HellTeeOne

What defines "aggressive"? The XE cams have been around for many years and are some of the most popular shelf LT1 cams. That particular grind will do fine with a set of decent springs. Drove fine, with good tuning it's a perfectly acceptable daily driver cam. It's not nearly as aggressive as the AI 228 cam I'm running now.

Back in the early 2000s myself and a few other locals here in NC ran that 224/236 XE cam in several forms and it always made good numbers. Most usually consider it a blower cam, but myself and several others made great numbers with it NA.

Supercharged111

iTrader: (1)

Aggressive to me is something hard on the valvetrain for an engine that will live its life at redline. I don't give 2 ***** about valvetrain clatter, terrible emissions, or shitty driveability as long as it rips from 3000+. That said, given my power goals, the cam will likely be quite friendly and only stink/lope a little. I don't want to live my life wondering when I'm going to snap a spring and drop a valve, seems to be common with unwisely chosen grounds in the LS world for people who hit the road courses. For a DD or drag racer, the valve train tends to see far fewer issues. I feel pretty confident that the lower end will stay together with ARP rod bolts and my 4 bolt block under 6500 RPM as long as it doesn't starve for oil. A great deal of my paranoia stems from the .600"+ lift cams in the LS world. I realize the architecture is different in the old GenI and II blocks, so what's the tipping point for valve lift WRT longevity in these older motors?

HellTeeOne

Well for road racing work I like a fat torque curve and good power so you're not shifting constantly to keep the engine in the curve. This little XE grind is well-suited to that.

There is no real "tipping point" for longevity that I'm aware of. It all depends on the combination. For just about any street-oriented LT motor with just about anything much bigger than a hotcam, I think running high-quality springs with the correct pressure ratings for your chosen lobes is important, and I think giving everything a once-over every 10k or so miles is wise. Not because breakage is imminent, but just to keep everything running at maximum performance. Springs degrade over time even with stock cam lobes.

At only .536/.555 lift I wouldn't think this cam would be a worry as being rough on springs or other valvetrain components. But for an engine that spends the majority of it's time in the upper rpm ranges, you're going to be servicing it much more frequently than a daily driver to begin with. There are few things that are low-maintenance on a road-race car.

KW Baraka

iTrader: (7)

Well...if I read Hell's posts correctly, the XE (Extreme Energy) cam lobes he used would have been:

Comp 503 Intake Lobe as the intake lobe on his cam (224*)...Lobe #3314
Comp 306 Intake Lobe as the exhaust lobe on his cam (236*)...Lobe #3316

Now....back in the early 2000's, these were Comps most aggressive cam lobes for the LT1/4 engines. But of the XE lobes, these were actually fairly mild.

In the early 2000's, I was using the Comp XE 224*/230* cam and the lift was .605" and .622" respectively. Those were the XE lobes #3192 and #3194.

Check out this link ---->> http://www.compcams.com/Catalog/230.html

So.....if you go the route that Hell took, you can use a number of springs that will easily handle the lobes he used. I would only suggest that you advance the grind 5*. This is the same advance used in the GMPP 845 and 846 cams....and is a big reason why they produced the torque that so many in the Impala SS community craved....after all, we're driving/racing 4300 LB cars.....

Jus' sayin'......have fun!

KW

HellTeeOne

Those are the lobes. Comp either does or used to catalog this grind on a 114 LSA. I ordered it on at 112 for the same reason you suggest advancing it (to fatten up the midrange), but mine wasn't advanced.

KW Baraka

iTrader: (7)

The 224*/230* cam I had was on a 114* + 4* LSA and had -1* overlap.

That lil' bitch could pull some torque!

W

Supercharged111

iTrader: (1)

Man, all of a sudden my email notifications started going to the promo box so I thought this thread had died! In addition to what's already been said, I understand that the base circle differs from the old engines to the LS engines. Did that affect the amount of lift that you're able to happily run on a motor? I should have included that in my "how much lift is OK" question. I don't think I'd go for a 114 LSA for this application, a 112 advanced a couple degrees seems right up my alley. The 112 plus advancing would not only boost midrange, but also help it fall off faster so I'm less tempted to take it past 6500 and put a hole in the block.

camar0corey

iTrader: (22)

Here is a chart when I had ran the hotcam with stock heads. Longtubes, single 3" exhaust, 1.6 rockers, dual springs, mail order tune:


Figured I would post it as you stated wanting more torque than horsepower and had mentioned the hotcam.

EDIT: Hmm damn that was one lean running motor at the time if the bottom of that chart is right! Woof. My current combo is around 12.7:1 at WOT.

Running the cc503 now, it also makes just below what it made for torque:

That is at only 30 degrees timing, I think there is more in it. This is with hand ported heads. The hotcam motor was unported heads.

96capricemgr

iTrader: (1)

LT1 is not an LT-1 from the early 70s and 30degrees isn't bad, mine is fastest with 29degrees commanded.

NewOrleansLT1

My cousin has a 96' Trans Am M6 WS6 with Hooker Headers and a rigged up y pipe.. With a CC305 on a 112 it put down 355rwhp and 363rwtq.. My jaw hit the ground when I saw his numbers.. Very impressive.. But I don't think his cam was on the old CC lobes because the box his cam came in didn't have "305" no where on it..

KW Baraka

iTrader: (7)

CC-305 duration but NOT the CC-305 lobes is most like the case.

KW

KW Baraka

iTrader: (7)

The type of duration you'd be looking to run won't even make power past 6500 RPMs no matter how you advance or retard the grind; both torque and HP will be dropping off.....so no worries on that front.

KW