TPI Tuned Port Injection discussion and questions. LB9 and L98 tech, porting, tuning, and bolt-on aftermarket products.
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by:

Camshaft Question

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Oct 28, 2005 | 03:46 PM
  #1  
Pat Hall's Avatar
Thread Starter
Supreme Member
iTrader: (31)
 
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 3,347
Likes: 3
From: Roy,UT USA
Camshaft Question

I have a GM hydraulic roller cam that's supposed to be from a 90-92 L98 engine, but looking at the info in the camshaft article here on the site, the last three numbers are supposed to be 773, and the cam I have has 395 as the last three numbers. The box it was shipped in has 93 LT1 written on it. Does anyone know if 395 corresponds to an LT1 camshaft? I also have an 88-89 L98 cam that has 049 on it, which does correlate with the info in the article. Thanks guys.
Reply
Old Oct 29, 2005 | 10:06 AM
  #2  
Pat Hall's Avatar
Thread Starter
Supreme Member
iTrader: (31)
 
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 3,347
Likes: 3
From: Roy,UT USA
I went to gmpartsdirect.com, and I think I figured out what it is. According to the site, it's a hydralic roller for a 383 truck. Not really a high performance cam judging by the specs listed there. The biggest downside is the lobe centerline is only 109 degrees, which sucks for a computer controlled engine. Anyone want to buy a 383 roller cam for cheap?
Reply
Old Oct 30, 2005 | 10:30 AM
  #3  
Vader's Avatar
Moderator
25 Year Member
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
 
Joined: Jan 2000
Posts: 19,675
Likes: 314
Don't condemn the cam based solely on the LSA. Many TPIs came from the factory with a lower LSA. My '86 TPI has a 110° LSA right from the factory. The more critical determining factor would be overlap. A short duration cam with a shorter LSA like that is just fine for an EFI engine. A TPI might actually work rather well with a typical RV type torque cam profile if the lift is adequate. It would probably be better than a longer duration profile with stock ECM programming.

Of course, you should consider reprogramming either way, so the duration and overlap are less of a factor if you can scan operational data and adjust the tables accordingly.
Reply
Old Oct 31, 2005 | 06:14 PM
  #4  
Pat Hall's Avatar
Thread Starter
Supreme Member
iTrader: (31)
 
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 3,347
Likes: 3
From: Roy,UT USA
Thanks for the advice Vader. I greatly appreciate it! However, I don't think I'm even going to bother running that camshaft since I have a couple of better ones laying around that I can use instead. I have an SLP #51002 cam, and also a ZZ4 cam as well. I've heard alot of people on this board saying they've had good luck running the ZZ4 cam on a MAF TPI system even with the stock programming, so I'll probably go that route for now. If the ZZ4 ends up being a little too radical for my taste, the SLP cam has slightly less duration and lift than the ZZ4 cam. The SLP cam is supposedly the one used in the factory firehawk cars. Both of these cams have 112 degree lobe separation, so there should be no doubt that they'll be agreeable with the ecm as far as that's concerned.
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
blackroc68
Engine/Drivetrain/Suspension Parts for Sale
9
Sep 1, 2015 08:01 PM
midge54
Engine/Drivetrain/Suspension Wanted
1
Aug 29, 2015 09:51 PM
SLNTSCPE
Tech / General Engine
3
Aug 22, 2015 09:15 PM
Jake_92RS
Tech / General Engine
3
Aug 17, 2015 09:42 AM
redmaroz
LTX and LSX
7
Aug 16, 2015 11:40 PM




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:01 AM.