Need dyno 206/212 .515/.522 112LSA in a 5.3
 

hey guys i'm looking at cams right now. Between comps 54-408-11 (206/212 .515/.522 112LSA) and the 54-412-11 (212/218 .522/.529)

Right now i think i'm leaning towards the 54-408-11 but i can't seem to find anyone who has run it. I want to see some dyno results and hear what people think about it.

for the 54-412-11 i found this https://www.performancetrucks.net/fo...d.php?t=435536
which is a great review of the cam but i want to see something like this for the 54-412-11

I really like the gains NicD saw on the topend but i spend most of my time below 3000 rpm. i want to gain bug on the low end from 1000-2500 rpm area but not give anything up on top.

right now i have truck manifolds without cats and might be moving to longtubes in the future.

what do you guys think about these cams, help me decide

Go with the 212/218, in a 5.3 it has a tendency to gain power everywhere.

You really need to get some long tube headers with that cam as you will probably only see about half the cams potential on stock manifolds. Plus get a custom tune / retune it since you have efilive.

X2.

i vote for the 212/218 as well, and def with a set of longtubes to go with it.

I've been running the 206/212 on a 114 in my dd for over 7 years now, and it was worth some good gains over stock, even on the stock converter. When I was on 33's, I swapped in the cam and had the PCM tuned for it, and went from 16.5@81.7mph to 15.6@89.5mph in the 1/4 mile. Not bad for a cam that absolutely everybody will tell you is too small. Even this baby cam can benefit from a higher stalled torque converter though, but it isn't necessary. I like my truck much more since I installed my FLT Level7 65E trans and Circle-D 3k converter. If I had to do it over again though, I'd probably go for the tried and true 212/218, probably just because I've had the 206/212 so long that I'd like something different. Actually, if I had the dough, I'd like to slap a TR220-112 in my 5.3 to hold me over until I can afford to put my LQ9 together :D

Also, FWIW, my fuel economy got better by about .5 mpg after the cam swap, if I can keep my foot out of it :lol:

Ur not going to find people dynoing such a baby cam. I ran 206/212 in my old 4.8 with longtubes,2600 converter, and 33s. It ran great for what it was. On a 5.3 I would definately do a 212/218 with some ls6 spring.

Thanks guys for the responces, it was just the push I needed to choose

I am looking at the 212/218 high lift for my lq4

I'd look bigger than that for a 6.0. Something like a 22x/22x @ .550/.550 - .590/.590

I like my gt2-3 cam in my lq4, I'm not convinced the big cams really gain all that much on a mild setup. Part throttle power is awesome. Yes bigger cams gain up top but you need power down low when you're cruising along in 4th with the tc locked. I can go up pretty much any hill with the tc locked and my tight converter makes for a great driving combo.

Know that the lift numbers are not the only difference between the two cams. The valve events are radically different between the "low-lift" and "high-lift" versions.

Personally, after reading quite a few threads on here between the two and seeing some dyno graphs, I'm convinced the low-lift version is still the better performer.

so I've been doing a lot of reading getting prepped for the swap and one of my main questions is if i have to remove the ac condenser or if i can just move it out of the way enough. i have a 3'' body lift if that makes any difference

No, don't even have to move it.

well i thought i had made my mind up and i kept going back and forth trying to make my choice. Today i ordered the xr259hr, rods and springs. I know almost everyone was pushing for the xr265hr but in the end i thought that for me since i spend most of my time in the lower rpms, that i would be more satisfied with a cam that provided more torque in my regular driving range.

i have a servo in my trans right now and an external cooler, should i do the transgo stage 2 shift kit right away or do you think i can wait a while before getting it?

let us know how you like it.

Honestly, I feel you would be happy with either of them. Let us know how it performs! :thumb:

You're going to like that cam, as I mentioned, it's a definite improvement over stock, and is totally stealthy. I drove mine for about 5 years on the stock torque converter too. You can hold off on the shift kit for a while, I never had one with mine, until my trans blew lol, but I ran the stock trans with 0 torque management for about 23k before it chucked.

Curious what springs you went with? Back when I got my cam, I was originally running Comp 915's (as per my pop's Comp rep's recommendation). I later swapped them out for the yellow LS6 springs that I'm currently running. If you went with Comp 918's, you may want to do some searching around here and on LS1Tech and see how many pics of broken 918's that you come up with...personally I'd never mess with them. LS6 springs are more than adequate for that cam, or if you want something that will allow for room to grow, I'd go with the PAC 1218's which have an excellent track record ;)

There was a magazine article a couple years ago comparing 6.0L cams - varying from very smallish ones all the way up to a 224/230 cam. The 210/218 Vinci cam outdid all the other cams in HP and TQ up to 4800 rpms.

I have a 222/226 600 in my LQ9, and it's noticeably soggier cruising on the highway than the stock cam. Part of that may be my tuning, I don't know, although I've spent literally hours fine tuning it with a wideband. That being said, it still pulls hills fine. I did get a chance to drive a stock 4WD ecsb 5.3 3.73s, and it definitely feels peppier off 0-1500 rpms than my truck does with the 4l80e.

I remember that article...I think that it may have been Car Craft...

that's the cam i have in my LQ4. the engine and cam have only been in a few days and still running on the old 5.3's 89 octane tune. seems nice, good pull up top with no fall-off after 5k rpm like the stock cam, kind of a soft spot at lower rpms even with the 3.2k stall but hopefully that will be fixed with the new tune.

for springs i was going to go with ls6 springs but i couldn't find then on lingenfelter's website so i called them up and they said the ls6 springs had been discontinued and replaced with ls9 springs, so that's what i'm going with.

i am currently running 0 TM, and i'm not sure if i'm going to do a shift kit or not

Well I got the cam in, i took my time and everything turned out great. Its a nice improvement over stock, the acceleration is awesome it climbs the rpm so fast now! I'm running it on my old tune and so far it looks like fuel is only off by a little bit in the lower rpms. I did bring my idle rpm up to 600 rpm, it was loping pretty hard at 525 rpm and spark was spinning all over the place. At 600 rpm the spark is a lot more smoother. I haven't really rapped out the motor yet so i don't know what the fueling is like up top.

loping sound clip:

‪206/212 .515/.522 112 lsa in 5.3‬‏ - YouTube

Just an update, i'm loving this cam i'm very pleased with it. Ran it in the 1/4 on a nasty hot and humid night and it ran a consistent 16.2 on a 89 octane tune. Will be taking it back when a cooler night shows up & will run my 93 octane tune and see what happens.

Sounds good..I plan on a similar cam for the 5.3 going in the jeep :)

did u ever run the truck before the cam swap?

unfortunately i never did, i'm not very impressed with the times but its been so crazy hot here lately 100* with 95% humidity :eek2:

UPDATE:
on 10/08/11 it ran 15.599 at 90.3 on a 91 octane tune