Friendly Stock Bottom End Cams
There have been 110-114mph passes with it on stock to mildly ported heads and not so perfect bolt ons.
12-31-2008, 01:22 PM
#25
It's a low end cam (227)...if you want something that will give you more mid and top range power look elsewhere. Our cars already have good low end as it is that's why I suggest looking into something else...Lloyd will tell you the same.
If you want a low end torque monster then the 227 or the LE version would be a good choice.
If you want a low end torque monster then the 227 or the LE version would be a good choice.
Last edited by Elliott's94Z; 12-31-2008 at 01:39 PM.
12-31-2008, 01:44 PM
#26
hmm i just did all the searching my brain can handle. the 227 is more stock then anything but makes good torque (which is nice in a DD) as you said elliot. and the 503 is a hard revving hp freak. now i have to figure out which i want. 
12-31-2008, 01:59 PM
#27
It's a low end cam (227)...if you want something that will give you more mid and top range power look elsewhere. Our cars already have good low end as it is that's why I suggest looking into something else...Lloyd will tell you the same.
If you want a low end torque monster then the 227 or the LE version would be a good choice.
If you want a low end torque monster then the 227 or the LE version would be a good choice.
12-31-2008, 02:14 PM
#29
TECH Regular
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Greenville, SC
Posts: 477
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think there is a misconception sometimes about big cams and stock bottom ends. It seems like some people have come to the false conclusion that a cam will hurt the motor. The only thing that hurts the motor is your right foot. So the point im trying to make is you can have as big a cam as you want so long as the rest of the valvetrain can handle it, BUT you may not be able to get the full potential out of a big cam with out being able to rev the engine higher.
just trying to clairify in case some newbs came under the wrong impression of big cams.
just trying to clairify in case some newbs came under the wrong impression of big cams.
12-31-2008, 02:22 PM
#30
If he wants a cam that is friendly on the stock bottom end then he is going to want one that works within the stock rpm range of the motor. And the 227 cam gives impressive gains across the board, not just low end. I don't think 115mph with a mail order tune out of heads that flowed 230cfm is exactly a slouch.
12-31-2008, 02:30 PM
#31
^ ^ i agree with all of that. theres no point in me having to high of a revving cam if im never going to get it to that point and get the full capabilities of the cam. ive revved the stock cam to ~6k no problems. after the engines warmed up of course tho. idk how comfortable id be with the 503 then if that cams powerband is well into the 6300 range. the 227 then sounds like a good choice. but does anyone have any experience with LE's 224/230 .560/.565 112 LSA cam ? that sounds pretty good for a puller cam that wont push the RPM's much farther past stock
12-31-2008, 02:38 PM
#32
The 224/230 .560/.565 112 LSA cam that's the cam I've been trying to direct you towards..not so much the 503..that was more of something I threw out there because you said you wanted something that's not gonna beat the crap out of your bottom end. That cam up top is his version of the H/C..I personally think you would be happier with that over the 227. If you do go 227 then go with Lloyds version of it...you will get a tad better performance
12-31-2008, 02:48 PM
#33
The 224/230 .560/.565 112 LSA cam that's the cam I've been trying to direct you towards..not so much the 503..that was more of something I threw out there because you said you wanted something that's not gonna beat the crap out of your bottom end. That cam up top is his version of the H/C..I personally think you would be happier with that over the 227. If you do go 227 then go with Lloyds version of it...you will get a tad better performance
reading about it does seem pretty spot on for what i want. thanks for all the help elliot and everyone else. i have some time before i do that swap but im a person that likes knowing Exactly what i need plenty of time before i tear into it. thats what i have to do because i dont have a garage of my own where i can lay the car up for weeks at a time 
one day
12-31-2008, 02:57 PM
#34
Yeah take your time w/ making a decision..call up Lloyd and talk w/ him if you have any concerns..he will tell you himself that the 224/230 .560/.565 112 LSA cam would be a wiser choice to go with rather then the 218/224 .544/.544 111 (which is his Crane version)
01-01-2009, 03:23 PM
#36
I think there is a misconception sometimes about big cams and stock bottom ends. It seems like some people have come to the false conclusion that a cam will hurt the motor. The only thing that hurts the motor is your right foot. So the point im trying to make is you can have as big a cam as you want so long as the rest of the valvetrain can handle it, BUT you may not be able to get the full potential out of a big cam with out being able to rev the engine higher.
just trying to clairify in case some newbs came under the wrong impression of big cams.
just trying to clairify in case some newbs came under the wrong impression of big cams.
