Please read this before you choose a cam!
11-27-2006, 09:32 PM
#78
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Kansas
Posts: 3,706
as posted in another thread
straight from a book about building small block chevy's
"...your favorite hero racer endorses Hu-Mon-Gor cams because 'they really work for me,' and he might even be telling the truth. They work for his application, and unless your application is exactly like his it will not work for you."
that being said, first define your goals.
to be successful, you need to have two simple things: combination and application.If you mismatch stuff, you have performance loss
A substantial number of cam buyers still seek the biggest, meanest, stick that can buy, regardless of their combination and application. Because of this, manufacturers use "advertised durations" which add to the confusion.
Remember that the advertised duration is purely theoretical and it does not usually represent the actual time that the valve is off the seat.
"...your favorite hero racer endorses Hu-Mon-Gor cams because 'they really work for me,' and he might even be telling the truth. They work for his application, and unless your application is exactly like his it will not work for you."
that being said, first define your goals.
to be successful, you need to have two simple things: combination and application.If you mismatch stuff, you have performance loss
A substantial number of cam buyers still seek the biggest, meanest, stick that can buy, regardless of their combination and application. Because of this, manufacturers use "advertised durations" which add to the confusion.
Remember that the advertised duration is purely theoretical and it does not usually represent the actual time that the valve is off the seat.
11-28-2006, 12:43 AM
#79
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Ocala, Florida
Posts: 3,245
I shift my 846 at 6500 but I have ported heads so I don't know how much that raises the shift points. I'm going to try out the 847 though I haven't been impressed with my 846. It could be that I haven't run it in anything colder than 80 degrees though, but I want to try something new to see how I like daily driving a big cam since I'm probably going to do a new shortblock in a year or 2.
11-28-2006, 12:45 AM
#80
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Ocala, Florida
Posts: 3,245
Thats the same cam I mentioned above, its also called the GM 846. It does have more lift on the exhaust and a bit more intake duration than the CC305 and many like that its billet instead of cast and some like the lobe design better. A fellow with ported heads is putting down 370's with it. He's using Crane 99893 springs. Many use the Crane 10308's too.
CC305 220/230 .510/.510
GM 846 222/230 .509/.528
-Dustin-
CC305 220/230 .510/.510
GM 846 222/230 .509/.528
-Dustin-
11-28-2006, 07:27 PM
#81
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 5,907
-Dustin-
11-28-2006, 10:12 PM
#82
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Rochester Hills, MI
Posts: 746
So, how does the philosophy at the start of this thread apply to the choice between LE1 and LE2 cams for street, with LE2 heads, shifting M6 at 6300ish? Reading the advice here, and considering the LE2 is 'similar to the 847 or CC306' I would conclude that the LE2 cam is too big. But, after researching my planned purchase, I concluded that an extra 20 or so HP & TQ coming on at only a few hundred rpm higher made the LE2 cam a better choice for me than the LE1. So, that's what I ordered a couple of weeks ago. Does anybody here think this was the wrong choice? If so, please convince me before it's too late. Experience speaks loudest.
11-29-2006, 08:30 AM
#83
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Ocala, Florida
Posts: 3,245
11-29-2006, 09:37 AM
#84
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: High Ridge, MO
Posts: 2,193
I would think that the LE2 H/C setup would peak around 6300-6400 rpm. That would require shifts of probably 6700-6800 rpm to not let the rpms drop too far. That doesn't mean that you HAVE to shift that high. It would just be recommended for best track times. I don't have any LE stuff, so this is all a guesstimate.
11-29-2006, 09:47 AM
#85
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Garland, tx
Posts: 2,475
11-29-2006, 02:20 PM
#86
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Chicago Area
Posts: 361
11-29-2006, 02:44 PM
#87
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: High Ridge, MO
Posts: 2,193
11-29-2006, 02:54 PM
#88
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Chicago Area
Posts: 361
Oh, the spring kit. I thought he had a LE2 package on his car.
-Even with the cc306 cam, those numbers are pretty low. If the "hooker" means headers and the tune is even moderately good, his HP should be much higher. My 96 WS6, bone stock with an air foil only, pulled 288RWHP and 313TQ on a Mustang Dyno. So somewhere, something is missing???
-Even with the cc306 cam, those numbers are pretty low. If the "hooker" means headers and the tune is even moderately good, his HP should be much higher. My 96 WS6, bone stock with an air foil only, pulled 288RWHP and 313TQ on a Mustang Dyno. So somewhere, something is missing???
11-29-2006, 05:12 PM
#89
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 66
With my cam only CC305 cam setup I used to "TRY" and shift at 6400. I say TRY because the factory tach is junk. I ended up hooking up a raptor shift light to my 6al and its seems more consistant. If I shifted any less then 6400 the car would be down 3+ MPH.
11-29-2006, 05:22 PM
#90
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Ocala, Florida
Posts: 3,245
Oh, the spring kit. I thought he had a LE2 package on his car.
-Even with the cc306 cam, those numbers are pretty low. If the "hooker" means headers and the tune is even moderately good, his HP should be much higher. My 96 WS6, bone stock with an air foil only, pulled 288RWHP and 313TQ on a Mustang Dyno. So somewhere, something is missing???
-Even with the cc306 cam, those numbers are pretty low. If the "hooker" means headers and the tune is even moderately good, his HP should be much higher. My 96 WS6, bone stock with an air foil only, pulled 288RWHP and 313TQ on a Mustang Dyno. So somewhere, something is missing???
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
dbusch22
Forced Induction
6
10-31-2016 11:09 AM
NewsBot
2010 - 2015 Camaro News, Sightings, Pictures, and Multimedia
1
12-24-2014 11:05 PM
z28projects4ever
Automotive News / Industry / Future Vehicle Discussion
9
07-16-2002 07:48 PM