What's new
CK5
Register an account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members.

LS cams and computers

Vombrown

Vombrown

Mountain Man
Joined
Mar 1, 2017
Posts
1,880
Reaction score
1,719
Location
Great Falls mt
So let's discuss Cams and other go fast stuff for the LS engines. Mine is 2005 gen IV? I think with 20k miles. It is without an intake and accessories so why not just do something stupid to it while I gather all of the other parts I need. Specifically interested in grunty low end cams and stuff to support that.
 
The NNBS or trailblazer SS intakes are a popular swap and tend to be a lot cheaper than a fast or other type intake.

All kinds of low lift “truck cams” out there.
 
Pk TQ numbers are REALLY high on the curve
 
I have a LS6 cam and springs in 2006 LM7 5.3. Dyno puts it 390 hp and 375 tq.

2005 is a gen 3 2007 starts the gen 4

 
This is for anyone wanting to address this:

I approached this conversation a few weeks back in my own build thread. Where’s the list of LS parts that will peak torque at 3000 instead of 5000.

It’d be better to run the peak torque at cruise speed than through the roof
 
If you are going to do it, do it now. The tbss intake is a nice upgrade over the truck intake for torque and comes with bigger injectors.

My bone stock lQ4 ran lean on a dyno because the bank needed more injector.
 
Bent77 said:
This is for anyone wanting to address this:

I approached this conversation a few weeks back in my own build thread. Where’s the list of LS parts that will peak torque at 3000 instead of 5000.

It’d be better to run the peak torque at cruise speed than through the roof
Click to expand...
I was gonna say nearly 400 hp at 6k is great but My build will never see it. I would like to make as much power down in the lower RPMS as possible. Hence the Grunty comment...
 
Vombrown said:
I was gonna say nearly 400 hp at 6k is great but My build will never see it. I would like to make as much power down in the lower RPMS as possible. Hence the Grunty comment...
Click to expand...

Im hitting 6K on a daily basis but that doesn't apply offroad. the LS6 cam puts a good amount of torque down low though
1480953988527
 
Looking for 400+ lb/ft by 2000-2500
A traditional SBC will do it. Has to be some combination for the larger 6.0L engine to produce those types of numbers.
 
TreeFarm said:
I have a LS6 cam and springs in 2006 LM7 5.3. Dyno puts it 390 hp and 375 tq.

2005 is a gen 3 2007 starts the gen 4

Click to expand...

I have the same cam in my 6.0L (plus turbo), I'm super happy with it.

Roller cams make flatter torque curves, some of the mentality of "need low end torque" in a truck is due to flat tappet cams. On those, you had to trade your top end to make more low end torque.

The chart above is good proof, unless you go crazy with the cam (i.e. over .600 lift kind of stuff) they do fine on the bottom end.

Besides, low end torque with no top end is for the birds and things that are underpowered or don't have enough gears. I will never have another old school small block or big block in anything I own.
 
More low end when you have 300hp to the ground is super fun... Just saying I want more power.
 
I'm sure things have probably moved forward since I did my research about a cam swap on my 5.3 a couple of years ago. The jist comes down to this, Hot Rod did a huge cam comparison on the 5.3 specifically and one major factor came out. Every and I mean EVERY cam they compared against the stock LM7 (5.3) cam LOST torque below 2500 rpm. Cams tested were the LS1, LS2, LS3, LS6, LS7, LSA, LS9, L33, LQ9 and three Crane Cams. All moved the torque peak up by as little as 200 rpm to 900 over the stock LM7. Incidentially, the LQ4 cam made similar numbers to the LM7.

For me any cam change was a move in the wrong direction of the torque curve. If I was putting the 5.3 into my Nova, sure any one of those would wake it up on the road. Bottom line, the stock 5.3 cam is a little measly grind, but for a heavy truck playing off road I needed all the torque I could get down as low as I could. Now I go back to my first statement, I looked this up a couple years back. Somebody might be making better cam now, but I've not looked for it.

http://www.hotrod.com/articles/ls-cam-test-comparison/
 
1977k5 said:
I have the same cam in my 6.0L (plus turbo), I'm super happy with it.

Roller cams make flatter torque curves, some of the mentality of "need low end torque" in a truck is due to flat tappet cams. On those, you had to trade your top end to make more low end torque.

The chart above is good proof, unless you go crazy with the cam (i.e. over .600 lift kind of stuff) they do fine on the bottom end.

Besides, low end torque with no top end is for the birds and things that are underpowered or don't have enough gears. I will never have another old school small block or big block in anything I own.
Click to expand...
While I understand what you are saying, also means the top gear is useless for something driven on the road. So unless you have a turbo, 6 speed, or 4.88 gears, you’re either going in between gears a lot, on on and off the converter.

All I asking is more power below 3000. The graph posted is pretty anemic. And that’s where I need the power
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest Posts

Top Bottom