Black2003SS Posted September 29, 2007 Report Share Posted September 29, 2007 Man...that is awesome. You picked up almost .2 tenths from just the header change...see...LT's really woke your motor up! Get that tune dialed in and you could find another tenth. You are one of the fastest stock cubed motors with a head and cam swap, so I wouldnt be too disappointed now. A fast intake willgive you some more top end, but will sacrfice thelow end a little more. You might need to go to a bigger converter if you go to a fast intake. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shadowsniper3006 Posted September 29, 2007 Author Report Share Posted September 29, 2007 (edited) Man...that is awesome. You picked up almost .2 tenths from just the header change...see...LT's really woke your motor up! Get that tune dialed in and you could find another tenth. You are one of the fastest stock cubed motors with a head and cam swap, so I wouldnt be too disappointed now. A fast intake willgive you some more top end, but will sacrfice thelow end a little more. You might need to go to a bigger converter if you go to a fast intake. yeah, the long tubes really helped, I'm wating for an "i told you so" from 12srock to. I need to send 2 of my pcms to zippy to have them updated, one with my 28.6" tires and one with my 32" tires, and i would say maybe another tenth from tuning. But the truck is running so good on this tune, there might not be much left. If he can sit in the truck and log runs, then i would say he'd find some more ET in her. And i was thinking about doing the fast 90 this winter/spring, but if this l92 is going to work out better i might start from scratch. Which is why i have all these questions, the low end flow numbers on those heads really make me question my future mods, and thats with out any porting or decking. And yeah, the converter is tight. It's supposed to be a 3000 but actualy is a 2700, i'm still pulling 1.95 60' times. Depending on what else i do, a fuddle 3400 might happen this winter. I was going to buy the one for sale on PT.net but he can't tell me if it a hp series or not. I already talked to chuck at flt about upgrading to a stage 5 trans to. Although my stage 4 has over 25,000 miles on it now and has never let me down. and sorry for all my spelling, we just switched to Vista and the spell check doesn't work. Edited September 29, 2007 by shadowsniper3006 (see edit history) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detjoe Posted September 29, 2007 Report Share Posted September 29, 2007 I guess headers are next to get the best from this cam. Nice time. what LSA are you running Shadowsniper3006??? I would still like to see about switching to LS3 heads intake, but then I would need to get a new cam...I wish I could make some of these parts in my back yard:) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black2003SS Posted September 29, 2007 Report Share Posted September 29, 2007 You are probably dam near 500crank hp right now or close to 400whp. If you switched to the L92's, you could pick up another 30-50hp with the right cam selection and that just might be good enough for the 12's you are looking for on all motor. I dont see how you are going to gain another 30-50hp from your setup without another power adder or different cam, which this one seems to be doing fine for you. The fast intake might give you another 20hp, but it will also move your power band around as well. The L92's flow better than your TEA at .550 and .600 lift if I recall correctly, by just a little bit. But the L92's flow ALOT better at the lower lift points. Your biggest gains with the L92's will be in the lower rpm bands with the correct cam, helping you 60' and 1/8th mile, which will help the overall picture. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zippy Posted September 30, 2007 Report Share Posted September 30, 2007 I haven't read that specific one yet as far as I know. I've read so many tests and still read them all them time (some just get re-printed from one mag to the next), that I almost read some of them for amusement. My opinion in short form: I recomend using the L92 heads. I don't recomend decking them though, with that valve size in that small of a bore, I wouldn't mess with the chamber. The best way to go fast and stay streetable is with cubes and big flowing parts. It's always best to have better flowing heads than make up for a heads flow with cam. More cam can make up for the lack of some head flow, but I would always recomend bigger heads whenever possible. This allows for a bit smaller cam (mostly duration). Less duration will make up for some of the torque lost from the head port size, yet the big ports will work much better up high. I would work on getting some L92 heads, valve springs, intake, and a new cam. Good to see the new results from the headers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shadowsniper3006 Posted September 30, 2007 Author Report Share Posted September 30, 2007 (edited) I guess headers are next to get the best from this cam. Nice time. what LSA are you running Shadowsniper3006??? I would still like to see about switching to LS3 heads intake, but then I would need to get a new cam...I wish I could make some of these parts in my back yard:) It's a 113, but i would really like to see what this cam would do on a 114 or maybe 115. might put my torque at a little better spot where my heads/converter are lacking...or it might just f'up the whole combo???? I haven't read that specific one yet as far as I know. I've read so many tests and still read them all them time (some just get re-printed from one mag to the next), that I almost read some of them for amusement. My opinion in short form: I recomend using the L92 heads. I don't recomend decking them though, with that valve size in that small of a bore, I wouldn't mess with the chamber. The best way to go fast and stay streetable is with cubes and big flowing parts. It's always best to have better flowing heads than make up for a heads flow with cam. More cam can make up for the lack of some head flow, but I would always recomend bigger heads whenever possible. This allows for a bit smaller cam (mostly duration). Less duration will make up for some of the torque lost from the head port size, yet the big ports will work much better up high. I would work on getting some L92 heads, valve springs, intake, and a new cam. Good to see the new results from the headers. I might just look into that over winter/spring, if i do you'll be getting the call. As far as decking goes, is it wrong to say that decking the heads creates more compression which results in more vacuum, which in turn will pull the air/fuel charge into the motor better, and make better use of large runners on a smaller CI motor, and also allowing a higher DCR with larger cams? What about the shift points zippy, how do you know where to shift? thanks! Brad Edited September 30, 2007 by shadowsniper3006 (see edit history) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vortec MAX Posted September 30, 2007 Report Share Posted September 30, 2007 I just finished reading these articles. All I can say is WOW! They gained 150 HP with those mods. I am actually considering doing this instead of buying a Radix. I like the setup they had with the Crane 1449551 cam. They called it a "Torque Monster." That cam put out a consistent 20 ft-lb more than the stock LQ9 cam throughout the RPM range, even as low as 1500 RPM. That cam had 210/218 duration and .531/.531 lift. That cam put out 462 HP @ 5,600 RPM and 463 ft-lbs @ 4,800 RPM. Id be pretty happy with that I think. I have a couple of questions on this: 1. Would that cam work with the stock LQ9 heads, or would I have to get different springs, etc? In other words what is max lift for stock LQ9 heads. (In case I want to try the cam w/o the L92 head swap) 2. Will that L76 intake (P.N. 12590123) they used with the 90mm TB fit in a truck, or is the intake too low? 3. Would that cam be suitable for a Radix if I decided to go that route in the future? Thanks in advance, Mike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shadowsniper3006 Posted September 30, 2007 Author Report Share Posted September 30, 2007 (edited) between that cam, tested as cam "O" and the crane 144hr00119, tested as "S" are the best cams they tested, IMO. I was thinking the "S" cam would be a good pick .624,.624 232,236 115lsa. But the "O" cam beats it in HP up to 5100 some times by up to 20, and has the same peak tq but the "S" cam peaks at 5300 not 4800. But at 5600 rpm the "s" cam beats it in hp by like 27. That "o" cam seems like it would be a real good cam for stock heads and some one with out or real mild stall. almost 350 tq right off idle, the larger cam doesn't reach that untill 2800. If i could afford it I'd like to test both those cams with my set up to see the quarter mile diff. not so much the HP and tq diff. "O" cam tested .531,.531 210,218 114 lsa "S" cam tested .624,.624 232,236 115lsa Here are the heads test and my TEA Stage 2.5 Brad Edited September 30, 2007 by shadowsniper3006 (see edit history) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shadowsniper3006 Posted September 30, 2007 Author Report Share Posted September 30, 2007 here are some scans from the mag so this makes sense to guys that don't have them, keep in mind this is the first time i'm doing this, so sorry if it doesn't look right Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shadowsniper3006 Posted September 30, 2007 Author Report Share Posted September 30, 2007 cam specs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vortec MAX Posted September 30, 2007 Report Share Posted September 30, 2007 (edited) That "o" cam seems like it would be a real good cam for stock heads and some one with out or real mild stall. almost 350 tq right off idle, the larger cam doesn't reach that untill 2800. I was thinking it would be great for a daily driver, but still deliver quite a bit of performance. I don't plan on putting in a larger stall because I tow a camp trailer quite a bit during the summer, and the more it slips, the more heat it generates. The "O" cam has a fatter torque curve everywhere. It even gains on the bottom. I think I want one. I do wonder if I need to also swap out to those L92 heads to get gains, or if I'd see good gains with the LQ9 heads. Does anyone know if I can use that cam with the stock LQ9 heads and springs? It has .531 lift on both valves. Mike P.S. I have scanned both articles if anyone needs them. They are about 750K per page, so not small. Edited September 30, 2007 by Vortec MAX (see edit history) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zippy Posted October 1, 2007 Report Share Posted October 1, 2007 So many questions at once... I wouldn't run any cam over .500 lift with the stock springs on a Gen III sb. Other than the LS1 hot cam, none of them are really right for the L92 heads. The O cam is close though. Shift points is complicated to explain and depends alot on the stall. To answer your question though on the one part, it's past the hp peak, not just past torque peak. You want the best average hp. If your shift extension drops you 2k on the 1-2 shift, you would take the highest hp average (2000rpm worth) and shift at the high point of that. The trans gearing also has an effect on this. I'm a big fan of compression, but milling the heads can lose you more flow than the compression can gain you sometimes. The L76 intake won't work on the LQ9 head, height isn't the issue. The O cam would be ok for a Radix, yes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shadowsniper3006 Posted October 1, 2007 Author Report Share Posted October 1, 2007 thanks for all the help zippy!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vortec MAX Posted October 1, 2007 Report Share Posted October 1, 2007 The L76 intake won't work on the LQ9 head, height isn't the issue. I know it won't work with the LQ9 heads because the intake ports are different shapes. I was asking if I swapped to L92 heads and the L76 intake if the throttle body would be in the right spot, or would it be too low. I know that using the car intakes creates a problem like this. I don't know what application the L76 intake is from. Thanks for the help Zippy. Mike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detjoe Posted October 1, 2007 Report Share Posted October 1, 2007 (edited) I am gonna say that they have got the placement of the TB worked out using the heads and truck intake. 90mm link How much is the X-link?? Edited October 1, 2007 by detjoe (see edit history) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.