Tick Performance exaggerated performance claims
Oct 26, 2021 | 02:32 PM
#26
Good customers get good customer service, but I won't jump on the OP bash wagon. I know there are "100hp kits" out there, my truck is living proof of that. I think he just needs to supply us more data so we can see where the power is hiding. Be it tune or hard parts
Oct 26, 2021 | 04:44 PM
#27
Thread Starter
Teching In
Joined: Oct 2021
Posts: 14
Likes: 2
Thanks arthursc2. My goal was to be as factual as possible about my experience with Tick so that others would be aware. If anyone can help me make better numbers, using my current setup, I'm happy to listen. Let me see if I can address a few of the issues folks have raised; they seem to fall into a few categories:
1. My expectations were unrealistic.
Yes, I'm well aware it's a 4.8 and that's the smallest LS, but this cam is specifically designed for the 4.8 and 5.3. See: https://www.tickperformance.com/tick...4-lq9-engines/ So, no, I was not expecting 100hp gains. I was expecting what Tick said to expect: 45-55RWTQ and 30-40RWHP. In fact, given that it's a 4.8, I was only expecting the low end of the range Tick was claiming, or at least within a few digits of it. But my numbers (13Tq and 23Hp gained) don't even come close to the low end of Tick's advertised range--especially torque. And keep in mind this cam is specifically marketed as a Towing and torque cam.
2. I have the wrong parts to make the numbers that Tick said I should expect.
Sure, other parts would help make more power. But the point is that, when I was considering whether to buy the cam, I told the Tick tech guy what parts my truck had and he confirmed that I could expect to see the gains posted on their website. Only after I had such lackluster results, and I called Tick about it, did they bring up the need for long tube headers. If that's what's needed to make the numbers they are claiming, then they should be clear about that on their website. The phrase "in a well-optimized setup" can mean a lot of things to a lot of people. I told Tick what my setup was before I bought this cam--they confirmed that I should expect the gains they had posted.
3. The tune is to blame.
Thanks for the suggestion about asking for the tune. I'll do that and post it here when I get it. Believe me, I would love it if someone can look at the tune and figure out how to get more gains, especially torque.
4. You need more info about my truck's modifications. It's a 2004 4.8, 118k miles, I run only 92 octane. Modifications: K&N cold air intake and K&N cone filter, custom dual exhaust with dual hi-flow cats, x-pipe, Flowmasters, a Flex-A-Lite electric fan conversion, and freshly-rebuilt 706 heads and iridium spark plugs installed at the same time as cam swap. Other than that, all stock. Also, someone mentioned possible cooler air temp differences between April (when I did the "before" run) and July (when I did the "after" run). I don't think that's a factor, because when the tuner did the July "after" test he got the best pull that he could at the end of the day, then he left the truck strapped to the dyno overnight, and did another pull first thing the next morning when the air was probably 20 degrees cooler. No change in the numbers. Lastly, someone gave me a hard time for waiting three months to post this, yet someone else gave me a hard time for going off of just dyno numbers and not real world conditions. The reason I waited three months is I wanted to drive the truck and take the time to get a good feel for what it was like in real world conditions. It feels exactly as it did before the cam swap, with just a little more hit around 5k, just as the dyno sheet shows.
5. A couple people commented that I should have been more skeptical about Tick's claims, they're salesmen after all.
That point I won't argue with. Hopefully others can learn from my experience.
1. My expectations were unrealistic.
Yes, I'm well aware it's a 4.8 and that's the smallest LS, but this cam is specifically designed for the 4.8 and 5.3. See: https://www.tickperformance.com/tick...4-lq9-engines/ So, no, I was not expecting 100hp gains. I was expecting what Tick said to expect: 45-55RWTQ and 30-40RWHP. In fact, given that it's a 4.8, I was only expecting the low end of the range Tick was claiming, or at least within a few digits of it. But my numbers (13Tq and 23Hp gained) don't even come close to the low end of Tick's advertised range--especially torque. And keep in mind this cam is specifically marketed as a Towing and torque cam.
2. I have the wrong parts to make the numbers that Tick said I should expect.
Sure, other parts would help make more power. But the point is that, when I was considering whether to buy the cam, I told the Tick tech guy what parts my truck had and he confirmed that I could expect to see the gains posted on their website. Only after I had such lackluster results, and I called Tick about it, did they bring up the need for long tube headers. If that's what's needed to make the numbers they are claiming, then they should be clear about that on their website. The phrase "in a well-optimized setup" can mean a lot of things to a lot of people. I told Tick what my setup was before I bought this cam--they confirmed that I should expect the gains they had posted.
3. The tune is to blame.
Thanks for the suggestion about asking for the tune. I'll do that and post it here when I get it. Believe me, I would love it if someone can look at the tune and figure out how to get more gains, especially torque.
4. You need more info about my truck's modifications. It's a 2004 4.8, 118k miles, I run only 92 octane. Modifications: K&N cold air intake and K&N cone filter, custom dual exhaust with dual hi-flow cats, x-pipe, Flowmasters, a Flex-A-Lite electric fan conversion, and freshly-rebuilt 706 heads and iridium spark plugs installed at the same time as cam swap. Other than that, all stock. Also, someone mentioned possible cooler air temp differences between April (when I did the "before" run) and July (when I did the "after" run). I don't think that's a factor, because when the tuner did the July "after" test he got the best pull that he could at the end of the day, then he left the truck strapped to the dyno overnight, and did another pull first thing the next morning when the air was probably 20 degrees cooler. No change in the numbers. Lastly, someone gave me a hard time for waiting three months to post this, yet someone else gave me a hard time for going off of just dyno numbers and not real world conditions. The reason I waited three months is I wanted to drive the truck and take the time to get a good feel for what it was like in real world conditions. It feels exactly as it did before the cam swap, with just a little more hit around 5k, just as the dyno sheet shows.
5. A couple people commented that I should have been more skeptical about Tick's claims, they're salesmen after all.
That point I won't argue with. Hopefully others can learn from my experience.
Oct 26, 2021 | 06:14 PM
#30
100% Redneck
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,098
Likes: 1,344
From: MAGA COUNTRY
With buying expensive hotrod parts, plus "I spared no expense on the install process" and dyno tuning fees...
Hotrodding can be a "scary" adventure even to the alpha male with high doses of toxic masculinity.
even me, "mr cool" I sometimes wonder why I love this expensive wallet draining hobby so much...
is it my quality wrenching, super body & painting skillz or my ******* awesomeness behind the wheel???
yes, yes & yes
Hotrodding can be a "scary" adventure even to the alpha male with high doses of toxic masculinity.
even me, "mr cool" I sometimes wonder why I love this expensive wallet draining hobby so much...
is it my quality wrenching, super body & painting skillz or my ******* awesomeness behind the wheel???
yes, yes & yes
