230/224 .575/.563 111 LSA ...... Is that too big of a lift for a stock internal car because a friend of mine said that the cam has to big of a lift and it will eat lots of valve springs. Is this true or what? I am looking for a cam to put me at close to 400 rwhp with a pulley also.. Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.. Also will the pushrods and valve springs that Thunder Racing offers hold up with that cam??

 

im pretty sure that the ls1 maximum lift is like .609 so you are well under that. These hydraulic cams that they use now are decent on springs.... and that cam isnt even that big compared to some peopls setups. someone will chime in with more info

-Dakota

 

It's important to note there is not set value of maximum lift as max safe lift is a function of many parameters not limited to lobe lift.

I really like this cam. It's the same trend that many cams have, but it's not as aggressive. Notice and compare duration at .100" lift and you'll see the intake is biased to an increased amount of duration. Notice the TRak cam, the CheaTR, and the FMS cams. Whether this shows up in the duration at .050" (the 230/224), or doesn't show up the FM13 (230/232?), the trend is for a longer intake lobe, as our cars have great exhaust flow. A 1 3/4" header is none to common on a SBC, but every LS1 car has them.

My take is the 230/224 follows this trend without being overly harsh in terms of ramp rate.

I think this cam was a result of trying to get more power out of the vulnerable 224/224. The exhaust lobe was increased and power didn't markely increase at 224/230. Then it was observed the results of the 230/224 were close to the 230/230, but with less duration on the exhaust lobe. This means comparable power, but with more opertional effeciency.

By take for what it's worth...

Ben T.

 

Oh, let me just add this is the cam I'd buy if was forced to pick a cam tomorrow morning. I really like this cam. Lastly, look at the LSA. This is a result of a design process that encompassed closing/opening the valves and letting the LSA be what it may. 111* if I'm not mistaken. A narrower LSA like this also promotes better midrange power and a healthier lope if you're into that.

Just make sure you're running full length, 1.75" tubes with a nice free flowing exhaust. I'd also venture to suggest a cutout to decrease exhaust backpressure as it is paramount to minimize pressure with a short ex lobe relative to the intake for a systematicaly powerful package.

Compare lift/duration to get a fill for lobe ramp rates.

Ben T.

 

The package thet Thunder sells is all you'll need. Works pretty good on my stock head/bottom end car. If you want to see a little more in depth into what this cam can do for you, do a search on LS1tech for my screen name over there VIPRETR2

 

Well for a free flowing exhaust I dont have any problem there because I have a Loudmouth copycat and I dont have cats so I think that it is really good even though it is illegal but oh well it sounds goooooood.

 

You ride around with an illegal exhaust!? Aren't you scared they'll impound your car?

Ben T.

 

Yes, I am very scared haha. Would an underdrive pulley with that cam put me over 400 rwhp possibly?

 

Yes, it's very possible with a good tune. I'd say that would be a quite obtainable goal considering your current power output. You have the best LS1 heads in your favor too, the '01-02 (casting number 241) heads.

Ben T.

 

like mentioned above this is a fairly average cam. In the beginning this was considered a big cam and now you have cams like the Trex and others like the FM14 that are right at .600 lift and high 230s in duration. Some over. THis cam from Thunder should do great. They have made an awesome name for themselves over the years and they cant be beat it seems. most i see are 380-390ish RWHp which is still very respectful. Im not sure how much the difference is but most people run 112 LSA to help a little with idle over the 111.

As for the springs? most people i hear change them at 20k just to be safe. some longer some shorter....i think its kinda like tire pressure...you can ask 15 different people and you will get 15 different opinions/preferences.Hope this helps and good luck.

P.S.....im going with the FM14...there are quiet a few people making 400 RWHP and up with cam only.

 

you seem to be dwelling on that pulley an awefull lot.

when in all reality it will probably gain you about 5hp....so if the cam gets you to 395...then maybe the pulley will help you meet your goal.

i say go for it and keep us posted on they dyno results.

 

That's because most people don't design a cam from the ground up according to vavle timing events like Thunder Racing has shown they have the intellect, expertise, equipment, and experience to do. If you pick lobes from a catalog and go with a 112 or 114 LSA you're leaving a lot on the table. This is what many do.

Besides why 112? I would rather see some 108 and 110LSA with short lobes running up and down the streets anyway.

Most people go with a 114/112 because they were nonconservative with their duration numbers because apparently (according to market demand) you have to have a huge cam to go fast.

Ben T.

 

You really think that everyone else in the world is stupid? When YOU put a cam and heads on YOUR car and YOU run better numbers than everyone else then you can use that condesending attitude. Until then, back it down a little.

 

Al, there's a difference between "most" and "everyone" (e.g. Business English 101). Why are you starting conflict? You're a moderator for crying out loud.

You're right, I've never had a H/C LS1 car, but the fbody is not my first automotive rodeo. I've had good luck before using systematic and generally 'conservative' builds with the SBC.

If we wish to limit our off-topic posting, please lead up to that direction by example.

I'm responding to your public post with a public post, but in the future if you have a personal comment about me please PM it to me.

Ben T.

 

Nothing wrong with conflict as long as it's civil. And I didn't start anything.
You're the one that posted up that everyone was a bunch of sheep using off the shelf cams stuck on 112° LSA.
That you and I quote; "I would rather see some 108 and 110LSA with short lobes running up and down the streets anyway."
There's a reason that you don't and won't see that in LSx engines. They aren't old school SBCs and stuff that works for old school SBCs doesn't work for LSxs. The heads are totally different. There's been years of research done by shops and builders to develop cams that work for the LSx engines and make driveable power. Like my cam. The builder said that this was the 31st version of cam that they had tried with my heads to get the best power. And it doesn't run too bad. Oh and it's a 112° LSA.