Originally Posted by Darth_V8r

OP -- The ONLY concern I have with the 219 cam spec is your dynamic compression. You might find that you have a propensity for KR if you run the cam with 11.4 compression. If you plan to run E85, you'll be fine. If you updated your compression goal to compensate for the cam, you'll be fine.

[rant]
Holy WTF. Very clear that people do not understand how a truck works... Late IVC is for biasing power to higher RPM, which is the LAST thing he needs. Sure in a 3300 lb street car, it's fine, and you can make some sacrifices and stall it accordingly to get perceived torque. Take all the street car generalities and toss them

Trucks don't work like that. You need lower stall speed so you're not revving the **** out of it to get it moving - especially with a trailer or loaded down. You ever drive through a parking lot, engine screaming at 3800 rpm at 5 mph pulling a trailer? It sucks. This is a 6000 lb truck that might at times be responsible for 10K-lbs given a family vacation pulling a camper or something. Torque needs to come in early and hard. If you need more power in a truck, it's not because you need more power, it's because you need more torque. In which case, if the OP feels he needs more torque, my advice would be a blower, not a cam swap. I actually liked the original 222/224 cam in your OP, myself, and I was very interested to see how it would do.

The purpose of a cam is NOT to make power - it is to determine the RPM range at which torque and power build, and the shape of the power and torque curves. The heads make the power. Cam determines WHEN and HOW it makes power. NOT how much power. Trucks need torque to build in the off idle region, not wait until the cam comes into tune to build torque. I once put a friend into a 180/186 cam with an all mechanical diesel-swapped jeep and a deliberately undersized turbo, and I would challenge most of the gasser strokers on this site to try to out pull that thing.

For those actually interested in learning, my proposed cam for the OP would be on the order of 220/228-114+0. With compression being the driving factor. If the engine was not yet built, i would recommend 220/228-112+2, and a 3cc dish in the piston to get compression to 11:1 for 93 octane friendliness. Without putting much thought into it or even looking into the cams from other vendors, my guess is that's in the same range.
[/rant]

Originally Posted by 01CamaroSSTx

With that being said I feel a cam change is eminent.

Originally Posted by Darth_V8r

I knew Chevelle when his eminence was merely imminent.

Originally Posted by Che70velle

And then there was...

Originally Posted by Darth_V8r

OP -- The ONLY concern I have with the 219 cam spec is your dynamic compression. You might find that you have a propensity for KR if you run the cam with 11.4 compression. If you plan to run E85, you'll be fine. If you updated your compression goal to compensate for the cam, you'll be fine.

[rant]
Holy WTF. Very clear that people do not understand how a truck works... Late IVC is for biasing power to higher RPM, which is the LAST thing he needs. Sure in a 3300 lb street car, it's fine, and you can make some sacrifices and stall it accordingly to get perceived torque. Take all the street car generalities and toss them

Trucks don't work like that. You need lower stall speed so you're not revving the **** out of it to get it moving - especially with a trailer or loaded down. You ever drive through a parking lot, engine screaming at 3800 rpm at 5 mph pulling a trailer? It sucks. This is a 6000 lb truck that might at times be responsible for 10K-lbs given a family vacation pulling a camper or something. Torque needs to come in early and hard. If you need more power in a truck, it's not because you need more power, it's because you need more torque. In which case, if the OP feels he needs more torque, my advice would be a blower, not a cam swap. I actually liked the original 222/224 cam in your OP, myself, and I was very interested to see how it would do.

The purpose of a cam is NOT to make power - it is to determine the RPM range at which torque and power build, and the shape of the power and torque curves. The heads make the power. Cam determines WHEN and HOW it makes power. NOT how much power. Trucks need torque to build in the off idle region, not wait until the cam comes into tune to build torque. I once put a friend into a 180/186 cam with an all mechanical diesel-swapped jeep and a deliberately undersized turbo, and I would challenge most of the gasser strokers on this site to try to out pull that thing.

For those actually interested in learning, my proposed cam for the OP would be on the order of 220/228-114+0. With compression being the driving factor. If the engine was not yet built, i would recommend 220/228-112+2, and a 3cc dish in the piston to get compression to 11:1 for 93 octane friendliness. Without putting much thought into it or even looking into the cams from other vendors, my guess is that's in the same range.
[/rant]

Originally Posted by Che70velle

I like this. I feel that with the engine being a 416...having a 4” arm...it’s going to make torque by itself and this cam will compliment the rpm range that the OP is looking for. It also will be stall friendly, meaning you won’t have to throw a big race stall at it to help it move off idle. I built a 6liter for my brother a couple years back. Had CNC’d LS3 heads that I moved over on the deck, just under 11:1 compression. It was going in a 99” Chevy 4wd ext cab truck built for pulling a trailer. We put a 219/231 on a 113 cam in it and it’s stout. Pulls really well.

Originally Posted by Adamjs24

Just got word from Pat G, "The cross ram intake manifold is a very torque-intensive unit and your cam would be a good choice for a naturally aspirated 6.2L. In a 418, it's going to be extremely torquey, but a little short on power above 5500rpm. If you don't have much concern about performance above this rpm, then you'll be fine. If you are looking for crazy power at 6500 rpm, then the cam is too small. If you value towing performance and lots of grunt off the line, then the cam will be great!"

Originally Posted by Che70velle

Sounds like Patrick agrees as well. It will be a very torquey vehicle which is what your after. I’d shoot for 11:1 and if KR does pop up, it’s easy to tune around. But at 11:1, I’d think you’ll be fine.

Originally Posted by Adamjs24

I am going to see if he can spec a cam that keeps that low end torque, but opens up the top a little more. Just to see for a potential future swap.

Originally Posted by Che70velle

Its a trade off. You simply can’t keep all the torque down low and open it up on the top. You’ll lose some bottom to gain some top. It’s not going to hit a wall at 5500, it will simply be down 20-30 over a well setup top-end camshaft choice. But with this being a suv/truck, you don’t need the top end horsepower. That’s what F-body’s are for!
You’re going to want to either focus on torque, or HP. For what your doing, I’d go torque all day, every day. The only way to really have the best of both worlds is boost.

Originally Posted by Adamjs24

I definitely prefer my torque. And in the future, I’d like to do some boost, but that’s a distant future haha.

Originally Posted by G Atsma

Man, I would just stick with your present combo.
As was said, that low end torque is NICE, and you'll be taking advantage of that a lot more than squeezing the top end for all it's got.
Enjoy!!