DROPPIN' THE DEUCE! STAGE 2 TURBO CAMS 

tighten the lsa for the chop

Hey Matt, is there a cam you'd recommend for a 6l with minimal chop? I'm looking for something that works with a turbo but doesn't sound like it's a crazy engine in a sleeper.

@@newdeathscope SS1 all day. great all around cam.

newdeathscope he literally has hundreds of videos just testing cams. Hundreds. Go check them out and answer it yourself

Matt, very interesting. Just curious where you learned about the development of the SS2 by GM back in the day?

this one took a lot of time

happy to help

I'm eyeing my 8706 right now and trying to decide if I should do an 8720 instead...

@@projectturbocoupe4897 you know after seeing this that 8720 looks really appealing

@@richardholdener1727 do you think the 8706 might be better than the 8720 on bigger engines like 5.7 and above?

socleanmx6 I did the summit 8719, stage 1 truck cam in my 4.8. I’m pretty happy. It is in a Jeep application though.

That 8720 is impressive.

I just installed the 8718. It worked great for me! I wasn't expecting any chop at all but it sounds fantastic, and pulls great even now before its been tuned.

You could save $100 and buy the sloppy can on eBay for $185 and have an almost identical power band.

@@phillipbelcher3371 the sloppy tax hit hard. Sometimes it is at 280 reselling. Sometimes 200

I don't think you will see that but that is why we test

in my opinion, i think boost and back pressure levels are the only thing that might change if the same test was done with a turbo.

thnx bro

Matt Vardaman I have that cam in my Jeep with a 4.8. I’m pretty happy.

What pushrods did you use?

@@jsmcortina I used the stock 7.4 pushrods. I just bought new ones on for about $40. Two ls builds now, one 6.0 and one 5.3, both used 7.4 pushrods. Summit 8718 truck cam in both motors. I just did valve springs on my 5.3 two days ago, used the summit 174002 springs. That’s their ls6 springs, since the gm blue springs weren’t available most of the year, they made their own line.

The summit pro ls truck cams have the same base circle as the stock cam. So with stock (or stock replacement) heads, rockers, and lifters you’ll use stock pushrods. Good luck!

So what would your cam of choice be for 3200 stall. 862 ported heads but small valves and tbss intake? 216/218 and then add nitrous? Makes a pocket rocket outta the 4.8

​@@ZackNakazora1 My buddy ran a 217/224 cam in his 5.3 truck engine, stock 706 heads stock injection. His converter was a 2400 stall. You could probably get away with a mid 220's or low 230s duration cam (.600-630 lift) with a 4.8 and 3200 stall. Make sure you have the piston-valve clearance for that much cam though if you're running stock bottom end. It really depends on the displacement atop a couple other things (IMO). Larger displacement will "flash" more quickly than a lower displacement that has an identical camshaft because it makes more torque; because of that, you can run a lower stall speed with larger displacement. Because of fluid dynamics of the converter, a higher torque applied to it on the engine side will raise flash RPM to the output side. It also depends on induction and rear gear, because both of those will change the RPM range and load characteristics. I'm running the same "3000 stall" converter (brake stalled 3200, flashed at 2800) in my mild setup as i will be in my wild setup. My new setup (11.5:1 6.0, 235/251 .630 cam, CNC 11 degree LS3 heads, EFI, massaged LS3 manifold) won't be getting a higher stall than my previous setup (9.0:1 6.0 LS, 232/236 .600 cam, 243 heads, single plane, 750 carb). Much bigger cam, much higher compression, wild heads with less RPM dependent intake, same displacement, same gear ratios.

@@ZackNakazora1 you're misunderstanding me. I don't choose a cam based on the converter. I first decide, am I willing to foot the expense of a converter. If yes, I go bigger, if no, I go smaller.

If someone was particularly enthusiastic or good with that kind of stuff, They could do it for him. It is something I would thoroughly like to do but I don't know Jack about computers, but I'm slowly learning for work

superflow has a free viewer available for download. no need to even convert the data.

bUt No SpInTrOn DaTa! lol

Test the tick towmax stage 2!!!!

That would had been the icing on the cake!

not sure if its copy right, but I am humming it when I edit!

Any time!

Much appreciated

I also would have loved this test on a 6.0! Even the more popular 5.3

minimal differences

Richard Holdener - I have some L92 heads (new) I will be running on it with a GM Performance carb intake that also has the injector bungs PN 25534416. The 6.0 block is new from GM. Crank and rods coming from a L92 that has a questionable block. Just need pistons now. Looking at the Tick cam because I know Jonathan well and their shop is not that far from me.

And faster spool because better breathing down low

Agreed

It is the chop madness. If we forget about the chop, those smaller cams are perfect

Turbonator - you weren't big into turbo regals back in the 90's were you?

@@383mazda Was just a kid in 90s lol , but I do love turbo 3.8 Buicks .

They might spread out some on a 6.0/6.2 build.

Nocturnal 007 for sure. Would be neat to see

why don't you leave the comment here

Ok, I'll redo the story deal right hear.

Many thanks!

Just move the RPM range down and the hp/tq numbers up a bit. Ta-Da!

I agree! Would have preferred the 6.0 or the more popular 5.3

He had a video already on it.

Al NOSNERD : Yup...Everythang....

I bet they change the name on it

@@richardholdener1727 well im ordering it before they go out of stock and there is the price jump. Supply and demand lol.

I dont even have an LS engine yet for my swap either lol.

You and me both!

should be popular with the internet

Facts. And the Summit cams have a VERY close price point to the Elgin.

Yes just buy whichever one is cheapest at the time. I or my ss2 for 230. If it’s the same as the summit cams I’d go with those.

You got the point. Cheap. Good and has part of the chop people wants. If people forget the chop they can go smaller with the same performance

Boom, someone said it

Wow, thank you

Gonzo's Garage : wise you are, Grasshoppers'an...

they were coming right back out in 10 minutes-besides, We did a torque wrench challenge -my elbow was within 1

Richard Holdener I wasn’t criticizing. :) I’ve done it with a cam that I was leaving in.

Richard Holdener I’ll send you a calibration sticker for that elbow.

Glad you enjoyed it!

Kevin Luck this^^

Pretty sure the balancer still needs to come off with the 2 piece cover. Kind of irrelevant

I have several

@@richardholdener1727 may make this test go a little faster or easier

Many of these vids are from older tests shot for magazine stories-before You Tube-I do video on every new test

I tested what all the manufacturers had as stage 2 turbo cams

@@richardholdener1727 I tried to send you a cam by contacting you on Facebook ;-) I'm sure you get a ton of messages, especially with the way this channel is growing. Thanks again!

I definitely would have preferred a 6.0! Even the more popular 5.3 A little disappointed in engine choice.

imagine slightly higher numbers at lower rpm's, viola

@@SloppyMechanics Totes. Take number. Divide by 4. Times 5. Bam, 4.8 to 6.0 (same heads) numbers. Wondering about the turbo? Take these numbers and then run through Richard's NA->Boost estimator. What ifs are pretty damn easy to get rough order of magnate figured out.

I'd like to see it on a 6.0 as well, except with larger differences in cam timing. Most of these were all within a few degrees of each other so it's no surprise that their curves looked similar. But what about a cam with a reverse split? Or one with a lot more exhaust duration like many of the LS3 grinds have?

That test would be of useless, everyone here needs to realize that its all about percentages! Identical camshaft, identical compression ratio, identical induction, identical port designs, identical rocker arm ratio, there is almost 0 variables! (Valve size doesn't matter in this instance) Adding the same camshaft to a 6.0 as you did a 4.8 will yield nearly IDENTICAL % power gain as it did in the smaller displacement. The power gain from the very first dyno graphs was 8.6% from the stock 4.8. Given a stock 6.0 horsepower, add 8.6% and thats how much power the camshaft will gain on a 6.0. Call it 435 horsepower. The curve shape will be nearly identical because everything is the same! For reference on how dead-nuts that number is, my past 6.0 setup with .015 bigger lift and 4/6 more degrees of duration cam makes 465 horsepower.

Also vs. the SS3...

Probably would have saved 20 minutes, per swap!

agreed

What is the part number for the small cam.

@@phillipslaton7870this is old as balls, but its a sum-8720

That’s my thought too! If you had of run the smaller Elgin 1839, you’d see the same thing, same peak HP but higher torque thru the mid range. But everyone wants beefy lope of the stage 2.

@@phillipslaton7870 they discontinued they cam kind of... They changed something I guess but it was replaced by 8720r1

see the lsa cam test video

think about this-boost doesn't blow out of the exhaust when the exhaust back pressure is higher than boost-more likely go the other way

@@richardholdener1727 , Yes forgot exhaust back pressure factor on turbo but not on supercharged so much. Turbo turbine design is big factor.