passing emmissions with a cc305 cam ground on a 112 lsa? also, how much would the extra overlap kill low-end, as opposed to adding more top-end? would it be enough justify having the cam custom ground(more $$) on a 112? or would I get more pure overall performance on the standard cc305 114?

Assuming this through full exhaust and all bolt-ons, with 2800 stall torque converter.

 

anyone? i figure because its a bit bigger than the hotcam, it will be pushing it to pass emissions...but will be close.

 

To give you a comparison I was able to pass emmissions with about half the allowable hydrocarbons and CO output with a HOTcam and ported heads with larger valves. The exhaust was run through a random technologies high flow universal catalytic converter. Unless your emmissions standards are much more strict than they are here in TN, I think you'll be fine.

 

Hmm, i believe TN and NJ are similar. Damn, that sounds pretty good. Did you have a dyno tune for that? or just a mail tune?

 

I don't really think your gonna notice the difference between 112lsa and 114 lsa. Car Craft did a test where they tested two identical cams. One ground on 108 lsa and one on 114 lsa. While the difference on the bottom end was significant, the two cams were only a few HP apart on the top end.

Dosn't NJ use the Dyno type emissions test? That test is a bit harder to pass then the idle test.

 

Yes.

 

Buy a cable and save your pcm, load your vin onto friends emissions passing car. swap the plates, have him pass, swap the sticker. Load his vin back in. It outa work, I havent tried it yet...

 

lol, might as well go with the cc306 if i am gonna do that.

 

If i have my stock cat on, hopefully that will help out a bit. Based on the fact that the CC305 isnt much bigger than the hotcam, and also that the hot-cam on a 112 lsa which is against it passing emissions, i think it will be pretty close to passing on the 112 with the cc305.

Also, with regards to the car craft, the bottom end difference seems like it would be big when comparing a 114 and a 108 lsa...but 112 and 114 doesnt seem like it would be that big.

the 108 and 114 were only a few hp apart on the top-end, but what were they revving to? do you think the 108 would have made a bit more power if they revved both higher?

 

Does TN have the dyno type test?

 

Any of you guys want to chime back in? so far, been good info!