CC503 vs. CC306
TECH Regular
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 481
Likes: 0
Yes I do, I guess a poor choice of words, I'm gonna do it once and only once, comp nsa pro mags, 918 valve springs, cc guide plates and crome moly pushrods, arp 7/16 studs, I've been doing my homework on all the things that ill need to do a cam swap right. You def got me thinking on the gears though, I def try to heed the advice of those that have more experiance than me. I thought that the gears would be fine with a baby cam
I hate to use my friend again as an example but M6 LS1 cam only (232/236 .592/.595 112) with 3.42s making 403/389. Even with my 2.73s we let off at 110-115ish and he caught up to my door. Put the gears in.
TECH Regular
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 481
Likes: 0
Ok, see I'm learning here, I guess somewhere I saw in a thread the 503 refferanced as a baby cam and it stuck in my mind. I'm not doing a track car, btw just my summer dd. I will hit the track to see what I run though, but it won't be a regular thing.
My car runs perfect with 3.73's, ran perfect with 3.42's and the cam also. Do the cam, if you wanna spend the coin on gears later then do it. You dont HAVE to have gears to run a bigger cam. Sure you'll launch better with them, but its not going to be a deal breaker without them.
With the M6 you are going to want 3.90-4.10 otherwise 6th is useless. Lugging an engine is a bad thing. If you actually look into the final drive ratio the T56 with 4.10s is comparable to the 4L60E with 3.23s. With 4.10s the cruise rpm at 65mph is still under 2000rpm.
One of my Caprice wagons had 2.56 gear in it, I actually got BETTER mileage in drive than overdrive. 65mph in OD was under 1500rpm, pulling it down into drive would put it up a little over 2000rpm and made the engine much happier and that is a stock lowend torque b-body engine with mild intake and exhaust upgrades. I could get mid 20s highway in drive with two guys and an engine in the back with the AC blasting, talking solidly over 5500lbs loaded like that.
One of my Caprice wagons had 2.56 gear in it, I actually got BETTER mileage in drive than overdrive. 65mph in OD was under 1500rpm, pulling it down into drive would put it up a little over 2000rpm and made the engine much happier and that is a stock lowend torque b-body engine with mild intake and exhaust upgrades. I could get mid 20s highway in drive with two guys and an engine in the back with the AC blasting, talking solidly over 5500lbs loaded like that.
Agreed. For me, cruise control on in 6th- 73MPH, 1600RPM. Definitely useless. 3.73s moves that to about 1800, 3.90s puts it at about 1900-1950. 4.10s would be about 2000-2050 (all numbers above on stock tire size).
LS1 Tech Stories
The Best V8 Stories One Small Block at Time
6 Common C5 Corvette Failures and What's Involved In Repairing Them
Pouria Savadkouei
Retro Modern Bandit Pontiac Trans AM Comes With Burt Reynolds' Autograph
Verdad Gallardo
Top 10 Greatest Cadillac V Series Performance Models Ever, Ranked
Pouria Savadkouei
Top 10 Most Powerful Chevy Trucks Ever Made!
Hennessey's New Supercharged Silverado ZR2 Has 700 HP
Verdad Gallardo
Coachbuilt N2A Anteros Is an LS2-Powered C6 Corvette In Italian Clothes
Verdad Gallardo
Awesome K5 Blazer Restomod Comes With C7 Corvette Power
Verdad Gallardo
10 Camaros You Should Never Buy
10 LS Engine Myths That Refuse to Die
Verdad Gallardo
I've got the CC306 in my A4... it's only got a 2600 stall, which is way too small for that cam, but even with the 323 gears it still roasted the tires anywhere under 25... now with the 373 it roasts em anywhere under like 35 lol 
With the 3600 stall it's gonna be crazy.
With the 3600 stall it's gonna be crazy. 
So you did zero research and blindly assumed the Edelbrock piece was a good thing?
Even magazines being paid for advertising struggle to put a positive spin on the Edelbrock stuff.
Just the intake swap netted a power LOSS they had to put a 52mm TB on it just to get it back up to STOCK power but they never tested the 52mm on a stock intake.
Their heads/cam/intake/TB combined make less flywheel HP than a good ported stock heads untouched stock intake with aftermarket cam setup makes at the wheel.
It is stock replacement, not performance parts as they should be.
Even magazines being paid for advertising struggle to put a positive spin on the Edelbrock stuff.
Just the intake swap netted a power LOSS they had to put a 52mm TB on it just to get it back up to STOCK power but they never tested the 52mm on a stock intake.
Their heads/cam/intake/TB combined make less flywheel HP than a good ported stock heads untouched stock intake with aftermarket cam setup makes at the wheel.
It is stock replacement, not performance parts as they should be.
Thread Starter
On The Tree
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 112
Likes: 0
From: Gilroy, CA
So you did zero research and blindly assumed the Edelbrock piece was a good thing?
Even magazines being paid for advertising struggle to put a positive spin on the Edelbrock stuff.
Just the intake swap netted a power LOSS they had to put a 52mm TB on it just to get it back up to STOCK power but they never tested the 52mm on a stock intake.
Their heads/cam/intake/TB combined make less flywheel HP than a good ported stock heads untouched stock intake with aftermarket cam setup makes at the wheel.
It is stock replacement, not performance parts as they should be.
Even magazines being paid for advertising struggle to put a positive spin on the Edelbrock stuff.
Just the intake swap netted a power LOSS they had to put a 52mm TB on it just to get it back up to STOCK power but they never tested the 52mm on a stock intake.
Their heads/cam/intake/TB combined make less flywheel HP than a good ported stock heads untouched stock intake with aftermarket cam setup makes at the wheel.
It is stock replacement, not performance parts as they should be.
The stock TB is 52mm on these lt1's. And either way, I'm working with a 58mm TB now. So speaking of "zero research", perhaps you should go do some.
The stock TB is 48mm you are doing a wonderful job of further proving your all consuming ignorance.
http://www.gmhightechperformance.com...ttle_body.html
Stock intake with a stock 48mm TB made more power than the Edelcrap with the stock TB and equal to the Edelcrap with a 52mm TB.
I am the first to dismiss magazine tests but when they publish a negative article about aftermarket parts you know it was bad. Advertisers are how they get paid not subscriptions.
Here is the testing with the Edelbrock heads and cam thrown in.
http://www.gmhightechperformance.com..._software.html
The Edelbrock head and cam with stock intake vs the whole edelbrock package showed your $460 intake "upgrade" made 2hp more average power yet the whole package still made less than 400fwhp. That is sad no matter how you slice it
http://www.gmhightechperformance.com...ttle_body.html
Stock intake with a stock 48mm TB made more power than the Edelcrap with the stock TB and equal to the Edelcrap with a 52mm TB.
I am the first to dismiss magazine tests but when they publish a negative article about aftermarket parts you know it was bad. Advertisers are how they get paid not subscriptions.
Here is the testing with the Edelbrock heads and cam thrown in.
http://www.gmhightechperformance.com..._software.html
The Edelbrock head and cam with stock intake vs the whole edelbrock package showed your $460 intake "upgrade" made 2hp more average power yet the whole package still made less than 400fwhp. That is sad no matter how you slice it
Thread Starter
On The Tree
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 112
Likes: 0
From: Gilroy, CA
The stock TB is 48mm you are doing a wonderful job of further proving your all consuming ignorance.
http://www.gmhightechperformance.com...ttle_body.html
Stock intake with a stock 48mm TB made more power than the Edelcrap with the stock TB and equal to the Edelcrap with a 52mm TB.
I am the first to dismiss magazine tests but when they publish a negative article about aftermarket parts you know it was bad. Advertisers are how they get paid not subscriptions.
Here is the testing with the Edelbrock heads and cam thrown in.
http://www.gmhightechperformance.com..._software.html
The Edelbrock head and cam with stock intake vs the whole edelbrock package showed your $460 intake "upgrade" made 2hp more average power yet the whole package still made less than 400fwhp. That is sad no matter how you slice it
http://www.gmhightechperformance.com...ttle_body.html
Stock intake with a stock 48mm TB made more power than the Edelcrap with the stock TB and equal to the Edelcrap with a 52mm TB.
I am the first to dismiss magazine tests but when they publish a negative article about aftermarket parts you know it was bad. Advertisers are how they get paid not subscriptions.
Here is the testing with the Edelbrock heads and cam thrown in.
http://www.gmhightechperformance.com..._software.html
The Edelbrock head and cam with stock intake vs the whole edelbrock package showed your $460 intake "upgrade" made 2hp more average power yet the whole package still made less than 400fwhp. That is sad no matter how you slice it
People who put together a complete pile of crap THEN ask questions are a particular pet peeve of mine.
The money you completely wasted on that intake could have gone a long ways in good parts. If nobody ever tells you it is bad you will go on thinking it is good and probably lead others to believe the same.
The money you completely wasted on that intake could have gone a long ways in good parts. If nobody ever tells you it is bad you will go on thinking it is good and probably lead others to believe the same.