Comp XER vs. EPS Truck Torque?
02-15-2011, 09:16 PM
#51
did a little search on tech just to see whats up with these lobes, id never use them!
quote for PG:
( EPS )They are a slightly calmer version of the new LSL lobe made specifically to be happy with beehive springs like the PAC 1518 and Comp 26918. The acceleration and jerk is much more friendly than XFI and XE-R lobes even though the duration at .006, .050, and .200" are similar
Billy Godbold, the head lobe designer at Comp, sat down with Geoff Skinner and me in December and asked us what we were looking for in a new lobe. We mentioned that we liked the power making potential and revability of the LSL lobes, but wanted something in a .600" lift version that would work with popular (and easy to install) beehive valve springs. I too, was skeptical of the lobes. They sounded too good to be true. But after installing some early ones on friends rides, I saw that they were the real deal. I love them. I only recommend LSL lobes above them for people who want more lift and need to run a dual spring.
from what im getting these lobes arent really all that great with dual springs and are basically made for single spring apps, i would think there limited in lift to .600 max?
quote for PG:
( EPS )They are a slightly calmer version of the new LSL lobe made specifically to be happy with beehive springs like the PAC 1518 and Comp 26918. The acceleration and jerk is much more friendly than XFI and XE-R lobes even though the duration at .006, .050, and .200" are similar
Billy Godbold, the head lobe designer at Comp, sat down with Geoff Skinner and me in December and asked us what we were looking for in a new lobe. We mentioned that we liked the power making potential and revability of the LSL lobes, but wanted something in a .600" lift version that would work with popular (and easy to install) beehive valve springs. I too, was skeptical of the lobes. They sounded too good to be true. But after installing some early ones on friends rides, I saw that they were the real deal. I love them. I only recommend LSL lobes above them for people who want more lift and need to run a dual spring.
from what im getting these lobes arent really all that great with dual springs and are basically made for single spring apps, i would think there limited in lift to .600 max?
. I do have patriot dual golds also.
02-15-2011, 09:20 PM
#52
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: van nuys CA
Posts: 1,026
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
all ive heard is that his smaller cams are making the power of other bigger cams and this was done by reading over at ls1 tech... and those who have the eps cams are happy with them. and yes im assuming they are ment to be ran on beehives since he recommended 1518 springs with my cam..
02-15-2011, 09:32 PM
#54
dont anyone get me wrong, i only copied and pasted what i read, i have no doubt i patrick, he spec'd my last 2 or 3 cams and all off them were an improvement over the next 
im one who needed more or what more lift, i prefer mid range to topend BUT not sacrificing to much low end torque
im one who needed more or what more lift, i prefer mid range to topend BUT not sacrificing to much low end torque
02-15-2011, 10:26 PM
#55
TECH Addict
iTrader: (10)
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Tupelo Ms
Posts: 2,114
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I haven't got to drive my truck very much with the eps cam.. Not even enough to nail the tune down but so far I like it but I changed the whole top end... I'm running patriot dual springs with mine and the cam has .600 lift
So far I like it and can't wait to see what it will do
So far I like it and can't wait to see what it will do
02-15-2011, 10:40 PM
#56
I'm pretty sure the reason for the different lobe is you spin your engines way past the power band (If I remember I once saw your graph was around 7500rpm). This being the case he probably spec'd you a lobe with a less aggressive ramp rate to keep valve float to a minimum. The EPS being to aggressive for your shift points. That's just what I gather I could be off as I don't pay attention to many posts on here.
02-16-2011, 10:22 AM
#57
dont anyone get me wrong, i only copied and pasted what i read, i have no doubt i patrick, he spec'd my last 2 or 3 cams and all off them were an improvement over the next
im one who needed more or what more lift, i prefer mid range to topend BUT not sacrificing to much low end torque
im one who needed more or what more lift, i prefer mid range to topend BUT not sacrificing to much low end torque
02-16-2011, 10:32 AM
#58
I'm pretty sure the reason for the different lobe is you spin your engines way past the power band (If I remember I once saw your graph was around 7500rpm). This being the case he probably spec'd you a lobe with a less aggressive ramp rate to keep valve float to a minimum. The EPS being to aggressive for your shift points. That's just what I gather I could be off as I don't pay attention to many posts on here.
