LT1-LT4 Modifications 1993-97 Gen II Small Block V8

¿Cam to big for stock heads? 242 / 248, .584 / .579 113 LSA

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 06-19-2008, 06:31 PM
  #1  
Launching!
Thread Starter
iTrader: (18)
 
AAK z28's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Macomb, Michigan
Posts: 226
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default ¿Cam to big for stock heads? 242 / 248, .584 / .579 113 LSA

63-07-468-8 Comp Cams XFI LT1 Camshaft, 242 / 248, .584 / .579 113 LSA, Good midrange with excellent top end power. Headers, exhaust, gears, converter, computer tuning recommended.....is all they say needed to run this cam on thunderracing.com.

what does everyone think about that?
Old 06-19-2008, 06:43 PM
  #2  
11 Second Club
iTrader: (1)
 
96capricemgr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 11,975
Likes: 0
Received 12 Likes on 12 Posts

Default

Absolutely horrible choice, to even attempt to use it you will need aftermarket injection. Comp's rpm ranges are way OFF, will need to go beyond 7000rpms.
Old 06-19-2008, 06:49 PM
  #3  
11 Second Club
iTrader: (1)
 
96capricemgr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 11,975
Likes: 0
Received 12 Likes on 12 Posts

Default

https://ls1tech.com/forums/showpost....8&postcount=10
Old 06-19-2008, 06:52 PM
  #4  
Launching!
Thread Starter
iTrader: (18)
 
AAK z28's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Macomb, Michigan
Posts: 226
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

what about 63-07-467-8 Comp Cams XFI LT1 Camshaft, 230 / 236, .576 / .570 113 LSA, Strong mid-range and top end power. Headers, exhaust, gears, converter, computer tuning recommended.
Old 06-19-2008, 06:54 PM
  #5  
Launching!
 
The Engineer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Moore Oklahoma
Posts: 271
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by AAK z28
63-07-468-8 Comp Cams XFI LT1 Camshaft, 242 / 248, .584 / .579 113 LSA, Good midrange with excellent top end power. Headers, exhaust, gears, converter, computer tuning recommended.....is all they say needed to run this cam on thunderracing.com.

what does everyone think about that?
I have that XFI cam in my 396 stroker and it performs really well (it's a bad-*** HR cam and I turn it just over 6500). However, the HR and 113 LSA has limitations for what I'm doing with my car, so next year I'm thinking SR (solid-roller) along with some Lloyd Elliot head work.

WD

Last edited by The Engineer; 06-19-2008 at 07:05 PM.
Old 06-19-2008, 07:03 PM
  #6  
Launching!
 
The Engineer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Moore Oklahoma
Posts: 271
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by 96capricemgr
Absolutely horrible choice, to even attempt to use it you will need aftermarket injection. Comp's rpm ranges are way OFF, will need to go beyond 7000rpms.
I bet you've never run that XFI cam! But it have for two seasons now and power-band is "well below" the 7000 you've incorrectly stated.

WD
Old 06-19-2008, 07:40 PM
  #7  
10 Second Club
iTrader: (2)
 
96LT1355Z28's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Holden, MO (KC)
Posts: 838
Received 9 Likes on 7 Posts

Default

Originally Posted by AAK z28
what about 63-07-467-8 Comp Cams XFI LT1 Camshaft, 230 / 236, .576 / .570 113 LSA, Strong mid-range and top end power. Headers, exhaust, gears, converter, computer tuning recommended.

That's what I've got. I spin to 6400, car runs fine. I'm not a cam expert by any means so I could possibly make more power w/ a custom cam but off the shelf I happy with it. You will want to open up your heads if you haven't already.
Old 06-19-2008, 07:42 PM
  #8  
11 Second Club
iTrader: (1)
 
96capricemgr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 11,975
Likes: 0
Received 12 Likes on 12 Posts

Default

The OP presumably has a stock shortblock to go with his stock heads and I posted a link to someone who has tried that cam on a 350.

Anyone with a clue knows added displacement lowers the rpm range of a cam.

I do not know if the ratio of displacement directly correlates to a percentage in rpm but if it does your 13% greater displacement would mean over 7300rpms if a 350 needs 13% more rpm to match.

My opinions are based on facts most of you choose to ignore or missinterpert, as this guy has choosen to ignore the post I linked, and ignore the displacement thing.


The cam I am running is smaller lift and duration than the second XFI listed even. I would stay below 230degrees intake on aa stock shortblock.
Old 06-19-2008, 08:11 PM
  #9  
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (3)
 
Formula350's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Decatur, TN (N-W of Athens)
Posts: 7,564
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 4 Posts
Default

I don't know anything about cams, and I figured it was way too big before clicking on the thread.

As far as making power with it on a stock motor, I'll have to say sure you would over stock, but you are not making anywhere near what it can. I'm sure not even 1/2 of it's potential has been released. Which I think is a part of what Caprice was saying about CID. *shrug*

Again, I don't know what I'm talking about, but I don't think you can flow enough air with the pistons to utilize that cam.
Old 06-19-2008, 09:36 PM
  #10  
11 Second Club
iTrader: (1)
 
96capricemgr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 11,975
Likes: 0
Received 12 Likes on 12 Posts

Default

A 350 can use a big cam like that BUT it needs RPM to do so, in this case more rpm than the stock rod bolts/rod bearing and pcm can handle.
Old 06-19-2008, 09:44 PM
  #11  
Launching!
 
The Engineer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Moore Oklahoma
Posts: 271
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

I really love the drama here. Two people who have “actually” run the Comp XFI cam and say it’s good cam choice with a reasonable power band around 6500 (even with 355 cubes).

And then several e-experts here on the forum who have “never run” the XFI cam (probable never even known anyone with it), but are sure it is a rotten cam choice.

However, I don’t recall any of those e-experts being the LTX Shoot-Out this year and actualling out-running anyone, me in particular in N/A!

WD
Old 06-19-2008, 10:01 PM
  #12  
TECH Regular
iTrader: (1)
 
kngkahious's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 497
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

so none of you ever anwsered his ? is the cam to big or not ? are any of you running the cam with stock heads yes or no? thanks i am trying to get the anwser myself.
Old 06-19-2008, 10:13 PM
  #13  
hashtagBMW
iTrader: (38)
 
Speed Density's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Boise, Idaho
Posts: 6,572
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts

Default

That cam is to big for a stock LT1, yes.

As far as the camshaft itself, I have something sorta similar to that in my 398ci and dont plan on cranking it higher then 6600 for peak. Should work very well.

Tony.
Old 06-19-2008, 10:25 PM
  #14  
Launching!
 
The Engineer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Moore Oklahoma
Posts: 271
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by kngkahious
so none of you ever anwsered his ? is the cam to big or not ? are any of you running the cam with stock heads yes or no? thanks i am trying to get the anwser myself.
I sent him a PM with the intention of helping him!

WD
Old 06-19-2008, 10:27 PM
  #15  
12 Second Club
iTrader: (129)
 
fergymoto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Rock Hill, SC
Posts: 2,810
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 96capricemgr View Post
Absolutely horrible choice, to even attempt to use it you will need aftermarket injection. Comp's rpm ranges are way OFF, will need to go beyond 7000rpms.
I bet you've never run that XFI cam! But it have for two seasons now and power-band is "well below" the 7000 you've incorrectly stated.

WD

Sorry but Caprice is right. I have run it in a stock short block with Lingenfelter CNCd heads. Way to big for a 350" motor that has a limited capability of RPM. We spun it to 7,000 on the dyno and the curve was still going up. Who knows where it had peaked. My buddy ran it in his stock headed 383 after I sold it to him for a smaller cam and it was even a little on the big side for that. I would highly discourage running this cam in a 350" motor.
Old 06-20-2008, 02:03 AM
  #16  
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (10)
 
zlover129's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 1,197
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

you're telling me you think either of those cams would be reasonable on a stock headed car...the first is no question, it would need RPM's well beyond a stock PCM and Opti can handle to work, and would but pretty gutless down low. The 2nd is still too big imo but hey..what do we all know, just trying to give good tried and true advice
Old 06-20-2008, 06:53 AM
  #17  
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (3)
 
Formula350's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Decatur, TN (N-W of Athens)
Posts: 7,564
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 4 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by The Engineer
I really love the drama here. Two people who have “actually” run the Comp XFI cam and say it’s good cam choice with a reasonable power band around 6500 (even with 355 cubes).

And then several e-experts here on the forum who have “never run” the XFI cam (probable never even known anyone with it), but are sure it is a rotten cam choice.

However, I don’t recall any of those e-experts being the LTX Shoot-Out this year and actualling out-running anyone, me in particular in N/A!

WD
Yes, because some of us don't have the means to make it to the Shoot Out, deems us incompetent. Great logic. Had I the money to travel for something like that, my car wouldn't be stock. But just like not being able to make it to the Shoot Out, having a stock car doesn't mean I don't know anything, just simply means I don't have the funds. Though I won't deny my cam knowledge is quite lacking, it just seemed pretty obvious that something that big would be pretty damn excessive on a stock motor, not to mention stock heads (which to me is unported).
Old 06-20-2008, 09:44 AM
  #18  
TECH Junkie
iTrader: (31)
 
96lt1m6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: LA$ VEGA$
Posts: 3,782
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts

Default

plain and simple the cam you have chosen is NOT the correct camshaft for the combination you have!
Old 06-20-2008, 11:50 AM
  #19  
TECH Enthusiast
iTrader: (22)
 
zigroid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: 18013
Posts: 713
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default

I have a similar cam going in to my car. its the XFI 242 intake lobe and an xtreme marine high lift 250* exhaust lobe. the seat to seat valve events are very similar to a GM847 (just much more aggressive lobes obviously). its also a stock headed 350. I specified I wanted a 4000-7000 rpm power band with stock heads. using a yank pt4000 stall, 4.10s, and about 150-200 lbs of weight reduction.
Old 06-20-2008, 11:56 AM
  #20  
TECH Veteran
 
BALLSS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 4,930
Received 95 Likes on 86 Posts

Default

I have the 466 in my 383 and shift at 6200.

for the author of this thread my $.02 is the XFI 465 would be better suited for his application if he wants a XFI grind.

what I have found is this cam grind wants "bee hive" springs.....as noted on it's cam card.


Quick Reply: ¿Cam to big for stock heads? 242 / 248, .584 / .579 113 LSA



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:59 AM.