GM Engine & Exhaust Performance EFI | GEN I/GEN II/GEN III/GEN IV Engines |Small Block | Big Block |

more more low end

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 11-04-2004 | 12:17 PM
  #11  
marc_w's Avatar
TECH Addict
 
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 2,618
Likes: 0
From: Central, MA
Default

Anyone with 4.8's or 5.3's running the Comp 206/212 112 cam?

I hear of a few LS1 guys say that it makes instant torque off idle. Not sure how well it works in the two smaller brothers...
Old 11-04-2004 | 12:41 PM
  #12  
Mr. Sandog's Avatar
TECH Veteran
 
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 4,632
Likes: 2
From: Sun Diego
Default

My 5.3L with it's newly installed 205/212, 548/540, 114+4 from Cam Motion makes all kinds of off idle power. I was going to change in my 3.73 gears for 4.10's because I was starved for power down low, but I don't think that will be necessary now.
Old 11-04-2004 | 05:19 PM
  #13  
02sierraz71_5.3's Avatar
Thread Starter
TECH Junkie
iTrader: (2)
 
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 3,473
Likes: 1
From: Cornelius, NC
Default

after the shift kit and stall Im left with only larger mods to do. which would you choose. I want to build something that will last for years and miles.

1.) forced induction: considering supercharger or turbo; supercharger seems to be better fit for trucks, but there are more gains overall to be had with turbo
worried about blowing seals and wear on engine

2)rework cam and heads: probably wont add up to the potential of forced induction but will probably last longer and get better mpg


Ive only had the truck for two months so im not even considering 6.0 swap

which would yall choose
Old 11-04-2004 | 05:22 PM
  #14  
02sierraz71_5.3's Avatar
Thread Starter
TECH Junkie
iTrader: (2)
 
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 3,473
Likes: 1
From: Cornelius, NC
Default

Originally Posted by Naked AV
My 5.3L with it's newly installed 205/212, 548/540, 114+4 from Cam Motion makes all kinds of off idle power. I was going to change in my 3.73 gears for 4.10's because I was starved for power down low, but I don't think that will be necessary now.

maybe its just me but 88mph/15.5 sec in the 1/4 seems low for a blown 5.3, where those times with the forced induction?
Old 11-04-2004 | 06:03 PM
  #15  
quicksilverado's Avatar
TECH Junkie
iTrader: (8)
 
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 3,944
Likes: 1
From: Marietta, Ga.
Default

Originally Posted by 02sierraz71_5.3
maybe its just me but 88mph/15.5 sec in the 1/4 seems low for a blown 5.3, where those times with the forced induction?
The 5.3 is in an Avalanche and it has 20 inch wheels on it.
Old 11-04-2004 | 07:03 PM
  #16  
marc_w's Avatar
TECH Addict
 
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 2,618
Likes: 0
From: Central, MA
Default

Originally Posted by 02sierraz71_5.3
after the shift kit and stall Im left with only larger mods to do. which would you choose. I want to build something that will last for years and miles.

1.) forced induction: considering supercharger or turbo; supercharger seems to be better fit for trucks, but there are more gains overall to be had with turbo
worried about blowing seals and wear on engine

2)rework cam and heads: probably wont add up to the potential of forced induction but will probably last longer and get better mpg
Personally, I'm a big fan of normally aspirated motors.

Partly because I'm a cheap bastid' and can't get myself to drop 5K on one mod... and partly because I just love that 'underdog' type of thing that goes along with it.

Anytime you say, "I'm sprayin'", or "I'm blown"... Those are strong words. It's easier to downplay a 'bolt-on' motor.

It's definitely hard to resist the 'coolness' of forced induction though...
Old 11-04-2004 | 08:18 PM
  #17  
Mr. Sandog's Avatar
TECH Veteran
 
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 4,632
Likes: 2
From: Sun Diego
Default

Originally Posted by 02sierraz71_5.3
maybe its just me but 88mph/15.5 sec in the 1/4 seems low for a blown 5.3, where those times with the forced induction?
Yes, that time was in my fat-*** truck (6,000 lbs) along with my own fat *** (240 lbs), a full tank of gas (27 gallons) and a full-size stock Z66 17 inch spare to boot.

But that was before the cam and I bet that shaves off some serious time. It feels like my truck lost a couple thousand pounds since the cam install...
Old 11-05-2004 | 01:20 AM
  #18  
02sierraz71_5.3's Avatar
Thread Starter
TECH Junkie
iTrader: (2)
 
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 3,473
Likes: 1
From: Cornelius, NC
Default

Originally Posted by Naked AV
Yes, that time was in my fat-*** truck (6,000 lbs) along with my own fat *** (240 lbs), a full tank of gas (27 gallons) and a full-size stock Z66 17 inch spare to boot.

But that was before the cam and I bet that shaves off some serious time. It feels like my truck lost a couple thousand pounds since the cam install...
I didnt realize they weighed that much good god 3 tons thats alot, didnt mean any disrespect
Old 11-05-2004 | 01:28 AM
  #19  
02sierraz71_5.3's Avatar
Thread Starter
TECH Junkie
iTrader: (2)
 
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 3,473
Likes: 1
From: Cornelius, NC
Default

so what do yall think about forced induction vs mormally aspirated?

Im right there with you marc_w, I think a corvette that can get 400 hp out of a naturally aspirated small block and go 0 to 60 in 4.3 is alot more impressive than any cobra or lightning funny thing is when I bought this gmc I was actually going to buy a lightning but the dealership pissed me off and the truck wasnt there so I went next door and got a gmc, Im happier with this truck
Old 11-05-2004 | 10:18 AM
  #20  
zippy's Avatar
TECH Veteran
 
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 4,534
Likes: 3
From: Las Vegas, NV
Default

the problem is in order to get a truck to run hard without adding some type of boost or other fuel, you need to raise either cubes or rpm.
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
zblee
GM Engine & Exhaust Performance
63
06-10-2023 02:25 PM
fctry286
FORCED INDUCTION
16
11-22-2015 04:26 PM
YenkoST
GMT 900 Trucks General Discussion
5
08-28-2015 02:42 PM
JordanH
GM Engine & Exhaust Performance
9
08-08-2015 08:59 PM
OLD BULL
INTERNAL ENGINE MODIFICATIONS
13
08-01-2015 06:00 PM




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:36 AM.