Camming this summer...gotta question...

[ericspecullaas]

well i found something that was a bit different lol check this link out

 

[ericspecullaas]

ahh zzp site is done with godaddy that may explain why the site goes down on black friday. server overload lol.

 

[Max Cook]

Somewhat recently. I'm not sure where the post is at, where zzp showed decent gains switching from 130# springs to 150# springs on an XPZ cam, due to valve float. The same thing applies to the XP though. LS6's or 105's are not heavy enough to keep the valves under control with the XP's lobe shape. Obviously, the LS6's and 105's work, but you are leaving some power on the table with those springs. I think that info is somewhat old on their page, but I'm guessing that if you email ZZP and ask them what springs to use, they will recommend something like a 130# spring.

My 01 has an XP cam, and I used to run Manley TI retainers with LS6 springs on it. I switched to Steel retainers and 130 comp springs about a year ago - I don't have actual dyno numbers, but the car picked up about 2-3mph in the 1/4, and about 30whp according to my scans.

When I did my XP cam like 6 months ago, ZZP said 105s were the way to go. I'd like to see this post you're talking about. Also those gains seem insanely high considering the gains from an XP in general are supposively 30-50WHP, and all you did was switch to inferior retainers and better springs? Granted you're not comparing the 105s to the 130s there but it seems like there had to be another issue there.

 

[GTPpower]

When I did my XP cam like 6 months ago, ZZP said 105s were the way to go. I'd like to see this post you're talking about. Also those gains seem insanely high considering the gains from an XP in general are supposively 30-50WHP, and all you did was switch to inferior retainers and better springs? Granted you're not comparing the 105s to the 130s there but it seems like there had to be another issue there.

Who did you talk to at ZZP?

I'll see if I can find the post.

 

[Max Cook]

Who did you talk to at ZZP?

I'll see if I can find the post.

Steve. As hes a good friend of mine. I'm not really trying to call you a liar or anything its just suprising/confusing and hard to believe information lol.

 

[GTPpower]

Steve. As hes a good friend of mine. I'm not really trying to call you a liar or anything its just suprising/confusing and hard to believe information lol.

No problem...I understand the confusion. I haven't been able to find the link yet.

The white car in my sig had an XP and 105's, but I still noticed some valve float in the upper RPMS. I'll keep looking for that link.

 

[Max Cook]

I sent him a message about this, I'll post what he says.

 

[GTPpower]

Go for it. Steve is a good guy.

I know I've got an email from PRJ regarding it as well, but I can't find it either. Evidently I suck at the internet today.

 

[Max Cook]

Response from Steve at ZZP:
"brand new 105's are fine with an XP. i have seen some cars pick up power going to 130's (i just did some on my car) they dont float BAD necessarily, but some cars will float some as the 105's wear out. usually it is a huge power drop, and boost climb at the top of the dyno chart.....the reason we dont put 130's in more cars, is because they are hard on a timing chain that already sucks to begin with."
So it seems like basically 105s are good for awhile and then could possibly lead to such situations as you observed.

Seems like you either pick replacing springs more often or replacing chains more often... Asuming he is refering to the double set as well on the 130s.

 

[GTPpower]

I put new springs on my white car when I did the cam, and took everything back out after ~8k miles. I know that boost used to increase at upper rpms, but I don't know for sure if that happened right away when I did the install - Can't remember anymore.

The LS6's on my 01 were bad though...boost would always increase 2-3psi at upper rpms. Now with the 130's, boost stays the same across the entire rpm range.