LT1 Based Engine Tech 1993-1997 LT1/LT4 Engine Related

crane cam question?

Old Mar 16, 2007 | 09:09 PM
  #1  
jonesy's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 508
From: Niles, Michigan
crane cam question?

I'm in the final stage of my 383, I've been playing with cam #'s and noticed that the Crane Cams CRN-119651 makes more power than the GM 847 ( on the computer) I did a search and tried to see if anyone has run this and found no results. what do you guys think? 240/248 .558/.558

thx,
jonesy
Old Mar 16, 2007 | 09:12 PM
  #2  
96capricemgr's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 4,800
I think you need to spend less time with simulations.
Look at the results you can find, do you honestly see "bigger is better" as a trend? I don't.
Old Mar 16, 2007 | 09:26 PM
  #3  
seawolf06's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 3,034
From: Raleigh, NC
This is what I see when I compare that cam to the GM847:

This cam has:
Higher rated RPM: up to 7k, might be lower with stroker
Slower ramp rates/less agressive
More intake lift should mean more power
IVC is later so you'll need more SCR

My suggestion: Either custom or xfi. They seem to do well in stroker motors.

Last edited by seawolf06; Mar 16, 2007 at 09:30 PM.
Old Mar 16, 2007 | 09:33 PM
  #4  
jonesy's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 508
From: Niles, Michigan
the GM 847 cam makes more power than the CC 306 so is bigger better, in this comparison YES, so why wouldn't the 240/248 cam be a little better, seems how its designed for a bigger motor. I agree bigger isn't always better but its not that much bigger and was wondering if anyone is running it on here.
Old Mar 16, 2007 | 09:33 PM
  #5  
maro z28's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 592
From: new orleans, la
I can't get at my valve events calculator. How much overlap does that cam have @.050 and how is the overlap oriented about TDC? To take advantage of being able to spin past 6500, you could probably benefit form overlap being more towards the intake stroke to help build hp past peak torque. That cam needs more SCR, as seawolf eluded to. You could also bump up DCR, but it would be at the expensive of overlap placement. As you advance the IVC, you continue to push overlap towards exhaust bias. JMO, though. Brett will probably chime in and put my advice to shame.
Old Mar 17, 2007 | 01:26 AM
  #6  
seawolf06's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 3,034
From: Raleigh, NC
Originally Posted by jonesy
the GM 847 cam makes more power than the CC 306 so is bigger better, in this comparison YES, so why wouldn't the 240/248 cam be a little better, seems how its designed for a bigger motor. I agree bigger isn't always better but its not that much bigger and was wondering if anyone is running it on here.
See reasons I listed above. @.050" duration isn't everything when it comes to cams.

Eric, the crane cam listed also has a good bit more overlap than the GM847 as well which could explain its higher suggested RPM range. Also, I'm pretty sure the LSA is 110 as opposed to 112 for the GM847. See Jonesy, there's A LOT more to cams than you might think.

Last edited by seawolf06; Mar 17, 2007 at 01:32 AM.
Old Mar 17, 2007 | 07:18 AM
  #7  
jonesy's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 508
From: Niles, Michigan
and I guess thats why they make adjustable cam gears. I'm new to the LT world but not in the cam world, I currently own a prostock diesel tractor that puts out over 2400 hp @ 4500 rpm, we spent hours on dyno with cams along with cam timing. you can take a 106 centerline, advance it 4 degrees and pick up 100 hp, and damn near 200 ft lbs of torque. I don't know it all thats why I'm asking, this car is for my son and was looking @ cam profiles and thought this might be a step-up over the 847, if I'm not mistaken I believe crane makes the cam (847). I appreciate evryones input and I know that people have differen't opinions on what cams work where, I just asked if anyone tried it and if they liked or disliked it. Seawolf , there are endless variables to go along with cams. If I wanted to install the more popular 847 cam I would install 1.7 rockers, but instead I got a deal on 1.6 rockers and thought the profile of 651 cam might work a little better, for our setup. Not trying to start a cam intellegence war, hell I can't even win arguements with my wife. thanks guys for helping out , I'm sure this thread will continue on.
jonesy
berrien springs, mi.
Old Mar 17, 2007 | 08:53 AM
  #8  
96capricemgr's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 4,800
Do you see "results" as dyno graphs or ETs? They are most definetely not the same thing.
Old Mar 17, 2007 | 09:49 AM
  #9  
seawolf06's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 3,034
From: Raleigh, NC
You shouldn't put 1.7 rockers on the LT1 head anyway. Search around this forum and you'll find about a million cam threads.
Old Mar 17, 2007 | 12:29 PM
  #10  
Injuneer's Avatar
Administrator
 
Joined: Nov 1998
Posts: 71,094
From: Hell was full so they sent me to NJ
Although you provided no info in your signature, or in the original post, appears you are talking about an LT1. I'll move this to the LT1 forum.
Old Mar 17, 2007 | 01:42 PM
  #11  
maro z28's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 592
From: new orleans, la
1.65 are the biggest ration RRs I've heard of for an LT1.

Hey Jonesy...nobody wins arguements with their wives, or girlfriends, or girls that are only friends, or female co-workers, or girls that once were our friends but........well, you get the point!
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
oldschool
Parts For Sale
16
Feb 9, 2016 09:21 PM
Brandon Wittmer
General 1967-2002 F-Body Tech
3
Dec 20, 2014 09:51 PM
Queens94z28
Parts For Sale
3
Dec 20, 2014 09:11 PM
Noenav
General 1967-2002 F-Body Tech
14
Dec 6, 2014 07:35 PM
Don 97 SS
LT1 Based Engine Tech
58
Jul 11, 2005 08:50 AM


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:26 PM.