Absolutely love the video, I just put the 202/202 btr torque cam in my twin turbo lq4 with l92 intake and rec port. Such an amazing power curve! Love being able to make 600ft lbs at 2500rpm and carry it to 5500rpm while still making usable power all the way to 6k. Used the "china gt35 turbos" that measure out to a 62/62 on a t3 .82 a/r hot side. Used stock truck manifolds flipped upsidedown to create my own twin t3 setup. Added 50mm external wastegate provisions on each manifold. I highly recommend this cam for anybody that wants a noticeable bump in power from idle to rev limiter (around 6k) with a nice smooth idle and great vacuum. I'll say this again as I've said it before, adding stall speed doesn't "gain you low end torque" it just puts you in a better spot on the power curve right when you smash the gas pedal to the floor. This is great except for when your cruising highway in torque converter lock. If you have big tires, high gearing, or both then your probably at like 1800rpm to do 60-70mph and the stall doesn't help there cause your converter is locked. You will get a lot more downshifts and torque converter unlocks on the highway when you hit an incline or a head wind if you choose a cam that makes less low rpm torque on big tires, or even just heavy trucks with stock gearing. Higher stall speeds are very dramatic on highway when the converter has to unlock to get you up the inclines. Also, the more your converter has to come out of lockup, the hotter the trans temps get. A big cooler is a must with a stall upgrade obviously but if your ever gonna haul weight then keep your stock converter and either the torque cam, stage 1 truck cam, or stock cam. The guys that really want more low rpm power on the LS powered trucks follow this plan. BTR torque cam 862 or 706 heads (stock or ported) even if ya got a 6.0 or 6.2. bigger is always better! More compression is more power everywhere and is most noticeable on bottom. 99-06 truck intake manifold with the 3 bolt throttle body And long tube headers. That's it, that's gonna max out your low rpm power production. You are not gonna make a Dyno queen this way because the things that create such strong power/efficiency in your casual driving rpms are going to be a bit of a bottleneck above 5500rpm where the Dyno queens really shine. But it's worth it to build one of these if you like to have your fun, get great mileage, and be able to haul like a diesel. Hope a few people benefit from my rant 😜

@EngineeringGoneWrong

Жыл бұрын

I swapped an LQ9 in my 05 silverado. Great bump over the high mile 5.3. Been considering long tubes for a bit now. Can't ever have enough lol.

@ChurchAutoTest

Жыл бұрын

Well said. Was planning to post something similar but you summed it up well. Focus on things that will bring up intake velocity/inertia at low rpms if you want more low rpm torque, but understand it will cost high rpm output. People get scared by the last part, but let's be honest, most truck motors rarely see over 6k rpm anyway. My Tahoe rarely sees over 5k, so I'm more interested in 2k-5k output than anything above that. My other cars, whole different story (and cam needs).

@coboscustoms4342

Жыл бұрын

@@ChurchAutoTest you want the BTR torque cam as an upgrade. It drives and idles like a stock cam but has a noticeable gain everywhere

@nyplantings2420

Жыл бұрын

Good insight and advice for daily drivers. This is what we need more of. All too often the forum leaders have their followers making mods that are tough to live with daily only for another 50hp.

@coboscustoms4342

Жыл бұрын

@@nyplantings2420 fully agree

Bring the big stroke crank, long runner intake and a tight lsa

Richard, You showed perfectly that the Intake makes low end torque, Remember the Ford 460 boneyard motor? The flat cast iron stock intake made the best low end torque from 1500 to 3500. Ford did that deliberately to generate maximum low end torque to get their 5000lbs land yachts moving

@charlesespenshade

Жыл бұрын

That 460 is a torque monster even stock. I don't think anybody has ever produced a gas motor to equal the torque that the old 460 puts out.

@P71ScrewHead

9 ай бұрын

@@charlesespenshade i agree..

@jimjoe9945

8 ай бұрын

​@@charlesespenshadecaddy 472/500.

@robparker5525

19 күн бұрын

@@charlesespenshade olds 455, at least in design if not numbers. UTG made an excellent video on it

@charlesespenshade

19 күн бұрын

@@robparker5525 I agree that the 455 was a good motor but I don't think the torque equals to the 460 Ford motor.

It's about time someone did a low r video.About 10 years late but better than never.I never understood why dynos don't read down low.

@richardholdener1727

Жыл бұрын

DYNOS DO-BUT WHO RUN WOT AT 2000 RPM?

Low speed torque That's where it's at on the street drivability keep up the great work Richard

BIG BLOCK SWAP THE WORLD

Like this guy cause he answers our questions we didnt know to ask 😂😂

I'm running an older Crane Cam. 458 intake and 478 on exhaust. It's 284 duration with 112 lsa. It's the top of stage 1 cam. Smooth idle. Perfect street cam.

Buying a cam with a tighter LSA and advancing the cam are two things I would do searching for low speed TQ

@cedricwilson2055

Жыл бұрын

Sounds like the theory of a thumpr cam everyone hates.

@larryfeasel2403

Жыл бұрын

@@cedricwilson2055 the people who hate them dont understand how important valve events are

@ThirteenTwentyRepair

Жыл бұрын

@@cedricwilson2055 I’m also in the Thumper hater category, along with some other gimmicks. They mostly increase overlap to make it sound nasty, it’s for fairground cruisers at best.

@hotrodray6802

Жыл бұрын

​​"everyone" hates? Sounds bitching and runs great in my stock FMX stock converter Cleveland.👍👍👍👍 Bust a gut good for a mild 351.

@ThirteenTwentyRepair

Жыл бұрын

@@hotrodray6802 This is exactly what a Thumper is intended to do , sound bitchin in a mild engine. Obviously there is a market for it, so kudos to Comp for catering to that crowd.

You're a wealth of knowledge! Much love and respect, sir!

@richardholdener1727

8 ай бұрын

I appreciate that

No replacement for displacement.

The best way to gain torque on the low end, is a supercharger 😁 Edit: and a stroker kit

@Marc_Wolfe

Жыл бұрын

Best? Bigger engine will give same power with less fuel consumption, or more power at the same.

@charlesespenshade

Жыл бұрын

I beg to differ. I'm running a stock crank and rods on my build. I raised my compression with pistons a a little shaving of heads and block. Why I couldn't go with a bigger cam. I don't need to put a valve through a piston. My motor is built for NOS. I want to break my motor in good before adding NOS. Besides my Frankenstein being a work in progress I'm not quite ready for the NOS yet. I need my frame connectors welded in yet and get rid of my V6 rear.

Supercharger that’s how you get low end torque 👌😄

Richard I know you do a lot of testing on the LS Engines and I’ve had several LS Engines and one LT Engine myself. I now have a Boosted Jeep, but I know their are a lot of younger guys with the 6.4L Hemi Charger/Challengers who are interested in finding the best Camshaft for the 6.4L platform. I believe many would be interested to see you test the new Comp HRT vs Comp 270 vs Cammotion Titan 1, etc. And as always appreciate your videos

I think that the best path to legitimately increase low end torque is add more displacement or add boost

Thanks for crushing my dreams.

The easiest way to make more torq down low is to install a stroker kit.

@Marc_Wolfe

Жыл бұрын

A stroker kit is more displacement. Easier and cheaper would be a bigger engine.

@I_like_turtles_67

Жыл бұрын

@@Marc_Wolfe I understand. I was sticking with the premise of the video. Using the same motor as a test mule.

@Marc_Wolfe

Жыл бұрын

@@I_like_turtles_67 By that logic, get an LS1 instead of an LS3. I'd throw out more examples, but I'm not a fucking encyclopedia.

@IndenturedSavant13

Жыл бұрын

​@@Marc_Wolfe what? An LS1 is 346 cubic inches and an LS3 is 376 cubic inches...

@Marc_Wolfe

Жыл бұрын

@@IndenturedSavant13 Your fucking point is what?

One thing that we're overlooking is head flow gains. Better heads either by good porting or swap increase cylinder flow with any cam, which means good increases in the most "useable" rpm range. Good heads bring out the best of what a cam can do. Of course Richard is correct when just comparing CAMS. They're less $$ than heads. Eg: Richard did tests on a SBF pushrod 5.0 and cams helped but heads alone were good for nearly 80 HP aaaand lower rpm, before cam changes. HEADS!!!! IMO good exhaust, then head flow, then cams... IF you can afford it.

@richardholdener1727

Жыл бұрын

PORTED LS HEADS DON'T ADD TORQUE AT 2000 RPM

@P71ScrewHead

9 ай бұрын

Heads is the most important, i bought TrickFlows 38cc for my 4.6L 2v rather than porting stock PI heads.. Unported TFS made a huge difference.. The cam i chose (MHS TFS stage 3 n/a) taps out at 5,447rpm 309rwhp 321rwtrq.. Huge torque all around..

My harley picked up 50% tq gain at 2500 rpm with 75cc big bore kit and cam change.

I used to be focused on having good low RPM torque when I was in high school. Now, I look at the total package. A reasonable cam with a good choice of gears is a very effective setup. I had a young man come to my shop looking for a supercharger to put on his T56/Coyote swapped mustang that had 2.73 gears. I convinced him to do a 3.73 gearset and a truetrac instead. To this day, we agree a supercharger would have made that car worse. If you feel like you need more torque, it's possible that your setup is holding you back. I mean, yeah, supercharger will make that car faster, but right now with the heat extractor hood, AC delete, ABS delete, Tilton 7.25, custom hard lines, it's just straight-up NA perfection under that hood.

Makes perfect sense. I had Yukon 2009 with 5.3 and dod lifters failed twice. After 2nd time I changed cam out to a summit racing tourque cam and completely deleted dod crap. I thought they sent wrong cam as it towed way worse than stock cam at low rpms. From 2500 and up it was quicker but only if you manually shifted transmission. The shift points stock you'd never feel the extra power because just as it would start to really pick up it would shift. Of course if you kept rpms higher it towed better with summit cam but that's not where I get best mileage. Summit cam had noticeable lope but without tuning idled lower and stalled alot. I did send ecu out and had dod tuned out after first time it failed when I replaced lifter but 2nd time lifter on opposite side failed.

Thank you for this. I know you get asked the same crap a lot!

From my experience if you use an aftermarket more regressive profile that is single pattern slightly more durations at .050 and less adv duration than stock and generally will have more lift and more 0.200 duration. Then tighten up the lobe seperation as factory can be 116 to 120 back to around 110. Put it in at 108 intake centreline and if your lobes are reasonably aggressive it is possible to reduce the advertised duration overlap. This improving available torque below 2500 and increasing the overall available torque & hp. Though this will generally not be a shelf profile. Thoughts Richard?

As a bolt-in I get what you are proving. A little compression bump with the TN cam will bring back the low numbers compared to stock. I realize piston to valve clearance becomes a problem.

@richardholdener1727

Жыл бұрын

compression adds torque with any cam

We all know that if yall want low rpm torque, you need a big block motor. More displacement is more bottom end torque. Other than using noz.

@bri-manhunter2654

Жыл бұрын

Long runner intake, small cam with big lift & tight LSA helps.

@richardcoleman9645

Жыл бұрын

@@bri-manhunter2654 like Richard said, not much. Lol. Nothing like 500-600 ft lbs at 2,000rpm's out of a big block NA.

@cedricwilson2055

Жыл бұрын

@@richardcoleman9645 yes but everyone not a fan of big blocks. Need a all around universal solution.

Build your engine with more cubes, more compression and small efficient ports if you want more low end.

thank you for the explanation. i did think that the LSA had a lot to do with the TQ numbers (especially down low rpm). the "smaller" the lsa the better torque number was achieved. was i incorrect? hope yall have a great day !!

Sounds about right, especially OHC engines.

Use a cam with a very early closing intake event (increase dynamic compression) and late opening exhaust event (hold the power stroke for longer). Caution use only 92 octane fuel or better to avoid pre-detention. Use small diameter headers 1 & 5/8 or 1 & 1/2. This was good for approx 25ft/lbs @ wheels at 1800rpm. This all comes at a cost to top end power. You will get less than the stock cam.

Everything is a compromise, and depends on the whole combination. For example, the Buick 350 made 400+ ft-lbs somewhere around 2500rpm, but there was no point in revving it beyond 4300. If you want that kind of torque in an LS, you've got to change a lot more than a cam.

The "BEST" torque cam (for a 5.3L truck) would be LSA of 109-110, 210-228 duration @ .050, .550 to .600 lift (stock to mild porting (possibly more lift with aftermarket heads)) , intake valve closing @ 35 deg ABDC @ 0.050 lift (32-38 is ok), with 15-35 degree overlap @ 0.050 lift. But this is with 10:1 to 11:1 compression. (this is more important than cam to maximize torque) The higher the compression the more torque it will make and NO 11:1 doesn't mean you must run 92 octane or racing fuel. You just need a really good tuner to do AF and timing.... You also need a good exhaust, either the stock truck intake or TBSS intake (w/ a cold air and a free flowing air filter, stock is fine with a K&N or similar filter). a 160 deg thermostat, and I would do a dual pattern cam with a slight exhaust bias. ( a few extra degrees of duration on exhaust lobe ) at least if running stock to mild ported 706s or 799 heads. As the exhaust on these heads is right around 70-80% the flow of intake and needs a little more, some aftermarket heads don't need a split duration though.... This will get you in the 1.35 to 1.45 times the torque per cubic inch range, and thats right at maximum torque for a NA engine. (420-460 ft/lbs torque). Anyone saying they got over that is either lying or breaking the laws of physics.... 1.45 times is max for anything from stock to a full race NA engine the only difference is where that max torque is in the RPM range (the higher the RPM the higher the HP max is).....

@richardholdener1727

5 ай бұрын

so much incorrect here! the best torque cam would be 210-228 (an 18-degree spread)? Are you taking about peak or average torque production? What about low speed torque (which is what most actually want). BTW-my Engine Masters entry was 1.53 lb-ft per inch-but that was a dedicated build.

@MSU_BullDAWGz

5 ай бұрын

please then say whats incorrect, I was using the 128 formula but if you have better please say and show. and the spread is because try finding a cam with those specs and the spread is also all within lower range without need of a stall converter but the lowest would be unable to rev to 6k while upper is still in stock converter range and could rev to 6300 but I am still learning till I die so I'm all ears to those who have more experience . But don't just bash, explain and teach... A final note is I'd of course would personally want the upper side of duration but that would need a custom grind having a split lobe with a fast opening and slow ramp on closing but try explaining that to most people would get lost and try explaining that even cams with exactly the same lift lsa and duration can have different overlap because of the lobe ramp and trying to explain it to most would take pages if not a book to correctly converse the how and why.@@richardholdener1727

@kevinwest3689

28 күн бұрын

Prove it. Richard does it every day. Then he shares the information unbiasely. If someone tells Someone that works at Nasa That the earth is flat. That person tells him that is incorrect, And the person say prove it. You tell them where the gift shops at and go about your work.

You mentioned that you could gain torque with a lower engine temperature. This made me think of a few noteworthy mentions. I would think that quite a few people wishing to increase torque would be choosing to modify their daily driver. That’s why these two considerations may be important. 1) Smoky Yunick stated that a hotter engine will resist wear more so than an engine running cooler temperatures. So engine temperatures could effect longevity. 2) I used to run cooler thermostats to pick up a little extra grunt. A fellow car guy shared with me that he had experimented with coolant temperature and determined that a hotter engine seemed to get better fuel economy. I never tested this theory with a carburetor but I have seen slightly better mpg on EFI engines with a 195 thermostat than with a 180.

@richardholdener1727

Жыл бұрын

hotter engine does get better fuel economy-but makes less power

Personally I blame John Woodworth!!

@boywonderrr71

3 ай бұрын

Who? Star Lord man.

Blower 🙌

I went from 205° water temp to 180° with a 160° Thermostat. Recommended back to stock gear ratio for my tire size, is 456, im running 488's even with the longer 1st gear of the 4l80e, its spicy. Tbss truck Norris 799's on a lq4. Its a bit much for cruising over 65 for long periods. It feels like 300hp in a 3000 lb car from a stop up to 80 mph. Which is darn cool in a lifted truck with 35's but really it needs 456's or 37" tires. This might help someone. 👍 I didn't know better and took someone's advice on a Form. Now I know and this is what happened.✌️

Displacement.

@Carl_Jr

Жыл бұрын

This! 1000% I had this discussion on a previous video with someone. All else being equal a larger displacement engine will increase low-mid range RPM torque. Every. Single. Time. That's why I've never really agreed with GM putting small displacement engines in trucks. It makes zero sense. All they did was make the engine rev higher but started to use 6, 8 and 10 speed transmissions to reduce RPM at highway speeds to keep the engine in its "powerband". 🤷

Compression and ignition advance: as much initial advance and most aggressive curve you can run short of hard starting and/or pre-ignition when hot. Optimizing the latter (compared to stock advance) made the same difference as installing a 2500 stall convertor on a 302.

@lukesimeon5756

8 күн бұрын

Water helps

So basically what ur saying is lower the temps, get a converter, install long tube headers and using boost will increase low end torque. But what about other little things like port matching, removing the air silencers from the throttle body, using a high flow filter and modifying a kegger (to increase air flow and reduce volume but leaving the runners long)? Also what about longer valves and or higher ratio rockers?

If only converter speed didn't come with heat. I know I know it's all comprises. Thanks as always.

Thinking about replacing the worn out 302 in my 90 Crown Victoria. 351 at the very least, but then again as a full size daily driver, 460 would be even better for the purpose and power band. Then when you start looking at price, performance gain, and the fact the old iron head factory motors were built well for that low/mid power from the factory decades ago, and the limited gains that can be achieved in the power band of concern with modifications, I think just buying a cast iron factory rebuild would be almost as good as a blueprinted and built custom motor. Most mods really are to maximize HP and top end, at the end of the day. Good empirical data in your work, thank you.

@charlesespenshade

Жыл бұрын

Check out my link I posted. As a little hint, a Chevy 350 has same bore as a 302. One tweak I did was 11.0:1 compression 350 chevy piston on a Ford rod. My motor isn't built for turbo or supercharger but down the road A 150 shot is in the plans. My car is named Frankenstein. When was the last time you saw a '97 Stang with a scoop sticking out the hood? I'm still running the V6 Trans, torque converter and rear. Yes my car use to be a V6. A subframe swap took care of the 5.0L mounting up.

@P71ScrewHead

9 ай бұрын

i agree, put that 460ci BBF in that bad boy.. A cam in that bbf only increases low trq n hp numbers too, look it up..

@kingduckford

9 ай бұрын

@@P71ScrewHead The issues finally come down to power band, and where you want it. I drive my Panther platform cars as luxury cars, easy going with stock soft suspensions and shocks. As such, low end torque, and/or mid range is priority. With the high gear in the rear, these cars do well with torquey low end RPM range alone, and this is more in line with what I prefer for ride comfort. If maximum torque in factory original is 2,800 RPM, and I rarely take it over 3,000 RPM, isn't this where the motor is well suited to the task? For pure luxury or workhorse purpose, displacement and mild cams are a good combination for a reason. You don't want to rob the extreme low end for power up the band, and you aren't concerned about a higher torque number 3,000+ RPM's if you aren't using it anyway.

No replacement for displacement. A low stall converter is nice though. I've driven 2 vehicles I believe had one, a 2004 454 Chevy something HD, and a 2001 Kia Sportage 2.4. Actually, the 454 might not have been that low, it's been over 10 years since I drove that thing.

I always felt that a lockup converter with a 3200ish stall would give you the streetability and still give a big launch off the line.

Currently building a high compression 292 chevy inline six, to replace my 327 chevy v8. This is for a firewood truck. That freakishly long stroke, that's what increases low-end torque. Also going from 4:11gears to 4:56 gears.

@richardholdener1727

Жыл бұрын

you will find the smaller motor makes less

@markgarland4532

Жыл бұрын

I used believe that a longer crank stroke was the key to making torque. But total displacement is a bigger factor. Anyone who has taken a basic hydraulics & pneumatics class will tell you that a larger piston has a greater area and will exert greater force when the same amount of pressure is applied. A larger bore also provides more room for flow around the valves. More flow equates to greater power potential.

@michaelmanzo1716

Жыл бұрын

@@richardholdener1727 yep, less up top. But with 4000lbs of green firewood, that high torque off idle will be nice. All low end grunt, crawling off road around cut sites, loaded heavy. A good environment for the straight six. Got clifford intake, forged high compression..060 pistons, total seal thin rings, Harland sharp roller rockers, howards hy-tork cam, ac delco hei truck distributor, long tube headers, flowkooler water pump, 6bt cummins radiator. Tom Lowe lump ports, bigger intake/exuahst valve kit. Excited to get it put together! I'm a little intimidated though, such a big project. Autoline just put me together a remanufactured motorcraft 2100 carb. They are amazing carbs off-road. Great fuel atomization at idle as well.

Please do more LOW RPM TORQUE vids! :-))) 1500-4500.

@richardholdener1727

7 ай бұрын

I CAN RUN WOT AT 1500 RPM IN MY TRUCK

Thank you Richard for choosing to go throught this topic of lower rpm torque! V8s' should always be able win Teslas in acceleration at the traffic lights. Watching the hp/torque curves, could it be said that the faster the engine likes to increase rpm(sharpness or sensitive for the throttle increase) the more torque it produce? If this were be true, then wouldn't making the rotational components as revolution easy as possible help to increase the torque production?

@richardholdener1727

Жыл бұрын

light weight assembly can help a little

I just did the Tsp chopacabra cam and ported heads on my work truck. I was really hoping that it would be better than it is. Do I make more power down low? Yes, but it's not game changing or really worth all the effort that I had to put in. It does do pretty good past 3k and pulls strong up to 6k but I rarely see those numbers in normal driving. This is the fist ls I've run, I usually have a tbi or vortec 350 and I'm a little disappointed to say the least. I'm thinking of maybe getting a slightly bigger converter when trans rebuild time comes next winter. Shorter gears are a possibility as well to go with it to get into the power curve a bit better. I also got to get the tune dialed in a bit better and work the shift points a bit better. It's got great pull in first but shifts out to second and lands at about 2250rpm 500rpm just short of where it really wakes up at 3k. From second to third is pretty nice and I usually pull it to about 4-5k. All in all, I'm happy I did it. Now I won't be feeling like I missed my chance to do it, the motor had to come out for a dead lifter and to be resealed anyway. The next one I'm doing is a 6.0 with a sloppy stage2 and a converter.

A great tork combo rich is this 496 to 620 cubes. 268 dur cam. 8 71 Supercharger. Stock heads. Bloodviking

Best Backyard Tuner Help on the Interwebs. While RIchard is not a backyard tuner, he takes junkyard dogs and flogs them on the dyno while sorting the best options. 100% the real deal.

Like your LSA cam test, it'd be interesting to do an overlap test, keeping identical LSA and only changing the overlap via duration, and see where and what torque does. Does peak torque stay the same just at different rpm's?

@stlchucko

Жыл бұрын

That would mean increasing duration to increase overlap… which would mean more power up top and sacrifices down low

@383mazda

Жыл бұрын

@@stlchucko yes, and decrease as well. On a 5.3, something like a 108 LSA, .550 lift, and 15, 45 and 75 degrees of overlap (@ 0.006)

@coboscustoms4342

Жыл бұрын

@@383mazda you can find ls cams of pretty much any duration you want in 112lsa. It's easy to make the comparison using Richards videos, pause on a Dyno screen and take a screenshot then find another video with the cam you wanna compare and do the same and you can flip back and forth through the screenshots. This is how I figure out what cam will best suit my needs on the custom builds I do. I have a whole folder full of screenshots of cam tests on 5.3s. I usually build bigger and higher compression engines or boosted setups but I'm not usually looking to compare numbers as much as the shape of the curve.

@jacobvanhalteren7452

Жыл бұрын

you will always gain average power even at idle with tighter LSA. LSA at the end of things determines the IVC point. Early closing = more dynamic compression = more torque = more hp. LSA should only be widened if your looking for better idle quality, more peak power (large durations at which point you need to reduce overlap by increasing LSA), and reducing compression. ideal LSA for a 6.0L is 108. There a formula you can use. Off course if you want a smoother idle you get a 112 114, or if you want to built a rev machine you throw in high compression pistons 11:1+ with a huge duration cam and 114 + lsa Lots of tests done on this, rich doesn't really have to. If anything by looking at his recent cam tests you should be able to realize that LSA has a huge impact on torque. The cam motion little choppa had huge durations but a tight LSA and was very similar in power to the Norris and torqunator.

@coboscustoms4342

Жыл бұрын

@@jacobvanhalteren7452 well said

Displacement or Forced induction. I'd love to see a comparison of equal piston diameter but change from inline 6 to V6 to V8. Maybe equal stroke and equal cam. See how much torque is made per cylinder.

I built an engine that ran way better than I expected. It was actually an accident. But it was a serious street brawler that I drove every day. And drove the car anywhere, and it had perfect drivability. The bottom end torque was impressive. It had an unbelievable powerband. Most of you won’t believe it, but I’m not bullshitting. Made 447rwhp 479rwtq Pulled to 7800 rpm. Peak power was at 6800 and only lost 12hp after that to 7800. Car: 92 camaro 3500lbs with driver Engine: sbc 383 stroker Compression 11.8:1 6.2” rod Cam: comp cam 230/244 hyd roller with solid rollers 114 lobe sep Intake: TPIS mini ram Computer: haltech e6gm 1/4 mile: 11.40@122 spinning on nt555r’s with a 2.0 60ft. This was back in 1998-1999

@richardholdener1727

Жыл бұрын

7800 rpm with a 230 cam on a 383?

@Turbogto_guy

Жыл бұрын

@@richardholdener1727 yes. You have to consider that when you put solid rollers on a hydraulic roller cam, duration is bumped. The mini ram intake flows well on top end. I had ported fast burn heads and a very important fact is I had very light valve springs and retainers. When I rebuilt this engine later on, it wouldn’t turn but about 6800, I changed cam to a 242/248 and the spring package on the rebuild weighed several pounds more. Yes, pounds more. I think it was a combination of good airflow and lightweight valvetrain.

Torque is made by using the summit 8720 cam I found in one of your videos . I just installed the 4th one . {the part number suddenly gained R1 on the end}

@richardholdener1727

Жыл бұрын

just not at 2000

I thought a tighter LSA such as 108 improved low end torgue while keeping good higher end power. You proved that another video. Vizards 128 formula works.

@richardholdener1727

Жыл бұрын

ADDS LOW END AND TOP END?

@keith6872

Жыл бұрын

You tested 3 exact cams with different lsa 108, 112, 117. The cam with 108 made more low end tonrgue with near equal top end power.

I achieved a lot more low speed torque by using short duration cam with 25% higher lift a nd increasing comp ratio to 10.5 to one and serious port and polish and bigger carb and still good fuel economy

People have to realize that using a 3000rpm stall converter on any LS engine even one with a stock camshaft will make it rev much faster and put the engine in a much better spot of the powerband to produce torque providing the gearing is right than a camshaft will at 3000rpm most camshafts will increase torque but most times it's 3500rpm and up even a mild truck Norris cam takes to about 3000rpm to match the stock 5.3 engines torque and the truck Norris cam makes less torque than the stock 5.3 from idle to about 2800rpm a 3000rpm stall converter fixes this problem

It does help to begin with the right cylinder head design--large ports are going to create a lazy flow at low RPM, and if the air and fuel separate, then it won't matter how much CFM flows. Its quality versus quantity. And if there's large valves, they'll just get in the way of flow with a small lift RV cam. So how much air does an LS head move overall? I don't think it was known for small port volumes. The reverse pattern cam result was interesting, Jon Kaase in the August 2016 issue of Car Craft ran his P51 wedge heads against his Boss 429 heads on a 521 cid engine, and mentioned that an exhaust port might need less cam timing than the intake due to exhaust pressure inside the cylinder along with the push of the piston. but he's likely referring to performance across the RPM range, and obviously there was more cid there. Small displacement engines are going to show smaller gains due to changes, and at lower rpm there's always going to be less change as the ignition is firing fewer times per minute of testing. and maybe the LS is just too efficient to show gains, an early wedge might have different results. Lowering the engine temp would be an interesting test--at 130 degrees i'd think the engine isn't burning its fuel as well as it would at 180 degrees. meanwhile, my 1968 Olds 442 has a .490/260 split cam, but variable duration lifters. I can put the manual valve body THM400 into top gear, set the switch pitch torque converter to 1,800 rpm, and the 10:1 C headed 455 will pull from a dead start up to redline when she's been warmed up. A captive discharge ignition and a spreadbore Q jet helps out and gets 15 mpg on 93 octane. So this is a subject that interest me (for those who wonder, if i change the stall speed to 3,300 rpm and launch in 1st gear, then 0-60 mph is 5.5 seconds and I can hit 100 mph at the end of a quarter mile distance).

@richardholdener1727

Жыл бұрын

the ls cath head is very good for torque-but the discussion was the cam

@albertgaspar627

Жыл бұрын

@@richardholdener1727 when you say the LS head is good for torque...how so? Generally they are known for the volume they carry, which suggests power starting in the midrange. Are there tricks with the valvetrain or displacement on demand to generate torque at lower rpm, the same way early 1960's wedge designs just use small volume ports and small diameter valves?

The biggest gains are boost, cubic inches or compression.

The answer really is yes... in a scenario where your cam is so absurdly small for the motor, you can get substantially higher torque down low. Swap to a good cam on a tbi 454 and see what you get.

@drkaymotorsports

Жыл бұрын

That being said torque down low is mostly changed by bore, stroke, and cylinder pressure.

to generate lower RPM torque , you have to have a higher crankshaft stroke , chevy guys , need the early 2000`s 454 with the 4.25 stroke crankshaft , ford guys need the lunati 351w 4.250 stroke crankshaft , then use the correct duration camshaft , with a correctly CFM rated carb along with a correctly jetted carb

More low speed tq is easy....more compression. Realistically when you add a performance you should add compression anyway. Exhaust on some of these cams might change it some at low rpm.

The answer is because at low engine speed, even with a stock cam, you’re running close to 100% volumetric efficiency. Theres only so much air that can enter the cylinder, and the only way to get more power than that with an NA motor is with more rpm. Volumetric efficiency drops at high rpms especially with mild camshafts. And a good cam is essentially allowing higher volumetric efficiency at high rpms.

@richardholdener1727

Жыл бұрын

the highest VE will be at the torque peak-nowhere near this 2000 rpm point

I'd like to see a stock vvt cam like in an LY6 vs a btr truck cam. Probably be difficult for you tho it seems your Dyno is set up for Holley efi. Would be interesting tho.

@Marc_Wolfe

Жыл бұрын

Nothing to keep them from using a stock harness, except the additional hassle of using something different than what's laying around ready to go.

The Other way LS LGM X is custom Engineering cylinder heads. Every engine out there gets its behavior powerband from the cylinder port shapes and internal runner lengths, cross sections, short turn radius, valve sizes , and throat ratios used.

@richardholdener1727

Жыл бұрын

no

@Marc_Wolfe

Жыл бұрын

Hard to tell if that's overthinking or underthinking.

@brracing7861

Жыл бұрын

@@Marc_Wolfe I think How much time and money do you want to spend ? A Big Block Large Cubic Inches is proven Superior Normal Aspirated.

@Marc_Wolfe

Жыл бұрын

@@brracing7861 When you want low end torque.

If NA...more compression, more cubic inches, and intake manifold design are a few ways to gain low rpm torque.

Small turbo and limit rpm due the small turbo. Huge low rpm torque, but back pressure and charge temp issues if you allow it to rev.🤷‍♂️ No gen 3 rods though😂

Based on your tests, a narrow LSA typically increases low speed torque. Advancing the cam also increases low speed torque. Small duration increases low speed torque. With this in mind, wouldn’t the “ultimate” low RPM torque cam be a small duration, good lift, narrow LSA, and advanced? For example, in a 5.3L something like a 200/210 with 0.550 lift and 107 LSA. I wouldn’t expect 50 lb/ft gains at 3000 rpm, but would think that 15-20 lb/ft between 2000-3000 rpm would happen. Frankly, I don’t see the point in it. Would get much larger gains just going to a bigger engine. 4.8 < 5.3 < 6L type deal. It was more of a thought experiment.

@richardholdener1727

Жыл бұрын

as indicated, those changes don't do much at 2000-2500 rpm (nowhere near 20 lb-ft)

@NBSV1

Жыл бұрын

At low rpm displacement is almost always going to be the biggest change in torque.

@scottsigmon926

Жыл бұрын

Chuck, I agree with you. Typically that is exactly what happens. BUT, according to Richard, there is “never a custom cam that will make more power.” He told me that before!!! Unfortunately, Richard is wrong. With the correct cam you can gain more power than these “run of the mill self cams”!!!! You are paying for a cam anyway so why not get a cam for YOUR ENGINE COMBINATION!!!

@cedricwilson2055

Жыл бұрын

@@scottsigmon926 that myth may be busted. Best you can do now is get a cam with the most modern lobe for your combo.

@cedricwilson2055

Жыл бұрын

Some of these ‘ more torque down low ‘ comments sounds like the theory behind the thumpr cam everyone loves to hate.

No replacement for displacement when you need low end torque. Yea axle ratio helps but the saying still holds true.

Richard, here in Australia a common term for an upgraded cam is ‘tow and go’ no idea what the profiles are but pretty much every place that sells them say the increase the torque. What you said makes sense so they must be a mildly wider profile?

@richardholdener1727

Жыл бұрын

they don't increase torque at 2000 rpm-only as shown by the graphs

Would VVT help broaden the torque curve? Helping the engine produce great torque down low and carrying the torque gains across the entire rev range?

Long high velocity ports and intake, big cubes, lots of compression... are the easy way.. cams move the TQ peak around a bit, but with the usually small engines you test the cams they come with are about the most grunt they gonna make under 4000. Only if they are overcammed or way under cammed will they pick up down low. Now... what about LSA? Can that bring up some bottom end TQ?

@richardholdener1727

Жыл бұрын

I have tried endless combinations

@brracing7861

Жыл бұрын

Poncho Power Thumper

Right on

This test would be interesting on a chassis Dyno. Could really show potential loss.

@richardholdener1727

Жыл бұрын

same results

A question since you mentioned VVT....With constant variable valve timing when testing to see the optimum change-over points (or angles), would it be best to test each test angle with an individual optimised spark table or run each angle with the same generic spark table? (one that won't cause knock regardless of the VE changes)

@richardholdener1727

Жыл бұрын

we ask the motor what it wants as far as ignition timing, we do that for each cam on VTEC and at various point using VVT

Hi , hope you can respond to this ,I built a 350 old school engine, put new flat top pistons, scat crank, 64 cc aftermarket pro Maxx heads,then the cam I chose is a tow truck/ or RV cam for low end torque, it's the summit 1103 ,288/298 dur, lift 444/446. Then put 1.06 rockers. 2,700 stall,converter/ 3.73 gears . I haven't dyno tested yet but here I was trying to develop low end torque, aluminum intake and 750 street demon carb the combo seems very torquey posi diff, it takes off pretty good.

@richardholdener1727

7 ай бұрын

hopefully you have a dual-plane intake, and if you want low speed torque, that cam is a tad on the big side-long tube headers also help

@terry9026

7 ай бұрын

Yes it's a dual plane intake, thanks for your input on this subject. Love your shows. You answer a lot questions for the home builder .

I make 540tq by 3800 rpm with a stock s366sx on a stock 5.3l with 218/220 cam. Elgin 1838p. 14psi pump gas

Do the David Vizard thing and narrow the LSA. You did a video on that. I agree that you can only do so much. Why you didn't have much luck is there aren't many off-the-shelf cams made to take advantage of that. One that comes to mind that isn't ideal but proves the concept is the Summit 1785 (LSA=106). Vizard put out a video not long ago where he mentions a few others. He's not specifically looking to maximize low-end torque, it just works out that way. The Holy Grail is the most torque over the widest possible range of engine speeds.

@sHoRtBuSseR

Жыл бұрын

That last bit is the key. Average torque across the entire range is where we should be looking

@cedricwilson2055

Жыл бұрын

Probably take a custom cam or a circle track cam. A more modern lobe that that ancient summit lobe would be better. Plus you’ll need tuning ability.

@richardholdener1727

Жыл бұрын

DAVID IS NOT LOOKING FOR TORQUE PRODUCTION AT 2000 RPM

@kd6tas

Жыл бұрын

@@richardholdener1727 That's irrelevant.

@1magnit

Жыл бұрын

The answer is VVT

are there any aftermarket intake manifolds with the same runner lemgth as sbc tpi manifolds? Like other comments have said, nothing beats displacement for low speed torque. Taking this to an extreme just for torque, could a stroked 5.3 with 20 inch runner length and a 210° duration cam be the tow truck torque champion? Would a stock 8.1 with a similar cam and a performer manifold make more torque for less money? The people clamoring for off ldle torque typically want to haul 10000 lbs at freeway speeds, and aren't looking to go 8s in a vega. So the desire to get big block torque is typically best served (cost effectively) by doing EXACTLY WHAT RICHARD SAYS! 😮

What about Rhodes lifters, on a modern cam? Cam timing will allow you to move the torque around a bit.

Roots blower. Increase only lift. LSA makes the curve rotate (Don't remember which way)

@pacman3908

Жыл бұрын

Lower the lsa is the low and midrange torque improves.all dirt track engines run low lsa camshafts

I just want a cam that doesn't kill what Torque the 5.3 has from factory. But, gives me better HP on the High side. I think the Truck Norris NSR is the best I can go with.

@Richard Holdener I doubt any cam could improve low end torque over stock because OEM care about optimum daily driving so they’ve already picked the best cam for that. You should do a video on volumetric efficiency. That’s the key to this whole debate. Stock cams are already at peak volumetric efficiency up to 2500rpm or so. The power gains seen by after market cams come from longer intake valve events, which actually increase the volumetric efficiency at higher piston speeds, but almost always at the expense of low end torque. VVT does mitigate that to somewhat

@richardholdener1727

Жыл бұрын

peak ve is actually at peak torque

Pretty much the only thing that will drastically change low speed torque iNA is more cubes.

Would you run a ported 243 head or a milled 706 head on a dual plane intake with an Texas Speed MS3 cam. On a forged 347ci with valve reliefs on a daily driver. 9:7ish 243s or 10:5ish 706 compression. I'm thinking 706 to bleed off static compression with the big cam and still keep up the dynamic compression for pump gas.

@richardholdener1727

Жыл бұрын

properly ported 243 will make much more power than stock milled 706

So the million dollar question is an intake the only way to gain torque at low engine speeds ??? Cause converter and gears only get you to a higher rpm where the torque is made and doesn't help with bigger numbers at lower rpms... and what about cam timing would more cam timing shift power band lower ??? Questions I believe should have been answered in this video. Thanks still loving the the content keep up the excellent work 😊

@richardholdener1727

Жыл бұрын

that question about cam timing was answered in the video and a very long runner intake is one way to add torque, boost and displacement and compression are others

@jdhamm155

Жыл бұрын

I watched video i must have missed it about cam timing i will watch again. Thanks

Do you have a video or advice on how to budget modify a ‘94 Ford 5.8 EFI truck engine? I have BE s/w a d a Moates chip to update the tune, but looking for the best way to get more HP and more Low end torque.

@richardholdener1727

10 ай бұрын

long tubes, compression, displacement and boost all add low speed,

The 210/218 cam on a 106 LSA would create more low end torque. That is dyno proven. Tighter LSA = higher cylinder pressure and more low speed torque.

@richardholdener1727

Жыл бұрын

no

@ericwhitaker2011

Жыл бұрын

@@richardholdener1727 apparently you’ve forgotten articles you wrote showing exactly how a 108LSA produced 35 ft/lbs more over a 120LSA at 3500 rpm. The 108 made the 120 it’s b!tch from the hit to peak power on HP and TQ.

@richardholdener1727

Жыл бұрын

apparently you missed the point, you can add cams to lose torque-which is what the 120 lsa did, can you add torque versus the stock cam? None of those three cams tested have anything to do with these small cams and this test or the results.

The best way to gain big torque from any engine down low is to concentrate on the crank and not the cam. Put a stroker crank in the 5.3 and make it a 383 or turn the 6.0 into a 406 and then match the cam for that size engine and the rpm range you want to use. You did a test between big block Chevy engines the 454 and the new generation 496 look that up and compare the stock for stock results. I think the 454 is a 7.4 liter and the 496 is a 8.1. I drive a semi and the Detroit in my semi is 14 liter engine and I think it's about 900 cubic inches in an inline 6 cylinder. These big truck engines have large strokes and make about 1100 ft lb of torque at 2200 rpm and less. I know I went a little off the rails talking diesel engine but it doesn't matter. More stroke equals more torque. Gas or diesel. Just my opinion but seriously check out that test you did on the big block engines and see if I'm right about it

@P71ScrewHead

9 ай бұрын

Bigger will always be better, no replacement for displacement as you pointed out..

No replacement for displacement! More cubes = more torque!

What does it matter what HP does if you are increasing your torque? HP is a bonus. Right? I was just watching Nicks Garage and he just rebuilt a 413 split ram duel carb intake that made 385hp and 500 ftlb torque! It’s in the build.

@richardholdener1727

Жыл бұрын

in his case it was in the 3-foot intake runner length

If low end torque is what you’re after then you’re looking for the forced induction section, not the cam aisle. 😉

I would think a cam with negative valve overlap or zero overlap it would provide excellent cylinder pressure at low rpm , tighter LSA of course, and kill high RPM power. Much like you would find in a BBC dump truck. Did you try any cams like this?

@richardholdener1727

Жыл бұрын

THE STOCK CAM AND -37 DEGREES OF OVERLAP-MANY OF THESE ALSO HAVE NEGATIVE OVERLAP-THAT IS NOT IT

I belive you've set the stage for David V cam formula to be tested.

Adding cylinder pressure is the best way to increase torque on a given engine right? Im at high elevation and i want to make more off-idle torque with my gen 1 350. Crane used to sell a cam with low duration and a 104 LSA. It closed the intake valve super early like 21 degrees ABDC to build cylinder pressure. I heard a few guys say it had stump pulling power off idle

I say an LM7 cam may potentially have a decent lowend gain in an LQ4 over the original cam. I mean the P/N for the lq4 is the same as the early ls1 so technically you're installing a stage 1 truck cam. Haha

@richardholdener1727

Жыл бұрын

the LM7 and early LQ4 are the same

@AndyR1982

Жыл бұрын

@@richardholdener1727 , right but ive never seen an early vs late curve

PD blower for the win 🤷 lol. All the low end torque on demand

If that was possible the GM Engineers would have done it believe me

Cubic inches, modest port and carb size.

My recipe for tq Compression, displacement, shorty headers, best intake possible and almost any cam with under 210intake duration with a single pattern

@richardholdener1727

7 ай бұрын

definitely no on shorty headers (long tubes add torque-shorty header do nothing), but the rest is correct-then add VVT

My 2014 Hemi Ram pickup pulls like a diesel. I can tow my trailer and the RPM is below 2000. The factory Engineers do that on purpose

I've come to the conclusion from looking at dyno graphs that the first part of the run isn't an actual representation of what's going on since there always is an immediate dip. drivability is probably a better Guage .