tr220
#1
Thread Starter
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 5,861
Likes: 0
From: Breaux Bridge, LA
hey fellas!
i'm looking into getting a cam for my truck soon. i was leaning towards the comp. 212/218 or the 216/220 until i seen what quickenough put down on the dyno's with his tr220. does anyone else have this cam with similar setup that i have? and what kind of gas mileage do yall get? i also plan on putting a stall between 2600 & 3000. thanks guys
i'm looking into getting a cam for my truck soon. i was leaning towards the comp. 212/218 or the 216/220 until i seen what quickenough put down on the dyno's with his tr220. does anyone else have this cam with similar setup that i have? and what kind of gas mileage do yall get? i also plan on putting a stall between 2600 & 3000. thanks guys
#2
The RCSB guys seem to really love this cam. I think it'll be especially good with your 4.10's and mild stall.
I ran a TR220 112 in my truck when it was near stock. Drop in filter, plugs, wires, and cat-back exhaust. And my own backyard tuning.
It had a very linear feeling powerband. The more you revved it, the harder it pulled. By SOTP, it lost some power over stock, up until about 2,200rpm or so. (highway speeds for me). It pulled hard hard hard up over 4,000rpm. Really put you back in the seat.
Some days I miss it... but it wasn't an optimal setup for me and my 50 miles of daily backroad commuting in my heavier truck on a stock stall.
I ran a TR220 112 in my truck when it was near stock. Drop in filter, plugs, wires, and cat-back exhaust. And my own backyard tuning.
It had a very linear feeling powerband. The more you revved it, the harder it pulled. By SOTP, it lost some power over stock, up until about 2,200rpm or so. (highway speeds for me). It pulled hard hard hard up over 4,000rpm. Really put you back in the seat.
Some days I miss it... but it wasn't an optimal setup for me and my 50 miles of daily backroad commuting in my heavier truck on a stock stall.
#3
i have the cam,bought it from marc_w, also tried the 216 220 too, i would go with the 220 and not look back, i'm now running a 3000 stall and have all the other bolt ons, which makes it really nice to drive now, i dont like driving my wifes car anymore. with proper tuning it shouldent be a problem, i ocasionally have problems with it stalling, but it dont bother me, cant tell you about gas mileage , i never check it, but it does seem to waste a little more.
#5
Originally Posted by gonzo 6.0
What ever cam you get make sure the lift is .550 or above, it's free HP with out the sacrifice elsewhere if you are using good springs.220 duration on a 114Lc is good
#6
If I had it to do over again i would go 220/560,the comp cam I used was almost new and was $200 and with bluestriped Ls6 springs it was a cheap combo.For the price of a new cam you have a choice to gain say .025 on each valve multiply that by 16 valves,thats a lot of HP/lift your getting without loosing bottom end or driveability.Just need matched springs.I believe if you go much past that lift you start taking chances on valvetrain wear and noise and valve guides and seals.For me dependability if first,driveability second performance third and mileage staying up.My combo has done all of that knock on wood for about 40k miles.Never one hicup.
#7
It's actually not that much power....Think about how long the intake valve stays kept @ that much lift. Adding exhaust lobe wont necessarily help out. Especially, with the amount of exhaust lobe most of you already use with your free-flowing exhaust.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
marc_w
GM Engine & Exhaust Performance
20
Aug 8, 2004 12:20 PM




