"cam only" LS1 powered F-body runs TENS!

[LxExGIxExRxCK]

http://members.cox.net/harddrivin1le/CAMONLYLS1.JPG

[Borla]

The car weighs 2890#'s, has long-tube headers, valvetrain upgrades for the cam, aftermarket throttlebody and MAF, several tranny mods, new driveshaft, 12-bolt rear end, and a full batch of suspension mods.


Somehow I missed those options on the order sheet..............

[LxExGIxExRxCK]

Originally posted by Bravo
The car weighs 2890#'s, has long-tube headers, valvetrain upgrades for the cam, aftermarket throttlebody and MAF, several tranny mods, new driveshaft, 12-bolt rear end, and a full batch of suspension mods.


Somehow I missed those options on the order sheet..............

The article speaks for itself. Stock heads, stock pistons, stock rods, stock crank, etc, etc....

Write HOT ROD if you have issues with it.

Try getting 409 RHWP out of ~ 95% of the old "muscle car" engines with those changes and see how you do.

The cam they used isn't exactly a "racing cam," either.

[Borla]

Somehow I missed where I compared it to any old muscle car engines. :think:

Just simply stating that it's not "cam-only". Put JUST the cam in, then see what times it gets. ;)

[LxExGIxExRxCK]

Originally posted by Bravo
Somehow I missed where I compared it to any old muscle car engines. :think:

Just simply stating that it's not "cam-only". Put JUST the cam in, then see what times it gets. ;)

That's why I put "cam only" in quotes in the thread title...

It still makes 409 RWHP....Normally aspirated and with what amounts to bolt-ons/"bolt-offs" and a cam.

And look @ that trap speed!!!:drive:

NHRA Super Stock class hemis weren't running that fast in the 60s'...on open long tubes, BIG aftermarket cams, ~ 12.5:1 and fully blueprinted engines!:eek:

[Borla]

Originally posted by LSENGINESROCK

NHRA Super Stock class hemis weren't running that fast in the 60s'...on open long tubes, BIG aftermarket cams, ~ 12.5:1 and fully blueprinted engines!:eek:

:givesf:



That has nothing to do with a "cam-only" Camaro.

[LxExGIxExRxCK]

Originally posted by Bravo
:givesf:



That has nothing to do with a "cam-only" Camaro.

Sure it does.

It demonstrates how automotive technology (particularly cylinder head design) has advanced during the past 30 - 40 years.

I used the LS1 as an example of that. :drive:

Similar mods in a "350 HP" 350 cid vintage 'Vette (e.g. 1969) MIGHT have gotten the car into the high twelves. That's because that engine only REALLY made ~ 250 HP (SAE NET) and the OEM heads wouldn't have been able to capitalize on a hotter cam.

[Borla]

Originally posted by LSENGINESROCK
Sure it does.

It demonstrates how automotive technology (particularly cylinder head design) has advanced during the past 30 - 40 years.

I used the LS1 as an example of that.

Similar mods in a "350 HP" 350 cid vintage 'Vette (e.g. 1969) probably wouldn't have gotten the car into the twelves.:drive:
That's because that engine only REALLY made ~ 250 HP (SAE NET) and the OEM heads wouldn't have been able to capitalize on a hotter cam. The biggest advantages that Camaro has arguably have more to do with the weight, suspension, tires, and rear end.

[LxExGIxExRxCK]

Originally posted by Bravo
The biggest advantages that Camaro has arguably have more to do with the weight, suspension, tires, and rear end.

...and the fact that it produces 409 RWHP....with the STOCK heads, crank, rods and pistons in place. And that's through MUFFLERS!
:drive:

That's a little more than what vintage street hemis produced with street/strip Racer Brown cams, OPEN long tube headers, worked carbs and minimal engine accessories (but otherwise "stock").:eek:

[Borla]

Originally posted by LSENGINESROCK

That's a little more than what vintage street hemis produced with street/strip Racer Brown cams, OPEN long tube headers, worked carbs and minimal engine accessories (but otherwise "stock").:eek: http://pics.evyl.org/humor/whofn.jpg




That has nothing to do with Camaros, or this Camaro in particular. :dunno:

[jaywoo]

So their idea of a cam only car is stock heads, stock block and literally every available bolt-on, plus massive weight reduction? Still pretty nice, but I like my daily driver too much to strip it of 600lbs of "luxury" items. I guess I'd rather throw on a b ottle of N2O then strip it down. ;)

[LxExGIxExRxCK]

Originally posted by jaywoo
So their idea of a cam only car is stock heads, stock block and literally every available bolt-on, plus massive weight reduction? Still pretty nice, but I like my daily driver too much to strip it of 600lbs of "luxury" items. I guess I'd rather throw on a b ottle of N2O then strip it down. ;)

"Every available bolt-on?" There is NO blower or no nitrous. Those are the MAJOR "bolt-ons" and neither is present on that car.

What IS present is 409 normally aspirated RWHP.

[jaywoo]

Well then, I have a bolt on car with over 500rwhp, since you are including N2O as a bolt on. Idiot.

[LxExGIxExRxCK]

Originally posted by jaywoo
Well then, I have a bolt on car with over 500rwhp, since you are including N2O as a bolt on. Idiot.

Yes...I would call that a bolt-on, albeit a NITROUS bolt-on.

That "cam only" car would have made a LOT more power with a bottle....

:drive:

409 RWHP....You'd have to understand what similar mods would have yielded in a 350 cid Chevy engine 30 - 40 years ago in order to appreciate that figure (which you clearly don't).

[jaywoo]

:rolleyes: Yeah, thanks. I appreciate your enlightenment. Sorry to disappoint you, but power adders aren't considered bolt ons (N2O, Superchargers, Turbos). Don't believe me, take a N2O or supercharged car to the track sometime and tell them it's a bolt on car. As for the cam only with 409 hp, so what? Not like it's a record. You need to do a little more research. LG has produced cars already above the 450hp range with stock heads.

[LxExGIxExRxCK]

Originally posted by jaywoo
:rolleyes: Yeah, thanks. I appreciate your enlightenment. Sorry to disappoint you, but power adders aren't considered bolt ons (N2O, Superchargers, Turbos). Don't believe me, take a N2O or supercharged car to the track sometime and tell them it's a bolt on car. As for the cam only with 409 hp, so what? Not like it's a record. You need to do a little more research. LG has produced cars already above the 450hp range with stock heads.

They're "bolt-ons" as far as I'm concerned because both BOLT ON (literally) to the car and the engine.

Show me the "LG" engine that produced RWHP in the "450 range" with stock heads. How many cubes was it? Did it use a stock crank, stock rods and stock pistons? Was it doing that through MUFFLERS (as was the case with the car above)?

That's not even a "full race" cam in that 409 RHWP car. Both the lift and the duration are moderate. That's because the car is TRULY "streetable."

[jaywoo]

Dude, Do you even have an LS-1? I seriously doubt it.

I guess cam and heads are bolt on also, since bolts hold them on. As far as showing you the cars, do the research yourself. The cars are there. :rolleyes: Noobs...

[LxExGIxExRxCK]

Originally posted by jaywoo
Dude, Do you even have an LS-1? I seriously doubt it.

How is that relevent to this discussion?:confused:

[jaywoo]

It's relevent because:
1. You've never worked on an LS-1
2. You've never driven an LS-1
3. You have NO clue what you are even talking about.

I'm doubting you are even old enough to have a driver's liscense.

[LxExGIxExRxCK]

Originally posted by jaywoo
It's relevent because:
1. You've never worked on an LS-1
2. You've never driven an LS-1
3. You have NO clue what you are even talking about.

I'm doubting you are even old enough to have a driver's liscense.

I have an LS1.;)

[262 77]

Damn, that engine only has 'Cam' for internal mod, that is what that magazine is getting it, which just happen to be in a Camaro.


We all know you can't touch 10s with only cam, not without some serious mods like that Camaro has.

We should be giving props to those guys for meeting their goal rather than trying to shooting down.

BTW, knock off the personal attacks.

[DrEvyl]

Originally posted by jaywoo
It's relevent because:
1. You've never worked on an LS-1
2. You've never driven an LS-1
3. You have NO clue what you are even talking about.

I'm doubting you are even old enough to have a driver's liscense.

No, he has a LS1. He just won't take it to the track.

He's a magazine racing troll... he posts threads like this over and over and over and over and every single one of them is a retarded argument trying to demonstrate to him just how far his head is up his ass...

He's not going to last long at this rate... and I'm putting this thread out of it's misery.