Tr220
#4
TECH Veteran
iTrader: (6)
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Posts: 4,397
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
Trending Topics
#8
12 Second Truck Club
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Sittin on jackstands
Posts: 5,230
Likes: 0
Received 5 Likes
on
3 Posts
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.