View Poll Results: GM 847 or CC306 cam??
GM 847
60
57.14%
CC306
45
42.86%
Voters: 105. You may not vote on this poll
Gm 847 Vs. Cc306
On The Tree
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 116
Likes: 0
From: Northwest burbs of Chicago
ahhh none. I would never run either cam on a complete stock setup. If I were you I would be looking at a cc503,lingenfelter or the hotcam. But if you run a gm847 on a stock car that thing will fall on it's face when it launches. My buddy has one is a 97 z but he has 4.10's to compensate when he launches. I wouldn't run either one, or then consider doing some head work.
Thread Starter
On The Tree
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 181
Likes: 0
From: Corsicana, TX
Originally Posted by Bossz28
ahhh none. I would never run either cam on a complete stock setup. If I were you I would be looking at a cc503,lingenfelter or the hotcam. But if you run a gm847 on a stock car that thing will fall on it's face when it launches. My buddy has one is a 97 z but he has 4.10's to compensate when he launches. I wouldn't run either one, or then consider doing some head work.
LS1 Tech Stories
The Best V8 Stories One Small Block at Time
Topdon ONE vs. Artidiag 800 BT2: Which is the Diagnostic Tablet For You?
Pouria Savadkouei
Gas Monkey Built a 6-Wheel Ferrari Testarossa With a Corvette LT4 Engine
Verdad Gallardo
7 Most Reliable High-Performance Engines GM Has Ever Built
Verdad Gallardo
Amazing '71 Camaro Restomod Is Modern Muscle Car Under the Skin
Verdad Gallardo
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
On The Tree
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 198
Likes: 0
From: Tacoma, WA
you know..I don't know too much about cams or anything, but I can tell you that the guys saying the cc306 and gm 847 are too big are wrong because every guy with stock heads and big cam is running just as fast as the guys with a mild port and small cam. Who honestly cares about low end torque anyways. I used to drive little four bangers and top end power is way more fun than low end torque in my opinion. I can't stand how my stock cam dies out at 5k rpm. Most other cars I drive pull all the way until redline. I plan on getting the cc306 and boltons. That's the plus side of fuel injection, you can tune it to run decently even with a big cam.
This is why most LT1's aren't running any faster than they were 5-10 years ago, no one is keeping up with technology and running old out-dated technology. The lobes on the CC306 are VERY lazy, my cam is in the low- mid 220's in duration on the intake, but by .2 lobe lift my cam is already ~10 degrees higher than the cc306. But if everyone is happy running slower than they should go ahead and keep doing it. 
I mean look at the LS1's, back in 2000 400rwhp was a big accomplishment to them, but now they are breaking 500rwhp on the stock bottom end. Yet the majority of LT1's are still running the same times as people ran 5-10 years ago. And for those of you saying small cams don't work, explain why Frank95Z had the fastest cam only car with a 210/224 cam for the longest time until he went with a custom cam. 
I mean look at the LS1's, back in 2000 400rwhp was a big accomplishment to them, but now they are breaking 500rwhp on the stock bottom end. Yet the majority of LT1's are still running the same times as people ran 5-10 years ago. And for those of you saying small cams don't work, explain why Frank95Z had the fastest cam only car with a 210/224 cam for the longest time until he went with a custom cam. On The Tree
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 198
Likes: 0
From: Tacoma, WA
Originally Posted by speed_demon24
This is why most LT1's aren't running any faster than they were 5-10 years ago, no one is keeping up with technology and running old out-dated technology. The lobes on the CC306 are VERY lazy, my cam is in the low- mid 220's in duration on the intake, but by .2 lobe lift my cam is already ~10 degrees higher than the cc306. But if everyone is happy running slower than they should go ahead and keep doing it. I mean look at the LS1's, back in 2000 400rwhp was a big accomplishment to them, but now they are breaking 500rwhp on the stock bottom end. Yet the majority of LT1's are still running the same times as people ran 5-10 years ago. And for those of you saying small cams don't work, explain why Frank95Z had the fastest cam only car with a 210/224 cam for the longest time until he went with a custom cam.
I mean look at the LS1's, back in 2000 400rwhp was a big accomplishment to them, but now they are breaking 500rwhp on the stock bottom end. Yet the majority of LT1's are still running the same times as people ran 5-10 years ago. And for those of you saying small cams don't work, explain why Frank95Z had the fastest cam only car with a 210/224 cam for the longest time until he went with a custom cam. the plus side to the cc306 or the 847 in comparision to a small cam is you have to like the idle. They sound better. I'm not saying a custom cam is not the way to go but in my car money is a concern. I'm married with a house and child so other things come before the car. When you can get a good deal like I did and still push the envolope of the 10 sec area why not buy a cheaper part that still runs good.
Originally Posted by ryanisfast
With his custom cam he only put down 357 rwhp and 390tq so I don't think that his cam is putting out any better hp numbers than a cc306. I think he was so fast because of the way his car was set up and obviously tuned very well. Plus his joe o cam was like 232 intake side and 240 something on the exhaust side so that's about the same as the cc306. I agree though that a custom cam is probably the best, but you could be making more than 405rwhp if you had a bigger cam in it. My plan is to get into 12's with regular street tires and it's basically proven that a big cam will do that for me. Also, It's way awesome to take it up to 6500rpm hearin the engine roar like a v8 should. Anyone that says bigger is not better....give it a break
Originally Posted by speed_demon24
I would be making alot more than 405rwhp if I didnt have a stock 100k mile shortbock, stock waterpump, and a pretty bad miss up top. Take a look at my dyno graph I can't believe i broke 400rwhp with that problem. And dyno #'s dont mean **** you cant compare dyno #'s across the country, track #'s are what talks. I never said bigger cams dont perform, but you need the right combo to get it to work. And the 306 has 290 degrees of advertised duration but only 230 at .050", thats pathetic, it sould be ~240 with that big advertised duration. It's bleeding off way too much dynamic compression for its size. Why do you think you see everyone claiming big #'s with it, but they run shitty at the track? Like the guy that posted 371 rwhp but he only trapped 113? When I had 20rwhp less than him (352rwhp) I was trapping 2mph higher than him (115mph) in a full weight car.
I agree, he's right guys. The CC306 bleeds way to much compression. You can go big in any application you choose, although custom grind is the way to go if your looking for maximum power. Now if finances are a problem, meaning you picking up a CC306 for say...100 bucks, then you can't beat the deal. Don't get me wrong, the CC306 makes power, just not as much as a custom grind. Either way you choose, its gonna sound badass and scare some people at a stoplight.
A friend of mine once told me, "BRE, Joe O...or go home."
On The Tree
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 198
Likes: 0
From: Tacoma, WA
Originally Posted by speed_demon24
I would be making alot more than 405rwhp if I didnt have a stock 100k mile shortbock, stock waterpump, and a pretty bad miss up top. Take a look at my dyno graph I can't believe i broke 400rwhp with that problem. And dyno #'s dont mean **** you cant compare dyno #'s across the country, track #'s are what talks. I never said bigger cams dont perform, but you need the right combo to get it to work. And the 306 has 290 degrees of advertised duration but only 230 at .050", thats pathetic, it sould be ~240 with that big advertised duration. It's bleeding off way too much dynamic compression for its size. Why do you think you see everyone claiming big #'s with it, but they run shitty at the track? Like the guy that posted 371 rwhp but he only trapped 113? When I had 20rwhp less than him (352rwhp) I was trapping 2mph higher than him (115mph) in a full weight car.
I know when i took my stock car out to the track the engine started getting too hot and it was stumbling at about 5k on up to redline, so I started shifting around 5500 instead of 5700 and my traps were about 97 and 98. When I shifted at redline I trapped 100mph, so I know that makes a huge difference in trap speeds. He was upshifting where a smaller cam should shift at. I heard of guys on here trapping 118 with just the cam and boltons. I don't hear of guys with small cams saying much of anything. Frank95z is trapped a lot lower with his small cam, compared to his joe o cam he gained a few mph. I think a lot of guys get a certain parts, but they don't know how to use them. Just like some guys in stock m6 lt1's getting mid 14's because they shift too soon and don't launch worth crap. I just say go big. I am actually now leaning toward the gm 847 after further researching it. I just son't know how high you can safely take the revs up on an lt1, but
Originally Posted by ryanisfast
I don't hear of guys with small cams saying much of anything. Frank95z is trapped a lot lower with his small cam, compared to his joe o cam he gained a few mph. I think a lot of guys get a certain parts, but they don't know how to use them. Just like some guys in stock m6 lt1's getting mid 14's because they shift too soon and don't launch worth crap. I just say go big. I am actually now leaning toward the gm 847 after further researching it. I just son't know how high you can safely take the revs up on an lt1, but
With a cc503 I trapped almost 113 in an automatic.
With a cam with less duration than the cc306 (my LE3 cam), I trap almost 119, and I plan to break 120.
Sorry but the cc306 is old technology that belongs in the dumpster.
On The Tree
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 198
Likes: 0
From: Tacoma, WA
Originally Posted by Javier97Z28
Speaking of not knowing how to use them... sticking a cc306 in and "hoping to go 12's" is a joke IMO. Those are some pretty easy to reach goals. Hell I did 12's w/ just boltons and Nitto's.
With a cc503 I trapped almost 113 in an automatic.
With a cam with less duration than the cc306 (my LE3 cam), I trap almost 119, and I plan to break 120.
Sorry but the cc306 is old technology that belongs in the dumpster.
With a cc503 I trapped almost 113 in an automatic.
With a cam with less duration than the cc306 (my LE3 cam), I trap almost 119, and I plan to break 120.
Sorry but the cc306 is old technology that belongs in the dumpster.
If all I cared about was 1/4 mile I would have bought an auto/stall tires/gearing and run 12's just like that, but that's boring.
On The Tree
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 198
Likes: 0
From: Tacoma, WA
Originally Posted by Javier97Z28
Speaking of not knowing how to use them... sticking a cc306 in and "hoping to go 12's" is a joke IMO. Those are some pretty easy to reach goals. Hell I did 12's w/ just boltons and Nitto's.
With a cc503 I trapped almost 113 in an automatic.
With a cam with less duration than the cc306 (my LE3 cam), I trap almost 119, and I plan to break 120.
Sorry but the cc306 is old technology that belongs in the dumpster.
With a cc503 I trapped almost 113 in an automatic.
With a cam with less duration than the cc306 (my LE3 cam), I trap almost 119, and I plan to break 120.
Sorry but the cc306 is old technology that belongs in the dumpster.
If all I cared about was 1/4 mile I would have bought an auto/stall tires/gearing and run 12's just like that, but that's boring.