They say once you use a solid roller you won't go back to a hydraulic.
Hydraulic rollers can be revved to around 7500rpm now I think if you have the correct valvetrain.
I will probably end up getting that new fast polymer tunnel ram intake in the future which should get me to about 7500.
I have short travel lifters and good springs to support it.

Whoa there scooter. What's ignorant is your trying to tell me how much overlap I should tolerate. I've done that 9 degree overlap thing and liked nothing about it. It did impress the car show crowd. It was a 232/234 112 Tx Speed torquer 2. As someone mentioned earlier in the thread, it was before LS3 specific cams were out (2008). Jerked it out in favor of a 226/234 114+2 Pat G cam. Before I replaced it, two of Houston's best tuners had a crack at it. The two cams made within a few HP of each other. The torquer 2 made quite a bit more torque, but peaked at 5800 rpm. Pat's cam pulled good through 6500 rpm.

I don't have, or want, to prove anything to you. And no, a cam with 9 degrees of overlap isn't going to run as nice as the 226/234 115+4 I have in this most recent Vette. You might convince someone else of that. Don't waste your time on me.

Hmm well I remember learning about Spinmonster cams back when and seriously considered using one but too large for my goals. 230/246 was what I recall from that time, theres posts over on CF about it if anyone is curious to dog em up but thats what I recall. Could be wrong though, it happens

Spin's cam was a 230/234 114+2.. Comp's XFI on the intake and XER lobes on the exhaust. Much better lobe styles available now.

So, which of today’s cams are quiet on the valvetrain? How do the BTR’s rank in this arena?

Cam Motion is widely known for smooth and quiet cams

You still don't get it so I will try explaining it again.
First of all I never said 9 degrees of overlap is going to drive like stock. I said this is about the point where the driveability will begin to suffer.
Around 4 degrees of overlap will drive like stock if you have a good tuner. If any tuner cannot get an LS3 to drive nicely with 4 degrees of overlap then they are not that skilled and you need to find someone else.
The reason the Pat G camshaft pulled better was not because of the overlap.
It has do to the EVO difference and the fact the first cam had it's overlap way too biased to the intake side which also explains why it falls off so early.
That 112 LSA camshaft had a much later EVO open event and of course this will not hang on up top.
And yes I agree, the Pat G spec is far better overall for driveability and power production which comes down to valve events, not specs.
I'm not trying to convince you of anything.
As I said earlier, you are just ignorant.
But it's ok, We are all here to learn something.

I had a 230/234 114 cam from Cam Motion/EPS back in the day. 4 degrees of overlap did drive like stock.

It needed compression.

LS3... has more compression than the LS1 and is a bigger motor. I could see it doing well.

The 230/246 spec was maybe the upgrade which is a lot better than the original. Much more favourable to LS3 style heads of course with the appropriate LSA and advance to suit.

BTR are also pretty good.
I'm sure they use the newer comp lobes which are easier on the valvetrain and run quiet.
Might be LSL and LXL lobes.

There are a lot of excellence quiet cam lobes available now compared to ~2002 when the choice was more limited.

One commonly and long available lobe that's good and often forgotten about is the Comp Cams Marine XE. Brian Tooley used it sometimes before the LSL etc

BTR, Cam Motion, Lingenfelter, Land Speed, and many of others cam select an excellent and quiet lobe for your application.

Reher-Morrison Darin Morgan spec'd a very nice 237/245 ~.625 lift 114 for my 416 that's quite. It's a peanut cam compared to what a lot of folks want but ideal for me.

Fwiw - my step son said the 416 sounded "tame and too stock" at idle with its quite lobes and no ticking compared to the old LS1 with the 224/224 XER which had the nasty tick tick sewing machine idle. Don't be surprised in twenty years if Comp Cams is still selling cams with XER lobes just for turn of the century nostalgia:)

Yes I agree.
If no one can get 4 degrees to drive like stock in an LS3 then they are not a good tuner,

It is a bit tame for a 416ci

Comp probably has the largest variety of lobes to suite pretty much any application. That Xtreme Marine series is a great lobe. I think it predates the LS engines though as I believe it was geared towards big blocks with heavy valves in marine applications where they sit at WOT and 5000RPM for long periods of time. I am using a high lift version of the Xtreme Marine that Comp calls the HUC lobes. Very little valvetrain noise, even with 1.8 rockers and .670" of lift.

You guys are all talking about decade plus year old lobes from comp. Even LSL LXL stuff is old now.

EHI/EHX are the shit.

They also have new low shock solid roller lobes that I’ll be running in my ls7 that improve on the LLSR idea. They have a wider range of acceptable lash to be a bit less fussy and don’t risk hanging the valves open when cold.

Their old hydraulic lobes were super aggressive off the seat and lower lift. It wasn’t that long ago that 6000 rpm with a hydraulic roller was high rpm. Doesn’t make the old stuff bad, just not suited for modern engines.

The endurance lobes like the marine stuff and HUC lobes are better for stability and longevity, but can be lazy.

Yeah they do.
I find though, those lobes that are too smooth they can be feel a little lazy especially at mid range.
Personally I would rather compromise a little bit and build a stouter valvetrain to handle a little more aggressive lobe.
Not like the ones of old though. They are un-necessarily too much.

EHI/EHX are a racing lobe.
Certainly not a lobe for street use. They are intended for a racing application that may see minimal street use.
I bet they would perform great but be noisy and also wear out your valvetrain fast.
You are better off using the QXI lobes which are designed for street and racing use. These would be the best compromise.

The only reason they say that is because of the noise, but they’re quieter than other engines I’ve heard. It’s what we’re running in our 415 with the CTS-VR hydraulic lifters. I was recommended them for a max effort hydraulic build that won’t kill itself even with 10,000 street miles a year.

They're a hybrid lobe like Cammotion’s LLSR. You can throw a tight lash solid on them too. Comp just doesn’t prefer doing that and would rather recommend an actual solid roller lobe - hence the new “low shock” lobes that Billy just designed.

I know what you’re referencing - the paragraph in the catalog, but it’s just a general guide. When I asked about the Q series lobes they recommended the E’s instead for best power.

Its the grind I followed over to CF for because some Vette stock cid LS3 guys hit 500whp with it. Spinmonster was all over that thread explaining the wide split. It could have been his ten hundredth cam profile for all i know ( maybe it wasn't even his? ) but its what I remember about it. IIRC that grind ended up being popular at Vengeance racing in the early LS3 days. Cams are an interesting component, the brain of the engine.

Does anyone have cam doctor profile of the various cam lobes discussed and overlays they can share? In 2002 I had one for a 224 XER vs 224 XE vs few others cam lobes. It was very informative. It's also long gone.


This thread makes meant to start one about Geoff of Thunder Racing and later founder of EPS, Engine Power Systems and the classic TR224 cam :)