I put a wheel to my poston 113A cam and here is what I got. Intake open 10.5* Intake closed 42* Exhaust open 60.5* Exhaust closed 2.5*. The cam card says at 4* advanced I should have Intake open 7* Intake closed 45* Exhaust open 60* Exhaust closed 6*. It looks to me the cam is retarded from the 4* advanced numbers and is about "straight up" Should I advance it or leave it where it is? I think the closing #'s are a little fishey because I would think they should be more than the 4* advanced numbers instead of less, or am I looking at it wrong? Thanks Mike D. PS; The car is mostly street driven stop light to stop light maybe a trip to the strip once in a while.
Mine was off by just over 2 degrees. I moved it to have installed a true "straight up" and the car runs great. Oh, I'm running the exact same cam.
Cam Degree question I have used the GS113A and the GS112 these are both great camshafts. I had chain stretch which caused the same problem you have. I agree with 70gsconvrt advance it to strait up and you will be happy with the results. Much better lowend torque!!! :jd: I use the GS112 currently and it is better than the 113A but both provide great HP. Weekender
Excuse me Kelly I have tried both in my setup and the 112 achieved a better result overall for my application with less stress on the valve train. I also enjoy the idle which is almost as good as the 110. He didn't say what his setup was and I was only offering an observation, chill out man. :bglasses: I have Stage 1 heads ported and CC'd but without the benefit of a flow bench I am still trying to find the right cam for the flow characteristics these heads. Might be cheaper to have them flowed and cut to the chase on the camshaft; Hey? Weekender 78 Regal 3950lb 11:95et@114.25
chilled Sorry, wasnt triing to slam on you. how did the 112 do on the bottom end? what E.T. did you pick up? i like my 113A but im not ready to go to a cam like the 112 and loose my low end, witch isnt that big a deal i cant give it full throttle eneyway unless im going over 30 mph or the back end wants to wrap around the front. the low lift of 112 would seam to be for unported heads.
:bglasses: Kelly No offence taken, I realized you were responding to a particular part of my thought not the whole thing. In my humble opinion, the 113a is an excellent camshaft. Smoother idle than the window breaker I have now but very powerful on the lowend as you stated. My car had a flat spot off the line with slicks and then it came on hard and would run 113 to 114mph through the traps. At that point I had not degreed the cam and I did not realize the dual roller chain had stretched to some extent and retarded my timing as referred to in the beginning of this thread. I purchased the 112 cam to eliminate that flat spot, lowend HP was what I was looking for at this point. when I went to the track my goal was to reduce my 60 foot times from 1.78 to 1.80 as Was the case with the 113A. ET was 11.98 @ 114.00 off the trailer. With the 113A the vehicle would run 12.05ET and on a good run 11.98 ET @ 113.50MPH The goal to lower my 60ft time was achieved, 1.65 and the flat spot was almost gone. This would indicate to me that the camshaft actually was a bit better on the lowend. however, more work was necessary. That engine was tired, so this year I did a heavy overhaul and fixed everything but camshaft and rockers. On the first run it went 11.95 @ 114.25, on old plugs and no tuning mods just to establish a baseline. Unfortunately I fryed the main bearing. When I rebuilt the engine the second time I took the time to degree the camshaft and found a 2 degree retard condition and corrected that to strait up. The results of that one change was very noticable in the "seat of the pants" test. My neighbor (a true chevy big block enthusiast) took a ride with me and immediately said he would expect to see a 11.20et @ 120MPH. Time will tell, but the chevy guy said he had never felt the kind of torque this motor puts out. I firmly believe this camshaft has as much lowend as the 113A plus top end. Easier on the valve train? - The lift in the 112 is .477 and this is the perimeter I was referring to. I had wasted so many cam bearings until now that I wanted to reduce the over the nose pressure on the camshaft to see if that was the problem. This was not the problem but, but it is a philosphical view that may not apply in reality. Sometimes less is more. I have a GS110 which is bearly streetable that I may try next years just to test the theary you presented that these heads my perform better with higher lift. I do not see that I will ever be able to use more HP than this car makes right now on the street. Here my setup if you are interested - 455 bored .40 over + What 465 CI -.005 deck height 68cc heads milled .15 Ported at the valve only Ports matched to manifolds Roller rocker 1.6 ratio Stage I valves Poston long tube header Pertronics ignition parts in GM distributor Speedpro 8.5 to 1 CR pistons, Calculated @ 10.5 to 1 CR actual GS 112 Camshaft degreed strait up Balance and blue printed crank and block Art Carr 3000rpm stall converter Ford 9" w/3:70 rear axle ratio T400 trans Boxed frame rails B4B Intake w/850cfm Holly .78 primary - .80 secondaries 6.5 power valve Race ready weight 3950 w/ me on board this appears to be a very strong recipe for a full dress street vehicle with a/c, p/s/,p/b, etc. Weekender
the rattle is what keeps me away, sounds like a good and very similar set up, i run a 4000 switch and the SP1 intake with a 800 Qjet.
