How probable are the results from this cam? Can you convert seat2seat specs to .050?
11-19-2008, 10:01 PM
#1
TECH Senior Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Decatur, TN (N-W of Athens)
Posts: 7,564
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
4 Posts
How probable are the results from this cam? Can you convert seat2seat specs to .050? Anyways, I'll get the second question out of the way first. Can you convert Seat to Seat specs, to .050? And/or vice versa? I wasn't able to 'design' the cam as specifically as I'd have liked in .050 mode, but apparently .050 is a more realistic result. That's why I ask.
Now for the main part. I spent a bit dicking around with values and finding the best combination, with still a streetable LSA. I assume least! W/ LSA@114.5 the HP is only down 10, tq up 1. What confused me was the fact that: The outcome changed little (a few HP, literally) with lift size, the outcome was on a stock motor save for running a 58mm TB (gain of only 1-2hp/tq so no benefit) and a Impala head gasket for upped compression (8-10hp/tq). Everything else was 'stock' for the F/Y LT1. As a side note, the LT1 I 'built' is with factory specs and flow numbers, and comes out to 275/325 as it was advertised. I then tweaked the cam accordingly.
So now assuming the engine was new, and had Beehive springs, could a cam that is of this low of lift w/ a ramp rate of only 2.5 make the power that is being calculated? And yes, I know that Desktop Dyno is a toy, but given the fact that factory specs resulted in a factory advertised powered simulated motor kind of baffles me and makes me wonder how accurate it actually can be. Also, are the specs for the cam feasible, or are there contradicting specs that would basically result in a cam that couldn't realistically be made? I ask all of this, because as far as cam specs and theory goes, I don't understand them
Following the main pics will be the same motor with LTs w/ Mufflers for quite a surprising gain and makes me even MORE skeptical of a cam on a stock LT1 being able to pull this off even at the flywheel.
(Side Note: I was able to adjust both seat durations and all seat timings, intake centerline, both lift sizes, and LSA.)
And w/ LTs
Now for the main part. I spent a bit dicking around with values and finding the best combination, with still a streetable LSA. I assume least! W/ LSA@114.5 the HP is only down 10, tq up 1. What confused me was the fact that: The outcome changed little (a few HP, literally) with lift size, the outcome was on a stock motor save for running a 58mm TB (gain of only 1-2hp/tq so no benefit) and a Impala head gasket for upped compression (8-10hp/tq). Everything else was 'stock' for the F/Y LT1. As a side note, the LT1 I 'built' is with factory specs and flow numbers, and comes out to 275/325 as it was advertised. I then tweaked the cam accordingly.
So now assuming the engine was new, and had Beehive springs, could a cam that is of this low of lift w/ a ramp rate of only 2.5 make the power that is being calculated? And yes, I know that Desktop Dyno is a toy, but given the fact that factory specs resulted in a factory advertised powered simulated motor kind of baffles me and makes me wonder how accurate it actually can be. Also, are the specs for the cam feasible, or are there contradicting specs that would basically result in a cam that couldn't realistically be made? I ask all of this, because as far as cam specs and theory goes, I don't understand them
Following the main pics will be the same motor with LTs w/ Mufflers for quite a surprising gain and makes me even MORE skeptical of a cam on a stock LT1 being able to pull this off even at the flywheel.(Side Note: I was able to adjust both seat durations and all seat timings, intake centerline, both lift sizes, and LSA.)
And w/ LTs
