Thunder racing

[Jermoslin]

Saw this on Ebay. Brand new TR224 on 112. Good deal. What would the differece be between the TR224 to the TR220 in a 5.3?
LS1 custom camshaft:eBay Motors (item 270426022226 end time Jul-20-09 10:51:20 PDT)

[txarkitekt]

The 224R should have more duration and lift...hence the 224 and 220 designations. Looks to be a decent upgrade from your current cam with a lopey idle.

[Jermoslin]

Looking to know if it would kill the lower end power too much, and I have a lower stall then most.

[COWL327]

I still have great low end on my 5.3 with a way bigger cam than that

[ff_jeff]

usually when people say they lost ''low end'' really what happened was that they gained more up top than down low. The low end is actually the same.
That cam has about 1 degree of overlap, and would work well with stock heads. I would say that it would have a decent lopey idle, and should have a wider powerband than your current cam, with a higher peak. I would like to hear this cam, and see some dyno/track numbers. Go for it. might even work well with a turbo.

[Show&Go]

Actually looking for someone to trade this cam for my boost cam on the side! haha. I want one bad. Just already have two cams having three would be ridiculous

[ff_jeff]

Actually looking for someone to trade this cam for my boost cam on the side! haha. I want one bad. Just already have two cams having three would be ridiculous

I hear you.
I have a 227/223 .591/.588 114lsa and a Z06 cam. I keep seeing turbo cams that I would like that are more aggressive, but like you 3 cams for 1 motor is a little much. Maybe put one in the vette.

[Jermoslin]

Well if I win it I'll let ya know, and post sound clips.

[randomhero]

usually when people say they lost ''low end'' really what happened was that they gained more up top than down low. The low end is actually the same.
That cam has about 1 degree of overlap, and would work well with stock heads. I would say that it would have a decent lopey idle, and should have a wider powerband than your current cam, with a higher peak. I would like to hear this cam, and see some dyno/track numbers. Go for it. might even work well with a turbo.

I would have to strongly disagree with that first part although of course everyone is entitled to their own opinion(Not trying to start and argument, but rather a discussion).

As you increase the duration of the cam the power band is shifted not increased. The stock cam stops making power well before you shift. If it were that case then we'd all be running massive cams, and never thinking twice about it.

I will post a bit of a personal example.

I ran an 11.2 in the 1/8th with my comp cams 224/224 on 112 lsa. That was with a 2.7 60' time and NO WHEEL SPIN even on an open differential.

The loss of low end was ridiculous.

After I added my ss3600 torque converter I was able to run an 8.9 and even that time was way higher than it should be as I was running 2.2 60' times with horrible wheel hop.

I gained about 14 mph in trap speed(67 mph to 81 mph) in just the 1/8th mile from swapping to a higher stalling torque converter and putting in long tubes. Nothing else.

There is no doubt about it in my opinion.

Also, it's pretty hard for me to prove my point with dyno graphs since most places usually start recording on the dyno around 3000 rpm

[GasGuzzler]

As you increase the duration of the cam the power band is shifted not increased.

+1 usually

If that weren't the case we'd all be running massive cams, and never thinking twice about it.

Fixed

The stock cam stops making power well before you shift.

That really depends on a lot of factors. Mine pulls fine all the way to 6K. Would it be better with a non-stock cam? Sure.

I will post a bit of a personal example. I ran an 11.2 in the 1/8th with my comp cams 224/224 on 112 lsa. That was with a 2.7 60' time and NO WHEEL SPIN even on an open differential. The loss of low end was ridiculous. After I added my ss3600 torque converter I was able to run an 8.9 and even that time was way higher than it should be as I was running 2.2 60' times with horrible wheel hop.

I gained about 14 mph in trap speed(67 mph to 81 mph) in just the 1/8th mile from swapping to a higher stalling torque converter and putting in long tubes. Nothing else. Also, it's pretty hard for me to prove my point with dyno graphs since most places usually start recording on the dyno around 3000 rpm

Some good points there. The MPH gain proves the converter was needed to bypass the low end that it lost when you stepped up in cams but most of the ET reduction is not from anything to do with the low end, mostly from the extra top end power and higher stall speed.