181/210 or 188/220 on my setup - now and future?

[AdamRRT]

Knowing cams pretty well from a gasser standpoint, both seem very small (I'm used to a "small" 5.7L LS1 cam being 232/240, .588/.592, 114 LSA). BUT I know we're limited by PTV clearance, so I am not griping. My point is I wanna go 188/220 because at these small sizes (for 5.9L displacement), bigger is better.

So would the 188/220 cam be acceptable to run on my current setup?
2006 Mega 2500. EFI Live, pressure box, HTS trans, Edge TC, AirDogII, QZ intake, Pusher, SL muffler, -cat, 35's on 18's, 4" lift, E.D. 62/68/12, 70hp tips.

Plans are in development now. I know I wanna go bigger on my air and fuel. I know I want a cam to bring in the spool much earlier. I'm between keeping my current turbo and using it with a 475 under it, or just using a 64 or 66mm turbo single. I'm wondering what my drivability would be like with a 66mm and this cam on an auto trans. By the looks of the graphs, it'll spool as early as my current turbo! I like the 66mm idea because I'd like to get 700hp.

Also, am I correct in thinking the earlier powerband will make better mpg, all other driving characteristics being the same?

So anyway, after way too much babbling, thoughts? Guide me on which one of your cams to buy, Zach!
Thanks!
- Adam

 

[mulisha]

Knowing cams pretty well from a gasser standpoint, both seem very small (I'm used to a "small" 5.7L LS1 cam being 232/240, .588/.592, 114 LSA). BUT I know we're limited by PTV clearance, so I am not griping. My point is I wanna go 188/220 because at these small sizes (for 5.9L displacement), bigger is better.

So would the 188/220 cam be acceptable to run on my current setup?
2006 Mega 2500. EFI Live, pressure box, HTS trans, Edge TC, AirDogII, QZ intake, Pusher, SL muffler, -cat, 35's on 18's, 4" lift, E.D. 62/68/12, 70hp tips.

Plans are in development now. I know I wanna go bigger on my air and fuel. I know I want a cam to bring in the spool much earlier. I'm between keeping my current turbo and using it with a 475 under it, or just using a 64 or 66mm turbo single. I'm wondering what my drivability would be like with a 66mm and this cam on an auto trans. By the looks of the graphs, it'll spool as early as my current turbo! I like the 66mm idea because I'd like to get 700hp.

Also, am I correct in thinking the earlier powerband will make better mpg, all other driving characteristics being the same?

So anyway, after way too much babbling, thoughts? Guide me on which one of your cams to buy, Zach!
Thanks!
- Adam

adam, either one of zach's cams would be fine, IMO just go with the 188....i will be a hamilton cam dealer any day now, so ill be able to help...:rockwoot:

 

[2007 5.9]

Ive got a 181/210...and I am SERIOUSLY considering swapping in a 188/220.

 

[Joesixpack]

I've got a 188/220 on the way, by the dyno results it looks like all win to me......I'll be killing some time on my superflow with it against a stock common rail cam.

 

[Hamilton Cams]

Adam,

I apologize, I did not see this one. Yes these cams are very small compared to gassers. There are quite a few reasons why. First, rpm range dictates duration. A diesel engine is done in most cases before a competition gas engine is even getting started rpm wise. We have large cams like what you are talking about, our 232-252- 106.5LSA will work well from 4,000rpm to whatever you want to run or our 230-240 .406-.420" 110 LSA will do the same. The problem is these will no work well on the street

In fact in most cases, if we go to longer duration to the point we need to flycut the pistons, we usually lose a good bit of bottom end with little gains up top.

That being said, the 188-220 will be the best thing for what you have if you plan on upgrading your turbo to a 64minimum, preferably a 66mm. It has more duration at .050" than the 181-210 but it is actually open for less time overall on the intake and the exhaust. The aggressive ramp rates make for a cam that works well on the bottom end but has enough duration at .200" and .300" to extend power in the upper rpm ranges(up to 4500rpm) even that is nothing compared to the gas world. If you plan on getting a bigger charger, go for the 188-220 and if you want to stick with the 62, go for the 181-210.

The 188 will work great for fuel economy but if you are wanting a good bump in power and maximum fuel economy, go for the 178-208. We are almost done with testing. It is looking like it will make as much power as the 181-210 but with better fuel economy.

Zach