[ShiftingSS]

Hey guys,

Looking at starting a mild street build, and don’t want to get into the motor or pull heads, and a budget in the low thousands.

What I’m considering:
Catted headers, 2”
E85 kit
Lt2? Intake
Roto cai
Cheap ported tb?
Mild higher rpm cam?

I’m unsure on vendors and overall config, but figure I can plan this as a one time install and get it tuned once everything is on, but what I have questions on are:

1. e85 plus cam, will I need an e85 specific cam?
2. How much of a factor is the cam in the above build? I’m considering it mostly to move power up in the rev range
3. Will I run into fuelling issues on e85 with stock pumps? From what I can see e85 kits tend to max out the stock pumps without a cam, but does anyone have experience with this?
4. Will I run into driveline issues at the 500-520 whp (optimistic?) mark?

Overall my goal is to get more pull at high rpm and keep costs reasonable, on an otherwise stock 16 SS 6 speed, and above all else keep this car reliable and happy for the next few years.


Any advice or experience appreciated.

[KingLT1]

You can't change the cam on these engines without pulling the heads...at least to do it right. Installing a aftermarket AFM cam is a waste and any you find laying around are likely old stock from 5yrs ago.

To cam these engines right you need to delete afm, install new lifters, p rods, spring kit, and lock out VVT.

[ShiftingSS]

Losing vvt sounds like a huge compromise, that what I figured.

[SSDan]

FWIW on the LT1 - the heads are coming off for a cam swap.

As to the other things - all will help especially E85 and the tune at the end once all the bolt-ons are in place. All your mods are aimed at getting more air in and then the exhaust out more efficiently plus the fuel boost with the E85 - all that gives some HP add.

Stock driveline will handle your plan and E85 should not tax stock fueling with this level of mods.

[17camaroSS]

Honestly, I’d get rid of the AFM and VVT. You’re really not compromising anything by getting rid of it. To do the cam, you need to pull the heads as stated above. You shouldn’t max out the fuel system with a setup like that either. But If it were me in your shoes with wanting to keep those things, I’d just do a FBO setup with with the MSD instead of the LT2 and no cam. Once you start adding a cam, you’re going to go over the budget you want.

So I’d do, the flex fuel for E85, MSD intake with a ported TB, Roto Fab, the 2” headers, ATI pulley, and be done. I think you’d be happy with a setup like that and still being within your budget

[6spdhyperblue]

Agreed on ported msd if cam is in your future.

I am LT2 because my build is pretty budget conscience and no cam plans. at most I landed on a end goal of ported heads and oe LT5 cam

[NA18CamaroSS]

Your power goals will determine if you want to go with a cam or not. With bolt ons you can get from 460-480 RWHP (SAE) depending on how you go. It sounds like your goals are fairly modest, so a cam is probably not for you. If you want 500 WHP or more, a cam is definitely in your future.

[ShiftingSS]

Originally Posted by 17camaroSS

Honestly, I’d get rid of the AFM and VVT. You’re really not compromising anything by getting rid of it. To do the cam, you need to pull the heads as stated above. You shouldn’t max out the fuel system with a setup like that either. But If it were me in your shoes with wanting to keep those things, I’d just do a FBO setup with with the MSD instead of the LT2 and no cam. Once you start adding a cam, you’re going to go over the budget you want.

So I’d do, the flex fuel for E85, MSD intake with a ported TB, Roto Fab, the 2” headers, ATI pulley, and be done. I think you’d be happy with a setup like that and still being within your budget

The biggest thing on vvt is that I’m already getting 13-16 on average on 93, and that’s with vvt. Frankly a lot of solutions in the lt1 aftermarket look like severe compromises and goofy workarounds that no oem engineer would support, and losing vvt on a daily driver in 2021 seems kind of silly, at least to me.

[LT1ornothing]

Originally Posted by NA18CamaroSS

Your power goals will determine if you want to go with a cam or not. With bolt ons you can get from 460-480 RWHP (SAE) depending on how you go. It sounds like your goals are fairly modest, so a cam is probably not for you. If you want 500 WHP or more, a cam is definitely in your future.

Agreed 100%, over 500whp will require cam and you may as well have the heads ported while they are off for the cam swap. By the way, not sure if it was mentioned, but a heads and cam job on these cars run about $5,000ish, definitely more involved than the LS engine days.

Otherwise, as just mentioned above, full bolt ons (FBO) will get you very close to 500whp

A 3rd option would be a LT4 blower swap, about the same cost as heads and cam, but will drive like stock and you would only have to remove your factory intake manifold instead of having to take the engine out AND take the engine apart for the cam swap, put it back together AND have the engine reinstalled into the car.

[NYblack1le]

Do you’re research and build the car in stages. Are you at all mechanically inclined? If so, all the bolt ons can be done on you’re own. The best tuners can tune you remotely and any update to a tune is very cheap. Anything beyond bolt ons is going to reduce you’re reliability or atleast increase routine maintenance. If you’re concerned about compromises and mpgs you picked the wrong hobby. No such thing as cheap reliable power.

[Puddin]

Originally Posted by ShiftingSS

The biggest thing on vvt is that I’m already getting 13-16 on average on 93, and that’s with vvt. Frankly a lot of solutions in the lt1 aftermarket look like severe compromises and goofy workarounds that no oem engineer would support, and losing vvt on a daily driver in 2021 seems kind of silly, at least to me.

You're not going to lose much mpg removing vvt and afm. I still average 14 on E85 and I have a 427 with over 20 degrees of overlap that I daily drive. Now if I floor it yeah it will drink it pretty quick but normal everyday driving its just another normal sports car that just shakes a little bit at red lights.

[s346k]

Originally Posted by ShiftingSS

The biggest thing on vvt is that I’m already getting 13-16 on average on 93, and that’s with vvt. Frankly a lot of solutions in the lt1 aftermarket look like severe compromises and goofy workarounds that no oem engineer would support, and losing vvt on a daily driver in 2021 seems kind of silly, at least to me.

there is a fair chance that vvt is actually causing your mileage to go down. i have no doubt swinging the cam timing around will let the ecu dump fuel at low rpm in an effort to build torque. if this is where you drive all the time its like daily driving a turbo 4 cyl in boost, it's going to get bad mileage. the fuel mileage is directly related to your location and driving habits. my fbo car on ethanol will average 20+ over the course of a weekend with a mix of cruising and flooring it.

vvt is about power. afm is about mileage. neither of them have a place with these engines once you start talking rpm.

[Hambo864]

Originally Posted by ShiftingSS

Hey guys,

Looking at starting a mild street build, and don’t want to get into the motor or pull heads, and a budget in the low thousands.

If a budget of low thousands is what you have then you may want to start looking at some basic bolt ons.

CAI
E85
Intake
Ported TB
Headers
HPTuners
Catback if you wish

Those mods alone are going to cost you a good 3 grand. You can save a little bit by doing the installs yourself. Like others have said. To do a cam, you're pulling the heads. To do a supercharger, you're way outside your budget. Good luck to you. Just make sure you do your research on parts. This group is very helpful.

[cmitchell17]

Originally Posted by ShiftingSS

The biggest thing on vvt is that I’m already getting 13-16 on average on 93, and that’s with vvt. Frankly a lot of solutions in the lt1 aftermarket look like severe compromises and goofy workarounds that no oem engineer would support, and losing vvt on a daily driver in 2021 seems kind of silly, at least to me.

So I know what you're saying about deleting things. I feel the same way and I would love to be able to keep cam phasing on my cammed LT1, but like s346k was saying its more trouble than its worth. So I believe the issue with trying to retain VVT with bigger cams is supposedly the phaser can become unstable and not command the right position. Now this is just all what I hear, I have never tried using and experimenting with my VVT with my bigger than stock cam and valve springs, but most of the big shop all came out with "VVT optimized" cams when VVT first came out on the GEN V LT1 and some of the truck GEN IVs. I think the issue is that with bigger cams you need stiffer springs and I think this supposedly makes it more difficult for the phasing mechanism to do its job from the increased spring pressure and therefore, increased friction. I am having a hard time logically concluding this though.

I would love to see a lot better and more hard data on the subject like logs and dyno runs comparing advancing and retarding a bigger cam. The stock tune if I remember correctly sits at the fully advanced position and is retarded by the phaser about 9-11 degrees at WOT starting at about 4000 rpms or so. I have heard people comment that they weren't able to get any better power numbers than the factory gets with the 9-11 degrees.

I think the main reason for the VVT phasing from the OEM side is it provides a built in EGR functionality. Like others were saying it kicks on at cursing speed and retards the camshaft by about 30 or 40 degrees if I remember correctly. The intent here is to try to leave the exhaust valve open way too long and have some exhaust sucked back into the cylinder. EGR is mainly for emissions, but it can increase efficiency by effectively diluting the air charge. It basically displaces some of the fresh air with "used up" air. So by doing this it has to open the throttle more to keep the same torque output. Opening the throttle as much as you can helps reduce pumping loses and increase efficiency.

That being said the difference and gain in efficiency for any of this stuff we are talking about is so negligible and small it is not noticeable and I would be willing to bet it is well within the uncertainty range of what you can calculate your fuel mileage.

I see the potential in using the VVT to try to make bigger cams behave better at idle although I haven't really thought it through but it seems like control reversion with big overlap numbers, which is similar to what I was describing above.