arthursc2

iTrader: (5)

I've seen supercharged LS's pick up almost 100hp from just long tubes and associated tune changes

long tubes seem to average 30-40 on NA applications

I don't know your setup or your tune; but a very similar cam (I mean, extremely similar), 1 7/8 long tubes, 4" intake and custom dyno tune got my 5.3 from 204whp to 302whp. Granted I think the intake is a joke, but the rest of it clearly helped her make power

wretched73

iTrader: (1)

My 2011 C6 Grand Sport, LS3 TR6060, gained 38 WHP going from stock manifolds and open loud valves to 1 7/8" long tubes x 3" collector- stock exhaust open loud valves. No other changes. Stock intake, TB, and stock paper air filter

arthursc2

iTrader: (5)

I'd like to see the timing table myself. For research purposes. Unrelated to the research I need to do on @dantheman1540 's hot female cousin

madmann26

iTrader: (7)

I guess I'll stir the pot. I'm in that kind of mood today -

You have a 4.8. The smallest cube LS motor made, no headers.

I'll ask the hard question - What did you expect? 100hp from a cam?

If you go looking, just about every major LS cam seller, maker will have that disclosure on their website re headers, stall, gears or a well optimized setup. You pick the verbiage. It means just the same.

Without knowing what the spark map looks like or even a copy of the tune, it's hard to say if any improvements can be made. Was this tuned on 87, 91 or 93 octane? Yes, there's a difference if tuned properly for the fuel provided.

Flowmasters eh? I bet it sounds good but they are absolutely the worst muffler you can put on any vehicle. They were given the nickname 'chokemasters' for a reason. You would see gains if a free flowing muffler, like a Magnaflow, or even headers.

The 4.8 engine as a whole is a high revving motor. It wants to rev high to make power. If you want more low-mid power, swap out the 4.8 for a 6.0. It's a direct swap for the most part outside of adjusting the tune.

Sorry I'm not being sympathetic to your cause. You came here to trash a company because you spent a bunch of money and didn't get the results you were hoping for.

The surging is the tune, plain and simple.

arthursc2

iTrader: (5)

That is damn near what I got out of it!

MikeGyver

iTrader: (5)

The most respected tune, you mean.

RB04Av

I don't think this is true AT ALL. It contains the truth in a way, but the wording is wrong.

The correct wording would be something more like:

The 4.8 as a whole produces inadequate usable power for a truck, beyond merely a fleet construction site work truck that the mfr can legally comply with a specification that says the truck must have a motor, at any realistically low RPM that the truck's drive train can otherwise support. It MUST rev very high, beyond the range of normal usefulness, to make useful power.

This person posted this same thing (copy & paste) all over ls1tech.com. Evidently this is his first time doing any kind of performance upgrades, and he fails to understand how upgrading an engine works, at its most basic level. He made every mistake that can be made in a project of this nature - a cam that he doesn't have enough motor for, a restrictive exhaust, poor or no tuning, excessive obsession over dyno numbers, and so on - and got exactly the results that everyone here or on ls1tech counsels n00bies against. Worst of all, he's acting like an entitled little only-child who finished last in the tournament and throws a tantrum because the winner's trophy was bigger and more blinged out than his participation trophy.

While I have never done any business whatsoever with Tick and have no dog in that hunt in any manner way shape form or fashion whatsoever, I hate to see mfrs trolled like this, even though what they "sold" him (remember, this is a free country: they didn't "sell" him A DAMN THING, what they actually did was ALLOWED HIM TO BUY FROM THEM) could not possibly live up to his expectations. It is true that there was a mismatch between expectations and results, but it's equally true that the mismatch BEGAN with unrealistic expectations, compounded by misdirected execution. Frankly, it wouldn't have mattered that this was Tick; it could have been TSP, or BTR, or Vinci, or Comp, or CamMotion, or WHOEVER; the exact same thing would have happened to this person. The problem isn't the product, it's the new owner.

He needs to delete his stupid crybaby post from here and from everywhere else he posted it, call the waaaaaambulance and have them deliver a pity party, then get his butthurt self onto the Internet and start READING about what he did wrong instead of WRITING anything; and learn from his mistakes (and everyone else that's made them, and any other mistakes he can learn about) so he can make better decisions next time. More specifically re. his truck, he needs to get a set of long-tube headers, a better exhaust system, a higher stall torque converter, and a better tune; and consider strongly ditching that work-truck POS 4.8 in favor of something that doesn't come with an ironclad guarantee (4.8 < 5.3 < 5.7 < 6.0 < 6.2 etc.) to be the BOTTOM OF THE BARREL, LEAST OF THE LEAST.

dantheman1540

Is anyone else just glad the OP didn't USE ALL CAPS and included punctuation?

RedXray

You're such a meanie

Not sure who designed the TowMax Stage 2 camshaft but if it's been in Tick's catalog before 2016 most likely it was Martin Smallwood. Martin has a lot of LS camshaft spec experience. Over at "tech" Martin is one of the "go to" guys for camshaft design whether off the shelf or custom spec'd. I've seen/read posts backed up with dyno numbers of Tick/Martin cammed SBE LS1's with 225 as-cast heads, Fast 102, 1-78" headers making over 500 N/A RWHP. That's give or take around 50 hp more than most make with the same parts with a different camshaft grind. I'm sure some of those gains are in the tune but that said Martin is a LS cam expert and if he says 40 hp gains are possible with the TowMax I'd tend to believe him.

madmann26

iTrader: (7)

That's fair feedback. I gladly accept it.