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

hotcam vs comp xe at the track only

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Dec 29, 2003 | 05:10 PM
  #1  
97silverTA's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 59
From: Amarillo,TX, Norman,OK
hotcam vs comp xe at the track only

I know the xe cams dyno more horsepower than the hotcam, but which one is better at the track and on the steet. what would I run at the track with a hotcam and longtubes? I kind of want the hotcam because it is cheaper, but I don't know if it will perform as well as the xe cams. I don't care if it dynos as much but I want the car to be as fast. thanks.
Old Dec 29, 2003 | 07:21 PM
  #2  
funina91ss's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 1,331
From: Huntington,WV
This is a hard question to answer. I have the XE 224/230 my best 8th mile pass was a 7.90@86mph. 12.32 in the 1/4 with a 1.74 60ft time on kuhmo 711's

But every body's car is setup diffrent and air temps etc.. have factors in times.. that is why it might be better to go with dyno charts.
Old Dec 29, 2003 | 08:07 PM
  #3  
94 CAMRO Z28's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 959
From: Green Bay, WI
Check my sig for times. I think the xe grinds are going to make more power but if your on a budget, everyone will agree that you can't beat the hotcam kit for the $$.

Aaron
Old Dec 30, 2003 | 01:29 AM
  #4  
1982z28with18s's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,743
From: Mission, Kansas
Originally posted by 94 CAMRO Z28
Check my sig for times. I think the xe grinds are going to make more power but if your on a budget, everyone will agree that you can't beat the hotcam kit for the $$.

Aaron
Hotcam kit is a great price, but the CM kit isn't much more. Also, if you do it right, you can pick up the parts off this board for much cheaper. I'm going to have right around $350 in my cam "kit".
Old Dec 30, 2003 | 03:18 AM
  #5  
bunker's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 4,305
From: North Vancouver, BC
for XE I found that MPH goes way up if you shift at 5800rpm at the track, if you shift past that I find in every XE car I drove be it the 230/236 & 236/242 & MPH at the track drops considerably because those cams fall off in power right after 6k, so shift at 5800 & you'll be happy. Hotcam make good power & MPH is high at the track cuz you shift higher & the extra inertia generated from your flywheel will help you keep going even though you're making the same power at 6500rpm as an XE at 5600rpm.
Old Dec 30, 2003 | 06:57 AM
  #6  
RE AND CHERYL's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 2,140
From: DOVER DE
Cool

Which XE cam are you refering to. I'm looking for something the peaks out around 5600-5800 RPM. RIght now I'm looking at getting the CC305.
Old Dec 30, 2003 | 06:32 PM
  #7  
steelheart's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 316
the cc305 is kinda a baby cam, you may want to rethink that a little bit, i would go hotcam or cc306...
Old Dec 30, 2003 | 07:34 PM
  #8  
12SCNDZ's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 3,634
From: Newark, Delaware
Originally posted by steelheart
the cc305 is kinda a baby cam, you may want to rethink that a little bit, i would go hotcam or cc306...
LOL....I'm glad to see my "baby cam" runs 12.0's...On a stock bottom end...In a full weight car.

Frank
Old Dec 30, 2003 | 07:47 PM
  #9  
Tony Danza's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 260
From: Turnersville/Washington Twp. NJ
steelheart-
the cc305 is kinda a baby cam, you may want to rethink that a little bit, i would go hotcam or cc306...
can you explain why? is this from expierence or other reasons?
Old Dec 30, 2003 | 09:07 PM
  #10  
stereomandan's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 3,620
From: Saginaw, Michigan
The CC305 is larger than the Hotcam. It is not a baby cam at all. Every car I have seen with the 305 is putting down excellent numbers.

Dan
Old Dec 30, 2003 | 09:14 PM
  #11  
12SCNDZ's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 3,634
From: Newark, Delaware
Originally posted by stereomandan
The CC305 is larger than the Hotcam. It is not a baby cam at all. Every car I have seen with the 305 is putting down excellent numbers.

Dan
Thanks for the "back up", Dan...LOL.

Frank
Old Dec 30, 2003 | 10:56 PM
  #12  
stereomandan's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 3,620
From: Saginaw, Michigan
Originally posted by 12SCNDZ
Thanks for the "back up", Dan...LOL.

Frank
You got it.

Dan
Old Dec 31, 2003 | 12:06 AM
  #13  
bunker's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 4,305
From: North Vancouver, BC
I think hotcam makes a tad more power from what I've seen though. Then again, I've seen CC304 dyno same as cc305's, I think its the same up to a point with stock heads, then again I saw a cc304 dyno 335RWHP with AUTO but it had very mild heads.
Old Dec 31, 2003 | 06:17 AM
  #14  
12SCNDZ's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 3,634
From: Newark, Delaware
Originally posted by bunker
I think hotcam makes a tad more power from what I've seen though. Then again, I've seen CC304 dyno same as cc305's, I think its the same up to a point with stock heads, then again I saw a cc304 dyno 335RWHP with AUTO but it had very mild heads.
Hey, you've got similar mods as me, but you're running a little more cam, and longtubes with an M6. Just for comparison sake, what does your car ET, and MPH?

Frank
Old Dec 31, 2003 | 08:10 AM
  #15  
QCKZ28's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 1,853
From: Christiansburg, VA
with my A4 and 3540lb raceweight, i trapped 115.38 mph with my little xe224/230. i shift at 6500rpm, it peaks around 62-6300 on the dyno. those dyno # in sig are with a failing fuel pump.
FWIW i ran 14.4 at 105mph with 2.5 60' the same night i dynoed.
i suspect im making a little more than 356rwhp/349rwtq right now. i would guess about 370-380rwhp.....
jesse



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:39 PM.