Have you noticed...
10-08-2008, 09:58 PM
#14
TECH Addict
iTrader: (10)
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Way out there
Posts: 2,199
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The wide LSA will flatten out the torque at the expense of the bottom and top output. The stock truck engine has a low static compression ratio, it needs some advance on those cams to bump up the low speed torque (115 +5), but that costs the top end. It depends if you are shooting for 300ft lbs from 2000-5000 or 350ft lbs at 3000 or 350ft lbs at 6000.
10-08-2008, 10:19 PM
#15
Best I can do without going and making another one.
http://videos.streetfire.net/video/B...4wd_163032.htm
http://videos.streetfire.net/video/B...4wd_163032.htm
10-09-2008, 08:32 AM
#18
I'm going to throw my 2 cents in. I believe this to be mostly designed around idle quality and low speed operation (towing, rock crawling, idling for long periods of time). Fact of the matter we can see who pisses longer all day long on here but moving a cam from a 112LSA to a 118LSA will move peak flywheel torque and hp at most 8 ft lbs and 5 HP. Unless this is an engine masters challenge, it's not worth going to the 112 LSA. I'd rather have the flatter, broader curve than the shorter, peakier curve. Other benefits of the wider LSA is more cylinder pressure, less intake port reversion (keeps intake temps down) and it's easier on motor mounts. For all the donkey dick cam lovers, that so called "Awesome Lope" you're all after is the engine back firing into your intake manifold. Wow, that's cool to have hot air fuel mix spit back into the intake manifold. 
10-09-2008, 04:06 PM
#19
I'm going to throw my 2 cents in. I believe this to be mostly designed around idle quality and low speed operation (towing, rock crawling, idling for long periods of time). Fact of the matter we can see who pisses longer all day long on here but moving a cam from a 112LSA to a 118LSA will move peak flywheel torque and hp at most 8 ft lbs and 5 HP. Unless this is an engine masters challenge, it's not worth going to the 112 LSA. I'd rather have the flatter, broader curve than the shorter, peakier curve. Other benefits of the wider LSA is more cylinder pressure, less intake port reversion (keeps intake temps down) and it's easier on motor mounts. For all the donkey dick cam lovers, that so called "Awesome Lope" you're all after is the engine back firing into your intake manifold. Wow, that's cool to have hot air fuel mix spit back into the intake manifold.
Regarding your love for the BBC, I think it's time you get a diesel and quit complaining. The LSX engines simply do not make torque down low like a SBC, let alone a BBC. It is something in their inherent engineering that is beyond my knowledge. I will be the first to admit that the low end of the 6.0 really dissapointed me, and that was coming from a 4.8. Under 2000, it really isn't much different, which was surprising. Finally, regarding your switch to a 408 stroker or the likes, I wouldn't do it. There's one thread you may want to dig up, where the OP states that he felt the low end on his 408 was weak (coming from a 6.0 magnacharged I believe) "I thought 408's made monster torque?"
10-09-2008, 08:03 PM
#20
Enter the TR224, well put as the "quintessential cam for the 346." It's often regarded as the greatest cam ever made for the LS1. So it would be even milder in the 6.0. The way I see it is that the low end with this cam is going to be no worse than stock. In fact, most say the low end is better, and the top end is hellacious.
(BTW, I'm planning on a 220/224 .551/.551 114 with a Yank TT3000 if I can ever afford to get this build off the ground, although I've changed my mind about the cam about 100 times so far lol)