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

Cam Suggestions

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Sep 27, 2008 | 12:05 AM
  #21  
7845's Avatar
Banned
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 781
Likes: 1
Default

Originally Posted by bluecajun5.3
for what he's looking for, his truck needs it's powerband to be mostly in the mid range for it to pull hard. his converter is plenty enough to take care of the bottom end. why have a cam that only pulls way up top when the aerodynamics have already taken over?

there is no need to explain myself anymore.
just stop reading all the hype and dyno #'s on ls1tech.
im speaking experience. he has a 3600 so he has the stall to use with the larger cam. the MS4 makes more power then the one he has now.

ok then explain why the RGV guys are big cammed, big gear and big converter and are probably the fastest around and making the most power? cause it works and has always worked.
Reply
Old Sep 27, 2008 | 12:08 AM
  #22  
InchUp's Avatar
TECH Resident
iTrader: (2)
 
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 939
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by GMCtrk
I'm calling bullshit on this. A 1976 454 Sierra beating a cammed LS1 camaro?
There's no replacement for CFM. Learn this one day and you'll be for the better.

PM me if you'd like me to elaborate more on the Sierra. I'm not going to wh0re up this thread any further.
Reply
Old Sep 27, 2008 | 12:10 AM
  #23  
7845's Avatar
Banned
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 781
Likes: 1
Default

Originally Posted by InchUp
There's no replacement for CFM. Learn this one day and you'll be for the better.

PM me if you'd like me to elaborate more on the Sierra. I'm not going to wh0re up this thread any further.
CFM works yes. but not all 454 flow. plenty of small blocks flow more then the old pigblocks
Reply
Old Sep 27, 2008 | 01:22 AM
  #24  
artypyro's Avatar
12 Second Club
iTrader: (4)
 
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 77
Likes: 0
From: missouri
Default

i've heard a lot of good things about the g5x3 v2. curios as to how well it would do
Reply
Old Sep 27, 2008 | 10:10 AM
  #25  
Grumpy5.3's Avatar
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (14)
 
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 1,014
Likes: 0
From: South Georgia
Default

Originally Posted by bluecajun5.3
for what he's looking for, his truck needs it's powerband to be mostly in the mid range for it to pull hard. his converter is plenty enough to take care of the bottom end. why have a cam that only pulls way up top when the aerodynamics have already taken over?

there is no need to explain myself anymore.
just stop reading all the hype and dyno #'s on ls1tech.

This man knows his stuff. He did get his blue brick to run 12.5x NA.

With a TR220...... not a big cam at all. MS4 may work well in a camaro, but not a heavy *** truck
Reply
Old Sep 27, 2008 | 10:32 AM
  #26  
TXsilverado's Avatar
Moderator
20 Year Member
Loved
Liked
Community Favorite
iTrader: (19)
 
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 18,364
Likes: 291
From: Humble Texas
Default

my only input will be if you decide to go with the MS4 dont try to use the .040 cometics. there will be piston to valve clearence issues. i think a stock mls gasket might work with the 243's and ms4.

i actually want to try the ms3 in my truck one day just as an experiment. i want to see exactly it will effect my 60' times and 1/4 times. i know the daily drivability will drop but my truck isnt exactly daily driven anymore. it will still be streetable but will have some NAAAASTY top end. the ms3 and ms4 cams are loaded with power. i wanted to try the ms4 but im not pulling my heads to do gaskets for a slightly better cam.
Reply
Old Sep 27, 2008 | 11:16 AM
  #27  
rgvsierra's Avatar
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (7)
 
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,482
Likes: 0
From: RGV, Texas
Default

i'd do a ms3, there is no loss in low end at the track with the right converter.
Reply
Old Sep 27, 2008 | 11:20 AM
  #28  
StrokerAce03's Avatar
TECH Addict
iTrader: (7)
 
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 2,844
Likes: 1
From: Georgia
Default

If you don't want to go as big as the MS3 you could also look into the MTI X1.
Reply
Old Sep 27, 2008 | 11:57 AM
  #29  
the_husk's Avatar
On The Tree
 
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 158
Likes: 0
From: Kansas/North Dakota
Default

Originally Posted by 7845
ever driven a Trex car? ever raced one?
ever driven a Ms4 car? ever raced one?
you dont see any fast LS cars with low rpm bands and tiny cams.

Torque gets you going HP finishes the work.

just take a look on TSP or thunders site. see the results for the big dawg cams. then look on tech at the fastest car lists and see whos running what

if you say thats cars then look at the trucks from RGV all the big hitters are running what i just spoke of. gears, converter and big cams. its proven over and over again. racing been around for decades all fast rides run large converters, steep gears and large cams.
Bull ****. If you look and or research this, there are MULTIPLE cam only cars running low 11's with a 220/220 cam, or even a little 224/224 cam, thats with almost stock tuning, no need for large gears or any of that, plus a lot easier to drive around town. To the op, since you have the stall for it, that is a nice cam, and responds VERY well to nitrous if you run that.
Reply
Old Sep 27, 2008 | 12:17 PM
  #30  
7845's Avatar
Banned
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 781
Likes: 1
Default

Originally Posted by the_husk
Bull ****. If you look and or research this, there are MULTIPLE cam only cars running low 11's with a 220/220 cam, or even a little 224/224 cam, thats with almost stock tuning, no need for large gears or any of that, plus a lot easier to drive around town. To the op, since you have the stall for it, that is a nice cam, and responds VERY well to nitrous if you run that.
Ok bud, your right I guess the large cams dont make power or good times and we all should run the small cams cause thats were the power lies.. o and on top of stock tuning.. wow i guess having a tune doesnt help either
Reply



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