that 216-220 is also a cam that is being used by a couple a people that are f/i as well.

 

Reviving this old thread, because I am trying to decide between these exact two cams (212/218 low-lift v. 216/220). I see a lot of people recommending the 212/218 and the TR220 for a 5.3, so it seems like the 216/220 is a great compromise between the two, and it makes its power from 1300 RPM (just barely more than the 1200 RPM at which the 212/218 low-lift begins making power).

With my Tahoe being only 2WD, will I not lose as much low-end going with the 216/220 as would a 4X4?

I am trying to keep this daily driver emissions-friendly and with relatively quiet valvetrain noise (a low-lift cam that uses LS6 springs). My performance mods are in my sig - all the usual bolt-ons.

Stock stall for now, although I will likely upgrade to a Circle D 2600-3000 (tow-capable) stall at some point. 3.23 gears for now, but going to upgrade to 4.10 or 4.30 with Truetrac at some point when I add 33s. I will also be getting a Blackbear or Wheatley tune after my cam is installed. I have no plans to go with FI - just a fast normally-aspirated truck.

Thanks for any ideas!

 

I love the way my truck feels with the 212/218 low lift and the Circle D TB reworked stall its so much fun to drive around it also lopes very nice with the borla xr-1 catless very DD freindly I will try and see if I can get some videos soon so you can get a better idea of what I mean yesterday me and Wheatley were out retuning my truck and its feels great thanks for the great tune Charlie.

 

anxious to see vids...

 

Unless your spraying 90% of the time or more, which you wont be, you dont need a "nitrous" cam....

The 216/220 is a great cam...

 

LOL, you just answered a question that someone asked four years ago

 

damn old thread, i used to run a 216/220 cam. ran damn good

 

What was your set-up when you were running it? 5.3L? Stall? Gears? Tire height? Tune?

I'm curious about the low-end loss, if any, since the 216/220 seems to start making power 100 RPMs above where the tried and true 212/218 low-lift starts making power, but still a few hundred less than where the TR220 starts making power.

Thanks!

 

Joshua (visciousknid) is running the 216/220, and I think that 00ChevyScott used to run it also. I was considering that cam for my LQ9 actually, but I ended up going with the Vinci trucker (216/224 .551 115)

 

Im pretty sure Scott said the 228/228 has just as good of low end as the 216/220. What you guys aren't taking into account is the fact that the 216/220 has lazy lobes compared to some other cams. The de facto 5.3 cam...the most proven 5.3 cam is the tr220. I think you'd be hardpressed to outdo it throughout the rpm range