[Z06] Against the grain
04-23-2018, 02:54 PM
#101
Le Mans Master
FI vs NA = (In general terms) Two completely different HP/TQ curves.
04-23-2018, 05:44 PM
#103
Agreed, but they aren't held at steady state output in the real world, and they get heat soaked in the real world. That's why an N/A car will typically beat a supercharged car with a bit more horsepower, and even sometimes a lot more horsepower. I've seen it myself, on both sides of the coin.
05-14-2018, 08:39 AM
#104
Le Mans Master
Thread Starter
Since I'll be installing an ATI balancer, I've decided to change out the cam. I'll already be most of the way into it, so I might as well.
I sent in a camshaft questionnaire to Pat G. Anxious to see what he comes up with. This time, I'll actually run what he specs me. I opted not to run his cam the first time around and pretty much regret it at this point.
So, I'll be doing an ATI UD balancer, Pat G cam, pushrods and PAC springs.
I also have the PRC 285cc heads on stand by if I need them.
I sent in a camshaft questionnaire to Pat G. Anxious to see what he comes up with. This time, I'll actually run what he specs me. I opted not to run his cam the first time around and pretty much regret it at this point.
So, I'll be doing an ATI UD balancer, Pat G cam, pushrods and PAC springs.
I also have the PRC 285cc heads on stand by if I need them.
05-14-2018, 08:48 AM
#105
Since I'll be installing an ATI balancer, I've decided to change out the cam. I'll already be most of the way into it, so I might as well.
I sent in a camshaft questionnaire to Pat G. Anxious to see what he comes up with. This time, I'll actually run what he specs me. I opted not to run his cam the first time around and pretty much regret it at this point.
So, I'll be doing an ATI UD balancer, Pat G cam, pushrods and PAC springs.
I also have the PRC 285cc heads on stand by if I need them.
I sent in a camshaft questionnaire to Pat G. Anxious to see what he comes up with. This time, I'll actually run what he specs me. I opted not to run his cam the first time around and pretty much regret it at this point.
So, I'll be doing an ATI UD balancer, Pat G cam, pushrods and PAC springs.
I also have the PRC 285cc heads on stand by if I need them.
05-14-2018, 08:56 AM
#106
Le Mans Master
Thread Starter
I went with an off the shelf, un-tested, grind, instead of something custom spec'd for my exact setup. Just because it "seemed" bigger and I stupidly thought it'd make more/better power.
Nothing wrong with the TSP grind but now that it's being used a little more, it looks like it's tapped out in the very low 600whp range. Meanwhile, other similar grinds are making more average/peak power.
It did work for what I wanted but I feel I need something catered to my setup now.
Again, the only thing that sparked this was the fact that I'll be changing the balancer out. I'll be, roughly, 75% of the way into a camshaft change at that point, crazy not to do it.
Nothing wrong with the TSP grind but now that it's being used a little more, it looks like it's tapped out in the very low 600whp range. Meanwhile, other similar grinds are making more average/peak power.
It did work for what I wanted but I feel I need something catered to my setup now.
Again, the only thing that sparked this was the fact that I'll be changing the balancer out. I'll be, roughly, 75% of the way into a camshaft change at that point, crazy not to do it.
05-14-2018, 09:15 AM
#107
Maybe I'm missing something but those numbers seem pretty solid for your setup. Keep in mind the TSP cam is ground on "ls friendly lobes". Based on some of the numbers out there, it seems like the less aggressive the lobe, the less power it makes, but it's a tradeoff for longevity. I'm sure if you put those same specs on an agressive comp lobe then you'd make more power.
I'll bet you that Pat G will spec you a TSP cam, he really likes their lobes for LS engines.
I'll bet you that Pat G will spec you a TSP cam, he really likes their lobes for LS engines.
05-14-2018, 10:09 AM
#109
Le Mans Master
Thread Starter
I consider my setup to be more "max effort" than most. I feel I'm willing to take it a step further to gain an edge. After all, that is why I bought the car.
That being said, I just want a cam tailored to my setup. I told Pat G that drivability was not a concern for me. This is a highway/1/4mi car. I told him I am looking for top end gains and acceleration. I'd love to be in the 630-650whp range on my tuner's dyno. Which would be the highest NA LS7 he has tuned.
That being said, I just want a cam tailored to my setup. I told Pat G that drivability was not a concern for me. This is a highway/1/4mi car. I told him I am looking for top end gains and acceleration. I'd love to be in the 630-650whp range on my tuner's dyno. Which would be the highest NA LS7 he has tuned.
05-14-2018, 10:38 AM
#110
Drifting
Since I'll be installing an ATI balancer, I've decided to change out the cam. I'll already be most of the way into it, so I might as well.
I sent in a camshaft questionnaire to Pat G. Anxious to see what he comes up with. This time, I'll actually run what he specs me. I opted not to run his cam the first time around and pretty much regret it at this point.
So, I'll be doing an ATI UD balancer, Pat G cam, pushrods and PAC springs.
I also have the PRC 285cc heads on stand by if I need them.
I sent in a camshaft questionnaire to Pat G. Anxious to see what he comes up with. This time, I'll actually run what he specs me. I opted not to run his cam the first time around and pretty much regret it at this point.
So, I'll be doing an ATI UD balancer, Pat G cam, pushrods and PAC springs.
I also have the PRC 285cc heads on stand by if I need them.
. I thought about an UD pulley but I am not going max effort-ish (for now lol).I consider my setup to be more "max effort" than most. I feel I'm willing to take it a step further to gain an edge. After all, that is why I bought the car.
That being said, I just want a cam tailored to my setup. I told Pat G that drivability was not a concern for me. This is a highway/1/4mi car. I told him I am looking for top end gains and acceleration. I'd love to be in the 630-650whp range on my tuner's dyno. Which would be the highest NA LS7 he has tuned.
That being said, I just want a cam tailored to my setup. I told Pat G that drivability was not a concern for me. This is a highway/1/4mi car. I told him I am looking for top end gains and acceleration. I'd love to be in the 630-650whp range on my tuner's dyno. Which would be the highest NA LS7 he has tuned.
I think it would be dope to see you with the PRC 285’s which would put you with a similar setup as me but you have the Hi-Ram/NW102 and I am on a ported MSD/ported stock TB. Of course our cams will be a tad different and you have the UD pulley.
05-14-2018, 11:29 AM
#111
You have a poorly optimized top end and valve train. It is fighting to make power.
Intake track upstream of the TB should not be restrictive. Velocity starts playing a role after the plenum.
Too much camshaft for a 7200 peak rpm 427cid. Not enough exhaust duration for those heads. LPE port work is not known for big power or high rpm. Frankly, those cam specs look horrid to me. You should consider one of Mike Jones's inverse rollers, seeing how you don't care about lower rpm drivability. That intake wants to see 8000 rpm.
Bad choice. Horrible actually.
I would find new friends to get advice from.
Too much camshaft for a 7200 peak rpm 427cid. Not enough exhaust duration for those heads. LPE port work is not known for big power or high rpm. Frankly, those cam specs look horrid to me. You should consider one of Mike Jones's inverse rollers, seeing how you don't care about lower rpm drivability. That intake wants to see 8000 rpm.
PAC 1209x
Install Height: 1.800"
Closed Spring Pressure: 160 lb. @ 1.800" Installed Height
Open Spring Pressure: 510 lb. @ 1.100" Height (.700" Lift)
Maximum Spring Lift: .750"
Coil Bind 1.000"
I am running Morel drop-in lifters with plastic trays. Would these springs be too much for those lifters?
Install Height: 1.800"
Closed Spring Pressure: 160 lb. @ 1.800" Installed Height
Open Spring Pressure: 510 lb. @ 1.100" Height (.700" Lift)
Maximum Spring Lift: .750"
Coil Bind 1.000"
I am running Morel drop-in lifters with plastic trays. Would these springs be too much for those lifters?
I would find new friends to get advice from.
05-14-2018, 12:00 PM
#112
Le Mans Master
Thread Starter
Too much camshaft for a 7200 peak rpm 427cid. Not enough exhaust duration for those heads. LPE port work is not known for big power or high rpm. Frankly, those cam specs look horrid to me. You should consider one of Mike Jones's inverse rollers, seeing how you don't care about lower rpm drivability. That intake wants to see 8000 rpm.
Hoping Pat G can set me straight and get me where I want.
Would you trust the stock bottom end to rev to 8k? If not, how would you set it up to do so? Next year I want to do forged pistons and ARP rod bolts. Is there a dry sump oil pump that can sustain that RPM? I know there are a few for a wet sump.
Bad choice. Horrible actually.
I would find new friends to get advice from.
I would find new friends to get advice from.
I appreciate you taking the time to respond here.
05-14-2018, 12:05 PM
#113
Le Mans Master
Thread Starter
Dyno's vary way too much. I'm not really worried about what I make on another one. I have multiple pulls done on my tuner's dyno, which is why I want to compare on that one. A buddy of mine just sent me some results where he made 630ish on one dyno and 600 on another.
Last edited by jayyyw; 05-14-2018 at 12:07 PM.
05-14-2018, 01:46 PM
#114
Team Owner
Did you discuss solid roller cams at all?
05-14-2018, 02:59 PM
#115
Le Mans Master
Thread Starter
I'm not there yet. That would be another ~$2-2500 investment towards just the components to run it. It's possible for next year. I REALLY don't want to pull my heads. IF I do, it'll likely happen. I just want the car running for the rest of this season.
05-14-2018, 04:40 PM
#116
Drifting
I run e85
Dyno's vary way too much. I'm not really worried about what I make on another one. I have multiple pulls done on my tuner's dyno, which is why I want to compare on that one. A buddy of mine just sent me some results where he made 630ish on one dyno and 600 on another.
Dyno's vary way too much. I'm not really worried about what I make on another one. I have multiple pulls done on my tuner's dyno, which is why I want to compare on that one. A buddy of mine just sent me some results where he made 630ish on one dyno and 600 on another.
05-14-2018, 07:13 PM
#117
Team Owner
05-14-2018, 09:42 PM
#118
Melting Slicks
Some people like the extra work
stuff that mostly belongs on race cars:
solid lifter
extremely high seat pressure spring
long runs of braided hose
extremely high compression
air filter may be neglected in favor of airflow, when necessary, if it meets endurance guidelines*
the best expensive racing fuels allowable
higher redline, "looser" engine, larger piston/wall clearance, bigger ring gaps, bigger main/rod bearing clearance
A/C is eliminated
slightly ridiculous hood latch, door latch, seat restraints
roll cages which require helmets and inspections
uncomfortable seats
push button start lol
noisy fuel pump, noisy engine, noisy transmission, noisy diff, noisy ____________ wherever applicable
-its a game, add your favorite!
stuf that... &c &c
cheapest fuel available
compression compatible with cheapest fuels available
tight bearing clearance, tight piston/wall clearance, tighter/no ring gaps, thinner modern engine oils, reasonable redline expectations
prioritize engine longevity, filtration and PCV suction, instead of the raw airflow/power output for the sake of competition
A/C
Steel fuel Hardline
OEM door/hood latches are recommended whenever possible
Hydraulic "self adjusting" lifters, low valvespring spring seat pressure, gentle ramp profile and minimal lift for maximum valvetrain/guide longevity
whats also funny is:
race car parts that were modified to be more reliable in a daily (most of the items on regular cars are derived from successful designs used on race cars)
* Consider a sand racing endurance application where failure to properly filter the air results with rapid deterioration of engine/turbo parts.
solid lifter
extremely high seat pressure spring
long runs of braided hose
extremely high compression
air filter may be neglected in favor of airflow, when necessary, if it meets endurance guidelines*
the best expensive racing fuels allowable
higher redline, "looser" engine, larger piston/wall clearance, bigger ring gaps, bigger main/rod bearing clearance
A/C is eliminated
slightly ridiculous hood latch, door latch, seat restraints
roll cages which require helmets and inspections
uncomfortable seats
push button start lol
noisy fuel pump, noisy engine, noisy transmission, noisy diff, noisy ____________ wherever applicable
-its a game, add your favorite!
stuf that... &c &c
cheapest fuel available
compression compatible with cheapest fuels available
tight bearing clearance, tight piston/wall clearance, tighter/no ring gaps, thinner modern engine oils, reasonable redline expectations
prioritize engine longevity, filtration and PCV suction, instead of the raw airflow/power output for the sake of competition
A/C
Steel fuel Hardline
OEM door/hood latches are recommended whenever possible
Hydraulic "self adjusting" lifters, low valvespring spring seat pressure, gentle ramp profile and minimal lift for maximum valvetrain/guide longevity
whats also funny is:
race car parts that were modified to be more reliable in a daily (most of the items on regular cars are derived from successful designs used on race cars)
* Consider a sand racing endurance application where failure to properly filter the air results with rapid deterioration of engine/turbo parts.
Last edited by Kingtal0n; 05-14-2018 at 10:56 PM.
