That 224* cam, peaked around 5200 in my 367 with aluminum heads.I installed it with 1.6 arms. It pulled hard to well into the mid 6xxxs, and with the right springs revved to 7000 no problem.(don't forget the oiling mods if you want to go there). The early power peak, means an early torque peak,probably a little shy of 4000, I'm guessing. Well guess what; 34mph with 3.55s is right around that rpm with the 2.45 low of the automatic. That means when you nail it from cruising in Second or Drive, and it drops into First,then you are right on or near the torque peak,and are blasting off.
This next part may not help you much but;
I installed an overdrive behind this cam, and with a 2.02 final drive, I was able to achieve 32 mpgUS @ 65=1650rpm(M/T). With straight 3.55s I cannot recall the fuel-mileage, except to say that it was waaaay better than the 230* I now have.
>The 230* pulls a bit harder and a bit longer, and is happy to be shifted as high as 7200. I think it power peaks around 5400, it's hard to say cuz the 110LSA stretches it out, and flattens the power curve to I can't be real sure exactly where it is; so I just rev the snot out of it. Most of the time the tires are spinning to past the speed limit anyway. With an automatic, the shift rpm might be around 6200.
Yeah and that's another reason to go with a 224*ish cam.That cam,with 3.55s,puts the torque peak right where you need it at about 34mph. And with the 2.45 low, it will power-peak right around 46mph, and carry that power almost flat to 51mph@5800, and there about,the power begins to slowly,fall off. BUT, properly springed, it will still carry you to around 56mph@6350. Furthermore, This cam makes gobs of torque below it's torque peak. I would not be scared to try it with the factory convertor which might stall between 2200 and 2400.And Here's why;
If you are running anything less than 275s out back, that cam is just gonna light them up from a dead stop, as the TC slingshots you off the line. If you can then get the revs up to 2800 or better, you will smoke those little wieners all the way through First. So then; If you woulda had a 2800 or better TC, it wouldn't have helped you one tiny bit, cuz the limit was traction.
>But if you solve the traction issues, and then the engine cannot generate enough torque at 2200 to 2400 to break traction, this is where a higher stall comes in.
>Another place a higher stall TC comes in, is when attempting to rocket away from a speed that is well under the torque peak, bur not standing still. 2200/2400rpm is about 20/22mph. If your engine is a little shy of torque there,then the acceleration will not be as brisk as it could be with a looser TC. Remember the torque peak may be up as high a 3900/34mph, so you will need to power from 20/22 to around 30mph, before RapidTransit begins. So this is where a 2800TC comes in.
Cruising will be about 65=2870with zero TC slip. So you kindof want to stay above that to keep the tranny fluid cool, and also, if you care about fuel economy.
>So with a 2800TC,lock-up in first occurs at about 26mph, a good 2 to 4 mph later, and the engine is making more torque up at that rpm; and so,the car rockets ahead a lot harder than when it had the 2200/2400.
>If you think I really like this cam, you would be right. Of the 3 cams I have tried, this 224*, was my favorite, most versatile cam. I would still be driving it, except that in 2004, it dropped two lobes. I then moved up one size,to the 230*, and for the rest of the summer, and part of the next, I was scrambling ,looking for the torque I had lost.For a while I was kindof sorry,that I had chosen the 230*. The cure for me was a deeper low gear,(manual trans) and a sharper tune.
>If you are gonna run 27 or 28 inch tires with the 3.55s and the 230* cam, you are for sure IMO,gonna need a looser TC than stock.
In my experience, the 230* gives up quite a bit of low-rpm torque to get a few more hp at 5400 and beyond.So much so that I needed a 3.09 low, over a 2.66, to get similar off-idle performance. That is a 16% increase in ratio. I won't say it took all of that 16%, but I think it would be fair to say at least half of that. I would estimate the loss of torque therefor to be in excess of 20 ftlbs, to perhaps as much a 24ftlbs, in the range from 1200 to 2400 rpm, where I like to dump the clutch and go;most of the time,lol.
I guess what I'm saying is, that the 230* with a factory TC,needs more gear than 3.55s, to be peppy in the range that most street-driving is done.IMO, the loss of torque below 2200, would require 3.83 gears to compensate. Well they don't make 3.83s do they? So your poison is 3.91s or 3.73s. Or instead of gears, you can up the stall.
But the 3.55s are just right for a 224* cam, especially with a 2800 or a bit more, and a traction aider of some kind, if you want to convert some of the tire smoke into forward motion.
All calculations were based on a 27"tire, and a 2.45 low.
Yeah I know, another stinking novel. I just don't know how it happens! I just type, and before you know it, Bam! there it is. Tell you what, hit Ctrl and minus, about 3 times, and then it might fit onto one screen,lol
