Katech Torquer LS7 110 vs 116
 

We ran the Torquer 116 on the engine dyno yesterday. Here is a comparison vs a Torquer 110. Granted, it's not the same exact engine, but it's the best representation we have right now.

Torquer 110 in black
Torquer 116 in blue

http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-..._7787364_n.jpg

The results show that it is a good in-between cam between the stock cam and the Torquer 110. The Torquer 110 is relatively mild itself, but if you're looking for a very mild upgrade in between the two, the Torquer 116 may be the cam for you.

JAson, I assume a stock LS7 makes about 505 hp and 470 tq on this dyno?

How is it that just a difference in LSA makes such a big power difference? I thought LSA just moves the powerband up or down and power comes from lift and duration?

Would the milder cam work if I was planning to put a supercharger say a Magnson for a 2008 ZO6

It would make more due to dyno headers, aftermarket calibration and J607 vs J1349 correction factors.

LSA affects overlap which helps scavenge spent gasses from the chamber and improves power.

Yes, it would probably be good for a supercharger.

Jason
I have the 110 now, If I switched to the 116 would it require a tuining change?

Any best guess at what it might make then?

WOW, the Torquer 110 made considerably more HP and TQ throughout the entire RPM band. If I had to choose right now Torquer 110 all the ay baby! :cheers:

This result begs 2 questions that I would want answered.

1. What would be the result if the torquer was re ground on a 107?

2. I would like to see the back to back of the 110 installed straight up and then retarded 4deg as suggested some time back. If that would add meaningful power around 6500, then that would be the overall best cam on the market as far as I am concerned. But again i am not interested in street manners, just in lap times.

John

Jason
why is Halltech making big numbers using the 116?
Is it the high compression and E85?

Jason,
What is the impression of the differences in idle quality? What were the differences in the engines tested?
Gary

Yes

~530

1. Interesting idea

2. We did that. It traded ~5hp for 5tq


13:1 compression
E85
FAST manifold
102mm throttle body

I haven't driven the car yet, but idle/drivability should be very good. Jim Hall loves his.

I tried to pick two of the most idential engines for this comparison. Both Street Attack LS7s without ported heads, FAST manifolds, or bigger throttle bodies.

I have the 110 with my ECS S/C Kit :cool:

a question I always had in mind is, why does the torque dip get larger in size with the bigger cams, can anyone explain what seems to be happening at that particular rpm??

I knew we would be sacrificing some hp, but the E85 fuel with coupled with high compression and the right tuning, yields much more hp than E0.

The ultimate goal was not to jump over 600 RWHP, but rather to have a mild mannered street killer bee. Smooth idle, with no exterior signs of modification, but able to smoke rear tires in second gear to 95mph.

If anyone wants to have a no surging platform, I highly recommend the 116 LSA grind.

The dip is caused by overlap (and runner tuning). The bigger the duration or narrower the LSA, the more overlap it will have.

I put a Katech Torquer in my 2007 LS7 tahoe, that was a bad ass cam!

too bad the trans couldn't take it, then the rear end, then the rear end again:thumbs:

Jason,

Have you done any further testing / comparisons with these two cams?

What do you think is happening to cause the dip in torque between 3200 and 4400 with the 110 grind? It's still there with the 116, but not as severe.

Did you try advancing / retarding the 116? I'm assuming the posted dyno run is with it straight up?