View Poll Results: What cam for the following application would you choose?
226/242 .622/.633 on a 110+2
17
11.11%
236/250 .630/.640 on a 112
44
28.76%
248/252 .610/.614 on a 113
32
20.92%
* much bigger cam
20
13.07%
* much smaller cam
18
11.76%
* none of the above, I would guess..........
22
14.38%
Voters: 153. You may not vote on this poll
L92 Cam Guestimates & Opinions
01-30-2007 | 08:02 PM
#61
Hey Fourteen3,
Give me a call or send me an email- Louis@LGMotorsports.com or 972-429-1963, after hours, today the 30th. Ill be here pretty late, need to ask a favor if possible......
Thanks
Louis
Give me a call or send me an email- Louis@LGMotorsports.com or 972-429-1963, after hours, today the 30th. Ill be here pretty late, need to ask a favor if possible......
Thanks
Louis
10-28-2007 | 02:38 PM
#64
Thread Starter
10 Second Club
iTrader: (5)
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,958
Likes: 0
From: by my computer
well... since someone bumped this thread.
I have done my research on cams and seat timing. I spec'd up a cam that I want to have ground specifically for my L92's/Nitrous/single plane:
246/254 .620/.620 111 +4 Ground in advance.
It should chop a bit more than my 244/248 and add a bit of performance. Kind of funny... one of my original specs in the poll was close.
I have done my research on cams and seat timing. I spec'd up a cam that I want to have ground specifically for my L92's/Nitrous/single plane:
246/254 .620/.620 111 +4 Ground in advance.
It should chop a bit more than my 244/248 and add a bit of performance. Kind of funny... one of my original specs in the poll was close.
10-28-2007 | 02:40 PM
#65
Thread Starter
10 Second Club
iTrader: (5)
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,958
Likes: 0
From: by my computer
the purpose of this thread was to use fake cam specs to see what everyone expected in a cam for a LS3/L92 headed stroker would be..... it is apparent that most either have zero clue of specs or nobody can agree on whether big split, small split, big duration, small duration etv etc....
10-29-2007 | 01:46 AM
#66
On The Tree
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 126
Likes: 0
From: Indianapolis, IN
the purpose of this thread was to use fake cam specs to see what everyone expected in a cam for a LS3/L92 headed stroker would be..... it is apparent that most either have zero clue of specs or nobody can agree on whether big split, small split, big duration, small duration etv etc....
I saw the cam specs you came up with. Are you going to drive your car on the street & do traffic & everything? My cam seems too big for bumper to bumper traffic. The car runs rough under 13 MPH in 1st gear; only due to the low RPM's not tuning.
Not everyone has "Greg Good" ported L92's; but we want them... You could run a cam with a smaller split if your intake / exhaust flow rates are closer.
Last edited by cybernco; 10-29-2007 at 01:55 AM.
10-30-2007 | 10:32 AM
#67
Thread Starter
10 Second Club
iTrader: (5)
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,958
Likes: 0
From: by my computer
A big split is necessary if your using stock (Un-ported) L92 heads, because the intake flows so much more than the exhaust. http://www.gmhightechperformance.com...ads/specs.html
I saw the cam specs you came up with. Are you going to drive your car on the street & do traffic & everything? My cam seems too big for bumper to bumper traffic. The car runs rough under 13 MPH in 1st gear; only due to the low RPM's not tuning.
Not everyone has "Greg Good" ported L92's; but we want them... You could run a cam with a smaller split if your intake / exhaust flow rates are closer.
I saw the cam specs you came up with. Are you going to drive your car on the street & do traffic & everything? My cam seems too big for bumper to bumper traffic. The car runs rough under 13 MPH in 1st gear; only due to the low RPM's not tuning.
Not everyone has "Greg Good" ported L92's; but we want them... You could run a cam with a smaller split if your intake / exhaust flow rates are closer.
exhaust did 257 without a pipe at .600
intake was 370ish at .650
dont need as much a split and the 244/248 drives real easy on the street!
11-03-2007 | 03:37 PM
#69
Well, our ported LS1 heads (190cc intakes btw) on a stock 346 with a FAST 90/90 makes 470-480 rwhp and 440-450 rwtq with only 3 deg overlap @ .050! The torque curve is the nicest I've seen on just about any LS1 and the car is very fast and yet also very driveable. When we tested our 408 on the ENGINE dyno so we could monitor air and fuel efficiencies, we tried cams that had up to 30 deg overlap and all we accomplished was a terrible torque curve and an incredible amount of airflow going through the engine....900 cfm @ 7000 RPM. The BSAC numbers were terrible and the torque/displacement ratio showed that even though the dyno said the engine had 120% VE, there was no torque production to back up anything even close to that VE number. This proved the engine WAS pumping alot of air (as it should with heads this good) but it wasn't trapping it in the cylinder to make any power. Now with the L92 heads excessive valve size, port area and abundance of low lift airflow, I still recommend a cam with about 0 overlap at .050 to make a great power curve.
Brian
HiTech Motorsport
Brian
HiTech Motorsport
11-11-2007 | 01:48 PM
#71
On The Tree
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 126
Likes: 0
From: Indianapolis, IN
11-12-2007 | 10:38 AM
#73
11-28-2007 | 07:48 PM
#74
11 Second Club
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 226
Likes: 0
From: Sydney
How does this sound for a 6.0L ported L92 head setup ? 224 232 .581 .595 114 running 10.4.1 scr. The car has good pipes and running a stock stallie. It can idle at 550 rpm with the TSP 220 @ 114 and still drive like a limo so I suspect we can go a bit bigger without losing the nice low down street manners.
cheers
cheers
12-01-2007 | 01:38 PM
#75
12-01-2007 | 05:01 PM
#78
11 Second Club
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 226
Likes: 0
From: Sydney
Yes I know it's an old thread but it doesn't help when there are heaps of small threads about the one subject.
I got a calc to convert Aussie Dyno Dynamics HP to US Dynojet figures. using that my car comes out at 469 rwhp which looks a lot closer when compared to other figures on this site. Maybe a little hight but I will claim 450 dynojet equivalent out of the 220.
The pipes seemed to be the key here because when I put em on it made a huge differnce to the cars power.
Having said that I have just ordered a 224 228 581 585 114 cam to go with Richards WCCH ported L92's .
http://www.to4r.com/calcs/pwtq.php
cheers
I got a calc to convert Aussie Dyno Dynamics HP to US Dynojet figures. using that my car comes out at 469 rwhp which looks a lot closer when compared to other figures on this site. Maybe a little hight but I will claim 450 dynojet equivalent out of the 220.
The pipes seemed to be the key here because when I put em on it made a huge differnce to the cars power.
Having said that I have just ordered a 224 228 581 585 114 cam to go with Richards WCCH ported L92's .
http://www.to4r.com/calcs/pwtq.php
cheers
