Comp 212/218 or 216/220?
12-11-2009, 02:47 PM
#12
On The Tree
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 146
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Reviving this old thread, because I am trying to decide between these exact two cams (212/218 low-lift v. 216/220). I see a lot of people recommending the 212/218 and the TR220 for a 5.3, so it seems like the 216/220 is a great compromise between the two, and it makes its power from 1300 RPM (just barely more than the 1200 RPM at which the 212/218 low-lift begins making power).
With my Tahoe being only 2WD, will I not lose as much low-end going with the 216/220 as would a 4X4?
I am trying to keep this daily driver emissions-friendly and with relatively quiet valvetrain noise (a low-lift cam that uses LS6 springs). My performance mods are in my sig - all the usual bolt-ons.
Stock stall for now, although I will likely upgrade to a Circle D 2600-3000 (tow-capable) stall at some point. 3.23 gears for now, but going to upgrade to 4.10 or 4.30 with Truetrac at some point when I add 33s. I will also be getting a Blackbear or Wheatley tune after my cam is installed. I have no plans to go with FI - just a fast normally-aspirated truck.
Thanks for any ideas!
With my Tahoe being only 2WD, will I not lose as much low-end going with the 216/220 as would a 4X4?
I am trying to keep this daily driver emissions-friendly and with relatively quiet valvetrain noise (a low-lift cam that uses LS6 springs). My performance mods are in my sig - all the usual bolt-ons.
Stock stall for now, although I will likely upgrade to a Circle D 2600-3000 (tow-capable) stall at some point. 3.23 gears for now, but going to upgrade to 4.10 or 4.30 with Truetrac at some point when I add 33s. I will also be getting a Blackbear or Wheatley tune after my cam is installed. I have no plans to go with FI - just a fast normally-aspirated truck.
Thanks for any ideas!
12-11-2009, 03:22 PM
#13
I love the way my truck feels with the 212/218 low lift and the Circle D TB reworked stall its so much fun to drive around it also lopes very nice with the borla xr-1 catless very DD freindly I will try and see if I can get some videos soon so you can get a better idea of what I mean yesterday me and Wheatley were out retuning my truck and its feels great thanks for the great tune Charlie.
12-11-2009, 06:11 PM
#14
Staging Lane
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: May 2007
Location: San Antonio, Tx
Posts: 95
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I love the way my truck feels with the 212/218 low lift and the Circle D TB reworked stall its so much fun to drive around it also lopes very nice with the borla xr-1 catless very DD freindly I will try and see if I can get some videos soon so you can get a better idea of what I mean yesterday me and Wheatley were out retuning my truck and its feels great thanks for the great tune Charlie.
12-11-2009, 10:59 PM
#18
On The Tree
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 146
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What was your set-up when you were running it? 5.3L? Stall? Gears? Tire height? Tune?
I'm curious about the low-end loss, if any, since the 216/220 seems to start making power 100 RPMs above where the tried and true 212/218 low-lift starts making power, but still a few hundred less than where the TR220 starts making power.
Thanks!
I'm curious about the low-end loss, if any, since the 216/220 seems to start making power 100 RPMs above where the tried and true 212/218 low-lift starts making power, but still a few hundred less than where the TR220 starts making power.
Thanks!
12-11-2009, 11:13 PM
#20
Im pretty sure Scott said the 228/228 has just as good of low end as the 216/220. What you guys aren't taking into account is the fact that the 216/220 has lazy lobes compared to some other cams. The de facto 5.3 cam...the most proven 5.3 cam is the tr220. I think you'd be hardpressed to outdo it throughout the rpm range