LQ4 VS LS3-LET'S TALK TECH
Вставка
- Опубліковано 8 лют 2025
- WHICH FACTORY CAM WOULD YOU RATHER HAVE? WOULD YOU PICK THE LOW-SPEED TORQUE OF THE LQ4 CAM OR THE GREATER PEAK POWER OF THE LS3 CAM? LET'S TALK TECH? MAKE SURE TO CHECK OUT RICHARDHOLDENERPERFORMANCE.COM FOR LS PERFORMANCE PARTS LIKE CAMS, SPRINGS, LIFTERS A FUEL SYSTEMS.
To your point, I changed the cam in my 66 Mustang last spring summer due to a suspected bad cam lobe. It has one of your least favorite engines (K code 289). That said it does have TFS 11R 170 heads, Performer RMP airgap intake, headers, big exhaust and 10.54/1 compression. It is backed up by a T-5 5 speed and 3:80 gears. The old cam was a hyd flat tappet from Comp with 274/286 duration, (219/226 at 0.05) and .475/.480 lift hyd flat tappet and 112 degree lobe separation. The new cam is a Com hyd roller 270/270 (215/215 at 0.05) duration and .533/.533 lift with 110 degree lobe separation. I have been watching your channel for a while now and I tried to use what I have learned when I selected that new cam. I know you do not think highly of single pattern cams but there was not much choice when it came to in-stock retrofit style (small base circle) rollers for 289 blocks. And what I got was an engine that behaves totally different. It has a WAY more low end torque and builds power linearly all the way to 6000 rpm. It is so much more pleasant to drive which is what I hoping for (in addition to getting roller cam reliability). I would not have been able to do that without all the knowledge you have presented on your channel. Thank you, I sincerely appreciate it.
A 289 isn't my least favorite motor-it is a short stroke 302, it just has less displacement and makes less power than bigger motors
@@richardholdener1727 I like to call 302s factory 289 strokers 😁. You are right, bigger engines make more torque and horse power. It was probably a little silly of me to leave the engine a 289 when I rebuilt it but it seemed like a good idea at the time. I was just very surprised with what I thought would be a relatively small change in the cams turned out to be so noticeable due to the torque being available down low vs up higher in the rpm range. I don't comment often but this seemed very much like what you were trying to explain and thought I would share my experience. As a side note, those small base circle roller SBF cams are crazy looking things!!
Hey Richard - love the videos and have the books from back in the day.
Request - could you do a video of an LS 6.0 turbo setup that comes closest to the street feel of a 6.0 + positive displacement blower say 2k to 5k, or lower to 5k.
I know the dyno chart might not tell us anything about street behavior, but talking about setups would be great.
I loved the fun of my LSA and would love my 6.0 to behave the same up to say 5k. I'd also love to save the $ by mimicking a $6k blower kit with a turbo. Thank you!
- this is for a '64 Vista Cruiser with an 80e
that should be easy
Good stuff
Ppl need to realize the power band differences between the same 6.0 in a SS trailblazer is not in the same area as the 2500 HD on 40s and then if ict's in a box truck and never had it revs over 4500 rpms
I bought the stage 1 truck cam version 2
I freeze my seals to put them in lol sometimes I freeze the bearings too and it helps em go in nice. There’s a Little tip I won’t charge for
freezing the valve seats (with liquid nitrogen) for installation has been done for years
@ that’s fancy I just use the ice box
Richard what you need to do is remind people that your cams are half the price of other cams so they can try two cams for the price of one and try both lol
unrelated to the video but i think you should share your store link in all your descriptions
it is there
Thoughts on lq4 4.030 bore 243 stock heads .051 head gasket 43lb injectors tbss intake shorty headers tsp cam 208 214 550 lift 4l80 stock converter with hd2 kit all in a 2500hd 2wd
should work well
Any buddy know what's up with Richard he hasn't had a live in a couple of days hope all is well
I heard he stopped doing you tube
@richardholdener1727 funny guy you are lol 😆
Hey I would be interested in one of these aluminum 5.3 liters you got coming up for sale! I assume this could be in the garage sale area! I’ll be ready to buy in about 60 days! So if you could hook me up with your email address so I can reach out and we can connect communication that would be awesome, thanks Richard
Your video that was uploaded on February 5th, 2023 tested the truck norris, chopacabra, torkinator, Lil chop. The Chopacobra made more power than the truck norris cam from 2500 rpm to 6000 rpm. The Chuck norris cam only carried the same peak number from 6000 to 6400 rpm. The truck norris cam was only up like 8 hp... so from 6000, they were the same and in a 400 rpm difference, it slowly gained 8 hp. Mentioned this on the live chat and you insisted that your cam and the truck norris cam were "more powerful" than the chopacabra cam. You literally disproved yourself in your own test...in other words, stop pushing those cams under the guise that they are better. 2500-6000 rpm having more power the whole time outweighs the 400 rpm stretch at the very end.
never heard of a Chuck Norris and since I have the data I know how well each of those did
I called the cam Truck Norris the first time. Didn't realize the autocorrect changed it the other times...hopefully that alleviated your confusion(seems more like a deflection move). Cool, so you have the data that you uploaded. For more responsiveness and more "truck rpm range," wouldn't the cam that makes more power from 2500-6000 rpm be the better and more obvious choice? Watch your own video and swallow your pride...
steve keeps saying things like NA cam and turbo cam...
Good morning!, please espanish traducción, thanks.