I think I have decided what cam to go with OPINIONS
#1
Thread Starter
Tin Foil Hat Wearin' Fool
iTrader: (36)
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 23,204
Likes: 4
From: Austin, TX
I am going to be putting a 6L in the Z with some WCCH stage 2 heads like the ones that grippy has. I think Im goin to go with a 224/228 .580 .580 with a 110lsa. This is what Richard(WCCH) recommended me to go with. It is suppose to have a nice torque bubble at 3000 on up to about 5800. Im going for the race car idle and lots of torque. I dont need low down power cause of the 3000 stall. I will be shooting 150 wet shot on top of that. My cr will be 10 to 1. I would like some feedback on this cam selection and see if anyone thinks this will work for what I am shooting for. BTW the 110lsa is suppose to move the power curve down a little to a more useable rpm I beleive.
Thanks, Cody
Thanks, Cody
#3
I ALWAYS thought that the smaller the LSA the less usable torque down low. 110 is not bad but you need to spin it a little more to use all of its potential. But damn 110 is alot, never seen anyone with a 110 before. But I would say go for it.
#5
Thread Starter
Tin Foil Hat Wearin' Fool
iTrader: (36)
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 23,204
Likes: 4
From: Austin, TX
Yeah I know but I think Allen can handle it.
If he can make a 245 6L put out 441 after tuning I think he can handle it. Well the cam specs is what richard said would get my heavy *** truck moving and be good for the juice so I am going to talk to allen a little more and see what he says.
If he can make a 245 6L put out 441 after tuning I think he can handle it. Well the cam specs is what richard said would get my heavy *** truck moving and be good for the juice so I am going to talk to allen a little more and see what he says.
#6
Thread Starter
Tin Foil Hat Wearin' Fool
iTrader: (36)
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 23,204
Likes: 4
From: Austin, TX
Just talked to richard he said the reason for the 110 is to add more mid range torque to my power band. So it will create a torque bubble around 3000 and it will also move the powerband down a little lower so it will keep the power more where I need it.
#7
Just something to think about...
If I remember correctly, those heads flow near 85% of the intake. Bolt on a stub pipe and the crummy truck intake manifold and now you're looking at around 90%. This in my opinion, and many others results in a intake crutch in one form or another.
I think you'll benefit from a fast ramped intake lobe, slower ramped exhaust lobe. You can usually see this in max lift values.
If it were my setup, I would use a very slow ramped exhaust lobe and a quick intake lobe. Note that your heads intake flow doesn't give out until .575'' lift and your exhaust peaks around .5''... Again, if I remember Grip's flow sheets correctly.
What am I talking about? Just a few examples using the same sized intake lobes at .05'' valve lift.
1)224/220 .581/.564
2)224/222 .581/.566
3)224/224 .581/.568
4)224/226 .581/.570
5)224/228 .581/.572
The better the exhaust flow the less exhaust LOBE you will need.
If I remember correctly, those heads flow near 85% of the intake. Bolt on a stub pipe and the crummy truck intake manifold and now you're looking at around 90%. This in my opinion, and many others results in a intake crutch in one form or another.
I think you'll benefit from a fast ramped intake lobe, slower ramped exhaust lobe. You can usually see this in max lift values.
If it were my setup, I would use a very slow ramped exhaust lobe and a quick intake lobe. Note that your heads intake flow doesn't give out until .575'' lift and your exhaust peaks around .5''... Again, if I remember Grip's flow sheets correctly.
What am I talking about? Just a few examples using the same sized intake lobes at .05'' valve lift.
1)224/220 .581/.564
2)224/222 .581/.566
3)224/224 .581/.568
4)224/226 .581/.570
5)224/228 .581/.572
The better the exhaust flow the less exhaust LOBE you will need.


