osolow

iTrader: (3)

I have a 05 ecsb chevy 1500 2wd 5.3. I have long tubes, 3200 stall, proted tb, 4.10 gears, and soon a 100-125 shot of go go juice.

Witch cam would be better for my setup?

Texas speed 220
220/220 .581/.581
or
thunder racing 220
220/220 .551/.551

Also should i get it on a 112 or 114 lsa?

Daily driven truck. I don't want to kill my gas milage.

Jake99

iTrader: (5)

The Tsp 220 cam will make more power and wont really throw your powerband up much at all. And go with th 112lsa that way the power band will come in a bit sooner.

03 BLACKOUTSSS

iTrader: (3)

The 114 lsa will be better on gas...I think.

budhayes3

iTrader: (19)

I've been curious about this for a long time...both cams use proven lobes, XER for TSP, and their own proprietary lobes for TR. Guys with TR cams have put up some great numbers, and seem to work really well in 5.3's with stock heads. It makes me wonder if the higher lift of the TSP cam is wasted on stock 5.3 heads...but if you ever plan to get your heads worked the extra lift may be beneficial. One thing that I noticed when looking at the flow numbers for their StageII 317's on WCCH's site, they seemed to have the fattest numbers between .550 and .575 lift. Granted this is a different head than the 5.3, and this is WCCH's CNC program (port jobs from other vendors may and probably do flow differently), but it was something that I noticed a long time ago. I'd like to see the same engine dyno'd with both cams back to back to see how different or similar they are...like to see them up against each other at the track. I'm sure that the results would be close...

jrmchevyman

Both are good cams imo I would go with the TSP for the little extra lift. I went with the TSP 220 112lsa.

Between 112lsa and 114lsa on the same exact cam it won't be that much difference but the 112lsa will sound a tad more lopey. If you cannot decide on 112 vs 114 split the difference and go with a 113lsa..

osolow

iTrader: (3)

What kind of #s are you putting down or what does it run at the track?

Sales2@Texas-speed

iTrader: (5)

Definitely not! The stock 5.3L heads flow a bit past .600" before even thinking about going turbulent....that extra lift definitely helps!

Robert91RS

iTrader: (2)

Nice to see you weigh in on this. Do you have any dyno info for the 5.3 and the cams in question sir?

fortplainman

in for the info as well. this is a great comparison thread between 2 proven cams.

budhayes3

iTrader: (19)

Thanks for the info Matt, I wasn't sure...I would imagine that it would help even more on a set of CNC'd heads?

Could you explain, or point me to a link (I know that you're a busy guy ) about "going turbulent" as you mentioned, and it's affect on performance? Thanks man!