Millions and millions served!

Yes, Richard has done so much for the car community. He’s squashed a lot of bs that people and manufacturers have tried shoving down peoples throats. He’s into all engines and isn’t biased from one brand to another. He just shows the data.

We must protect this man at all costs lol thanks for the info Mr Holdener

​@@brandongibson85Yes!!! Lock him in a dingy little cell on the a 200 year old cellblock in and toss him a few junkyard engines a Dyno and misc. Extras and record everything he says and does.

I Revisit these videos, After reading your comment I had a funny thought. If the goid comments i've given and other people to richard, went to his head in the form of hair, he would be the Lead singer of twisted sister by now.😁

You would be amazed at how many guys put too big of a camshaft in engines. I see it everyday. Too big of a cam and too tight of a stall almost every time.

@@nocturnalspecialties642 When I was 18 I had a 69 El camino with a 350, I don't remember the numbers but it was a ridiculously huge cam and a 750 dual feed Holey. I had 2.73 gears and it wasn't happy unless I was in low gear and up around 4 grand. So I lost a ton of bottom end with super tall gears and a carb that was way too big. Never again

@@DM-qp7do Haha. I know that had to be a hard lesson learned. I get kids all the time bringing a truck to the shop wanting it tuned. Only to find out they have put a 227/237 LS3 type cam in a 4.8 with a "trailblazer" converter. And expect it to be 550hp like the LS3 would have been.

@@nocturnalspecialties642 Kids today want the lumpy cam idle more than they want horse power. It just takes life experience and owning a few vehicles before they will learn.

Yes!👍

Glad I could help

That’s a good observation.

Kinda. I think it would have been a better test had he used a head which has a bigger difference in airflow between .450 and .500 lift. Do this on a 6.2 with a good head like a BR3 CNC or a ported LS3 and I suspect that we are looking at a different scenario.

@@AB-80X then it would have only shown the difference at high rpms where the majority of people arent. that same point could be said for every test. honestly, how many people are rolling through the streets with ported heads?i bet the difference would have been under 25hp. all that airflow and going with a mild lift cam seems like a waste to me.

@@natricjol That is kind of the point and what will happen. If nothing is changed down in the mid lift area, then you obviously won't see a change there. The point of this test was to see the difference in power from lift, not from various heads or variations in cam duration. In order to do that, you need to use a head that keeps performing stronger the more you lift. If the flow flattens out, then you get a smaller difference and the difference is mostly because you lift the valve longer at the previous max lift. If you want changes everywhere, you need a head that will flow more everywhere as well. What I talk about, singles out the effect of the lift not the effects of a better head. Lots, and I do mean A LOT of people are running around with ported or aftermarket heads. Not all of us are into the junkyard thing. Hell, people are even having these basic LS heads ported for cheap. Aside from that, there's a slew of pored LS2, LS3, LS6 and LS7 heads running out there. After that, you have all the aftermarket stuff. Thousands and I do mean thousands of cars run this stuff.

@@AB-80X we all know that a higher limft cam will make more power when you have better headflow to match with the displacement. if you have have too much head flow and not even cam or displacement to take advantage of it, then you will kill power. no one is disputing that. This was to compare what is essentially the same camshaft with the only difference being lift. if you have higher flowing heads, get the cam with more lift. if you are after more power than the nsr cam, get the og version or something with more lift or duration. take this test for what it is.

Minus draw from accessories, drive train, and voila. Still slow.

watch the truck cam test where I ran stock ex manifolds

we did run that cam with stock springs on the 4.8L (not that having springs makes any difference to the power gain offered by the cam)

Dang that's gonna be a blast. Please post a few videos on the car if you can. I'd love to see it!

MINIMAL CHANGE NA-SO MINIMAL CHANGE UNDER BOOST

For sure.... Shows you how good thise heads really are. We never saw gains like this with the old small blocks back in the day. One COULD have seen a 100h.p. gain between a stock cam and a big solid roller with those old school small block's, but the rest of the engine needed to be nothing but high strung, top-of-the-line, hi-performance, parts.

It would depend more on the flow of the heads. If the heads simply don't flow more air at 550 than at 500, then you won't see a difference from the lift. The extra lift with identical duration does mean that the cam has a faster ramp rate, which will generally produce more power, but in this single digit area that they're talking about in the video. If you have a head that can flow to higher lift, even as simple as an LS7 style head(stock ls7 is 315 at 500 and ~330 at 500) you will see more gains.

Still the heads only flow x amount, the cam should match the head flow. If head flow is say best at .400 lift with a .500 lift cam then you have too much cam. Then there is LSA which has a lot of factors with the specific engine specs.

I think it has to do with BTR being a channel sponsor for these tests. Kip does not sponsor these tests apparently.

WHO IS KIP-AND I HAVE TESTED CAM MOTION STUFF

Then maybe try it on a 400+ cubic inch engine too, follow that with more compression in the same displacements

so lift and duration are meaningless?

MAKE IT HAPPEN MODE

that's why we test on real dynos-and not computers

the heads already flow enough to support over 500 hp

@@richardholdener1727 True, but that 500 hp number also comes with a specific amount of air needed. If you don't change the time you keep that valve open, and the added lift does not really increase the amount of air going into the engine, then you are not really changing anything. Yes these heads will make 500 hp but that takes a lot more duration because it needs more time to pull in air into the cylinder. If you keep airflow the same at say 450, but increase it substantially at 500 vs. keeping similar airflow number at 450 and 500, then that higher lift should provide more than the 7 hp.

He is marching to his own drum

it has not done that in my testing

THAT IS NOT ACCURATE-LOTS OF COMBOS RUN CAMS THAT ARE NOT MATCHED TO THE LIFT CURVE OF THE HEADS

In future videos that is

changes more than lift

@@richardholdener1727 So does changing the camshaft.

this head flows better at 550 than 500 and better at 600 than both

@@richardholdener1727 I figured as much but 5cfm vs 20-30cfm counts.

a cam always changes power in any motor

Yes, the whole point of going high lift is taking advantage of additional air flow capabilities...kinda pointless without good heads

PLEASE SEE THE OIL VISCOUSITY TEST VIDEO

Because 500-550 is not really big but 500vs600 that’s we’re things get good that’s why Texas speed shows that .ls cathedral port 600 lift they still flow

@@utahcountypicazospage5412 .500 to .550 and .550 to .600 is the same total difference: .050. That's what I'm talking about here. If BTR made a "high lift" version of the Truck Norris cam with .600 lift we'd really be able to see how true it is - in theory the difference between it and the regular Truck Norris cam (.552 lift) would be even greater than the 7 or so hp seen in this video.

no

SOUNDS LIKE LOTS OF CUSTOM CAMS-$$$$

@@richardholdener1727 that's part of the fun isn't it? you wouldn't need that many, 3 or 4 would suffice. finding lobes with enough lift at the shorter duration and the lessening area under the curve would restrict your choice for a worthwhile comparison too i guess. and some of the benefit is going to be in idle vacuum and low speed manners, which you can't assess on the dyno. maybe lowest rpm it'll hold full load at? then you're into time spent setting up tune as well.

no

I agree mindblown watcher... Try those same cams on Tfs 205 heads. Or teas 799....

Obviously, if the head can't accommodate the extra lift.

@@richardholdener1727 Not in this case. But are you telling us that if you have a head that flows 300 at 500 and 302 at say 550. vs. 300 at 500 and 325 at 550 then it would not matter? Makes no sense. Please explain.

that is incorrect-the motor made 441 hp or so with the TN cam and 481 hp with a bigger cam using the stock heads. That the head flow stall and matches the max lift of the cam does not control power output-we have exceeded 500 hp with these stock 799 heads

@@richardholdener1727 Stock head flow for this head ~250 max. .257×250×8=514 hp. If what you say is true with the claim of 500 hp that engine is 97% efficient theoretically and you would have to have the lift to support it as well. What am I not seeing? 10:31 is where you tell the horsepower of the Red Hot Cam and it's at 454, but I know you test a ton of cams.

IF WHAT I SAY IS TRUE? I'M NOT THE ONE USING SPECULATION HERE. AS A DYNO RESULTS CHANNEL, I DON'T PROVIDE OPINIONS BASED ON THEORETICAL (AND INACCURATE) MATH. I PROVIDE DATA. PLEASE SEE THE 6.0L 799 HEAD TEST WHERE THE MOTOR MADE 522 HP AND 481 LB-FT OF TORQUE. 2 HP PER PEAK CFM IS A GUIDE...NOT AN ABSOLUTE. I HAVE MADE 2.32 HP PER PEAK CFM ON A STOCK 5.0L FORD HEAD.

please watch the tn vs ss2 cam video-it was posted long ago

we run 5/16ths in every ls

@@richardholdener1727 brain fart I meant 5/16 vs 3/8. Edited my original comment.

who is adam

@@richardholdener1727 Adam of Cattledog Garage ... his engine building methodology parallels David Vizard's approach, understanding that *LSA ISN'T A BYPRODUCT* and that there is a specific formula for certain engine platforms that give a fairly accurate and good baseline to start with when spec'ing a camshaft for a given application. Vizard's formulas for LSA (mainly engine size and valve diameter) and Duration (Application) have proven to provide a solid baseline to start with and then factoring in valve timing events based on headflow etc. Whilst it seems BT builds his camshafts more of a reverse order and that LSA is just an after effect. Now that the grand master Vizard is back on YT making use of his vast knowledge and experience is more readily available for the masses. I think much of what you do runs in the same direction that Vizard has done over the past 50+ years.

your description of a difference between how Brian and David design cams is nothing more than speculation-picking a single cam element as MOST important is equally a fool's errand I have spoken on the subject of picking the BEST cam many times, a formula won't work because there is no single answer

@@richardholdener1727 I said it sets an good baseline depending on multiple variables, and David has specific formulas depending on these variables that are not speculation but 50+ years of proven race experience, I wouldn't call his methods a fool's errand. Only if one is leaving out everything else and just using one formula to apply to everything which is certainly not how he explains it and definitely would be just shooting in the dark Brian's methods are akin to taking Kung Fu taught from Buddhist monks and getting Karate, a lot is missing from but a rigid method was created that works for some people.

Case in point is the fact that these tight LSA, low lift, NSR, and med lift cams are performing just as well if not better even when they have higher duration than those with wider LSAs throughout the RPM range given the application is suitable. According to old myths we certainly wouldn't have thought they'd be suitable in heavy trucks ... the issue with tight LSA is that it also narrows down their applicable use and require specific parameters in order for them to work in that application. Wider LSAs provide leeway for wider range of application, so they tend to do better as "off the shelf " cams

I THINK MY BOY JIMMY MAVE HAVE CONTACTED YOU GUYS ABOUT HIS J SERIES SWAP NSX

THE 799 HEADS USED ACHIEVE MAX FLOW AT .700 LIFT (250 CFM-ENOUGH TO SUPPORT OVER 500 HP)

ls3 would be terrible down low

Don't know how happy, but 62-6300 on my 6.2 so far hasn't been an issue.

@@Slik-rik87 are you this nsr cam in a 6.2?

@@Akestler yea I have the truck norris nsr in a 2012 6.2 crew cab z71

@@Slik-rik87 notice any TQ loss down low?

@@Akestler none, I was very impressed

29 total and please watch the tuning video

Actually you also want to run the PI valve springs because they are rated at 61 lbs versus the NPI at 50lb and the melling springs for PI engines at rock auto are rated at that amount for cheap. when buying used PI cam always ask for the PI springs chances are the guy selling the cams replaced the springs as well you might get um for free. do not use the PI valve lasher these bleed down faster then NPI which is main reason the PI cams works so well in NPI engines. Avoid 4 V valve lashers then bleed down the fastest.

@@mathewhoffer4541 PI valve springs are identical to the 96 and later npi valvespring. In fact, the same spring has a shorter installed height giving the 96+ NPI more seat and open pressure on the stock valvesprings. This comes at the cost of maxing valve lift to around .540~ without offset retainers.

@@madmod I have a 1998 Gt and a 2003 Gt a part in my basement and the springs are not identical the PSI readings I gave you were from those springs and the retainers are different as well they are 2 completely different springs and both these cars were purchased new so no one swapped them out at a later time. go to rock auto and look up springs for 1998 gt and 2003 gt they are different part numbers as well because they are not interchangeable without changing the retainers as well. melling makes a performance spring for the PI that is good to .600 lift and has 110 lb seat psi and is 1 3rd the price of any aftermarket cam spring.

@@madmod the NPI lash adjusters are better you get the full benifit of lift with them as they leak down slower. Ford made the PI lash adjuster bleed down faster because of the lift same as the 4V lash adjusters.

@@mathewhoffer4541 This is backwards Pi adjusters are the slow bleed. Npi are fast

THNX

What engine is this? Port injected 5.3/6.0?

@@riccocool Its the new direct injection 6.6 pushrod engine from GM. But companies already make conversion kits to run it port injected with an older E38 ECU (which means you could do Holley EFI as well).

he has done a few

ask yourself if the lift is valuable with the other cam specs

@richardholdener1727 how do the hydraulic rollers of Lunati stack up against the btr, sloppy stage x, etc? Seems I can't find a lot of lunati cam test on a 5.3. Old school iron 5.7, I really liked what Lunati offered. Do they not translate in Ls world? Voodoo? Bootlegger? Here to learn more. Impressed with the power gains from the 5.3s and thinking of crossing over 😎

the nsr cam was run both the stock 706 springs (on the 4.8L test) and after market springs on the 5.3L-it doesn't need a spring upgrade. Stiffer springs (if anything) cost power

HOW DO YOU ISOLATE THOSE?

@@richardholdener1727 It certainly is easier said then done, that's for sure. You've already done about half the work with this video. There are multiple variables that change DCR but the real test would be just testing a low DCR cam and a high DCR cam (with at least 1 point of DCR change) on the same engine. I assume you know how to calculate it but if you don't I can point you to two different websites or I could do the number crunching for you. I will suggest two different cams now and you might have already tested them. I can't keep track of all the cams you test. How many have you tested? SUM-8726R1 and Howard’s 190315-08. I have a cam spreadsheet with all the cams I'm looking at for my 6.0LS. These two cams have a DCR of 7.08 and 8.91 respectively.

THE 799 HEAD FLOW PEAKS AT 700 LIFT-NOT .500, .525 OR .550.

@@richardholdener1727 Hi Mr Holdener. Thanks again for your efforts. We all learn alot from your work. But many heads have a sag if you will. Right in the .475 to .550 lift range. And that sag is greatly increased or decreased by valve seat profiles etc. Another words. Without data on the exact heads you used along with a basic velocity profile. The test you did does not tell us what the cam lift does.