Highest lift cam for a stock motor lt1?????? Does anybody know what is the highest lift cam you could buy for a stock motor LT1, without having to change anything?????? |
By "anything" do you mean Valvetrain??? if so then from my understanding the stock cam is the largest for the springs and such the next size cam would be the LT4 Hot Cam and that's a fairly small cam. |
without having to change pistons? prolly near or above .650 lift... |
Originally Posted by daniel6718 without having to change pistons? prolly near or above .650 lift... You are going about picking the cam all wrong though. Even on my setup with nice ported heads and all I run well under .600 lift. As covered springs are going to be manditory, hell at 10 years old the engine could benifit from new springs on the stock cam. |
you wont be needing anywhere near even a .600 lift on a stock lt1........ my le3 383 doesn't even touch the .600 lift marker. If you want to make power get quality parts that will all work together. A huge cam isn't going to help you if you can't accomplish adequate airflow to feed it. If you want quick power get a bottle, if your building a motor...... build it smart. |
why not change your valve train when you do it.. buy the LT4 hot cam kit, cheap power that you can really feel... |
Stock Valve Springs I wouldn't put past .475 lift.. they are tiny. The LT4's are at .525 max, and the Hotcam Kit puts them right there. How many people are over .600 lift with a LT1, will the Heads even flow enough to feed that? I am just wondering, the only Head stuff I have been really researching lately was for mine so I could get a proper Cam for them. Very big difference between LTX and LSX Heads.. |
My new cam is just over .600 lift, and my heads peak around that area. Can't wait to run it! |
You can run as much lift as you can put in it, duration and vavle events are what determines when the valve comes into contact with the piston. And when heads keep gaining flow well past 600 lift it makes no sense to not to run a cam with high lift. Big lift #'s does not mean its a big cam. :judge: |
^^Very true..:judge: |
In running a lil ol 230/236 .576/.571 in mine, stock heads........for now |
About the biggest combination I've seen on a stock longblock car is the GM847 with .595 lift (1.6 rocker) on the exhaust side. I remember seeing some numbers from a long time ago saying something to the effect that .600-.605 is where you better start thinking of PTV issues. |
I am a good 11-years late for this discussion and forgive me fellow members for commenting on this old thread, but I do have a contributing comment to make here. Hypothetically, using stock LT1 aluminum heads with necessary valvetrain modification for a very high lift cam and using 1.7 rockers with the geometry altered for easier operation, could you still safely use a camshaft likened to the LS7 cam? To throw out numbers here, intake lift: 0.589 in. exhaust lift: 0.593 in., duration: 200/207, lobe separation angle: 117 or 118. I understand this discussion is based on unmodified stock LT1 heads, yet, for highest lift ground into a cam you need to modify the valvetrain! So, if you modify the valvetrain accordingly, could you use a custom LT1 grind likened to the LS7 cam? It doesn't hurt to explore this idea! |
Originally Posted by Phoenix'97
(Post 19993152)
I am a good 11-years late for this discussion and forgive me fellow members for commenting on this old thread, but I do have a contributing comment to make here. Hypothetically, using stock LT1 aluminum heads with necessary valvetrain modification for a very high lift cam and using 1.7 rockers with the geometry altered for easier operation, could you still safely use a camshaft likened to the LS7 cam? To throw out numbers here, intake lift: 0.589 in. exhaust lift: 0.593 in., duration: 200/207, lobe separation angle: 117 or 118. I understand this discussion is based on unmodified stock LT1 heads, yet, for highest lift ground into a cam you need to modify the valvetrain! So, if you modify the valvetrain accordingly, could you use a custom LT1 grind likened to the LS7 cam? It doesn't hurt to explore this idea! |
Originally Posted by PARMY
(Post 19993228)
Why try to re-write the book on LT1 mods when there are soooo many proven cams, cam/head combos etc? Seems like a waste of time to try new stuff at this point...just use what has been proven to work reliably. I understand where the original poster's mindset is at and I understand the theory behind giving a stock cam as much lift as can be ground into it without really changing anything else. Can it work safely if the heads have the correct valvetrain modifications, in my case the valve covers for the 1.7 rockers, the right springs, and the geometry reworked with unported heads? I will pose this camshaft question to the cam maker since I am dead set on smooth idle and ample vacuum levels. I am only interested in changing how much air the camshaft can supply my engine at lower to mid-range RPM and whether or not I am going to need porting if it deemed necessary for my build, which in all likelihood it may be, but I can't have port velocity take a hit, however, from the porting. |
Phoenix You have asked several ?'s in various threads about very unconventional mods because you feel "everything" has not been explored with the Gen 2 LT1 SBC. Nothing wrong with asking or even trying something new......but in the case of your ? in this thread what you ask is not going to provide any more, and likely far less, power, drivability, mileage, low end TQ, etc.than the several cam profiles or valvetrain components proven for the LT1. Guys like Lloyd Elliott has forgotten more about cam grinds for various uses than most of us will ever know so aside from off the shelf cams that spec what their operating ranges is (RPM) custom grinds from guys like Lloyd provide more bang for the buck. To improve your stock cam power and or TQ you do what people have been doing with SBC for decades like higher ratio RR, better valve springs, thicker RR studs & PR to reduce flex of those parts, free flow exhaust/headers are what will give you more TQ & HP on a otherwise stock motor and have a + benefit towards gas mileage. If you explore some new concept you think of that does more than any of the well proven methods....please enlighten us all. |
People don't run LS7 esque cam lifts on LTX junk cause, LTX junk flows like shit at factory lift levels, hanging the valve open even more won't get you anything. |
Originally Posted by BALLSS
(Post 19993298)
Phoenix You have asked several ?'s in various threads about very unconventional mods because you feel "everything" has not been explored with the Gen 2 LT1 SBC. Nothing wrong with asking or even trying something new......but in the case of your ? in this thread what you ask is not going to provide any more, and likely far less, power, drivability, mileage, low end TQ, etc.than the several cam profiles or valvetrain components proven for the LT1...
Originally Posted by Shownomercy
(Post 19993333)
People don't run LS7 esque cam lifts on LTX junk cause, LTX junk flows like shit at factory lift levels, hanging the valve open even more won't get you anything. |
Originally Posted by Phoenix'97
(Post 19993363)
I ask very unconventional questions because So, with your logic turbocharging my stock LT1 won't net me any power gains? Supercharging my LT1 won't net me power gains? Stroking my LT1 won't net me power gains because the stock heads don't flow as well as LS heads? I beg to differ in your assertion about the LT1. Yes, to get the most out of an LS7-esqe camshaft tailored to my LT1 I will likely need porting to my heads, hell, I would probably be better modifying a cheap set of cast-iron LT1 heads with better flow. I fail to see how allowing the LT1 to suck in more air will not help it yield a torque curve that is a modest improvement over it's stock torque curve. There is little point in hanging a valve open say .6 if the head is well past max flow at .4 I am struggling to see why you think that by just forcing the valve open more, the head will accommodate you and flow some more all of a sudden. You are wasting motion for nothing gained. Furthermore, why do you care what the head flows if you are going to restrict it with a god awful TPI intake? And yes, I know you can in theory trade high lift instead of duration, but that gets into race car land and you don't want that. You have quite possibly stated that you want to do exactly every thing the internet has said not to do. Iron heads? TPI intake? Lower torque curve to be TPI like? You are either a brilliant troll, or just incredibly stubborn. Aside, you will get good net gains if you turbo charge it with stock heads. And just think of the wacky boost curves you could dream up to net you max fuel efficiency |
Originally Posted by Shownomercy
(Post 19993400)
There is little point in hanging a valve open say .6 if the head is well past max flow at .4 I am struggling to see why you think that by just forcing the valve open more, the head will accommodate you and flow some more all of a sudden.
Originally Posted by Shownomercy
(Post 19993400)
You are wasting motion for nothing gained. Furthermore, why do you care what the head flows if you are going to restrict it with a god awful TPI intake? And yes, I know you can in theory trade high lift instead of duration, but that gets into race car land and you don't want that.
Originally Posted by Shownomercy
(Post 19993400)
You have quite possibly stated that you want to do exactly every thing the internet has said not to do. Iron heads? TPI intake? Lower torque curve to be TPI like? You are either a brilliant troll, or just incredibly stubborn. |
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:53 PM. |
© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands