PDA

View Full Version : New Roller Sticks



BadFastGTC
08-14-2006, 10:30 AM
I will soon have available new performance roller camshafts. These cams are based on the factory rollers. I tracked down the cam manufacturer and had UGL sticks manufactured. I found a cam grinder who has a like mindedness and experience as to what turbo motors seem to prefer. I've been running two initial grinds to see how they behaved on the street and how the perform in day to day driving and I can say I've been very pleased with them. I hadn't been able to go to the track as of yet. My planned trip was detoured last Friday night. These puppies pull to 6800/7000 rather well. They do require a valve spring change. I can supply you with the proper valve spring also. The specs on the cam are both 252 adv. duration intake & exhaust. Duration @ .050" is 216 and 207 I/E respectively. Valve lift is .507" intake and .510" exhaust. Intake lobe centerline is 108.

The cams do not need any shims. The base circle is the same as the factory roller. The lobes were hardened deep enough so the wear will be essentially zero. Costs for the cams is $325.00 shipped to you. The attached picture is of a used one from testing in my Lancer.

Steve M.

Frank
08-14-2006, 10:39 AM
I am in for one. I still have the voice mail saved of you reving the motor. :)

I am going to move this to the Group Buy section since that is basically what this is.


Frank

show-off
08-14-2006, 11:02 AM
Steve,
Is $325.00 include the valve springs? Just wanting clarification. If I already have the same springs you use in your big valve head, will I need to change again?

Clay
08-14-2006, 11:05 AM
will these be worth using on a stock head?

BadFastGTC
08-14-2006, 01:38 PM
The voice mail was a fun thing to do! heh-heh...

Steve M.




I am in for one. I still have the voice mail saved of you reving the motor. :)

I am going to move this to the Group Buy section since that is basically what this is.


Frank

BadFastGTC
08-14-2006, 01:44 PM
Mark,

I should have been more thorough with my explanation, no, the springs are not included.

The springs I use have had no problems in Sledgehammer with the cam. I would use a better spring for these, especially if one wishes to up the RPM limits. I would venture to say if you stay under 6500, you should be OK provided the installed height is proper. I will be upgrading the springs in my Lancer after I pull the head. Frank is currently running the proper heavier spring.

Steve M.



Steve,
Is $325.00 include the valve springs? Just wanting clarification. If I already have the same springs you use in your big valve head, will I need to change again?

BadFastGTC
08-14-2006, 01:44 PM
I wouldn't.




will these be worth using on a stock head?

Frank
08-14-2006, 02:03 PM
The voice mail was a fun thing to do! heh-heh...

Steve M.


LOL. Oh I fixed your avatar!

85glht
08-14-2006, 03:56 PM
They do require a valve spring change. Steve M.

What springs do you recommend/ sell?

powermaxx
08-14-2006, 04:02 PM
Add me to the list. We'll talk springs for my head when you have a chance (PM me).


I will soon have available new performance roller camshafts. These cams are based on the factory rollers. I tracked down the cam manufacturer and had UGL sticks manufactured. I found a cam grinder who has a like mindedness and experience as to what turbo motors seem to prefer. I've been running two initial grinds to see how they behaved on the street and how the perform in day to day driving and I can say I've been very pleased with them. I hadn't been able to go to the track as of yet. My planned trip was detoured last Friday night. These puppies pull to 6800/7000 rather well. They do require a valve spring change. I can supply you with the proper valve spring also. The specs on the cam are both 252 adv. duration intake & exhaust. Duration @ .050" is 216 and 207 I/E respectively. Valve lift is .507" intake and .510" exhaust. Intake lobe centerline is 108.

The cams do not need any shims. The base circle is the same as the factory roller. The lobes were hardened deep enough so the wear will be essentially zero. Costs for the cams is $325.00 shipped to you. The attached picture is of a used one from testing in my Lancer.

Steve M.

BadFastGTC
08-15-2006, 06:59 PM
LOL. Oh I fixed your avatar!

Thanks Frank! I had another shot I from the F-1 race at INDY that I may switch.

Steve M.

BadFastGTC
08-15-2006, 07:01 PM
You'll have the correct spring and the heights will be what they need to be to run the new cam. I'm starting on your head as soon as I get off here!

Steve M.



Add me to the list. We'll talk springs for my head when you have a chance (PM me).

BadFastGTC
08-15-2006, 07:03 PM
What springs do you recommend/ sell?

I use a Comp Cams spring. 926-16. The spring is a pretty stout unit. Single spring w/dampner.

Steve M.

tryingbe
08-15-2006, 08:08 PM
will these be worth using on a stock head?
I wouldn't.


Then what do you recommand to use this cam on? Mildly ported head? Heavily ported? What?

BadFastGTC
08-16-2006, 08:52 AM
I'm not politically correct, so please consider that as I answer your question. :thumb:

Would I use the cam in a midly ported head with stock diameter valves that flows no air over the stock lift of .430"? No, it is a waste of time in my opinion.

I would use the cam in a midly ported, properly done & set-up head that was capable of flowing enough air to be beneficial to the user.

I would use the cam in a "heavily ported" head. See above for explanation.

Steve M.





Then what do you recommand to use this cam on? Mildly ported head? Heavily ported? What?

85glht
08-16-2006, 04:40 PM
I use a Comp Cams spring. 926-16. The spring is a pretty stout unit. Single spring w/dampner.

Steve M.

Are they similar to Mopar performance's spring #P4876061? That is what I'm running now (had a super 60 cam and it wore out....go figure:yuck: )

BadFastGTC
08-17-2006, 08:06 AM
The Comp spring has a higher seat and nose pressure. I do not feel your wear issues are from the spring. I noted when my S60 cam began to wear it was the followers beginning to come apart taking out the cam lobes. They were crumbling due to the fact that the lobe shape put so much pressure in a small area of the rocker. That is my assessment and I'm sticking to it!

Steve M.



Are they similar to Mopar performance's spring #P4876061? That is what I'm running now (had a super 60 cam and it wore out....go figure:yuck: )

John B
08-18-2006, 02:51 PM
I'm not politically correct.

Steve M.

Oh no Steve, say it ain't so!:)

BadFastGTC
08-21-2006, 07:38 AM
I'll never be and you can't make me! Heh-heh......

Steve M.



Oh no Steve, say it ain't so!:)

8valves
08-21-2006, 12:05 PM
Can you somewhat compare these to any of the previous TAFT offerings? I'm looking for something that is geared towards 4000-7000 rpm ranges, and not worried about rough idle's, some stumbles here and there... that doesn't bother me.

AM

Captain Chaos
08-21-2006, 02:51 PM
UGL sticks manufactured.
Whats UGL?

BadFastGTC
08-22-2006, 08:03 AM
The only comparison I can make is you don't need to shim your lifters with these. I cannot say anything with regards to the specs of the TAFT cams. The lobe shapes, lobe separation, lift, overlap are probably different as my grinder and I discussed these for some time. And before I forget, thanks to the rest who had input into the cams.

What I can say is these pull very well. I do not have hard factual data in hand. I do know my cars very well and based off of what I experienced in them, these work. I will be attempting to get one of them to the track to see what they do.

Looking at the RPM band, I had the GTC out on my backroad test track. The initial drive the car pulled to 6800 before I got out of it. Subsequent cruises have gone beyond that as my fears were diminishing. I went to the 7400 rev limiter. The motor is tired in the GTC, but it feels better than it did. Idle is just a hair lumpy. Vacuum has been in the 15-16" area.

Steve M.



Can you somewhat compare these to any of the previous TAFT offerings? I'm looking for something that is geared towards 4000-7000 rpm ranges, and not worried about rough idle's, some stumbles here and there... that doesn't bother me.

AM

BadFastGTC
08-22-2006, 08:05 AM
UGL = Unground Lobe. The cores are made and machined to fit the cam tower, keyed, machined for the seals, and that is all. Whatever specs. you want on the cam is dictated by you and the limits of the material on the lobe, etc.

Steve M.



Whats UGL?

8valves
08-22-2006, 11:35 AM
So is there a possibility of having a cam ground with some altered specifications then? Say, some heftier duration into the 280's or more?

AM

Frank
08-22-2006, 12:08 PM
Aaron,
I dont think you will want more duration because it gives more overlap... more overlap means more exaust gas left over in the cyclinder during ingestion of fresh air and fuel. Not to mention these bad boys have higher lift then the other cams.

Granted that is in theory, but something to consider.


Frank
How are the lobes if you were to increase the duration and maintain

8valves
08-22-2006, 12:20 PM
I guess that would all depend on the LSA.

Where I'm going with this is that the big boys in the 4 cylinder world are using cams of 280+, sometimes 290* duration. There was also a very fast TD that ran one in the low 290*s... If the LSA is larger then the duration can be increased with less overlap.

I think it's a very key item to be looked into. If the duration is dropped so drastically, is the benefit of the larger lift profile going to really out-perform the lower lift, longer duration cam? The S3 has .476 lift I believe, and 279 or 282 duration IIRC, for reference.

What I'm saying is that this is probably an absolute bad---- of a cam for someone still on a stocker. But for someone already on a big cam, will the benefit be there to switch?

Please don't take this in a negative fashion at all, I'm simply prodding and trying to start up some conversation so we can get some good ideas going. Ya know?

AM

Frank
08-22-2006, 12:44 PM
Oh no negative thoughts at all. Rather intersting statements. I think alot of it depends on how efficent the exhaust side is - port to turbo. The less exhaust backpressure, the more overlap becomes tolerable and in turn the more duraction you can run at the same LSA.

So what is the duration of the S3 at .05"? I can't find my link to that cam page.


Frank

8valves
08-22-2006, 12:49 PM
Pretty sure it's 279 intake, 282 exhaust. I can't remember exactly though. Having a highly ported header, .63 AR, and a GT series turbine wheel will help that pressure ratio.

I can tell you for a fact that a VERY fast TD had a cam with over 290* duration.

AM

Rattlesnake
08-22-2006, 01:28 PM
281 intake,279 exhaust .
Have you visit FWDperformance lately, They have their own cams now

Clay
08-22-2006, 02:03 PM
281 intake,279 exhaust .
Have you visit FWDperformance lately, They have their own cams now

yeah, but they are regrinds, not new cams.

8valves
08-22-2006, 06:27 PM
And they still don't have something as agressive as I'm looking for. Rattlesnake, what happened to the cams you were coming up with?

AM

Frank
08-22-2006, 06:30 PM
That is true. With the exception of Steve's predefined duration for your taste, these are about as aggressive as the current market has because of the lift and LSA.


Frank

Clay
08-22-2006, 06:37 PM
You could always do like some of the major auto manufactures do. Make standard cam shafts and GLUE the lobes on.

If someone could do this for the aftermarket, a guy could buy a standard blank cam shaft, and an assortment of lobes, and make what ever he wanted!! I think the problem is getting the lobes off after you glue them on. The OEMs done like the lobes to come off....... at least not for 3 years/36000 miles. ;)

Whorse
08-22-2006, 11:06 PM
What PSI are you running in the GTC while testing this? Certainly a good flowing head will make a huge difference, but it would be nice to buy a cam that is good on under 18psi, and then equally as good if not better when the boost is turned up on a better flowing head.

turbovanmanČ
08-23-2006, 01:47 AM
Great job Steve, :thumb:

BadFastGTC
08-23-2006, 08:52 AM
I run a two-stage system on the GTC, low is set at 20psi and high is set at 28psi. The car has run a best of 12.58 on 20 psi and 11.87 on 28. Getting more hard factual data is important to me, but as I said, I know my car very well and I'm betting the car is going to run quicker. I may just re-ring the thing and see what it does.

Your point about making power at high boost was one of those questions I covered with the cam grinder. Each and every other stick I tried, and I hadn't tried them all, made my car at least .3 and 3-5MPH slower at the track. We talked about that and I gave him my input and he gave me his. He's done a bunch of turbo stuff and based off the testing others have done compared to the grinds, we went with the specs. I gave. Specs are one thing, shape is another.

Steve M.



What PSI are you running in the GTC while testing this? Certainly a good flowing head will make a huge difference, but it would be nice to buy a cam that is good on under 18psi, and then equally as good if not better when the boost is turned up on a better flowing head.

BadFastGTC
08-23-2006, 08:54 AM
Thanks Simon. I've been trying for 4 years to get this done! I didn't want shims and I didn't want what everyone else had. Now I can share!

Steve



Great job Steve, :thumb:

Captain Chaos
08-23-2006, 10:02 AM
Package deal for a head/cam combo?:eyebrows:

John B
08-23-2006, 10:20 AM
Intake lobe centerline is 108.


Steve M.

What is the effect of the 108 centerline compared to the traditional 113-114?

mock_glh
08-23-2006, 06:46 PM
Specs are one thing, shape is another.

Steve M.

:amen: Shape is often more important than size:nod: . Cams are no exception.

8valves
08-23-2006, 07:05 PM
Steve,

Is there any chance that I could provoke you to take a picture from a side angle of one of the Lobes... and if you were really bored, one intake and one exhaust? I'd like to take a peak (ha, get it! Sorry...:) ) at them and see how they compare. This could be my ticket to staying under 25 lbs for 400 whp on pump!

AM

mock_glh
08-24-2006, 01:14 PM
WHAT!!!??? Higher flow with lower boost and cooler air?:eek: What a concept!

BadFastGTC
10-02-2006, 05:27 PM
Update on the rollersticks: I should have the first 1/2 dozen in my hands by the end of this week. I was told the same thing last week too! I'm sure the grinder will pull though for me. So, for those of you interested, let me know. I'll send them off to the first six guys that send me the cash! PM me for my mailing address and to sort out the rest of the details. Note: You will need to upgrade valve springs to run these rollers!

As of now, Frank's name is on one. I know others have interest. I have enough cores, for now, to handle all that have requested them.

Should anyone need valve springs, let me know. I pay around $90.00 for a set of 16. I'll ship you out a set for $50.00. Hey, I have to drive to UPS, hence the cost!

I can also get a nice titanium retainer from Manley. I will be looking to sell these for $100.00 a set shipped. Once you price the MP titanium retainers ($160,00 a set), you'll be pleased with this price! I can probably get them cheaper, but we'd have to purchase 100 of them as a group.

Valves - I use Manley GenII Severe Duty valves in all my heads. Should anyone want a set, they'll run you $240.00 plus shipping. The last set I ordered took 2-1/2 months to get as they were out of blanks. Get your order in soon while they have them!

Valve Keepers - I use a machined keeper on all the heads I do instead of the stamped junk. $26.00 a set shipped to you.

Thanks,

Steve M.

turbovanmanČ
10-02-2006, 05:57 PM
Great prices Steve.

Honestly, on a 5800 rpm 8 valve engine, are titanium retainers necessary? Never really got a straight answer and seen as you are the man, :eyebrows:

Frank
10-02-2006, 05:58 PM
I think the retainers are nessary under two situations.... high rpms and strong valve springs.

Frank

powermaxx
10-02-2006, 07:26 PM
My name should be on one those as well.

LMK

GLHSKEN
10-02-2006, 10:33 PM
Great prices Steve.

Honestly, on a 5800 rpm 8 valve engine, are titanium retainers necessary? Never really got a straight answer and seen as you are the man, :eyebrows:


PFFFFTTTT... 5800... not with that cam.. I'll be looking to a 7k shift with that cam installed... (and steve's head!!!)

Reeves
10-02-2006, 11:26 PM
I need to get my arse to the garage!

turbovanmanČ
10-03-2006, 02:53 AM
PFFFFTTTT... 5800... not with that cam.. I'll be looking to a 7k shift with that cam installed... (and steve's head!!!)


Hahhaaaa, it wasn't meant for this cam, more of a general question for the mass's. :nod:

BadFastGTC
10-03-2006, 12:19 PM
Great prices Steve.

Honestly, on a 5800 rpm 8 valve engine, are titanium retainers necessary? Never really got a straight answer and seen as you are the man, :eyebrows:

No, not really. I use them to lighten the load on the spring as much as possible. Durability is paramount to me as is increased longevity of the spring. Avoiding valve float/bounce is a good thing!

BadFastGTC
10-03-2006, 12:20 PM
My name should be on one those as well.

LMK

It sure is. By the way, your cylinder head is at the machine shop awaiting their end. Hopefully I can keep the guy on a roll with these things!

BadFastGTC
10-03-2006, 12:22 PM
I need to get my arse to the garage!

Yes, you best quit loafing!

The last case of Milk Stout I consumed over the past week was very tasty!

BadFastGTC
10-03-2006, 12:30 PM
Steve,

Is there any chance that I could provoke you to take a picture from a side angle of one of the Lobes... and if you were really bored, one intake and one exhaust? I'd like to take a peak (ha, get it! Sorry...:) ) at them and see how they compare. This could be my ticket to staying under 25 lbs for 400 whp on pump!

AM

As soo as I get the new shipment back, I will do so.

Reeves
10-03-2006, 03:40 PM
Yes, you best quit loafing!

The last case of Milk Stout I consumed over the past week was very tasty!

Milk Stout....mmmmm....

I just had a really good Indian beer for lunch. It was 10000 something for the name. 8% !!

:confused: ;) :D

RedDeerGLH
10-03-2006, 08:43 PM
What is the effect of the 108 centerline compared to the traditional 113-114?

I'd also like to know this as well.

thanks
Jay

Birddog
10-03-2006, 09:38 PM
I'd also like to know this as well.

thanks
Jay
As that number decreases overlap increases. 108 is really nice for top end compared to 114-115 which would be better for low end.(VERY basic description).


Ay chance of producing a cam "kit" package????

Frank
10-03-2006, 09:52 PM
Actually 108 centerline means that it is better matched to our engine geometery. It looks at where max port velocities due to that gemoetry are and maximing lift during that time. Centerline doesnt mean less overlap to the extent that changing lobe seperation angle does. His high lift profile does allow for less duration to help decrease overlap.


Frank

Birddog
10-03-2006, 10:09 PM
Sorry somehow I got a bit twisted there......Gotta stop drinking and typing! Honestly I'm not as dumb as I type:D

RedDeerGLH
10-04-2006, 12:49 AM
alright maybe i'm not quite understanding something but he did say that the intake lobe centerline was 108 but isn't the cam centerline the difference between the intake lobe center and the exhaust lobe center. And if so what is the exhaust lobe center. Just asking because reading all the comp cam books and such all there cams for turbo or blown applications are a 112 to 116 centerline. Someone please feel free to correct me on this i'm fairly new to it.

thanks
Jay

glhs875
10-04-2006, 06:15 AM
As that number decreases overlap increases. 108 is really nice for top end compared to 114-115 which would be better for low end.(VERY basic description).


Ay chance of producing a cam "kit" package????

Actually, from what I've read and from first hand experience, A higher centerline# is geared more for top end HP. Overlap will only mainly help when proper exhaust scavaging is applied. Which will actually pull in additional air/fuel above what is normally drawn in. Hard to do with a turbo. A turbo cam needs to take exhaust reversion into account, because exhaust backpressure is usually much higher than boost pressure. And because of this reason, the boost escaping during the overlap period like has been told, is highly unlikely. But I feel some overlap is needed for other reasons in a turbo cam. I've always ended up running quicker and faster setting an 8V cam to higher centerline #'s. Like in the high 1-teens to low 120deg. area myself. Now a low centerline # ground on a cam could mean it has a fast opening rate which would be a good thing. As peak piston velocity starts even sooner than 108 deg. I feel a turbo cuts down on some of the need to have the valve at full lift sooner, but it's still there. A high overlap cam can have more top end vs. the same cam ground with a wider lobe separation and less overlap, if the exhaust has a scavaging effect. But it will usually only happen in a narrow rpm band (wherever the setup is tuned for) and needs to have and will have low exhaust backpressure at this point to work well. A wider lobe separation ground cam will usually have a wider powerband, and not as peaky. Cams can be ground with the centerlines being at different degrees, intake vs. exhaust. I feel a turbo cam needs to be able to allow as much exhaust to be evacuated as possible before the piston starts on the upstroke, to cut down on pumping losses, and to cut down on reversion when the intake valve opens and the overlap begins. That's just some of my dimented theory.

Force Fed Mopar
10-04-2006, 08:34 AM
I was just talking to an engine a couple weeks ago about this. The high centerline broadens the powerband, which is what makes it better for the street. The narrow centerline basically moves the power band up, helping to make more power where you want it (up top). They are more peaky and less streetable, but make good top end power. Also, the narrow centerline cams have less vacuum, and don't work as good for power brakes and such.

glhs875
10-04-2006, 10:33 AM
I was just talking to an engine a couple weeks ago about this. The high centerline broadens the powerband, which is what makes it better for the street. The narrow centerline basically moves the power band up, helping to make more power where you want it (up top). They are more peaky and less streetable, but make good top end power. Also, the narrow centerline cams have less vacuum, and don't work as good for power brakes and such.

I agree with that on a NA engine, where the increased overlap from the tighter lobe separtion allows one to tune in a scavaging effect to where an engine acts slightly supercharged from this effect in the rpm range it is tuned to happen in. Not likely to happen in a turbo appl. The increased overlap is what decreases idle vacum and low speed torque and throttle response. A higher overlap cam would work okay in a turbo engine where you are using a large AR ratio turbine along with a compressor that can make good boost at a slow compressor rpm. But mainly at low boost levels where back pressure is alot lower than at high boost pressures.

Frank
10-04-2006, 11:31 AM
Exactly. There is no scavenging effect with turbos setups.

John B
10-04-2006, 02:01 PM
I was just talking to an engine a couple weeks ago about this.

Straight from the horse's mouth! You just can't argue with a testamony directly from the engine itself.:p

Reeves
10-04-2006, 10:39 PM
Straight from the horse's mouth! You just can't argue with a testamony directly from the engine itself.:p

LMFAO!!!

BadFastGTC
10-11-2006, 11:06 AM
I just got the first shipment today! I looked at the spec. sheet right off the bat and noted something different. We gained a little exhaust valve lift! The issue was with the calculations done. I didn't look at the ratio used to calculate the exhaust lift. The exhaust lift is .555". All else is the same.

GLHSKEN
10-14-2006, 11:37 AM
YIKES!!! will my springs still Support this!!! or should I bring the head to you for re-work??

Frank
10-14-2006, 12:18 PM
YIKES!!! will my springs still Support this!!! or should I bring the head to you for re-work??

WOW! I just checked my specs. My coil bind height of the spring is 1.140". My exhaust spring installed height is 1.700" on #4 and 1.705" on #1 thru #3.

That means the most lift I can have is 0.560".... that is CLOSE! Will I have issues?


Frank

BadFastGTC
10-15-2006, 09:40 PM
Frank,

The springs will not be liking this on along term basis. I have a few other things to check into before I'd be willing to send one off to you. No sense in sending the thing out to you if you are going to run into trouble. Durability is paramount to me.




WOW! I just checked my specs. My coil bind height of the spring is 1.140". My exhaust spring installed height is 1.700" on #4 and 1.705" on #1 thru #3.

That means the most lift I can have is 0.560".... that is CLOSE! Will I have issues?


Frank

BadFastGTC
11-05-2006, 08:03 AM
Continuing on....

I had concerns as to having a .555" lift, based from the numbers on the exhaust and did a little double checking. The figures I came up with along with looking at several other cam specs didn't add up. A Super 60 cam has a lobe lift of .290" and a net valve lift of .499". Stock has a .243 lobe lift and a .430" valve lift. The old Wolverine replacement cam has a lobe lift of .245 and a valve lift of .434". Granted the S-60 is a slider and the other two are rollers. The rocker ratio turns out to be 1.77 for the roller. The use of the 1.77 ratio was confirmed when I measured valve lift with one of the new bumpsticks in a head with a dial indicator. The intake lift was .484" and the intake was .531".

I also had two rollers ground with a single pattern using the intake lobe on both the exhaust and intake. One will be run at Cecil next weekend and one will be going in Frank's car.

We're also going to be looking at making a couple of sticks with the .205 duration/.531" pattern for both the intake and exhaust.

So for now, I'll bring a couple of cams to Cecil along with valve springs for anyone interested. The cam and springs will run $355.00. It'll save you $25.00 bucks.

Steve M.

John B
11-05-2006, 08:41 AM
I don't understand .205 duration! 'Spain please:confused:

BadFastGTC
11-05-2006, 09:51 AM
205@.050" is the duration the valve is off the seat @ .050". Advertised is measured at .006".

Steve M.



I don't understand .205 duration! 'Spain please:confused:

GLHSKEN
11-05-2006, 09:53 AM
In a full rotation of the cam, From .05" opened lift all the way around to .05" before closing, the cam rotates 205^ out of a 360^ circle.

That is my understanding of it... PLEASE correct me if I'm wrong... (that's why I rely on others for this info)

Frank
11-05-2006, 10:08 AM
Here is the minor correction. And 205degress is the right number


In a full rotation of the crank, From .05" opened lift all the way around to .05" before closing, the valve opens for 205^ out of a 360^ circle.

glhs875
11-05-2006, 10:47 AM
Continuing on....

I had concerns as to having a .555" lift, based from the numbers on the exhaust and did a little double checking. The figures I came up with along with looking at several other cam specs didn't add up. A Super 60 cam has a lobe lift of .290" and a net valve lift of .499". Stock has a .243 lobe lift and a .430" valve lift. The old Wolverine replacement cam has a lobe lift of .245 and a valve lift of .434". Granted the S-60 is a slider and the other two are rollers. The rocker ratio turns out to be 1.77 for the roller. The use of the 1.77 ratio was confirmed when I measured valve lift with one of the new bumpsticks in a head with a dial indicator. The intake lift was .484" and the intake was .531".

I also had two rollers ground with a single pattern using the intake lobe on both the exhaust and intake. One will be run at Cecil next weekend and one will be going in Frank's car.

We're also going to be looking at making a couple of sticks with the .205 duration/.531" pattern for both the intake and exhaust.

Steve M.

The rocker ratio gets less on the closing side of the lobe. Which can be a good thing for valve control if the cam takes it in to account. I like that your cams are not regrinds and with the larger (stock base circle). That can help with valve control in the higher R's as well. I feel that a larger than stock base circle might could help control valve float even more, I don't know. I'm starting to think that anything that could be done to get the lift and the duration that is needed/wanted, while keeping the profile of the cam lobe as gentle as possible (closer to the base circle) is a step in the right direction. A super quick closing rate is a no no in controlling valve float in my opinion. I feel your heading in the right direction with your cams Steve, and will end up coming up with a KILLER CAM!! At least I hope!. I feel an 8V engine definitely needs the high lift to make upper RPM HP. But then that could bring about valve contol problems, and make running real high spring pressures mandatory. I been doing alot of research on the valve train since I have run into valvetrain problems above 7000rpm. But still have alot to learn. Keep up the good work Steve!! :thumb:

Force Fed Mopar
11-05-2006, 11:23 AM
Straight from the horse's mouth! You just can't argue with a testamony directly from the engine itself.:p

LMAO I just noticed that, doh!:lol:

Directconnection
11-05-2006, 12:06 PM
The rocker ratio gets less on the closing side of the lobe. Which can be a good thing for valve control if the cam takes it in to account. I like that your cams are not regrinds and with the larger (stock base circle). That can help with valve control in the higher R's as well. I feel that a larger than stock base circle might could help control valve float even more, I don't know. I'm starting to think that anything that could be done to get the lift and the duration that is needed/wanted, while keeping the profile of the cam lobe as gentle as possible (closer to the base circle) is a step in the right direction. A super quick closing rate is a no no in controlling valve float in my opinion. I feel your heading in the right direction with your cams Steve, and will end up coming up with a KILLER CAM!! At least I hope!. I feel an 8V engine definitely needs the high lift to make upper RPM HP. But then that could bring about valve contol problems, and make running real high spring pressures mandatory. I been doing alot of research on the valve train since I have run into valvetrain problems above 7000rpm. But still have alot to learn. Keep up the good work Steve!! :thumb:

Due to the slider effect, the rocker has a variable ratio because the cam lobe doesn't "wipe" the follower in an exact spot throughout the event. I *think* a mechanical follower would be ideal for high rpms. No hydralic cams in serious V-8 power and other forms of racing that i know of...and for good reason. But, to throw a rag into the cogs of my reasoning... stephane ran stock lifters over 9,000rpms in his T-III. Maybe his were collapsing some and sacraficing HP at the expense of non-strict valve control over the cam's profile... now he uses a solid lifter..at leats he was going that route when I talked to him on the phone last spring.

glhs875
11-05-2006, 04:15 PM
Due to the slider effect, the rocker has a variable ratio because the cam lobe doesn't "wipe" the follower in an exact spot throughout the event. I *think* a mechanical follower would be ideal for high rpms. No hydralic cams in serious V-8 power and other forms of racing that i know of...and for good reason. But, to throw a rag into the cogs of my reasoning... stephane ran stock lifters over 9,000rpms in his T-III. Maybe his were collapsing some and sacraficing HP at the expense of non-strict valve control over the cam's profile... now he uses a solid lifter..at leats he was going that route when I talked to him on the phone last spring.

I tried solid lifters just recently. Although I feel that the possibility of a HP increase is there running solids, it didn't help valvefloat at all with that being the only change. The right springs and lightweight parts are going to be mandatory! And a good cam profile will defintely help! I feel with the right setup of valvetrain parts, the hyd's will do okay to the 7500rpm level or so that I want to run for now anyway.

turbovanmanČ
11-05-2006, 06:47 PM
Due to the slider effect, the rocker has a variable ratio because the cam lobe doesn't "wipe" the follower in an exact spot throughout the event. I *think* a mechanical follower would be ideal for high rpms. No hydralic cams in serious V-8 power and other forms of racing that i know of...and for good reason. But, to throw a rag into the cogs of my reasoning... stephane ran stock lifters over 9,000rpms in his T-III. Maybe his were collapsing some and sacraficing HP at the expense of non-strict valve control over the cam's profile... now he uses a solid lifter..at leats he was going that route when I talked to him on the phone last spring.


You got to remember Steve, the hyraulic lifter actually moves in V8 engines and the roller version weighs a ton, hence the problem with spinning at high rpm and the fact that they do bleed down.

The TIII again doesn't really have alot of mass to move either, basically a rocker arm, rollerized at the cam end and the lifter is in the arm and contacts the valve, ala 3.0L V6. I doubt he went to solid for weight savings, just to stop the bleeding off at higher rpm and make it more accurate.

The 8 valves are the same, theres not really any mass moving, with the lifter sitting still, the only moving part is the rocker arm so to me, the only reason to change out the lifter and go solid is to stop the bleeding down at higher rpm, and make it more stable, :thumb:

Directconnection
11-05-2006, 07:48 PM
You got to remember Steve, the hyraulic lifter actually moves in V8 engines and the roller version weighs a ton, hence the problem with spinning at high rpm and the fact that they do bleed down.

The TIII again doesn't really have alot of mass to move either, basically a rocker arm, rollerized at the cam end and the lifter is in the arm and contacts the valve, ala 3.0L V6. I doubt he went to solid for weight savings, just to stop the bleeding off at higher rpm and make it more accurate.

The 8 valves are the same, theres not really any mass moving, with the lifter sitting still, the only moving part is the rocker arm so to me, the only reason to change out the lifter and go solid is to stop the bleeding down at higher rpm, and make it more stable, :thumb:


That's what I thought I said... hydralic lifter buffers the cam profile.

426 hemi's with the mechanical cams kick arse more than the 1969+ I believe it was 426 cars due to them going with a hydralic cam. The mechanical cam needed routine adjustments and with the 426, if it wasn't properly adjusted, the engine ran like poop... worse than the hydralic oem setup. But when adjusted correctly, more peak hp at higher rpms.

John B
11-07-2006, 04:04 AM
Here is the minor correction. And 205degress is the right number What does that equate to at .006"?

Frank
11-07-2006, 05:44 PM
Dont know... depends on the ramp profile of his cam.

John B
11-08-2006, 12:55 AM
At first glance it appears to have a lot of lift and modest duration which will be great for turbo engines. I wish I had a bigger turbo.:o

BadFastGTC
11-09-2006, 05:07 PM
Package deal for a head/cam combo?:eyebrows:

I have 3 cams and spring sets to bring to Cecil that are not spoken for. I decided to sell a package for Saturday. Those interested can get the cam and springs for $355.00. I will also bring a couple of sets of retainers along for folks to look at.

Steve M.

Frank
11-09-2006, 06:16 PM
I wont make it there to buy mine.

BadFastGTC
11-10-2006, 08:46 AM
And why the hell not, may I ask? Hmmmm?:o




I wont make it there to buy mine.

Frank
11-10-2006, 08:53 AM
I couldnt find a substitue for this weekend. In addition the Bronco keeps stalling on me. I have to get it fixed badly.

Reeves
11-10-2006, 11:11 AM
Steve,
Give me a call when you get a chance. CSXTRA and me got some ideas.

BadFastGTC
11-10-2006, 06:45 PM
I did call ya back the other day. I can't get a signal down at the campground, so I'll try you as soon as I get back home. I'll try you from Cecil if I get a chance.

Steve M.



Steve,
Give me a call when you get a chance. CSXTRA and me got some ideas.

Mario
12-10-2006, 09:44 PM
Have any of these left?

BadFastGTC
12-11-2006, 08:56 AM
I have two left.



Have any of these left?

Mario
12-11-2006, 11:18 AM
Take PayPal?

glhs875
12-11-2006, 12:32 PM
I have two left.

Will you have more made up? Are your valvetrain parts going to be an ongoing thing?

BadFastGTC
12-11-2006, 06:06 PM
Take PayPal?

No I don't deal with them. I do accept checks or money orders! PM me your phone number and I will give you a call.

Steve M.

BadFastGTC
12-11-2006, 06:11 PM
I intend on having more soon. The valve gear will be available until I totally quit running TD's. :thumb: What I plan on doing is getting a few sets of valves to have on the shelf in the garage. I'll have all the related parts here.

Steve M.



Will you have more made up? Are your valvetrain parts going to be an ongoing thing?

glhs875
12-11-2006, 06:37 PM
I intend on having more soon. The valve gear will be available until I totally quit running TD's. :thumb: What I plan on doing is getting a few sets of valves to have on the shelf in the garage. I'll have all the related parts here.

Steve M.

Thanks, I'll be buying some things from you after I get caught up on my other work ( customer cars to fix) and can get my head pulled off. From the looks of things that could be a little while!

contraption22
12-18-2006, 05:09 PM
Just thought I would add, seat of the pants, my car pulls up to 6500 RPM like it never did before. It might pull farther than that, but I haven't tried it yet. This thing is pretty wicked!

8valves
12-18-2006, 05:48 PM
Just thought I would add, seat of the pants, my car pulls up to 6500 RPM like it never did before. It might pull farther than that, but I haven't tried it yet. This thing is pretty wicked!

In comparison to what cam prior?

AM

contraption22
12-18-2006, 07:00 PM
Previously I have tried Turbo roller, TBI roller, and a Wolverine Blue Racer.

The Pope
02-04-2007, 04:55 AM
What is the effect of the 108 centerline compared to the traditional 113-114?

For every 1 degree lower in centerline you narrow the lobe sepperation and increase overlap. So about every 1 degree in centerline drop you gain 2 degrees of overlap. A 252 duration intake and exhaust @ .006 cam has 36 degrees of overlap @ 108. At the 114 your overlap drops to 24 degrees. People complain about the s60 not working at high boost, thats because the overlap with our engines is a killer. Most everyone runs a log header of some type. So big pressure diff problems with a reversion header = a S60 cam that doesn't want to work at high boost.

This cam is a 252 duration on both ends cam with a 108, that 36 degrees overlap
The S60 cam is a 260 duration on both ends with 113, that is 34 degrees overlap

So expect the same type of overlap problems with this cam as a S60 has. Still though both cams work with the right engine. The big valves heads today, FWDs tube header to fight reversion and the LWP custom intake. Add a big flowing turbo and IC and this cam would make unreal power at 20 PSI. But if it had a 114 centerline it would have a 24 degree overlap and be a much better cam at 30 PSI of boost, same reason people run stock cams. FYI

http://www.wallaceracing.com/overlap-calc.php

A great calculator for a cam shopper looking at different cam specs, add the .006 or advertised duration and the centerline. Be sure to play with it to see if lowering the center line raises the overlap Frank.

BadFastGTC
02-04-2007, 09:39 AM
Your numbers are incorrect as are your deductions. Overlap at .006" is 32 degrees. What is the overlap at .050" compared to others? What are the valve timing events and what do you know of the lobe shapes? ZERO. The calculator assumes way too many things and averages everything. You know nothing of these cams, haven't had them in your hands, and have zero feedback or personal use of them.

Steve M.


For every 1 degree lower in centerline you narrow the lobe sepperation and increase overlap. So about every 1 degree in centerline drop you gain 2 degrees of overlap. A 252 duration intake and exhaust @ .006 cam has 36 degrees of overlap @ 108. At the 114 your overlap drops to 24 degrees. People complain about the s60 not working at high boost, thats because the overlap with our engines is a killer. Most everyone runs a log header of some type. So big pressure diff problems with a reversion header = a S60 cam that doesn't want to work at high boost.

This cam is a 252 duration on both ends cam with a 108, that 36 degrees overlap
The S60 cam is a 260 duration on both ends with 113, that is 34 degrees overlap

So expect the same type of overlap problems with this cam as a S60 has. Still though both cams work with the right engine. The big valves heads today, FWDs tube header to fight reversion and the LWP custom intake. Add a big flowing turbo and IC and this cam would make unreal power at 20 PSI. But if it had a 114 centerline it would have a 24 degree overlap and be a much better cam at 30 PSI of boost, same reason people run stock cams. FYI

http://www.wallaceracing.com/overlap-calc.php

A great calculator for a cam shopper looking at different cam specs, add the .006 or advertised duration and the centerline. Be sure to play with it to see if lowering the center line raises the overlap Frank.

8valves
02-04-2007, 02:13 PM
Your numbers are incorrect as are your deductions. Overlap at .006" is 32 degrees. What is the overlap at .050" compared to others? What are the valve timing events and what do you know of the lobe shapes? ZERO. The calculator assumes way too many things and averages everything. You know nothing of these cams, haven't had them in your hands, and have zero feedback or personal use of them.

Steve M.

Well, the pretty much ended his argument!

Let's not forget the described setup using the Lonewolf 8V intake that doesn't exist right now, and the FWD header that with the best possible respect I can give it, could be better made and designed by a 10th grader (no offense to any 10th graders out there! :eyebrows: )

Moreover, people who complain about the "big" cams for high boost don't have a good flowing setup. I've used the Taft S3 at 25 psi for quite some time and I love it. Could the car do better on a less overlap cam? Possibly, but it wouldn't be able to run the same boost on a given octane either.

Ah well. Looking forward to giving you a realworld example of your cam against the Taft cams Steve!

Directconnection
02-04-2007, 02:52 PM
You know nothing of these cams, haven't had them in your hands, and have zero feedback or personal use of them.

Steve M.

True.

Rob, it's ok to speculate, but not come right out and tell people the in's and out's of this cam without any data to back it up.

The fact that Marra is very impressed with it tells me alot sofar.

glhs875
02-04-2007, 03:20 PM
Moreover, people who complain about the "big" cams for high boost don't have a good flowing setup. I've used the Taft S3 at 25 psi for quite some time and I love it. Could the car do better on a less overlap cam? Possibly, but it wouldn't be able to run the same boost on a given octane either.


One thing Kevin Davis and I have pretty much recently confirmed with our own setups and real world testing, and that is backed up with a recent book Kevin got on tubocharging saying in it the same thing as we found is, that too much overlap in a cam (s) in high boost situations can cause enough reversion of the hot exhaust gases back into the combustion chamber to cause detonation in what seems to be mainly in the higher rpm's. I've suspected this, and Kevin actually had this happen to his car at around 7K when trying out some Crane 18's in his 2.4. I think he was running 28 to 30psi when this occurred. Better exhuast flow should help this possibilty. But it seems that cam overlap and turbo's don't mix real well at high boost. How much overlap vs. how much boost will it take to reach the critcal state? I don't know!!! And that could depend on many factors!

glhs875
02-04-2007, 03:25 PM
It would be awesome if the 8V cams could have the intake or exhaust lobes adj. on the shaft to change overlap and lobe separation. I can dream!

8valves
02-04-2007, 08:11 PM
It would be awesome if the 8V cams could have the intake or exhaust lobes adj. on the shaft to change overlap and lobe separation. I can dream!

I've got some contacts on Team Viper for DCX, maybe they should make a cam using the Viper's new VVT setup for a single cam in block setup, just put it up on the head! :nod:

BadFastGTC
03-30-2007, 09:15 AM
The cams are all gone as of now. I am looking into the possibility of getting more made, but the possibilities look slim. We shall see. I was very lucky I was able to get the first small batch of cores and it cost a load to do so.

On another note, those of you waiting for valves, Manley was out of the exhaust valve material and they have been backed up with orders. The valves are slowly beginning to trickle in and I hope I will be seeing all of the orders soon.

Steve M.

30 PSI SHADOW
03-30-2007, 11:36 AM
Let me know steve if you do,I was going to get one. Waited to long!! augg..

bill

BadFastGTC
04-06-2007, 02:56 PM
Manley was kind enough to call me and let me know the remaining valve orders will be shipped by next Thursday. I'll get them out to those of you waiting as soon as they are here.

Thanks for your patience,

Steve M.

Frank
04-06-2007, 09:20 PM
What are you able to get us for the 2.4L setups? I need big valves.


Frank

BadFastGTC
04-07-2007, 10:28 AM
Frank,

I'll look and see what they have to work with. What I want to know is, why do you need larger valves given what flow and power these heads can make with the stock stuff?

Steve M.



What are you able to get us for the 2.4L setups? I need big valves.


Frank

turbovanmanČ
04-07-2007, 03:08 PM
Frank,

I'll look and see what they have to work with. What I want to know is, why do you need larger valves given what flow and power these heads can make with the stock stuff?

Steve M.

Frank likes big, :lol:

Frank
04-10-2007, 08:22 AM
Ignoring Simon the post whore....

Why not put bigger in? :) I am going to do the INDY port job on it but was deciding whether to go big valve or not. If I let them supply everything, it is alot... however if I supply my own valves and such, well it is more reasonable.


Frank

turbovanmanČ
04-10-2007, 11:25 AM
Ignoring Simon the post whore....

Frank

Have you seen your new avatar? :p

Stratman
04-10-2007, 03:53 PM
Hey Steve,

I just found this thread for the first time! Let me know if you find another place for blanks and if you will be having any more made. I am just now looking for someone with blank sticks to make a high lift cam with a little different spec for the CSX, but if you have some made again I will probably just buy one from you.

Gaboon
05-08-2007, 09:41 PM
Fix me up with something for all out power. I'll heal toe it at stop lights if needed.:nod:

powermaxx
05-10-2007, 08:39 AM
Just installed mine last night. Wanted to do some baseline testing with the new head first (:thumb: Steve M.). Got that out of the way and slammed it in (little delay as I popped the cam key and had to find that first :mad: ) otherwise it would been in a day sooner.

Anyway the old butt dyno says there's an improvement and it definitly gets to those upper R's a whole lot quicker. Vac dropped a few inches but that's to be expected. Will go to the track this Friday and report back.

I left my cam retarded by 5* I'll probably bring it back to 0* (didn't have time to degree it in due to the keyway fiasco...). Any comments on where the cam timing should be? With this L body I've been trying to kill off the bottom end torque for traction.

THX Steve :D

Gaboon
05-10-2007, 05:13 PM
Just installed mine last night. Wanted to do some baseline testing with the new head first (:thumb: Steve M.). Got that out of the way and slammed it in (little delay as I popped the cam key and had to find that first :mad: ) otherwise it would been in a day sooner.

Anyway the old butt dyno says there's an improvement and it definitly gets to those upper R's a whole lot quicker. Vac dropped a few inches but that's to be expected. Will go to the track this Friday and report back.

I left my cam retarded by 5* I'll probably bring it back to 0* (didn't have time to degree it in due to the keyway fiasco...). Any comments on where the cam timing should be? With this L body I've been trying to kill off the bottom end torque for traction.

THX Steve :D


Which of Steve's cams did you get?

Let know how things go at the track.

powermaxx
05-23-2007, 01:39 PM
Which of Steve's cams did you get?

Let know how things go at the track.

The ones listed in this thread I believe.

Did about the same on the track as before, no real improvements. I'm thinking the exhaust needs to be opened up some more to take advantage of this cam. I'm running a 3" mandrel bent, no CAT and a straight thru muffler. But I only have a ported OEM iron exhaust manifold. Can't justify a header for this car (that's reserved for the TIII project) so I've pulled the camshaft and went back to the stock setup for the bracket racing (consistancy is the key there not max power...) it runs in.

Had one of the best races (Club Clash, street cars...) ever though! Ran a 70's Dodge van (one of our car club former members) and he is deadly consistant. I knew I had a real race on my hands and had to be "On my game". He dialed 12.18 (he pulls the wheels when it launches :thumb: ) to my 12.45 and when we launched he had me by the 60' mark so I figured "It's all over now...". But I kept in it and finally caught him before the 1000' mark! Raced him on the top end (in and out of the throttle) and kept a fender on him (MOV was .03)! He broke out by .01sec and I ran a 12.49. The .004 light I had helped a bunch too :D .

Also I had a huge backfire on the 1-2 shift. People came up later and was asking what broke. I'm thinking the custom cal needed to learn some more.....


Sorry for the race news.....

Return to your regular programing. :D

BadFastGTC
05-24-2007, 08:49 AM
Steve has one of the dual pattern grinds. The cam favors the exhaust a little more than the intake. Hopefully he'll get a chance to work out some of the "bugs" he had with regards to how the car ran with the cam in to note any improvements or not. I'd have to agree with him, while he is bracket racing, he has zero time to be tinkering!

Steve M.




Which of Steve's cams did you get?

Let know how things go at the track.

BadFastGTC
05-24-2007, 08:54 AM
Steve,

All I am running is a ported stock exhaust manifold myself. I haven't had the backfire issues you have experienced with that same cam in either car. Same exhaust system as a matter of fact!

Do you monitor your A/F ratio and EGT by chance? I'd be interested to see what the numbers are with and without the cam.

Great job on the race! Trust your car........

Steve M.





The ones listed in this thread I believe.

Did about the same on the track as before, no real improvements. I'm thinking the exhaust needs to be opened up some more to take advantage of this cam. I'm running a 3" mandrel bent, no CAT and a straight thru muffler. But I only have a ported OEM iron exhaust manifold. Can't justify a header for this car (that's reserved for the TIII project) so I've pulled the camshaft and went back to the stock setup for the bracket racing (consistancy is the key there not max power...) it runs in.

Had one of the best races (Club Clash, street cars...) ever though! Ran a 70's Dodge van (one of our car club former members) and he is deadly consistant. I knew I had a real race on my hands and had to be "On my game". He dialed 12.18 (he pulls the wheels when it launches :thumb: ) to my 12.45 and when we launched he had me by the 60' mark so I figured "It's all over now...". But I kept in it and finally caught him before the 1000' mark! Raced him on the top end (in and out of the throttle) and kept a fender on him (MOV was .03)! He broke out by .01sec and I ran a 12.49. The .004 light I had helped a bunch too :D .

Also I had a huge backfire on the 1-2 shift. People came up later and was asking what broke. I'm thinking the custom cal needed to learn some more.....


Sorry for the race news.....

Return to your regular programing. :D

powermaxx
05-24-2007, 01:24 PM
Steve,

All I am running is a ported stock exhaust manifold myself. I haven't had the backfire issues you have experienced with that same cam in either car. Same exhaust system as a matter of fact!

Do you monitor your A/F ratio and EGT by chance? I'd be interested to see what the numbers are with and without the cam.

Great job on the race! Trust your car........

Steve M.

Thanks! Posts can be so misinterperted, so glad you weighed in!

I'm thinking the backfire was the custom cal learning (it only happened once but it was huge!). Interesting our setups are simular so I'm leaning more to the cal learning.

A/F was still on the rich side (several "greens" showing). Will try to get some dyno readouts of either cam. Regular dyno no longer has an AF readout with the run. So will have to go to another dyno for any back to back comparisons. Will be a few weeks before I can do that.

Gaboon
09-21-2007, 08:04 PM
Mine goes great so far. 15 inches of vacume at idle with a nice lumy lobe that makes it sound like I have something in there. I can't run more than 17.5 lbs boost on 94 octane but for the turbo I have in there, even at that boost, it pulls very hard with no signs of dying off up to 7000 rpm.

I will hopefully have it car on the dyno next Friday and will run 116 octane and see what happens up and over 30 lbs boost.

1FastCSX289
09-21-2007, 11:24 PM
Mine goes great so far. 15 inches of vacume at idle with a nice lumy lobe that makes it sound like I have something in there. I can't run more than 17.5 lbs boost on 94 octane but for the turbo I have in there, even at that boost, it pulls very hard with no signs of dying off up to 7000 rpm.

I will hopefully have it car on the dyno next Friday and will run 116 octane and see what happens up and over 30 lbs boost.

Doesnt sound like its working well if you can only run 17PSI of boost on pump gas.













I think you should sell the cam to me. ;) :nod:


.

Reeves
09-22-2007, 02:35 AM
Mine goes great so far. 15 inches of vacume at idle with a nice lumy lobe that makes it sound like I have something in there. I can't run more than 17.5 lbs boost on 94 octane but for the turbo I have in there, even at that boost, it pulls very hard with no signs of dying off up to 7000 rpm.

I will hopefully have it car on the dyno next Friday and will run 116 octane and see what happens up and over 30 lbs boost.

I'm anxiously awaiting the results.....hold me...

8valves
11-07-2007, 02:32 PM
Mine goes great so far. 15 inches of vacume at idle with a nice lumy lobe that makes it sound like I have something in there. I can't run more than 17.5 lbs boost on 94 octane but for the turbo I have in there, even at that boost, it pulls very hard with no signs of dying off up to 7000 rpm.

I will hopefully have it car on the dyno next Friday and will run 116 octane and see what happens up and over 30 lbs boost.

Any updates?

powermaxx
11-07-2007, 02:39 PM
I think you should sell the cam to me. ;) :nod:


.

I'll have one available if you want. My race setup is going to be the TIII Rampage so I have no use for it now.

1FastCSX289
11-07-2007, 11:20 PM
I'll have one available if you want. My race setup is going to be the TIII Rampage so I have no use for it now.


PMing you.

moparzrule
08-15-2008, 04:29 PM
Wanted to bump this thread, has anybody had any dyno results or whatever results with this cam? Who's running one? Opinions on it?

"Top Fuel" Bender
08-15-2008, 06:49 PM
My omni went 10's with it
good vac. and the car runs great when I have the cam timing set correctly :o

moparzrule
08-15-2008, 06:50 PM
Thanks. Weren't you running 10's with a different cam though? What did you gain with this cam (MPH and ET)? And what cam did you change from?

zin
08-15-2008, 07:11 PM
I'm also interested in what results folks got, and what mods they'd done, so as to figure at what point a cam like this is going to be a big.

Mike

turbovanmanČ
08-16-2008, 05:29 PM
My omni went 10's with it
good vac. and the car runs great when I have the cam timing set correctly :o

Gary went 10's with a stocker, hehhhee! ;)

contraption22
08-16-2008, 11:54 PM
I am running the milder Menegon cam. .485 lift.

Runs awesome. Ran my best ET and traps to date with it, on less boost than before.

moparzrule
08-17-2008, 06:52 AM
I am running the milder Menegon cam. .485 lift.

Runs awesome. Ran my best ET and traps to date with it, on less boost than before.

Thanks! Do you know the exact specs of this cam? Did you get a cam card with it or anything?