which 224/230??please help im a newbie to cams
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 2,006
From: (SHOWING U MY TAILIGHTS)FaiRFieLD CaLiFoRNiA
hey everybody i dont know much about cams i dont know which one to choose and best suites my setup heres the 3
224/230 duration, .536"/.544", 112lsa
224/230 duration, .560"/.598", 112lsa
224/230 duration, .602"/.622", 112lsa
what are all these last numbers?? sorry for the dumb question im just so new to this . . but thanks you guys
224/230 duration, .536"/.544", 112lsa
224/230 duration, .560"/.598", 112lsa
224/230 duration, .602"/.622", 112lsa
what are all these last numbers?? sorry for the dumb question im just so new to this . . but thanks you guys
Not sure where you got these numbers....but by looking at them it looks like the same cam with different rocker ratios. The last set of numbers you are asking about are the cam lift. Fisrt one is intake and second one is exhaust. Lift is how far the valve opens. Stock LT1's come with 1.5 ratio rockers.....so if i'm right about the numbers the .536 and .544 would be what you would end up with. If you went with roller rockers (which I would reccomend) come in 1.5, 1.6, 1.7 ratio's. As the ratio increase so does your lift. As far as which one you should go with...I would say NONE right now. Looking at your mods you should invest the money in some headers. That is where you would see your biggest gain right now. Bigger cams let more air/fuel in and allow for the more exhaust out. Right now you have nothing that will aid in getting it out....my two cents. Also with numbers other than the first set..head work would benefit from that large of a cam. Anything with lift that gets close to .600 is getting close to hitting pistons.
Last edited by whatsup; Jan 13, 2004 at 01:05 AM.
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 2,006
From: (SHOWING U MY TAILIGHTS)FaiRFieLD CaLiFoRNiA
i just ordered my jet hot lt with y pipe and i plan on going with 1.6 rr with my cam package and head work is in the future when i get more $$$. . .but thanks for the reply!!
Once you start getting to 0.600" lift and above you need a very strong spring to control the valve train. This places more wear on all of the other parts, which also have to be upgraded. Spring life is also reduced with high lift. You would also have difficulty getting enough installed height with stock valves to use 1.7 rockers. So, the springs have to match the cam and rocker ratio, as do all the other parts.
Rich Krause
Rich Krause
Those are actually the different grinds of the XE 224/230.
If it was just different rocket ratios, then you'd be looking at .503/.510 with a 1.5, .536/.544 with a 1.6, and .570/.578 with a 1.7.
Personally, I like the .560/.598 lift grind, but you better make dang sure you've got the parts to take that. Heads most specifically. If your heads quit flowing at .550, then why insist on taking it up to almost .600?? Granted, you get more peak flow open time, but doesnt the possibility of the air stalling up high exist?? Springs, check your piston to valve clearance, pushrod length, ect. should all be taken into account too.
I just don't like the low lift with the "standard" 224/230 being only .536/.544 with a 1.6. That's why I'm switching to a 1.7 when I get it running right.
If it was just different rocket ratios, then you'd be looking at .503/.510 with a 1.5, .536/.544 with a 1.6, and .570/.578 with a 1.7.
Personally, I like the .560/.598 lift grind, but you better make dang sure you've got the parts to take that. Heads most specifically. If your heads quit flowing at .550, then why insist on taking it up to almost .600?? Granted, you get more peak flow open time, but doesnt the possibility of the air stalling up high exist?? Springs, check your piston to valve clearance, pushrod length, ect. should all be taken into account too.
I just don't like the low lift with the "standard" 224/230 being only .536/.544 with a 1.6. That's why I'm switching to a 1.7 when I get it running right.
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 2,006
From: (SHOWING U MY TAILIGHTS)FaiRFieLD CaLiFoRNiA
Originally posted by Fastbird93
Those are actually the different grinds of the XE 224/230.
If it was just different rocket ratios, then you'd be looking at .503/.510 with a 1.5, .536/.544 with a 1.6, and .570/.578 with a 1.7.
Personally, I like the .560/.598 lift grind, but you better make dang sure you've got the parts to take that. Heads most specifically. If your heads quit flowing at .550, then why insist on taking it up to almost .600?? Granted, you get more peak flow open time, but doesnt the possibility of the air stalling up high exist?? Springs, check your piston to valve clearance, pushrod length, ect. should all be taken into account too.
I just don't like the low lift with the "standard" 224/230 being only .536/.544 with a 1.6. That's why I'm switching to a 1.7 when I get it running right.
Those are actually the different grinds of the XE 224/230.
If it was just different rocket ratios, then you'd be looking at .503/.510 with a 1.5, .536/.544 with a 1.6, and .570/.578 with a 1.7.
Personally, I like the .560/.598 lift grind, but you better make dang sure you've got the parts to take that. Heads most specifically. If your heads quit flowing at .550, then why insist on taking it up to almost .600?? Granted, you get more peak flow open time, but doesnt the possibility of the air stalling up high exist?? Springs, check your piston to valve clearance, pushrod length, ect. should all be taken into account too.
I just don't like the low lift with the "standard" 224/230 being only .536/.544 with a 1.6. That's why I'm switching to a 1.7 when I get it running right.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Magenta_Hearts
LT1 Based Engine Tech
15
Mar 29, 2017 08:54 PM



