INTERNAL ENGINE MODIFICATIONS Valvetrain |Heads | Strokers | Design | Assembly

212/218 hi lift in a stock 5.3

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 08-21-2009, 12:20 AM
  #11  
TECH Addict
iTrader: (14)
 
Coban's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: League City, TX
Posts: 2,130
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Yea, it was the very first mod I did. Even before my Air-Raid MIT, and true-flo filter.

I'll admit, it was much more fun when I had 4.10s. Its harder to tell any difference with the 3.23.

I had 3.42 and G80, 4.10 and tru-track, and now run with 3.23 and tru-track. Loads up the turbo very well... But before the turbo I ran all three ways NA.
Old 08-21-2009, 03:42 AM
  #12  
12 Second Club
iTrader: (2)
 
AdioSS's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: East Texas 75707
Posts: 675
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

The reason I ask is my truck also has 3.23s and a stock converter. I know how much steep gears and a good converter can help performance. I actually like the fuel economy that my truck gets. I'd like for it to get better instead of worse. Gears would hurt mileage everywhere, and a converter would hurt it around town. A cam swap could actually help fuel economy IF it is conservative enough.

I'd rather swap to a 6L80 (to get a MUCH steeper 1st and 2nd gear) than swap gears and converter. But that is a long ways out.
Old 08-21-2009, 08:12 AM
  #13  
TECH Addict
iTrader: (14)
 
Coban's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: League City, TX
Posts: 2,130
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

With 3.42's and 3.23's, any loss of low end is amplified. I can't say that I lost any with this cam.

Here's my deal, I got a tune and thats when my mileage took a turn for the worse. I got the cam after and it stayed the same.

I know a lot more about tuning now. The quest for mileage is one of the reasons I am going back NA. I feel like I will be able to get my original mileage. I doubt it would get better though...
NA and 4.10 mileage = turbo and 3.23 mileage

I wish the 6l80e electronics were figured out. I would love to have that unit.
Old 08-21-2009, 08:30 AM
  #14  
TECH Resident
iTrader: (8)
 
philntx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: DFW
Posts: 796
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

OP, I have that same cam in my truck. I'm using late version 918 springs. No problems at all. It pulls pretty good.

However, I can't really provide low end comparisons to your truck due to the mods on mine.
Old 08-22-2009, 02:45 PM
  #15  
no title here
Thread Starter
iTrader: (8)
 
skyhighsami's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Montgomery, AL
Posts: 2,352
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Default

I am guessing since this cam is so mild it would be OK with stock TC and stock manifolds. I understand it would make more power with aftermarket but I was thinking something that would help the truck get out of the hole. Maybe a torque converter would suit my needs better. I could have the tranny built and TC put in before the LS2 goes in.
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
5.3Okasai
Trucks and SUV Classifieds
15
03-09-2022 01:07 PM
thunder550
Trucks and SUV Classifieds
9
10-08-2015 04:53 PM
steves86ta
GM Engine & Exhaust Performance
5
07-28-2015 10:21 AM
Choda
MULTIMEDIA (truck related)
9
07-21-2015 03:47 PM
bk_cauley
GMT K2xx Trucks General Discussion
5
07-19-2015 09:56 PM



Quick Reply: 212/218 hi lift in a stock 5.3



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:23 AM.