Comp Cams 102200 vs. 102500

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
  #1  
Old 02-06-2008, 12:57 PM
Jackal's Avatar
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: KC, MO
Posts: 2,233
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Comp Cams 102200 vs. 102500

Can anyone run the difference down for me? I'm hoping I'll get some loping out of these...anyone have an audio clip? Is a complete valve job required or just springs?
 
  #2  
Old 02-06-2008, 02:57 PM
Labnerd's Avatar
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: So. Texas
Posts: 2,226
Likes: 0
Received 41 Likes on 37 Posts
The 102200 has a 268 intake duration and the 102500 has a 262 duration. If you are wanting a lopping idle and a good cam for mid range to high end, the 102200 is for you. The bottom end isn't great but it's not a negative either. Neither should have any requirements for a special stall converter. FWIW, I run a 102200 in one of my Tritons. It has added a lot to the pulling power of the engine which is why I chose the cam. It does sound like a fuel drag engine at cold startup but is not so wild that you can't run A/C on it. I think if you are looking for a decent all around cam, want a good sounding cam, good pulling power from 1800+ rpms, the 102200 is the right cam for you.
Here's the technical on them:
http://www.compcams.com/technical/Ca...6-07/62-63.pdf

Sorry, no sound clips but you might venture thru the CompCam site and see if they have any. I would never consider putting a new cam on old valves. I would also suggest using the CompCams springs and retainers. If this is an older engine like a 385 or an FE, use the CompCams gears and chain too.

I did find a sound clip of a 350 GM that does sound just like my truck only I don't have the idle as high as this one. This is the 102200 cam with 268 duration:
http://s178.photobucket.com/albums/w...t=100_2765.flv

I also have Hooker Headers, 3" stainless dual exhausts with 42" Cherry Bomb mufflers that are straight thru. It's not too loud but there is no mistaking it for a stock truck. Again, I have mine for pulling, not racing. But don't get in the way or it can blow the doors off of most trucks. A good set of LS 4.10 gears helps too.
 
  #3  
Old 02-06-2008, 03:21 PM
Jackal's Avatar
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: KC, MO
Posts: 2,233
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
This would be for my 01 4.6L. Also, I have the 5-speed and plan on 4:10's soon after. It's a 4x4, but the 5-speed tranny has a final drive ratio of 0.7 where as the auto is 0.8. This means 4:10's in my 5-speed is = to 4:50 in an auto.

Is the 102500 more for low to mid-range then? This is what Built54 was running and what was recommended for my application. Just wanted your all's thoughts because I'm a valvetrain retard and have no idea how lift and duration effects things. Damn I love that sound.
 
  #4  
Old 02-06-2008, 03:41 PM
Pnewman's Avatar
Member
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Rule of thumb, the longer the duration the higher your usable power range is bumped up. The power range can start higher up and be shorter overall so be careful when selecting a radical cam on a stock compression-ratio engine unless you are running boost.
 



Quick Reply: Comp Cams 102200 vs. 102500



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:34 AM.