http://www.lingenfelter.com/store/lpe-74219.html

is anyone running that cam or something like it? Im wondering if that cam or the LT4 would be better.

specs are:219/219 duration @ .050 .560"/.560" with 1.6 rocker
LT4 specs: 218/228 duration @.050 .525"/.525" with 1.6 rocker

so with the LT4, the exhaust is open a little longer, but i get less lift. Ive got a TPI, but with the stealth ram intake it flows like an LT1, and both of these cams were designed more for the LT1 so i posted here too.

any opinions?

 

everything I've read is that these cars like a dual pattern cam more than a single pattern

 

That Lingenfelter cam is similar to this Edelbrock cam...http://www.edelbrock.com/automotive/2108graph.html

 

I've used/tuned both cams quite a bit.. The 219 is commonly used among the vette and TPI crowd. Its a really nice performer that sounds really really tame. It typically peaks out at around 5500 rpm. It goes along with the superram nicely. I would use a hotcam over a 219 in a miniram/LT1/LT4 intake setup.

I've got dyno sheets on our website of a few cars with 219 LPE cams.

 

Look around and as noted almost every other cam you find people using will be dual pattern, heck I believe most of Lingenfelter's own cams are dual.

The Edelbrocks cam is similar but the Edelbrock parts are also a joke so you do this Lingenfelter no service in comparing the two.

 

Well let's see here...

Edelbrock cam: Lingenfelter cam:
single pattern single pattern
218/218 @.050 219/219 @ .050
.560 lift (1.6 ratio) .560 lift
112 LSA 112 LSA
Joke Quality

Duane, I see only 1 major difference here. The original poster was looking for info about a 219 cam so I threw him a link to a 218 cam with dyno info. I know there is alot more to a cam than just lift and .050 durations but we are talking about very mild street cams with livable ramps so the differences are probably very small. Whether or not Edelbrock parts are a joke is arguable. I have used many Edelbrock intakes and several performer carbs that worked great. I'm not sure what you are basing that on. Your comments don't do Edelbrock any service either.

 

Edelbrocks carbed intakes are nice the LT1 parts are what are the joke been covered look at the details they give for their testing it includes a header swap which can mean big gains in and of itself. You can also bet the stock motor was on stock tuning and they modded on dyno tuned also that single pattern cam might work well with THEIR matching heads but most smallblock and LT1 heads will work better with a split pattern because the exhaust side is usually comparatively weak.

People love the MARKETTING and ignore even the tricks they tell you about like the header thing imagine what they leave out of the test. This is the same as when the one magazine did the Granatelli test and everyopne drooled over the results, when if they actually read it they admitted they used a BADLY neglected paper filter in the baseline and a K&N in the after. A true honest baseline would have included a clean filter and cleaning the old MAF but that would not give them the results they wanted, heck better yet dyno tuning each so the computer misscalibrations are taken out of the equasion.
This is exactly why the aftermarket sells so much crap people are incapable of looking at things objectively and analyzing all that is put in front of them so marketting is the one key to major aftermarket success leaving the truely good companies to often struggle with low volume while the work slowly spread among the intelligent which takes time not as quick as paying a magazine advertizing dollars to get them to half falsify some dyno "testing" on your behalf.

 

I can say that the LPE 211/219 cam worked great in my LPE 383 for nearly 10 years...I was going to switch to the 219/219 and go with the Superram which was what the cam was designed for, but it was waaayyy cost prohibitive. I would think that the 219/219 would've worked fine with my current set up because it was only adding a little lift and duration over the 211/219...LPE no longer does any R&D on LT1 stuff and they couldn't tell me what the 219/219 would do in my 383 since they only ran them with the Superram, so I ended up going with Joe Overton and couldn't be any happier...but both the 211/219 and the 219/219 LPE cams are great and emissions legal...The 211/219 carried my 383 car into the 11s for a long time...

--Alan

 

Right on, I understand marketing and the tricks involved. Obviously they are going to put their product in the best light possible. Sell the sizzle - not the steak! To be fair, Edelbrock at least used a Corvette LT1 that dynoed pretty well to start. The only difference with the Corvette motor and the Camaro engine other than 4 bolt mains and better intake is a freer flowing exhaust and manifolds. They could have used a Camaro engine to start with. The original poster cc89formula is probably going to use headers and programming I would imagine so the dyno test I provided a link to is probably pretty close to what he can expect. Remember too that the Edelbrock head is just a replacement head and not a ported head with slightly improved numbers. Fortunately, the aluminum head has better int/ext ratios than the iron head so a single pattern cam will be ok- not to mention better low end torque and less emissions than a dual pattern. I would however recommend the cc305 over both cams asked about in this thread.

 

thanks for the answers everone, the reason i choose these 2 was for cost. Im trading an 88 ragged out parts car for one of the 2. so i think what im going to do is go with the lingenfelter and try to polish the exhaust ports as best as we can.