Spinmonster cam specs 2009
06-23-2019, 12:51 PM
#61
TECH Addict
Thread Starter
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.
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.
Are these EHI lobes quieter than the old XER I wonder?
Running those lobes would need some expensive valve springs, rockers and lifters so they live.
06-23-2019, 12:58 PM
#62
TECH Addict
Thread Starter
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.
Someone grinded it on the new Texas Speed lobes.
I saw the dyno sheet and it did surprisingly well.
Power began falling off at 6300rpm and torque fell off after 5800rpm quite quickly
It made 496rwhp on a dyno jet which means on a mustang dyno it will read less.
It's impressive for what it is but I do not like the fact that the peak power falls of earlier than the stock LS3 camshaft.
I reckon if it was a 230/238 114 LSA +2 it might just achieve that extra rpm.
06-23-2019, 01:43 PM
#63
TECH Senior Member
This thread is REALLY becoming more interesting as it goes! Thank you bortous for starting it.
As was said, the cam is the engine's brain. It decides overall behavior (behaviour for the Aussies out there..) and performance level, but needs a good backup team (heads, intake, HEADS, exhaust, and did I mention HEADS?? lol) to achieve its intended goals.
As was said, the cam is the engine's brain. It decides overall behavior (behaviour for the Aussies out there..) and performance level, but needs a good backup team (heads, intake, HEADS, exhaust, and did I mention HEADS?? lol) to achieve its intended goals.
06-23-2019, 02:12 PM
#64
Stock rockers with CHE bushings
FED dual spring .660” lift and Ti retainers
Manley hollow stem intakes and stock exhaust valves
It was dead smooth at 7500 on the engine dyno.
These new lobes from comp are more stable than the old stuff as it’s meant to turn high rpm. The old stuff was never intended to see 7000 rpm.
06-23-2019, 02:16 PM
#65
TECH Senior Member
Simple is good.... stupid simple even better!
06-23-2019, 04:37 PM
#67
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.
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.
Scooter, you need to reboot. So, now 8 degrees or overlap can be tuned for perfect manners and stock like drivability. Probably stock like MPG too. Are you the expert tuner, or is it someone else? I sincerely hope no one else believes this drivel. Yeah, I'm the ignorant one....but educated enough to detect BS when it is passed before me.
So, did you recommend a 10 degree overlap cam to someone? Did he complain about crappy manners? Is that why you insist that a cam with that much overlap can have stock like manners? Do tell.
06-23-2019, 05:08 PM
#68
TECH Senior Member
Scooter, you need to reboot. So, now 8 degrees or overlap can be tuned for perfect manners and stock like drivability. Probably stock like MPG too. Are you the expert tuner, or is it someone else? I sincerely hope no one else believes this drivel. Yeah, I'm the ignorant one....but educated enough to detect BS when it is passed before me.
So, did you recommend a 10 degree overlap cam to someone? Did he complain about crappy manners? Is that why you insist that a cam with that much overlap can have stock like manners? Do tell.
So, did you recommend a 10 degree overlap cam to someone? Did he complain about crappy manners? Is that why you insist that a cam with that much overlap can have stock like manners? Do tell.
06-23-2019, 05:20 PM
#69
Bortous you sure seem like an instant specialist basically overnight. Youre saying alot of incorrect things and ideas that are clearly from internet searching and not from listening and paying attention. Plus "summitt" is someone that knows well more than most of the posters on here including you. Youve reached the point of sit down and listen. You asked for help and input and people told you what to do and i know a few companies you reached out to tried to tell you also but you didnt listen and it really seemed like you didnt care, you just wanted a sounding board.
The time has come. Submit yourself to this request.
You want true dyno results in a stock application, look no farther than tsps cams. They tested all their ls3 cams in an all stock ls3. They have "old" designs and "new designs" and the new designs have actual dyno graphs while the old designs have write ups. There may even be dyno vidoes of most of them on YouTube.
I use TSP as an example because they have the best real world exact info people need. If anyone else has that info like lingenfelter etc then use them instead. Thats real data from the exact engine they are going in, so its exactly what you or anyone else is looking for.
As far as the subject of the post, spin did help with the other side argument but that was without newer lobe designs. Some people still use 15+ year old lobes on their cams and they make ok power, but why dont they develop new ones? He was also a juiced up meat head that flew off the handle alot, so you have to use a fine pair of tweezers to get good info out of what he said.
I myself have spoken of his cams alot which is where im betting you got this idea from as nearly no one else has mentioned him in years and the same amount knew about what he used. My point there like i have said is that those cams made power. 500 rwhp on a 230/234 not likely at all unless everything else was upgraded and had a massive amount of compression. That would have still been on pump or race fuel as e85 was barely on the scene so I just dont realistically see it happening. So again, youve gotta sit back look at the whole picture and say, what can i ACTUALLY glean from this that translates into actual results or good info.
The time has come. Submit yourself to this request.
You want true dyno results in a stock application, look no farther than tsps cams. They tested all their ls3 cams in an all stock ls3. They have "old" designs and "new designs" and the new designs have actual dyno graphs while the old designs have write ups. There may even be dyno vidoes of most of them on YouTube.
I use TSP as an example because they have the best real world exact info people need. If anyone else has that info like lingenfelter etc then use them instead. Thats real data from the exact engine they are going in, so its exactly what you or anyone else is looking for.
As far as the subject of the post, spin did help with the other side argument but that was without newer lobe designs. Some people still use 15+ year old lobes on their cams and they make ok power, but why dont they develop new ones? He was also a juiced up meat head that flew off the handle alot, so you have to use a fine pair of tweezers to get good info out of what he said.
I myself have spoken of his cams alot which is where im betting you got this idea from as nearly no one else has mentioned him in years and the same amount knew about what he used. My point there like i have said is that those cams made power. 500 rwhp on a 230/234 not likely at all unless everything else was upgraded and had a massive amount of compression. That would have still been on pump or race fuel as e85 was barely on the scene so I just dont realistically see it happening. So again, youve gotta sit back look at the whole picture and say, what can i ACTUALLY glean from this that translates into actual results or good info.
06-23-2019, 08:09 PM
#70
TECH Addict
Thread Starter
Scooter, you need to reboot. So, now 8 degrees or overlap can be tuned for perfect manners and stock like drivability. Probably stock like MPG too. Are you the expert tuner, or is it someone else? I sincerely hope no one else believes this drivel. Yeah, I'm the ignorant one....but educated enough to detect BS when it is passed before me.
So, did you recommend a 10 degree overlap cam to someone? Did he complain about crappy manners? Is that why you insist that a cam with that much overlap can have stock like manners? Do tell.
So, did you recommend a 10 degree overlap cam to someone? Did he complain about crappy manners? Is that why you insist that a cam with that much overlap can have stock like manners? Do tell.
You seem to make things up that I never said and on top of this, you are trying to be a smart *** too.
It's ok.
If you still do not understand, what I have written, PM and I will break it down for you even further.
Don't turn on your bullshit meter near yourself though, as it may overload and you will have to get a new one. :-)
06-23-2019, 08:31 PM
#71
TECH Addict
Thread Starter
Bortous you sure seem like an instant specialist basically overnight. Youre saying alot of incorrect things and ideas that are clearly from internet searching and not from listening and paying attention. Plus "summitt" is someone that knows well more than most of the posters on here including you. Youve reached the point of sit down and listen. You asked for help and input and people told you what to do and i know a few companies you reached out to tried to tell you also but you didnt listen and it really seemed like you didnt care, you just wanted a sounding board.
The time has come. Submit yourself to this request.
You want true dyno results in a stock application, look no farther than tsps cams. They tested all their ls3 cams in an all stock ls3. They have "old" designs and "new designs" and the new designs have actual dyno graphs while the old designs have write ups. There may even be dyno vidoes of most of them on YouTube.
I use TSP as an example because they have the best real world exact info people need. If anyone else has that info like lingenfelter etc then use them instead. Thats real data from the exact engine they are going in, so its exactly what you or anyone else is looking for.
As far as the subject of the post, spin did help with the other side argument but that was without newer lobe designs. Some people still use 15+ year old lobes on their cams and they make ok power, but why dont they develop new ones? He was also a juiced up meat head that flew off the handle alot, so you have to use a fine pair of tweezers to get good info out of what he said.
I myself have spoken of his cams alot which is where im betting you got this idea from as nearly no one else has mentioned him in years and the same amount knew about what he used. My point there like i have said is that those cams made power. 500 rwhp on a 230/234 not likely at all unless everything else was upgraded and had a massive amount of compression. That would have still been on pump or race fuel as e85 was barely on the scene so I just dont realistically see it happening. So again, youve gotta sit back look at the whole picture and say, what can i ACTUALLY glean from this that translates into actual results or good info.
The time has come. Submit yourself to this request.
You want true dyno results in a stock application, look no farther than tsps cams. They tested all their ls3 cams in an all stock ls3. They have "old" designs and "new designs" and the new designs have actual dyno graphs while the old designs have write ups. There may even be dyno vidoes of most of them on YouTube.
I use TSP as an example because they have the best real world exact info people need. If anyone else has that info like lingenfelter etc then use them instead. Thats real data from the exact engine they are going in, so its exactly what you or anyone else is looking for.
As far as the subject of the post, spin did help with the other side argument but that was without newer lobe designs. Some people still use 15+ year old lobes on their cams and they make ok power, but why dont they develop new ones? He was also a juiced up meat head that flew off the handle alot, so you have to use a fine pair of tweezers to get good info out of what he said.
I myself have spoken of his cams alot which is where im betting you got this idea from as nearly no one else has mentioned him in years and the same amount knew about what he used. My point there like i have said is that those cams made power. 500 rwhp on a 230/234 not likely at all unless everything else was upgraded and had a massive amount of compression. That would have still been on pump or race fuel as e85 was barely on the scene so I just dont realistically see it happening. So again, youve gotta sit back look at the whole picture and say, what can i ACTUALLY glean from this that translates into actual results or good info.
Let me address your observations.
Can you please tell me what things I have been saying that are incorrect?
I would like to know as correction is the best way of learning.
In regards to Summit Racing, I was not aware they had their new PRO LS line of camshafts out.
I was looking at the previous generation which were not up to date.
The new ones are pretty much what I said they should be and am confident enough to use one.
My mistake there.
Can you also tell me which companies I reached out to for help?
The only one I am aware of is Brian Tooley Racing but I didn't message them through these forums.
I received great advice.
The forum members here who have given me input I have certainly taken their advice also and listened. (Except for the high rpm runners ok, don't give me a hard time about it)
I'm not one to not show appreciation of others advice if I ask for it.
So please clarify this for me.
TSP are really good since they updated their lines. No issue there
Lingenfelter I would not use as their grinds are very out of date and they use a very harsh Comp LSK lobe.
I had two of their cams in my 6.0 and I hated them both.
With Spin, it had nothing to do with you mentioning him.
As I said, at the beginning of this thread, I was going through my old emails from the Corvette forum and I read all the correspondence I had with him from 2009 and 2010
And yes you are right. Some of his responses were borderline aggressive.
He probably is juiced up.
I also agree that that camshaft did not make 500rwhp cam only. The valve events don't add up to make that kind of power with only a camshaft in an LS3.
I can also tell you what I have gained.
I agree with the points you have made but certainly not the first paragraph.
You are reading me wrong.
Using my own words to me is somewhat comical.
The time has come for you to clarify and SUBMIT your're response.
Haha
06-23-2019, 08:40 PM
#72
TECH Addict
Thread Starter
You don't read too well. In your quest to deliver a smartass tirade, you ignore the fact that he NEVER said an 8 degree overlap would tune for perfect manners, stock drivability, or stock MPG. Nor does he claim to be an expert tuner. He knows what he is talking about. Not sure you do. You put a lot of words in his mouth. In the next paragraph you say he recommends a 10 degree overlap can be tuned with stock like manners. WHAT are you smoking/drinking/snorting?? What an ignorant hick. Try again, SCOOTER!
I might start agreeing with him to cheer him up a bit. Haha
06-23-2019, 11:15 PM
#73
TECH Senior Member
06-24-2019, 05:38 AM
#74
With all of the cam lobe vs cam lobe discussion, any one know what the difference in hp is between say a LSL vs LSK vs XE Marine vs another lobe for the same cam on the same engine would be?
With hundreds of lobes I can't help but think in many cases it's almost the same thing with a new name.
With hundreds of lobes I can't help but think in many cases it's almost the same thing with a new name.
06-24-2019, 06:32 AM
#75
TECH Addict
Thread Starter
With all of the cam lobe vs cam lobe discussion, any one know what the difference in hp is between say a LSL vs LSK vs XE Marine vs another lobe for the same cam on the same engine would be?
With hundreds of lobes I can't help but think in many cases it's almost the same thing with a new name.
With hundreds of lobes I can't help but think in many cases it's almost the same thing with a new name.
Just by seat of the pants these camshafts feel like they perform better than the smooth lobe designs. I remember how brutal they felt when accelerating.
The cam motion camshaft I had was a good performer but it did feel kind of lazy but not in a bad way. It just didn't have that same level of brutality. Kind of hard to explain.
If you read comps catalogue the LSK are are very harsh and not recommended for street applications.
The LSL are from the same profile family but are not as harsh on the valvetrain as the LSK.
I know the marine lobes are a smoother lobe and won't destroy the valvetrain.
I am quite keen on trying the QXI lobe lobe. It's a street and racing profile specifically designed for high lift square port heads.
06-24-2019, 07:11 AM
#76
Moderator
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: My own internal universe
Posts: 10,446
Received 1,835 Likes
on
1,145 Posts
Brian tooley did a lot of spintron work and determined gentler lobes were making more power. That is one of the big reasons you saw 53-55 degree ramp rates regain popularity.
Lobes that are faster on and off the seat will often have better manifold vacuum at identical 050 lift cam specs due to reduced seat to seat duration. This effect can be duplicated by simply running a higher lift lobe which will have faster ramp rates by design. This is one of the many benefits of LLSR.
Often a short lift lobe with a fast ramp rate is not the best combination. The valve wants to follow an ideal path, and if it deviates much from it, you see it in valve float or pole-vaulting.
Simple example - stock ls2 cam. If they had just given it more lift instead of a table top, it likely would not be the valve floater it is. I still wish they had just put the 01 ls6 cam in it and a better intake. I bet it would have been right there with the ls3 from the factory. Sigh.
Lobes that are faster on and off the seat will often have better manifold vacuum at identical 050 lift cam specs due to reduced seat to seat duration. This effect can be duplicated by simply running a higher lift lobe which will have faster ramp rates by design. This is one of the many benefits of LLSR.
Often a short lift lobe with a fast ramp rate is not the best combination. The valve wants to follow an ideal path, and if it deviates much from it, you see it in valve float or pole-vaulting.
Simple example - stock ls2 cam. If they had just given it more lift instead of a table top, it likely would not be the valve floater it is. I still wish they had just put the 01 ls6 cam in it and a better intake. I bet it would have been right there with the ls3 from the factory. Sigh.
06-24-2019, 07:20 AM
#77
TECH Addict
Thread Starter
Brian tooley did a lot of spintron work and determined gentler lobes were making more power. That is one of the big reasons you saw 53-55 degree ramp rates regain popularity.
Lobes that are faster on and off the seat will often have better manifold vacuum at identical 050 lift cam specs due to reduced seat to seat duration. This effect can be duplicated by simply running a higher lift lobe which will have faster ramp rates by design. This is one of the many benefits of LLSR.
Often a short lift lobe with a fast ramp rate is not the best combination. The valve wants to follow an ideal path, and if it deviates much from it, you see it in valve float or pole-vaulting.
Simple example - stock ls2 cam. If they had just given it more lift instead of a table top, it likely would not be the valve floater it is. I still wish they had just put the 01 ls6 cam in it and a better intake. I bet it would have been right there with the ls3 from the factory. Sigh.
Lobes that are faster on and off the seat will often have better manifold vacuum at identical 050 lift cam specs due to reduced seat to seat duration. This effect can be duplicated by simply running a higher lift lobe which will have faster ramp rates by design. This is one of the many benefits of LLSR.
Often a short lift lobe with a fast ramp rate is not the best combination. The valve wants to follow an ideal path, and if it deviates much from it, you see it in valve float or pole-vaulting.
Simple example - stock ls2 cam. If they had just given it more lift instead of a table top, it likely would not be the valve floater it is. I still wish they had just put the 01 ls6 cam in it and a better intake. I bet it would have been right there with the ls3 from the factory. Sigh.
There is a very good video of him with the tuning school answering questions about camshafts, wide splits, EVO's, head cylinders and how to design a boost cam.
Do you know what lobes he uses for the NA camshafts?
My guess is either the marine lobes which someone mentioned and LSL lobes. He may even have proprietary lobes too.
I really liked my LS2 back in the day. Once I put an exhaust, headers, OTR intake and a maffless tune, it was strong everywhere.
I don't think I ever experienced valve float as it pulled cleanly to the stock 6500rpm.
06-24-2019, 07:58 AM
#79
Moderator
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: My own internal universe
Posts: 10,446
Received 1,835 Likes
on
1,145 Posts
His done a lot of work.
There is a very good video of him with the tuning school answering questions about camshafts, wide splits, EVO's, head cylinders and how to design a boost cam.
Do you know what lobes he uses for the NA camshafts?
My guess is either the marine lobes which someone mentioned and LSL lobes. He may even have proprietary lobes too.
I really liked my LS2 back in the day. Once I put an exhaust, headers, OTR intake and a maffless tune, it was strong everywhere.
I don't think I ever experienced valve float as it pulled cleanly to the stock 6500rpm.
There is a very good video of him with the tuning school answering questions about camshafts, wide splits, EVO's, head cylinders and how to design a boost cam.
Do you know what lobes he uses for the NA camshafts?
My guess is either the marine lobes which someone mentioned and LSL lobes. He may even have proprietary lobes too.
I really liked my LS2 back in the day. Once I put an exhaust, headers, OTR intake and a maffless tune, it was strong everywhere.
I don't think I ever experienced valve float as it pulled cleanly to the stock 6500rpm.
To say it differently, if you are not controlling your valves, then there is not a lobe change in the world (at equal durations and lift) that will help you. Tell you what, though... You run LS7 lifters and 5/16 x .080 pushrods like everyone does, because it's cheap on a Nasa-designed Uber-Ultra-Mega-Lobe. I'll run johnson short travels on an ancient, shitty, garbage, outdated XE lobe with 3/8 pushrods. Same cam specs. Who wins?
My wife's ls2 vette still has stock valvetrain. it floats bad. I transfered my fast 102 to it to extend RPM range over the LS2urd intake manifold, but it still falls off hard at 5700, and the graph looks like ****. I threw it away I was so ticked. Holdener ran a "every stock cam in a 5.3" comparison test. LS2 cam floated on him also.
There's a reason the LS2 responds to cam swaps particularly well.
The following users liked this post:
Che70velle (06-24-2019)
06-24-2019, 08:17 AM
#80
TECH Addict
Thread Starter
I'm actually thinking Brian has his own proprietary lobes. A lot of well connected builders do. Martin Smallwood had proprietary lobes that Tick inherited. It's an entire field of study I'm sure. I tend to fall into the "valve control trumps all else" category. Give me a solid lifter or a short travel hydro, biggest pushrods I can fit and then go bigger, a good rocker, light valve, and choose spring accordingly with the whole system in mind. Is there hair-splitting nuances between lobe shapes that can result in more found power, etc? Yes, of course. But I but you the pumping losses on a LS7 lifter causing delayed open and close, etc, create more losses than the minutiae of lobe differences. Ditto for flexing pushrods due to either undersized rods or oversprung valves. So your valve travel path does not match the cam's intended travel path. if the valve is not following the cam already, there's no point to nuanced lobe changes.
To say it differently, if you are not controlling your valves, then there is not a lobe change in the world (at equal durations and lift) that will help you. Tell you what, though... You run LS7 lifters and 5/16 x .080 pushrods like everyone does, because it's cheap on a Nasa-designed Uber-Ultra-Mega-Lobe. I'll run johnson short travels on an ancient, shitty, garbage, outdated XE lobe with 3/8 pushrods. Same cam specs. Who wins?
My wife's ls2 vette still has stock valvetrain. it floats bad. I transfered my fast 102 to it to extend RPM range over the LS2urd intake manifold, but it still falls off hard at 5700, and the graph looks like ****. I threw it away I was so ticked. Holdener ran a "every stock cam in a 5.3" comparison test. LS2 cam floated on him also.
There's a reason the LS2 responds to cam swaps particularly well.
To say it differently, if you are not controlling your valves, then there is not a lobe change in the world (at equal durations and lift) that will help you. Tell you what, though... You run LS7 lifters and 5/16 x .080 pushrods like everyone does, because it's cheap on a Nasa-designed Uber-Ultra-Mega-Lobe. I'll run johnson short travels on an ancient, shitty, garbage, outdated XE lobe with 3/8 pushrods. Same cam specs. Who wins?
My wife's ls2 vette still has stock valvetrain. it floats bad. I transfered my fast 102 to it to extend RPM range over the LS2urd intake manifold, but it still falls off hard at 5700, and the graph looks like ****. I threw it away I was so ticked. Holdener ran a "every stock cam in a 5.3" comparison test. LS2 cam floated on him also.
There's a reason the LS2 responds to cam swaps particularly well.
Brian is such a good guy to talk to on the phone.
Unfortunately Darth I had no choice but to use 5/16 0.80 pushrods with my LS3 heads because the 3/8 size would not fit due to head fouling. I also have Isky high rpm short travel lifters too so that should help.
The ones my tuner uses are a custom hardened version that he gets from this private company direct. They have some type of special forging or something but they are expensive.
Don't know the details.
I remember when my LS2 got a tune only it pulled really well right to the 6500rpm red line, Torque was very flat with minimal drop off even after 5500rpm and this was with the stock intake.
Maybe you have a valvetrain issue? Fix it and see the engine shine.