...and the cam was desinged with the low intake/exhaust flow ratio of the L92's. Rectangular port cams have a ton more seperation between in/ex duration.

Rick

 

Wide LSA cams suck, no low/midrange. That cam will make good power but its a little lacking and not so great for a cathedral head.

 

I would do something like a 216/228 on a 115lsa +2
Or even a 116lsa if you wan a real smooth idle

 

The L92 heads are tempting.

 

I was unable to find the valve opening and closing on this cam, however I believe it is close to the LS7 cam. Despite the LS7 cam having an LSA of 120 the actual duration at 0.004 lift was 277 and 295. Based on that information the overlap was 43 degrees. The most recent article in Hot Rod on the LS9 bragged about a reduction of Overlap by 30 percent which was probably accomplished partially by the increase in LSA to 122.5 which should bring the LS9 camshaft overlap to around 30 degrees. As long as there is some overlap until the full valve closings, even though it is low, Im going to try this out especially with FI. Thanks for all your input!

PS, the valve overlap on my old XR265HR was only 40 degrees at 0.006 lift.

 

We'll the cam is in now and the idle is silky smooth - The engine still has to break in before I can give a good prognosis. So far there does not seem to be any drop in power levels off idle. I can bring the idle down to 550-600. I did notice that the huge exhaust duration is very sweet sounding.

 

 

In for results

 

Digging up an old thread....

What was the end result with the LS9 cam?

 

The CAM is not bad. I have the idle down to 550/600. I could not go that low on my 212-218. Naturally aspirated it is not bad just like a non supercharged corvette. With forced induction it pulls real good. If you want more performance with natural aspiration then go with a CAM that has a smaller LSA. I have no regrets going this route and I will also be upgrading to the L92's in the future and switching to a turbo. It comes down to Your Goals.