSG, and HUC lobes all have more lift than an XE-R lobe. But they all are vastly easier to control. And if you look at the LSL and LSG lobes, they have more duration @ .200" (more curtain area) while being about as fast off the seat @ .006" duration. The LXL is a little slower and is designed more for an exhaust lobe (slower closing) and the HUC lobes are designed for marine applications where you run a constant RPM. You could even through the XFI or XE lobes in there and they'd do better than an XE-R or LSL type of lobe. Point is, the jerk, intensity, and ramp up and ramp down intensity all matter... not just the lift or even duration. But the lobe shape itself.
My current cam is an LSL/XE and before that it was an LSG/LXL. Zero problems running them up past 7000RPM or taking them on 2+ hour road trips. Of course, I'm running Johnson short-travel lifters, 11/32nd pushrods, and lightweight hollow-stem valves. Weight is the enemy. As is too little or too much spring pressure.
With the LS3 valves, your valves are actually lighter than the LS1 valves. So you have an opportunity to control the valve well with lighter/less spring pressure to get the same RPM out of the system. And less friction = more power and RPM.
Also, peruse this: https://ls1tech.com/forums/generatio...alvetrain.html
In the Comp catalog... the LSL, LXL, LSG, and HUC lobes all have more lift than an XE-R lobe. But they all are vastly easier to control. And if you look at the LSL and LSG lobes, they have more duration @ .200" (more curtain area) while being about as fast off the seat @ .006" duration. The LXL is a little slower and is designed more for an exhaust lobe (slower closing) and the HUC lobes are designed for marine applications where you run a constant RPM. You could even through the XFI or XE lobes in there and they'd do better than an XE-R or LSL type of lobe. Point is, the jerk, intensity, and ramp up and ramp down intensity all matter... not just the lift or even duration. But the lobe shape itself.
My current cam is an LSL/XE and before that it was an LSG/LXL. Zero problems running them up past 7000RPM or taking them on 2+ hour road trips. Of course, I'm running Johnson short-travel lifters, 11/32nd pushrods, and lightweight hollow-stem valves. Weight is the enemy. As is too little or too much spring pressure.
With the LS3 valves, your valves are actually lighter than the LS1 valves. So you have an opportunity to control the valve well with lighter/less spring pressure to get the same RPM out of the system. And less friction = more power and RPM.
Also, peruse this: https://ls1tech.com/forums/generatio...alvetrain.html
04-30-2017, 10:52 PM
#36
TECH Senior Member
Wow Jake! That was VERY educational! Thank you! A LOT of good info!
I knew there was a good reason to lurk around here....
I knew there was a good reason to lurk around here....
05-01-2017, 12:01 AM
#37
Marine lobes are used alot or diaguised as a different lobe, but work very well.
Cammotion uses to say they like to design their lobes with a little more off seat duration so keep the valve train a bit quieter but make a little more power too.
Comp has added extensively to their lobe lineup even after the lsl,lxl,lsk lobes. You should see the diff between their 2013 lobe catalog and their 2016. Not just hyd roller even.
Cammotion uses to say they like to design their lobes with a little more off seat duration so keep the valve train a bit quieter but make a little more power too.
Comp has added extensively to their lobe lineup even after the lsl,lxl,lsk lobes. You should see the diff between their 2013 lobe catalog and their 2016. Not just hyd roller even.
05-01-2017, 12:20 AM
#38
TECH Senior Member
I'm sure computer imaging and simulation has come a long way in the last few years, plus a little (ahem) "cross pollination" among cam grinders.
05-01-2017, 10:18 PM
#39
While we're waiting for a Pat G recommendation, just for conversations sake, which cam between these 2 should theoretically make the most power? And which would be the most "stealth" like?
Cam 1: Torque Titan 218/226 .595"/.587" 116 LSA
Cam 2: Livernois 1C 218/229 .600"/.600" 117.5 LSA
Cam 1: Torque Titan 218/226 .595"/.587" 116 LSA
Cam 2: Livernois 1C 218/229 .600"/.600" 117.5 LSA