GMT 900 Trucks General Discussion 2007 - 2013 Trucks | General Discussion

Been a while, new truck...again.

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Feb 2, 2013 | 01:58 PM
  #21  
NKPPhil's Avatar
TECH Fanatic
 
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,074
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by 1slow01Z71

Bang for the buck its hard to argue, but to me its not so much the cost of the actual cam but the labor to put it in.
I agree, and it also makes a difference what's important to the guy driving the truck. If you like quick throttle response and major instant torque in daily driving you might care a little less about the extra hp above 4K. If you care more about max-rpm performance and 1/4 mile times, and your truck (converter, etc.) is built around that, you'd make a different cam choice.
Reply
Old Feb 2, 2013 | 07:47 PM
  #22  
1slow01Z71's Avatar
Tin Foil Hat Wearin' Fool
iTrader: (36)
 
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 23,204
Likes: 4
From: Austin, TX
Default

Exactly, it all depends on what you expect out of the cam youre installing. Many are interested in WOT performance, maybe in my old age Ive gotten boring but I want more performance down low where I spend most of my time. Even WOT there are better cams than the LS9, theyre just more expensive and require better springs. All depends on your budget and expectations.
Reply
Old Feb 3, 2013 | 09:14 PM
  #23  
OrangeChevyII's Avatar
Thread Starter
TECH Enthusiast
 
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 637
Likes: 0
From: Dallas
Default

My end results were possitive. It went quicker and faster in the 1/4 vs the bolt ons and stock cam. As far as the 60ft, it spun either way. Never put a sticky tire on it.
Reply
Old Feb 4, 2013 | 10:24 AM
  #24  
Area47's Avatar
TECH Fanatic
 
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,737
Likes: 0
From: K.C.
Default

majority of it came from a better calibration. the ls9 cam was a horrific waste of money and time in the truck.
Reply
Old Feb 4, 2013 | 10:34 PM
  #25  
OrangeChevyII's Avatar
Thread Starter
TECH Enthusiast
 
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 637
Likes: 0
From: Dallas
Default

We will agree to disagree.
Reply
Old Feb 5, 2013 | 09:45 AM
  #26  
TECH Enthusiast
iTrader: (13)
 
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 503
Likes: 0
From: Rowlett,Tx
Default

Originally Posted by Area47
majority of it came from a better calibration. the ls9 cam was a horrific waste of money and time in the truck.
Both combinations were properly calibrated.
Reply
Old Feb 5, 2013 | 09:52 AM
  #27  
Area47's Avatar
TECH Fanatic
 
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,737
Likes: 0
From: K.C.
Default

yea, the ls9 is a super cam for a 5k+ truck. makes a boat load of torque that really helps the truck moving off idle to 3k. not to mention the increase in mpg.

...........

/sarcasm.
Reply
Old Feb 5, 2013 | 10:33 AM
  #28  
TECH Enthusiast
iTrader: (13)
 
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 503
Likes: 0
From: Rowlett,Tx
Default

Originally Posted by Area47
yea, the ls9 is a super cam for a 5k+ truck. makes a boat load of torque that really helps the truck moving off idle to 3k. not to mention the increase in mpg.

...........

/sarcasm.
Sounds like you had a programming issue not a ls9 cam issue.
Reply
Old Feb 5, 2013 | 10:56 AM
  #29  
Area47's Avatar
TECH Fanatic
 
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,737
Likes: 0
From: K.C.
Default

im sorry im not a self proclaimed elitest. mechanical changes in the engines ve and air flow characteristics can not be over come by a "programming" issue. anyone who remotely knows something about an internal combustion engine knows this.

there is more indicators in the logs themselves that show the cam is crap in a truck application.

that is fine. keep your dreams alive.
Reply
Old Feb 5, 2013 | 11:20 AM
  #30  
iamkeniff's Avatar
Moderator
iTrader: (16)
 
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 5,365
Likes: 3
From: Gonzales, la
Default

Can i race that LS9 cam
Reply



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:29 AM.