aceez71

iTrader: (1)

Heres the deal. Building a 383 with a mini ram setup. I called comp cams today and for the intake and heads i have they suggested the 292xfi when i was actually calling about the 280 xfi. I've searched high and low here and can't seem to find anyone running my combo. Any and all help greatly appreciated. Currently i'm running a 89 mass air setup and planning on switching to the 24x system from efi connection when i do the engine swap.

Specs on new engine:
Forged 383 short block
Lingenfelter cnc ported L98 heads (113's) 58cc 263 cfm at .600
TPIS mini ram
42# injectors
24x efi (LS electronics)
vehicle weighs aprox 3200 lbs
342 gear ratio
11:1 COMPRESSION RATIO
2800-3000 Yank STALL
4L60E TRANSMISSION
Cam - need suggestions. Have a new Lpe 219 but seems a little whimpy

5.0 Eater

iTrader: (2)

Hey aceez71 (still want your other miniram by the way) I would really suggest to stay with the 280 cam. I bet if you call comp tommorrow and get a different tech they would suggest something else. I have the 280 cam and when I ordered my comp port 195 heads from AFR I asked if I should go bigger on the cam and he told me if I went anything over 240* of duration I should go with a sollid roller setup to see any real gains. The 280 cam will be a breeze to tune with the coil per cylinder stuff, and it would be a much better choice over that 219 cam. Just my thoughts, good luck.

89gta383

iTrader: (5)

Don't know what your intentions are with the car, but he LPE 219 is a great all-around street cam. I ran it with the super-ram years ago and regret switching from that combo.

What are the specs on the xfi292?

Orr89RocZ

iTrader: (20)

XFI 292 is a nasty cam. its 242/248 .584/.579 on the 113. Its a rev happy cam that would KICK BUTT in a 11 to 1 compression 383/miniram/AFR 210's.

Its a combination i wanted to run. I had a similar cam spec'd out for me that I wanted to run, but decided not to go that way. It was 240/243 mid .580's I think and 108 lsa. Kowboy59 on here had a cam just like that on his 383 and it ran VERY good. Low 11's at near 120 mph on motor. My car ran a best of 11.4 at 119 in summer heat. 195 cc AFR heads

I do not know what your ported L98 heads spec out at as far as port volume, but I do not think your higher than 190 cc so in that sense, I would stick with the 280 XFI cam or something else along those lines.

YOur flow numbers are great for a ported L98 head, but just dont think it will support a 292XFI cam

aceez71

iTrader: (1)

Thanks for the info guys. Still undecided. I agree the 292 is too much for my heads in my opinion. So the 280 may be in order just want to maximize my setup and be very streetable. In addition the 219 may still be an option, it doesnt spec out to the numbers in the LPE book anymore somewhere along the line it was changed from 219/.503 219/525 to 219/.570 219/.570 with the same LSA of 112 but it wasn't designed for a setup with runners as short as a mini ram i don't know how it will bahave. This will be primarily a street car to play around in on the weekends. They tore the track down here in Jacksonville and the closest is gainsville.

RedGut86

Are you sure about the 219?

I'm pretty sure it was and has remained 219/219 with .525/.525 lift (or .560/.560 w/ 1.6s). During changes from cam manufacturers I believe there was a switch from grinding the cam straight to including 4 deg into the grind.

This LT1 intake-219 combo might give you an idea of behavior but keep in mind, these are new AFR eliminator 195s and outflow your ported 113s by 20cfm up top and probably similar throughout the lift profile, so focus on the shape of the curves rather than the power output and probably expect less RPM too.
http://forums.corvetteforum.com/c4-t...o-numbers.html

Finally, if you want street-able, what kind of vacuum does a 280 pull at idle?

1989GTATransAm

iTrader: (3)

I agree with Orr and stick to the 280XFI camshaft. We have a 383 that will be on the dyno next Saturday with the 292XFI camshaft but with much better flowing heads than the ones you have. It should make peak power around the 6500rpm mark. This is going to be and interesting dyno session for our SoCal 3rd gen club with the new combinations coming on line.

I think at this years LA Invasion our cars are going to show the 4th gens how its done. We should have numerous 11 and 12 second cars. Every year the et's keep getting lower.

aceez71

iTrader: (1)

Hey thanks for the link.
Very impressive numbers for a 350. And i do stand corrected about the lift it is .560 with 1.6 rockers. However the LPE book has the lift split intake/exhaust. I wounder what an LT1 383 dyno would look like with the 219 cam. I'm really leaning on using the 219 plus i have heard nothing but positive feedback about driveability and i already have it.

RedGut86

I have the LPE book but not with me, that is weird I'll have to check it later.


Yeah, if you have it, why not try it. I just don't know about that 350. Those numbers and that RPM it peaks at seem really high, but if you can run it and it does similarly, that would rock.

1989TA, please post up in here after that dyno. I'm excited to see those results.

89gta383

iTrader: (5)

The LPE 219 is a great all around cam. With the superram it was a perfect combo, with the miniram it will make more power up top, I think to 6200. There are some guys on the corvette forum who swapped intakes with the 219 cam, do a search in the archives and see what their dynos looked like.

I have a used comp 242-254 .575 .585 110lsa cam that I will sell you and I am here in Jax also. It didn't give me enough vacuum for my power brakes so I pulled it out. I didn't have enougn compression for it, it wanted at least 11:1 and 11.5:1 or higher would have been better for it. It sounded nasty though.

badgta

iTrader: (4)

i have a brande new in the box xfi 292 cam, but i think i will trade it in for somthing smaller, even though i have all forged bottom end, i dont feel like revving to 7000= rpm to make 500hp, i plan on adding a blower or turbo in the future anyway, so i think i will go with the xe-288hr-10 and it will be happy with it... tunings going to be a bitch, but better than the 292, just a killer on the valve sprngs, and the 195 eliminators just won't handle it out of the box from what i gather...

good luck man, orr and gta383 know there stuff, they have been here a while and are good tuners as well!

aceez71

iTrader: (1)

Thanks for the advise all. I just have to decide between the 280 and the 219 now, any furhter input by any and all appreciated. Brian at Harris tpi has a similar combo with the LT4 Hot cam (a little smaller than the 219 LPE) and ported lt1 heads on his LT1 383 vette i think he said something like 490hp and a little more tq at the flywheel.

Orr89RocZ

iTrader: (20)

I like a small cam combo that makes good power. I think your setup would like the 219 cam. You have good compression but a slightly understalled converter for that setup. 219 cam would compliment it better than the 280 xfi. 280 will turn more rpm than the 219 but both will make good power. The LPE is a old grind but proven to be very effective. If you already have it, use it. Run it with a 1.6 or even 1.65 ratio rocker if you can. Get that lift up to take advantage of your heads

When you install it, install it straight up, no advance in it. Its on a 112 LSA so put it on a 112 ICL. That cam probably advertises install at 108 but for that 11 to 1 383 with a miniram, i'd retard it back to 112 and let it eat. That will give some top end back and make that cam act alittle bigger than it is, plus lower the DCR alittle more for better pump gas tunability

badgta

iTrader: (4)

heres a guy from www.highperformancetoys.com, cracky had a 350 lt1 with the xfi 292, it defanantly wild, you can here him tapping the gas in the burnout and how the idle sounds in the other, i would love a cam that runs and sounds like that without taking it over 6500 to make near 500hp with a 350... big dreams i guess.

http://s16.photobucket.com/albums/b3...urnouts033.flv

http://s16.photobucket.com/albums/b3...t=MOV00261.flv

aceez71

iTrader: (1)

Thanks again
Hey Orr89RocZ sounds like you know your stuff and the 219 well. You think 3500 stall is in order or you thinking even higher it's not too late to swap it out and i'd rather be dead on the first time rather than use too small converter and have to pull it. Was just going by LPE's recomendations of around 2800-3000. With your knowledge i'd like to know what you recommend. Thanks again

aceez71

iTrader: (1)

Forgot to mention i have comp cams 1.6 Pro Magnums.

Orr89RocZ

iTrader: (20)

Depends on the use of the car but more drag than street would love 3600 or so. More street I would go 3200

aceez71

iTrader: (1)

Very Good. Thanks for the advise. I plan on mostly street driving with some drag racing so i think the 3200 will work better in my case. I'm shooting for about 6 weeks to do this conversion (alot to do switching to the 24 x system and the mini ram at the same time plus a 4l60e) i'll post dyno results if anyone is interested.

Orr89RocZ

iTrader: (20)

I had 3600 in my 383 and it was very fun on the street. Wasnt too much stall at all. Infact I wish I went 3800-4000 on my setup since it made peak torque in the 4000-4500 rpm range. your setup I would expect it to peak in the 3600-4000 range since the cam is alot smaller than what I ran. You could street drive a 3500 +- 100 rpm stall just fine and it will be a BLAST off the line or from a low roll speed kick. 3200 is a great overall range for a setup like that however. Lots of cubes, smaller type cam thats gonna make decent power and a miniram which will give flat torque curve. 3200 will put you right in the meat of that band right before peak so its gonna pull hard through the midrange. Should be fun and very streetable

TA

iTrader: (1)

The 383/292XFI combo was putting out 389 HP/371tq, still in the 12.5 Air/fuel range on that pull. On the next dyno pull it "farted" a large amount of oil out the back of the engine, so we pulled it off the dyno until we could find out what happened. Maybe a collapsed breather or something pressurized the bottom end, and it just blew out the silicone at the back of the intake manifold. Honestly, with all the mods done to increase airflow into this engine, power still peaks at 5,750RPM, which does not match peak for the XFI292 cam, so I think I am actually over-cammed for this combo, but until the tuning is completed, we don't really know for sure.

383 forged bottom end
ported e-tech 200 heads: 275in/241ex flow @550 lift
Exensively welded/ported SuperRam/58MM BBK throttle body
44# injectors
Converted to Speed Density
Dougs' long tubes, dual bullet cats, full Bassani exhaust out the back
342 gear ratio
10:8 C.R
3500 STALL/700R4

TA

89gta383

iTrader: (5)

My AFR 190 heads with 383 and various sized cams all peaked around 5800-5900. I had a 242-254 .555 .585 110lsa cam that peaked at 6100. After my heads were ported by LE and the area between the pushrod pinch was opened up, and the intake port CC's are now 216cc, the current 230 .600 107lsa cam peaks at 6400 rpms.

What kind of work was done to the heads and what kind of valvetrain are on the heads?

Orr89RocZ

iTrader: (20)

Heads are a limiting factor...same with intakes. Need a certain cross sectional area to allow motors to peak where the cam wants to peak. For what its worth I had a 230 deg intake lobe 245 deg exhaust on a 109 lsa with just over .600 lift on AFR 195 eliminators. Basically peaked at 6250 rpm, but held flat to 6500 where the dyno stopped. I shifted at 6600-6800 and it seemed to like either one. Abit more head like 210's, I think it could have peaked 6400-6500, but I only wanted the cam to be around 6200-6300 anyway. It was spot on.

articwhiteZ

iTrader: (56)

have a LPE/comp cams
mech roller if anybody is looking comes with lifters all comp cams
w/1.6 rockers its spec are 232 236 @ 50 ex 563/586 112 LC

this was in my lingenfelter 383

1989GTATransAm

iTrader: (3)

TA, I think you are finding the limit of your heads. More tuning and you will be over 400rwhp.

By the way my TPI motor made peak power at 6400rpm with a 228/228 camshaft on the dyno last Saturday getting ready for the Los Angeles Invasion drag races. We did not take it high enough to see where the power starts to drop off.

TA

iTrader: (1)

[QUOTE=What kind of work was done to the heads and what kind of valvetrain are on the heads?[/QUOTE]

The heads have a good valve job, bowls, pushrod pinch and valve guide area modified. The intake and base plate got the huge amount of work in comparison, and the base/runners flow well over 300 CFM together. I'm running the Comp 26986 "new beehive" valve springs/retainers, just slightly tighter then the recommended install height, but Alan (1989GTATransAm) opined that he thought it sounded like it was floating the valves when I took it to 6,500, and it struggled to get that high, was not making good power up there.

Flow numbers for the heads are:
.250" 159 in, 137 ex
.300" 185 in, 156 ex
.350" 211 in, 171 ex
.400" 232 in, 194 ex
.450" 252 in, 217 ex
.500" 266 in, 232 ex
.550" 275 in, 241 ex
.600" 275 in, 246 ex

These are measured figures, not advertised figures, which we find are almost always off by a significant amount. I think I might need a bit more work on the intake ports, but the exhausts are very efficient and should support more RPMs. The rotating assembly is very light, especially when compared to stock components, so I'm a bit puzzled as to why it does not want to rev. Maybe I need solid lifters?

TA

Orr89RocZ

iTrader: (20)

thats ALOT of cam for those beehives. Simply not enough pressure. Upgrade to the PAC-1220 big block beehives if your heads can handle the higher install height. 1.445" diameter, 155 lbs seat at 1.880 install height. Shimmed down to a 1.800 install height would put them at 184lbs on the seat which is abit much unless you have a strong hydraulic roller. I ran 170 lbs on my LS7 lifters just fine.

Or get a strong double spring and shim to match your installed height. AFR 8019 springs are what I'm using. 155 lbs advertisted install height. Slightly shimmed will get you to 165-170 lbs like i'm using. I think thats a 1.775" install height. Cant remember what I had.

Patriot extreme gold is nice too. Similar to the AFR spring.

I know comp doesnt advertise those type of rates for these XFI cams but they are wrong. They bigger XFI lobes are hard to control.

TA

iTrader: (1)

Obviously you know what you are talking about. The Big block springs are not gonna work, not enough room for the installed height. The LS beehives were the springs that comp recommended for this cam, and they do not appear to be up to the job. This cam has some pretty steep ramps, so a major spring is required, so I will investigate your other recommendations. Thanks for the info Orr.

TA

89gta383

iTrader: (5)

I am using comp 977 springs with 150 lbs on the seat, not sure about the open pressure. Did the dyno graph drop off a cliff or flatline?

Guest

Looks like the spec on those according to comp cams website is 109# closed, 284# open, and .575 max lift. The rate is 280#/in. Those numbers are based on an installed height of 1.800" (unlikely) and .625 of valve opening. That is not really enough spring to handle that cam, not enough seat pressure or spring rate.

Those are actually not the spring they have on the cam spec sheet, they call out the 26918. Those springs are 125# closed, 367# open, .625 max lift, and a rate of 372 #/in. That is actually more in line with what my dads car is running, supposedly (if my last post was actually correct) its 135# on the seat. I cant remember exactly but its somewhere in the neighborhood of 350# open. I suspect from hearing stories it pulls just fine to 7k with no hint of power loss or anything odd going on with the valvetrain.

http://www.compcams.com/Cam_Specs/Ca...?csid=210&sb=0

Scroll down to where it says valve springs, says 26918-16

1989GTATransAm

iTrader: (3)

From my experience the springs are most likely the problem and I have to agree with the above posters that the spring is to light. Another thing is the spring actually close to the rated numbers or is it less. My 918's were less and I ran into valve float problems with the XFI268. This is why you have to check everything. Trust no one with their advertised numbers.

I bought the Manley beehives from Kevin to replace the 918s and they are working great even with my heavy valves. They are a direct replacement and wonder of wonders they actually checked out as advertised on Don's spring checker. After the Invasion you might want to look into changing out those springs.

Orr89RocZ

iTrader: (20)

Just pay attention to what some of the LSX guys run. They have setups pulling to over 7000 rpm on hydraulic rollers.

My buddys turbo 4.8L motor pulled to about 7500 rpm. NO valve float. LS7 lifters i believe, and a stiff double spring I think it was.

LSx guys have some of the steepest most aggressive lobes available. They beat up valvetrains. Pressures are high. 160-180 lbs on the seat can be common.

Beehives can handle an aggressive cam with less seat/open pressures than a double spring because of the beehive design. Their shape/design allows for a progressive rate spring which does not have a constant/single resonant frequency like a typical shaped valve spring. Beehive is less prone to bounce and cause valve float since its frequencies are high, but still doesnt make spring pressure obsolete. You can still have a beehive that just does not have the pressure to control a lifter on the lobe.

New age double springs in the lsx world are small diameter which makes them lighter in weight, and have high spring rates which gives good spring pressures at seat and open heights. This all helps push resonant frequencies up high to allow high rpm control.

I was looking at XFI lobes when I did my 383. I only wanted a peak rpm of 6200-6300 since my 6E based ecm only has PE mode control to 6400. I really wanted a big cam to go over 6500 but didnt want to risk not having the fuel control for those rpms. Most of the cam grinders I've talked to or seen posting on forums about XFI lobes say they are difficult to control and do not like the fact they have wide lsa's. You can get them custom ground on a tighter LSA, but they still said the lobe is hard to control and would be hard on the valvetrain. So I passed on the XFI lobe and went with relatively mild lobe with HIGH lift. I was able to control it to near 7K rpms with no signs of problems. It made strong power for a street car. I was happy with that choice.

I still want to build another 355 and plan to rev it to 7200 rpm with a hydraulic roller. I'd use something as big as the 292xfi, but slightly different lobe. If i was going to use the XFI, i'd have some very strong springs and titanium retainers. May consider longer valves or deeper cut spring pockets to use the 155lb beehive springs but shimmed abit to 165-170 lbs. Then i'd run the cadillac race lifters.

1989GTATransAm

iTrader: (3)

The Manley beehive/ovate spring I'm using is 150# on the seat and 355# open. Part number is 221428-16.

I see Manley has a new spring available that is polished for better life. Looks like the same spring but enhanced. 150# on the seat and 375# open. Part number is 221438-16.

See what Don can do for you.

From what I have read Orr is right about the XFI ramp rates. The bigger the duration the faster the ramps. Buy the way when I had my valve float it was not all that evident listening to the motor. However the dyno sure told the tale.

TA

iTrader: (1)

OK, I thought I was going dyslexic in my old age, the cam card calls for the 26986, but I have the box and I installed the 26918s.

The dyno run that I took to 6,500 did not record, so I have no graph, and seeing and hearing how poorly it ran past 6, I didn't go there in subsequent runs, so I have no graph of those RPMs. Power starts dropping off after 5750, but it goes down gradually until it starts audibly breaking up at about 6,300.

TA

1989GTATransAm

iTrader: (3)

The 26918 spring shows 125/367 advertised. Chances are better than 50-50 the seat pressure is less than that.

No matter what Troy, you are still making very good power to do quite well at the Invasion. It looks like you and Bill will be fighting it out for top dog. That Vincent guy is probably a busy beaver getting his car ready and it will be interesting to see what he comes up with. With Don and I down on power we may be bringing up the rear of the top tier. Don's driving skills will be worth some et so you never really know.

VincentZ28

iTrader: (2)

With those heads, I would go with the XI268 for a happy medium. It will give you a very good bottom/mid range and decent power to 6000. You would be happy with that.

TA

iTrader: (1)

It was not my intention to heist this thread, but to continue discussion of things relevant to this cam choice for anyone who did a search.

I contacted a tech guy at Comp Cams, and he agreed that the 292xfi has very aggressive ramps, and unless you have a featherweight valve train, he recommended a stiffer dual spring to control it: Comp 914-16 springs. 1.800 installed height, 165lbs seat pressure, 385lbs open pressure.
Max lift is .650 lift at 1.800 installed height

Thanks everyone for your input, you are what makes this website so invaluable.

TA

1989GTATransAm

iTrader: (3)

I think the Comp Cam guy is right on target. I still recommend the Manley Beehive as an alternate. I see 400rwhp in your future. Now you just need to get all that power to the pavement. See you at the Invasion.

Edit: we are just helping to keep the thread alive.

Orr89RocZ

iTrader: (20)

Those are nice springs. AFR 8019's give similar performance with .015" of shims for around a 1.775" install height I believe. They are advertised at 1.800" but mine did not spec out that high I think. I have to check my notes when I get a chance.

HiTech5

iTrader: (4)

FWIW - Crower has a great line of springs that I have run for years on my solid roller and hydraulic roller cams.

badgta

iTrader: (4)

wonder if a person could go out of box 195 eliminators with the hydra rev kit they sell and be ok?

i was reading somewhere a new beehive spring for the ls1s someone came out with claiming to handle the big cams for the ls1's, be nice if they would work with a afr sbc head.

wonder how much differnce there is in the xfi 292 and the xe-294, same overall duration and .050 duration specs. im sure ramp rates are different. but i wonder how much?

insteresting read, none the less.

well said fellas

Orr89RocZ

iTrader: (20)

Its possible the hydrarev kit + out the box springs will work but it will probably cost more. The 8019 upgrade springs are only 100 bucks more than the base 8017's. A couple bucks for a set of shims and a 7 dollar compressor will get you the spring specs you want, however you wil probably want to have a 30-40 dollar valve spring height micrometer to verify install heights. Its money well spent if planning on an aggressive cam lobe. Power is there to be made with these lobes but only if you have the right spring. There are many companies making suitable springs. Between 1.25 and 1.32" in diameter, there are several good double springs out there with good pressures.

XE294 Lobe adv. .050 .200 Lobe lift
Intake 3317 294 242 164 .360
Exhaust 3318 300 248 171 .375

XFI292 Lobe Adv. .050 .200 Lobe Lift
Intake 3018 292 242 165 .365
Exhaust 3039 300 248 169 .362

The XE intake lobe has slightly less lift and duration at .200, and slightly more advertised duration. Its abit less aggressive than the XFI intake lobe. The XE exhaust lobe however has more duration at .200 and more lift. It appears its lifting and closing the valve faster than the XFI exhaust after .050" lift but comp says the xfi exhaust has more area under the curve than xe lobes. Not sure based on those numbers.

For information, heres a lobe designed for high rpm with heavy valves. Its a less aggresive lobe in terms of valve motion but will do great at high rpm. XFI/XE would require more spring to control the same rpms as this lobe

Adv. .050 .200 Lobe Lift
294 239 158 0.365

I kinda like the XE cam since its on a 110 lsa and has good lift to match the XFI lobes. Wont be as smooth as the XFI at idle but I would say it would make more power with the same rocker. BOth would require a good spring.

TA

iTrader: (1)

For those of us that have to pass the California emissions test, wider LSA is necessary to minimize fresh intake charge getting into the exhaust pipe on overlap. I just found out (the hard way, "FAIL") that they have again tightened the allowed emissions numbers for our cars to pass.

TA

Orr89RocZ

iTrader: (20)

I'm surprised alot of the combos posted in the cali boards are passing. Thats impressive. To even think the XFI292 cam can be used out there in any engine is incredible. It would be interesting to see the results of this cam on emissions output. I think its pretty large for anything under 400 inches.

norcalz28

iTrader: (13)

When you do the 24x swap, let me know how much it costs to get everything you need. I didn't see a price for a complete kit on their site, and I stopped looking after I totalled up about 2 grand in parts, I'm sure it costs more than that.

Orr89RocZ

iTrader: (20)

Wow, that seems rather pricey for a factory ECM conversion. At that level might as well go XFI or BS3.

norcalz28

iTrader: (13)

It does, and I really like the idea of being able to use the LS1 PCM, but for that amount of money I'd be well on my way to an LS1 swap LOL so I dunno. I do like sequential injection, sounds so much better than batch fired

88BlackZ-51

iTrader: (2)

curious why 42 pound injectors?