TU and F4 Camshaft Follow-on Discussion

[Shadow]

oh jeez Chris..now I have to figure out if I should get this instead of an F4....and I have no idea how to figure that out..helppppp...why do I know so little about CAMS???? arghhh

man $250 what a DEAL!

maybe you could talk a little about how you came up with this new R5 design? aww itll probably be sold out before I get anything figured out anyways

Don't want to make this post sound like a downer, but is there Any more info on this cam? Any track or dyno tests? Asa, you are correct in the assumption that there is No way for you to know if this cam would work better than the F4 or really work well at all. There simply is not enough info.

Chris, can you post the LSA? Seat to Seat duration? Is this "symmetrical", or "A symmetrical"? Is the 113.5 the recommended installed centerline?

This would really be Minimal info to have Any idea of how this cam will perform.

This is why you really need a cam card.

So for now, the F4 is the Proven performer (info or no) and that is what I would base my selection on.

Hopefully someone can do a legitimate comparo Or at least some kind of BtB comparo to Prove this cam, who knows, it Could be Dabomb!

[Frank]

Shadow,
I think that is Chris' question to answer. Not sure you can say proven for anyone but you or an exact duplication of your engine, car, and calibration. Things like weight, fuel, altitude, temperature all play vital roles. You have found something proven that works for you. To try and poo-poo on someone else's emerging product is inconsiderate. Give Chris some time to get specs posted and it tested. Lets keep this thread about Chris selling and answering questions asked to him. If you want, I can move your post to the tech forum for further discussion, debate, or even some test results.

Thanks,
Frank

[Shadow]

Sorry Frank, really wasn't trying to Poo Poo on anything, just stating Absolute Facts. The F4 has worked for Every Single person who has used it AFAIK. So you can delete this after reading as well. I believe Chris said he was going to post all specs and what he posted really doesn't tell much. I was actually posting to get him to do what no one seems to know or want to do, post Proper cam info.

Again, sorry this forum is at a level where no open discussion is tolerated, the Q's I asked were absolutely legit and were in no way meant as a slam but to allow More info to get out and IF enough info came out, I may have been able to tell what this cam would/ wouldn't do before even running it But I understand your decision making process and in no way want to stand in the way of new products being released

So please delete and carry on and I will Not post in this section ever again

[Frank]

Shadow,
Open discussion is tolerated. The vendor sections operate by a different rule set that may not be obvious. They are for vendor announcements, vendor Q&A, and a place for the vendor to operate within since they pay for it. It is ok that you asked for more detailed specs. I have no problem with that, however it is clear that you are not a potential buyer of that cam and as such it is basically just stirring the pot by mentioning the F4. It is a valid comparison test and I look forward to seeing more results that Chris has promised to release, that thread just wasn't the place.

I do think your car would be a perfect test bed for it.

V/R,
Frank

[Shadow]

Shadow,
Open discussion is tolerated. The vendor sections operate by a different rule set that may not be obvious. They are for vendor announcements, vendor Q&A, and a place for the vendor to operate within since they pay for it. It is ok that you asked for more detailed specs. I have no problem with that, however it is clear that you are not a potential buyer of that cam and as such it is basically just stirring the pot by mentioning the F4. It is a valid comparison test and I look forward to seeing more results that Chris has promised to release, that thread just wasn't the place.

I do think your car would be a perfect test bed for it.

V/R,
Frank

Fare enough, although I've never quite understood the "negative" surrounding informative questioning when it comes to parts being developed. (don't worry, this is Not the first forum that has taken my Q's in the vendor section negatively)

Not sure why you would think I'm Not a potential buyer? IF that cam had the Right specs and I could clearly see that it Would out perform the F4, I would Obviously want one.....No?

Now I have to admit, the opening description is deceiving all by itself, because we all Know that you Can't move the powerband up in the rpm range for Great top end power Without sacrificing low end performance. So that kind of throws a "curveball" into thing right off the hop.

Either the cam was profiled for Great top end gains and it will lose some low end power, or it's a "compromise" and will make some gains up top, but minimal at best because it is profiled to still perform down low.

This is why I asked for the info that I did. I would be able to tell what it is IF I had all the specs. For all I know, Chris may have just worded his description Wrong and really meant to say something like "profiled to breath higher in the rpm range without losing a Lot of low end power. (you will lose some below 3500rpm) but loses should be fairly minimal when compared to top end gains".

[Shadow]

I do think your car would be a perfect test bed for it.

V/R,
Frank

Agreed, and therein lies the problem. From the beginning there was enough power coming out of our 8v platform that cams kind of took a "back seat". Then someone made a statement about high boost and valve overlap and everyone (including myself) pictured this in their heads and the stock cams became the go to and "good enough" piece.

I Struggled to find any real info on cams for Years and in total frustration. No one, and I Mean No One did what I would consider Proper BtB testing, so all results left you going "WTH was that?". Why didn't you X, and then Y, which would = Z?

Enter Warren Stramer; He was the First one I found that Knew how to "dial in" a cam and understood that, Of Course you're going to Change the fueling requirements for each cam tested! Duh, how else are you going to see what the difference is! lol

Anyway, I Still was apprehensive, seeing Warren's testing was done Below 30psi and I was running more than 30psi and that old adage came right into play....Again, and scared me off from trying it for another few years. But Warren was persistent, he all but Guaranteed I would gain 30+WHP with Increased PB.

Now let's not forget the ported stock exhaust mani. I was also thinking my drive pressure was somewhere in the 2-2.5 : 1 range vs intake, so I Was worried that a cam Could Hurt my build and give little to No gain because of the added drive pressure.

This is why I pressure tapped my exhaust mani first, to see IF there was room to breath! lol Man, what a Shock that was! Almost 1:1, so in went the cam, same day, No other change, didn't even change the cam timing. (left it right where it was with the stocker) Just added a bunch of fuel up top because I was too lean to run above 5000rpm when I first put it in.

The rest is History, as I went to the track and proceeded to trap a consistent 3 mph Higher than ever before and on 3-4psi LESS boost! (on a Now slipping clutch no less!)

So, in the end I was able to Absolutely VERIFY what Warren had been trying to tell the community for Years! And at Any boost level! (I have now run 39psi with nothing but constant Gains as I increase boost)

After Two Highly reputable individuals had gone to such lengths, you'd think that people would get a clue. Took a few more years of Me spouting off, but 5-6 years after what should have been a "Holy cow" moment in our community, individuals are finally starting to Listen

So here's the rub; Outside of myself, there are only two or three others that I would even trust to do a Proper test on something like this. I didn't see any of them pick up this cam

Problem #1. You Need to have a Perfectly tuned and running powertrain to even be considered. That just eliminated 95% of the community right there!

Problem #2. You need to be able to keep all other parameters equal. Almost no one else seems to be able to do this. Change ONE thing and see the difference and Stick with it till you get the result.

Problem #3. Honesty! Almost everyone is EGO driven So much so that IF they get some ridiculous gain from their set-up Not being right on the dyno, then they correct the problem, they Will believe that they just gained 150WHP from a cam swap! lol Now don't get me wrong, I'm not saying they are Purposefully doing it! BUT PEOPLE! You Have to be able to OPEN your EYES and see the Truth! IF something Doesn't make sense, it most likely ISN'T right. Gotta be able to put EGO aside and SEE what is really going on or people like myself will Never give your opinion the time of day. (hope people can read the truth in this and not Just be offended!)

So ya, "In time" it will be proven...........sounds like another 10 years minimum to me

[Rattlesnake]

"Problem #2. You need to be able to keep all other parameters equal. Almost no one else seems to be able to do this. Change ONE thing and see the difference and Stick with it till you get the result."

Logically, that right there is the wrong approach. If you change the cam you have to change a lot of parameters along with the cam to compensate for the extra airflow that this cam will produce. If you don't, it is going to throw everything off and instead of gaining performance you might loose it. Also, all engines are not equal, a cam change in car A will have different results in car B even though the are using the same cam; after a cam change tuning is the key.

I've build a lot of engines, and that is one thing I emphasize, ONE item WILL NOT MAKE POWER! It is the combination of changes in the system to compensate for that ONE change that will make the difference.
My advice? Get the R5 cam and tune accordingly and you will not be disappointed!

Reinaldo Moloon

[Shadow]

"Problem #2. You need to be able to keep all other parameters equal. Almost no one else seems to be able to do this. Change ONE thing and see the difference and Stick with it till you get the result."

Logically, that right there is the wrong approach. If you change the cam you have to change a lot of parameters along with the cam to compensate for the extra airflow that this cam will produce. If you don't, it is going to throw everything off and instead of gaining performance you might loose it. Also, all engines are not equal, a cam change in car A will have different results in car B even though the are using the same cam; after a cam change tuning is the key.

I've build a lot of engines, and that is one thing I emphasize, ONE item WILL NOT MAKE POWER! It is the combination of changes in the system to compensate for that ONE change that will make the difference.
My advice? Get the R5 cam and tune accordingly and you will not be disappointed!

Reinaldo Moloon

Then please explain to me how the Charger gained 30-40WHP coming from an already 480WHP (Mustang dyno, so more like 550 Dynojet) with Just a cam swap (F4) and obviously the right springs to go with? And at 3-4psi Less boost to boot!

[Rattlesnake]

Then please explain to me how the Charger gained 30-40WHP coming from an already 480WHP (Mustang dyno, so more like 550 Dynojet) with Just a cam swap (F4) and obviously the right springs to go with? And at 3-4psi Less boost to boot!

"and obviously the right springs to go with" There you go!

[acannell]

From what Chris says about someone testing it in the very near future with a BMFI and a TU header, that should be interesting data for several BMF intake customers who also have a TU header.

The only data so far for the BMFI is from my car and my car is pretty much useless for anything but fitment testing. It has a ridiculous equal length header with 14" primaries and the BMF prototype, and a huge intercooler and H20 injection, but it also has 2.5" SV, bone stock head and valvetrain, and a totally untuned stage 5 FWDP cal (actually the stock cal is in there right now lol).

But the time will come when I fix all that, and a cam I will definitely need. And I dont think I'm alone in that regard. I dont know what the BMFI customers are planning on as far as a cam, but I would imagine an F4 and/or R5 are on the radar.

[BoostedDrummer]

This has my interest peaked now. Currently I'm running the F4 cam in mine, and acannell's big intake is in the future for the Omni. Realistically, I'm looking for the most horsepower, so if coupled with the new setup I'm planning to run combining the big intake, Megasquirt, holset, and E85; the prospect of a new cam could be promising if it unlocks a few more ponies

[168glhs1986]

I have its older brother, r2+ cam (new grind from 2012) in my GLHS and I love it.

[onerippinturbo2]

i think what needs to happen is chris donate a cam to the cause (ship one to rob and allow rob to install it and run it in his car) then we as a whole community would have real world results at a fraction of the time and above all else honest real world results, i personally dont know rob, but i have had some dealings with him (all positive) and read everything that he talks about and have never found him to be misleading in anyway, if the new cam is better, he will say it is, if it isnt, he will say so as well. this is really the only way i see to solve this debate, also i'm not saying that rob gets the cam for free, he should have to pay for it should he want one in the end (which would cover chris for the potenial loss of that cam)

[Frank]

Shadow,
Here is a different perspective. I agree with you 100% on the technical aspects above. I also agree BtB tests are rare for the reasons you listed. Where our hurdles are may not be centered around ego but around the fact that this is a small group of performance oriented, aging, cheap cars.

As such, vendor A and vendor B don't get along and fight for what is a limited market. Most places our vendors can go to have these built require a minimum order. They do not have the capital to purchase 10 cams and have them tested with no return on that investment because they are unlikely to be able to distribute the costs over 500 cams.

So ask your question to Chris in his thread, but don't expect him to accept you mentioning a competitive vendor's product in it and down playing his product before it has been tested to your liking. Do I want to see it tested? Yes. However sometimes the paper design has to suffice, just like many cams for our cars before this one.

[moparzrule]

We don't know much about the F4. Rob did you get a cam card with your F4? Whats the LSA of the F4?

The more difficult thing is we don't know the duration specs of the F4 at .050'' lift. Every other cam manufacturer gives specs at .050, but for some reason FWD only lists .006 specs which no one else uses so there's no way to compare if Chris gave the specs out anyway.

While it's true that FWD might not say so it doesn't get duplicated, but if that's the case you can't really call Chris out for doing the same. Chris is actually being less secretive, as soon as someone gets the cam card I'm sure the full specs will be posted.....and I'm sure Chris knows that as well.

I will be testing out the R5 soon, but only against a stock cam for now. In time hopefully I will acquire an F4 and be able to fully dyno test both.

[Shadow]

i think what needs to happen is chris donate a cam to the cause (ship one to rob and allow rob to install it and run it in his car) then we as a whole community would have real world results at a fraction of the time and above all else honest real world results, i personally dont know rob, but i have had some dealings with him (all positive) and read everything that he talks about and have never found him to be misleading in anyway, if the new cam is better, he will say it is, if it isnt, he will say so as well. this is really the only way i see to solve this debate, also i'm not saying that rob gets the cam for free, he should have to pay for it should he want one in the end (which would cover chris for the potenial loss of that cam)

First off, as much as I appreciate the words and comments and agree with what you're saying, I would have to Remove myself from the equation because of the simple Fact that many know I run the F4 and IF the R5 proved less gain, I could really see people on the TU side of things crying foul.

So agree with what you're saying, but someone else would have to do the testing

Shadow,
Here is a different perspective. I agree with you 100% on the technical aspects above. I also agree BtB tests are rare for the reasons you listed. Where our hurdles are may not be centered around ego but around the fact that this is a small group of performance oriented, aging, cheap cars.

As such, vendor A and vendor B don't get along and fight for what is a limited market. Most places our vendors can go to have these built require a minimum order. They do not have the capital to purchase 10 cams and have them tested with no return on that investment because they are unlikely to be able to distribute the costs over 500 cams.

So ask your question to Chris in his thread, but don't expect him to accept you mentioning a competitive vendor's product in it and down playing his product before it has been tested to your liking. Do I want to see it tested? Yes. However sometimes the paper design has to suffice, just like many cams for our cars before this one.

Funny, the Only reason I brought up the F4 was in response to acannell's post (which was about the F4), but I see your point, and point taken.

When I say "ego" I say it with the understanding that we ALL have them, including myself. (just part of the Human condition) Most though, are unaware of when their Ego is in play and think it's just themselves, so nothing to change or notice. This shows itself every time someone dyno's a high #, then goes to the track and the car mph's like it has 150 Less WHP. I feel Bad for them, because the Simple Truth is, The Dyno was WRONG, but their Ego's will Not accept this, so they struggle on, never going any faster and always believing that the Dyno was Right, just can't explain why the car is slow.

It is for this reason I will never trust a dyno # alone, specially when it comes to testing/ Proving a performance piece. As a Good friend of mine once said on this very site; "Dyno's are only as good as the operator behind them, the track is the real Lie detector!"

Real World results! FTW

Having said that, IF you Know what you're doing, you can get good BtB dyno info doing the testing on the same dyno, same day. At that point the Total #'s are meaningless, just the amount Gained.

We don't know much about the F4. Rob did you get a cam card with your F4? Whats the LSA of the F4?

The more difficult thing is we don't know the duration specs of the F4 at .050'' lift. Every other cam manufacturer gives specs at .050, but for some reason FWD only lists .006 specs which no one else uses so there's no way to compare if Chris gave the specs out anyway.

While it's true that FWD might not say so it doesn't get duplicated, but if that's the case you can't really call Chris out for doing the same. Chris is actually being less secretive, as soon as someone gets the cam card I'm sure the full specs will be posted.....and I'm sure Chris knows that as well.

I will be testing out the R5 soon, but only against a stock cam for now. In time hopefully I will acquire an F4 and be able to fully dyno test both.

LSA of the F4 is 116 AFAIK. I thought someone had an F4 on the cam doctor? Didn't anything Good come out of that thread? (where everyone was sending in their cams to be checked?)

I was calling Chris out because I had previously read that he was going to give All the specs. (I think he told Todd that?) But whatever, if you are able to do some testing, Maybe we found our guinea pig right here!

[moparzrule]

LSA of the F4 is 116 AFAIK. I thought someone had an F4 on the cam doctor? Didn't anything Good come out of that thread? (where everyone was sending in their cams to be checked?)

I was calling Chris out because I had previously read that he was going to give All the specs. (I think he told Todd that?) But whatever, if you are able to do some testing, Maybe we found our guinea pig right here!

I read that thread and I never saw anywhere the actual info was posted...maybe I'm blind? But I don't see it. I would definitely like to know, because as far as I know we know very little about the F4 to even compare them anyway. But like you said, real world results are where it's at, taking them to a dyno is just more of a curiosity for me.

I will have the cam in time to take it to the strip on the 15th, so I should atleast get some testing done there. After just getting my intercooler installed yesterday, I can finally start actually tuning my cal now.

[acannell]

I read that thread and I never saw anywhere the actual info was posted...maybe I'm blind? But I don't see it. I would definitely like to know, because as far as I know we know very little about the F4 to even compare them anyway. But like you said, real world results are where it's at, taking them to a dyno is just more of a curiosity for me.

I will have the cam in time to take it to the strip on the 15th, so I should atleast get some testing done there. After just getting my intercooler installed yesterday, I can finally start actually tuning my cal now.

uhh.. I would like to make sure I do not miss whatever goes on with your build..is your car in a project thread or something? sorry if I've already asked..

[turismolover22]

I agree with Rob 100% on it. The way I see it, no one should give a ---- cc what beef the vendors have with each other. In the real world, a vendor works for US, because without US, they wouldn't have a place to sell their parts. Its a two way street, I get that. But to say that asking about performance against another vendors product is a bad thing, is flawed in my book. The way Chris should handle it is to try and get more info out on his product, and prove that he has the best over everyone else. Will it work best for everyone? Unlikely. But to say its bad to ask how it performs over another product, and get "in trouble" for it, isnt right. I dont know how everyone else operates here, but I for one should NOT have to find all the specs and answers to the questions I have by myself. I dont drop good money on parts based on a whim and a "looks good to me" attitude. I think Rob is right, totally right. Being vague about a product after its release isonly going to hurt his sales. No one else's. So if he can produce a better product than his "rival" then that should push her/them to make something better. I think Chris' thread was the perfect place for it, its the best spot to lay it all out, and throw the perverbial cards on the table.

[moparzrule]

Chris has already posted more info about the R5 than we know about the F4....I don't really see how he's being ''vague''. People bought the F4 with the same or less info, so I don't really get your post.