MTI C1 cam, any input?
09-02-2004, 04:15 PM
#1
MTI C1 cam, any input?
Well, I knew this was coming. Now I want more cam. I talked with a few f-body guys last night about trying MTI's C1 cam. 222/222 .551/.551 112. I am going to be getting a TCI verter first off. But how do you guys this this truck will react with that cam and stall? ALSO, will I have the ability to tow about 1800lbs with that setup?
09-02-2004, 04:29 PM
#2
TECH Fanatic
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: oklahoma
Posts: 1,721
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I hear that is a strong cam and acts bigger then what it really is, I don't think you will have a problem towing that weight because it's not much but make sure the converter can handle that.
09-02-2004, 04:58 PM
#3
Had that cam in my TA. Ran very strong for not having any tuning done. drilled out TB to get it to idle well.
With a stall no higher than 3500 I would expect you to be able to tow @4,000 lbs. without too many problems - not an expert though, JMHO.
good luck!!
With a stall no higher than 3500 I would expect you to be able to tow @4,000 lbs. without too many problems - not an expert though, JMHO.
good luck!!
09-02-2004, 05:47 PM
#4
Originally Posted by 99Silver5.3
Well, I knew this was coming. Now I want more cam. I talked with a few f-body guys last night about trying MTI's C1 cam. 222/222 .551/.551 112. I am going to be getting a TCI verter first off. But how do you guys this this truck will react with that cam and stall? ALSO, will I have the ability to tow about 1800lbs with that setup?
09-02-2004, 09:17 PM
#6
You'd be better off running a custom ground Comp XER 220 220 .581 .581 114. You'd have better idle, better low / mid range torque, and make more power than the C1. Downside would be the more aggressive lobes causing valvetrain noise and being tougher on springs.
Trending Topics
09-03-2004, 05:35 AM
#8
Personally I really dont think that there is any sense in putting too much of a bigger cam in the trucks (with stock heads). You have to remember that the camaro guys have a bigger engine, and better heads (stock). The cam you have is actually pretty big for a truck anyway and I wouldn't go bigger than the 216/220 That Flyer has got. Either way I think at this point a good set of heads will do more for you than stepping up to a bigger cam. Pm me and I can give you the rundown on the heads.
09-03-2004, 06:03 PM
#10
12 Second Truck Club
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 5,575
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I still don't buy into the "too big for a truck" thing. If you race your truck then a 220-226 cam is not too big. With a decent stall and proper tuning you can overcome alot of the low end issues and reap great midrang and top end.
I seriously wish I would have dyno'd after we tuned my 226 cam just to show that the bigger cams do indeed make decent power. I dyno'd 304rwp at 5900rpm on that cam. Did some street tuning and gained 2-2.5mph in the 1/4 with DA calculations so I knew it wasn't a weather induced gain. That would mean i either picked up 20+HP or some TQ somewhere. The truck was perfectly drivable, didn't stall, drove better than stock even at part throttle and ran like a raped ape for my mods at the time. 14.29@97mph isn't too bad for a cam only 4x4 ext.cab.
I seriously wish I would have dyno'd after we tuned my 226 cam just to show that the bigger cams do indeed make decent power. I dyno'd 304rwp at 5900rpm on that cam. Did some street tuning and gained 2-2.5mph in the 1/4 with DA calculations so I knew it wasn't a weather induced gain. That would mean i either picked up 20+HP or some TQ somewhere. The truck was perfectly drivable, didn't stall, drove better than stock even at part throttle and ran like a raped ape for my mods at the time. 14.29@97mph isn't too bad for a cam only 4x4 ext.cab.