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

Tr220

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 11-15-2005, 09:42 PM
  #1  
On The Tree
Thread Starter
 
METALMULISHA777's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: MA
Posts: 105
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default Tr220

TR 220 114 or 112 ????? any reccomendations
Old 11-15-2005, 09:45 PM
  #2  
Banned
iTrader: (4)
 
litreddevil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: From Houma La. Living n Ellisville Miss.
Posts: 5,151
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

114 if it were me
Old 11-15-2005, 10:03 PM
  #3  
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (6)
 
closet red neck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 1,171
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Why???
Old 11-16-2005, 05:01 AM
  #4  
TECH Veteran
iTrader: (6)
 
Sport Side's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Posts: 4,397
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

The 112 without a question. Most of the TR cams come with 4* of advance putting your ICL numerically 4* lower than your LSA.
112+4=108
114+4=110
On a 108, hp should peak at near 6000rpm. For proof, check out RGVSierra's dyno graph.
A 114 in my opinion sacrifices too much overlap and will shove power a bit higher in the rpm scale. Of course were not talking about huge losses of low end when comparing equal lobes with small changes in timing events... but the VEs look better on the 112+4

If I were stuck on this cam, I would have TR cut it on a 109-111LSA with no advance. Average power is going to increase from the added overlap and I just like the timing events set up this way. Not every cam needs 4* advance.
Low Compression + mediocre heads + low rpm travel is just asking for overlap.
Old 11-16-2005, 08:15 AM
  #5  
12 Second Truck Club
iTrader: (5)
 
white1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Sittin on jackstands
Posts: 5,230
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

114, unless you like cam surge and dying in parking lots.
Old 11-16-2005, 09:17 AM
  #6  
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (1)
 
TigerFan187's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 1,586
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by white1
114, unless you like cam surge and dying in parking lots.

OOOHHHH FIGHT FIGHT FIGHT! J/K! Depends on your preferences!
Old 11-16-2005, 09:30 AM
  #7  
TECH Enthusiast
iTrader: (8)
 
custom 68's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: springfield MO
Posts: 534
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

are the tighter values (lower lsa) harder to tune? I believe they are. I dont tune so will have this done when I make the swap also.
Dave
Old 11-16-2005, 09:36 AM
  #8  
12 Second Truck Club
iTrader: (5)
 
white1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Sittin on jackstands
Posts: 5,230
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by TigerFan187
OOOHHHH FIGHT FIGHT FIGHT! J/K! Depends on your preferences!


Yea, I have a 112, but I also have a mail order tune, so thats part of the problem. I think you can get it right, but from what I understand, (and have experienced) a 114 is easier to tune.
Old 11-16-2005, 01:28 PM
  #9  
PT's Slowest Truck
iTrader: (19)
 
budhayes3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Hackensack, NJ
Posts: 17,863
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

The 114 will be easier to tune and more emissions friendly if that's a concern. The 112 should sound a little meaner due to the increased overlap from the tighter lsa.
Old 11-16-2005, 01:46 PM
  #10  
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (7)
 
rgvsierra's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: RGV, Texas
Posts: 1,482
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

how bout try both, then report back to us which you like.. lol


Quick Reply: Tr220



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:25 PM.