RichWhalen

I have the hotcam, home ported heads, etc. and dynoed at 362 rwhp. My best run so far has been a 12.600 @ 112mph. I just returned from my sister-in-laws wedding and averaged 26.7 mpg on the way out and 27.5 on the way back. This is with 4.11s too. Around town, I usually only get around 220-230 a tank.

stereomandan

Don 97,

True, but if I see a high MPG number from someone with the mods I'm looking at, it helps me understand what the cam is capable of.

97SS_1341,
Well isn't that a profound statement. Of coarse I'm not looking to gain mpg by adding a cam and boltons. I just want to know if one cam, vs the rest seems to be more of a gas hog, due to overlap, scavenging...

Brad Z28,
I have reviewed the dyno cureves of all these cams on numerous setups, and the 224/230 is just a little more than what I want in the upper rpm range. I am fully aware of the high end torque issue. Like I said earlier, I don't plan to go past the stock redline, so anything above 5700 rpm is wasted. The XE224/230 is shifted a little higher in the rpm band than I want. I can't take advantage of the TQ above 5700 rpm. The 502 brings the torque curve a little lower in rpm, where I want it. The 224/230 has more potential with higher rpm applications. I'll admit it is a great cam, and I'm very impressed with some numbers that I see from it, but it is just barely more than what I'm looking for.

RichWhalen,
Good to hear those numbers. Very impressive.

Dan

Don 97 SS

Based on your comments, you may be happy with the milder CC502 (218/224). I can say that it is a great cam for a driver and should pass emissions just fine. But everyone's needs and wishes are different.

I plan on dynoing my combo next month and will have more facts to report then.

stereomandan

Thanks Don. Emissions are not an issue for me, but I still think the 502 might be my best bet.

I'll be VERY eager to hear how your setup dyno's. That is very close to the setup that I am planning, except for LT's instead of the shorties. I'm debating cat's or not, mainly for sound. I don't want the raspy, hollow sound you hear so much with LT's, no cats, and a very low restriction exhast.

If possible, could you post the results?

How do you like your 3.73's?

Dan

Don 97 SS

If I go to the group dyno as planned I'd be pleased to post my results. I got 349rwhp and 349rwtq corrected when I had a Crane 210/224 cam in it when I last dynoed several years ago.

I replaced that cam and freshened things up with the CC502 along with new lifters, timing chain and a new opti this last spring but never got around to dynoing it since I got it back together.

The 3.73s have been in for nearly 4 years. I am very pleased with them. It is a nice step up, first gear is still usable and 6th is a little more practical. 4.10s make for a more dramatic change, but I was just looking for an incremental improvement.

stereomandan

We seem to think alike. The Crane 210/224 was another cam I was looking at. What differences did you notice between the two cams? Anything you can tell me will help.

What did you all change at the same time as the 502 cam?(just lifters, opti, and timing chain?) Looks like you were making very good TQ with the 210/224 cam. You don't happen to have a dyno chart on the net somewhere do you?

Was that with ported heads(the 210/224 numbers)?

Thanks,
Dan

Don 97 SS

I forgot to mention I redid the springs with Crane dual springs. The CNC'd heads were on when I dynoed last. The main difference would just be the cam and perhaps a nice new tight ED timing set. My older opti was fine. I just wanted to replace it once I got that deep into the engine for a new cam.

I can't say that I've noticed a big difference, but my butt dyno is not very precise. I am unable to display the dyno graph, but that cam and my combo had a nice fat, flat TQ curve. That is what I want for a driver. Peak numbers are fine for bench racing, but I'm more impressed with the right curves.

stereomandan

I have to agree with you about having the right TQ curve. That's what it's all about. I could care less about peak HP.

Here's a weird question for ya.

Did you notice any more noise from the valvetrain using the 502, since it has the XE lobes that are more agressive on the valvetrain? What RPM do you spin it up to?

Thanks,
Dan

Don 97 SS

There was no perceivable change in valve train sounds after the cam swap. I don't think the minor changes in ramp slopes would affect the sound of the valve train.

I try not to test the up rpm limits. I have my rev limiter set at 6200.