From www.thunderracing.com

Comp Cams "305" LT1 Camshaft, 220 / 230, .510 / .510 114 LSA, I'm not sure what rockers they are using for lift. (1.5 or 1.6?)

GM LT4 Hot Cam, 218 / 228, .525 / .525 112 LSA Lift #'s w/1.6 Rockers

 

I have a CC305 ground on a 112 LSA. The cam is very streetable...and I'm still on the stock programming. The CC305 has 2* more duration on both I/E as well as .19" more lift. However, the CC305 is normally ground on a 114 LSA which will give it a more tame idle than the hotcam as well as a broader power curve. On the flip side, the 114 LSA will make the 305 peak a little higher in the RPMs than the hotcam. The power difference between the two cams is negligible. See my sig for dyno numbers/track times - these numbers are with 100% stock tuning and stock heads.

 

Specs were posted near the top of this thread.

CC503 specs:

224/230 duration, .503/.510 lift w/1.5 .536(I think)/.544 lift with 1.6, 112 LSA

Comp uses 1.5 rockers in it's lifts. 305 would be .544/.544 lift with 1.6 rockers.

 

I think the hot cam is great if you dont want to spend a lot of money. If you dont mind putting down close to $1000 for a cam then skip the cc305 and get something better like the XE224/230 or XE230/236. FWIW i have the XE224/230-110 LSA and definitely like the power.

 

Do you have any track times/dyno numbers with your 224/230? Although everyone has jumped on the XE bandwagon recently, I really haven't seen too many impressive numbers out of the XE grinds.

 

I should be posting Head/XE 224/230 numbers within a week at most, provided no problems arise.

 

I ran both on my previous setup and the biggest difference is that the hotcam has a lopier idle than the cc305 due to its 112 las. Both have good mid to upper rpm power. If you dont do the hot cam kit(cheapest way to go) I would skip the 305 and go with the xe 224/230 because the cost for springs and such would be the same and streetability is very good with a smoother curve.

 

How bout the Crower 562. That's the one I'm considering.

 

97Bowtie. Great numbers man!!! I would love to run those times.

That cam sounds like a good way to go.

 

turbo_Z, what is your ET's/MPH? also, do you have any dynojet #'s?

 

sorry guys i dont have any track times or dyno numbers.. possibly the track times in a couple months though and if i had a job id go to the dyno. but the way i see it.. if you are going to buy all the parts seperate anyway you may as well get a larger cam... more bang for you buck right! the cc305 isnt that much smaller at 220 intake and 230 exhaust but the advantage of the XE comes from the radical lobe design but its also rough on valvetrain. but i will say i havent had a single issue with my car yet and get on it ALL THE TIME!

 

I am yet to see proof of this "advantageous ramp design." Not bashing, but I would really like to see some dyno/track results from some of the XE owners.

 

yeah id like to see number too. but in my theory because of the steep ramps of the XEs, that would allow the valve to stay open in the highest lift point for a longer period of time which means more power usually. if you take the exhaust lobe of the 2 cams for instance the advertised duration is more for the cc305 and less for the XE with the same duration at .50" lift of 230 and total lift of .510". because the max lift and duration at .50" lift is the same, most people think there is no difference but thats just not true. for a lobe with less advertised duration (the XE), in order for it to have the same duration at .50" lift as a lobe with more advertised duration (305) it must spend more time in the max lift range. or another way to look at this... if the valve spends less time on the ramps because they are steep, it must spend more time at the top. anyway, i hope that helps you see the difference of both cams and clears up some questions but i must warn you... dont take all that to heart because that is my personal theory on why the XE is better.. it just seems right to me.

 

The X224/230 need a lot of dyno tuning to pass emmisions(sp?). CC305 & Hotcam will both pass without tuning.

 

I understand the theory behind the XE grinds...however, as of now it is just that - a theory IMO. I have seen some decent numbers out of 230/236 & 236/242 XE grinds with a decent set of heads on top of them. I have seen just as good, if not better numbers out of non-XE CC306ish grinds.

The XE ramp design seems like a good design - however when dealing with LTX heads, you are generally dealing with exhaust port limitations in the neighborhood of ~ 200 CFM. When dealing with LSX heads, you have an exhaust port capable of flowing 270+ CFM which is why they seem to like single pattern grinds or "tighter splits" between the I/E duration. From my (somewhat limited) experience with LT1 motors, they like a larger split than 6*. IMO, they need 10-14* of split between the intake and exhaust to be really effective. I would love to see how the XE ramps work on a CC306ish grind.