SSEUL8R

93 Pony, so you say I should run the 3725 intake lobe, but go with like a 3716 or 3717 exhaust lobe? Im looking seriously at the absolute speed stg 2 heads or the MTI stg 2E heads. For now im on stock heads, and i know 400 RWHP is possible on stock heads, and im tryin to get there. any advancing or retarding of the cam? thanks

black_knight

iTrader: (1)

Maybe no one noticed, but I asked a follow-up question. If no answer is coming, at least tell me that instead of leaving me guessing.

ChrisB

I don't think I ever suggested that you should, I just questioned "why" the 4 degrees retard in both cases. Since it's all relative, I could use the logic above and say - "okay, go 6 degrees retarded, or 10" - since its' intake restricted. Obviously that's not the only factor - other items need to be taken into account - since, again, it's all relative.




I would submit that there is *no* theoretical reason to shoot for ICL's and LSA's that are equivalent (no advance/retard). There are definitely situations were this is appropriate, but there are situations that it isn't.
It's not an issue of me not understanding what you are doing, it's an issue of me disagreeing with it. If you don't want to discuss it then that is fine - that's your perogative, but then if you don't want to share information what is the point of posting here? I could very well be mistaken (though obviously I don't think so), and have no problem admitting so - but so far I haven't seen any hard evidence, just general "trends" to.
But again, if you could post "why" you try and set everything so it's installed straight up I would be very interested - as was mentioned before, it won't give away any additional "secrets" as people can already order their cams like that if they - but it would help people "understand" what is going on!


I agree 100% - specific VE's would only be valid for a specific motor, as would 'rules of thumb' - it is exactly things like this - like "make the ICL and LSA equal numerically" and other rules of thumb I would like to see beyond.

93PONY

black night:
For those running an LS1/LS6 intake I'd say go with a cam that is ment to peak below 6400rpm. This works out quite well as most don't like shifting at 7K anyway. For an application with a shorter runner intake it'd be best to match everything in the setup for higher power peaks...including the cam.

Chris,
Simply put retarding both of those cams to 'straight up' will result in better VE's IMO. I do not do this with every cam. It depends on the profile. And actually, I'd have no problem with 1 or 2 degrees retarded from there on those 2 particular applications.

You seem to be very limited in your understanding of VE's & cams. I mean, on the surface you put up a good game, but damn, you've asked the same question more then a few times & I've answered it every time. I can not help that you just don't get that it's all about valve events. That's all a cam is. The opening & closing of valves. Time it correctly for a particular application & everything comes together. Drivability, idle quality, power, etc. Time the valves incorrectly and you end up with idle surging, low speed drivability problems, lack of power, etc. Not to say these motor have a lack of power, but power with the sacrafice of low-speed drivability & other 'issues' is costing power.
I've NEVER had surging problems with any of my cams. Nor low-speed drivability issues.

I've posted my reasons IN THIS THREAD for why I choose reverse-split cams. I've also posted WHY I don't advance any of these profiles....it's the same reason!

ChrisB

[/b]

I apologize if I am offending you with my obvious lack of knowledge - but then, we are all here to learn (well, most of us)! Perhaps you would be willing to humour me and answer my question with a real answer? I don't really accept the answer's you have given as valid or complete - I thought the reason why was obvious, but perhaps not, so I will try and point out why I would like a more concise answer. See comments below:



I disagree with this, and I am sure you will also if you think about it. No doubt the valve events are important, but as I am sure you are well aware we can take 2 camshafts with the same valve events, but only lift on to 0.150", while the other opens to 0.600". I think the ramifications of that are patently obvious? That is of course an absurd case, but it nevertheless illustrates that there is more to a lobe than valve events.



You have posted "reasons"? Lets see what I can find...



I find that interesting - one would tend to think that the RPM at which you achieve "inertial supercharging" at the intake valve would depend on both the harmonic you are shooting for as well as the intake duration? (Since the goal is to get the reflected pressure wave in the valve it would normally matter how long the valve is open (duration), as well as RPM to convert "how long" in degrees to "how long" in time.
If you run the numbers you will find with a large duration camshaft you can get a bit higher than 6300 for hp peak.

So I question where you get this number from?



Isn't that kind of a given? Max cylinder pressure will occur at peak torque, and I would hope the torque peak is under 6200 - or where you trying to say something else. Again, with my "limited understanding of VE's" I could easily be missing something - but if you could help me out I would appreciate it!



And how do you choose your IVC's? Based on what factors? What are you doing to arrive at a given IVC "number" based on engine specs? If you could provide something a little more concrete than "these engines are all intake limited, so you need to take that into account" it would probably help me understand what is going on, then I could hopefully stop with all the incessant questioning!

And of course the follow up is how do you pick the EVO values. Yes, I can read - I saw based on the IVC - but surely there is more to it than just adding XXX degrees to the IVC event? And even if there isn't, where do you get the XXX degrees from? Based on what.
And so on with all the other events!


Unfortunately this seems to have turned into a pissing match - if you have no intention of answering the questions in a complete manner just let me know and I will let the thread die (or at least stay out of it) - I really am just trying to get some good information here, something other than a few suggested tweaks that we are expected to take on faith.

Thanks again for your time!

soundengineer

iTrader: (16)

Ok...I've ben reading this for a while...I want some opinions....
I have an experimental idea.....but I wanna know from you guys....you take on it...

218/232 .591/.571 112lsa with .279/.279 advertised seat to seat duration.

IVO -3*BTDC
IVC 41*ABDC
EVO 48*BBDC
EVC 4*ATDC
ECL 112*
Overlap 1*

I know its a drastic split...but wht about valve events??? it should creat good torque down low...and good up high power...(or so I think)
what do you think??

93PONY

This thread seems to be turning into a circus....

I'll do my best.

We're talking about real world stuff here right? I don't think I'll ever see an LS1 with a .150/.600 lift cam.

Yes,...and here it is again:
Not sure if this is a question, but this is a true statement. To expand, the runner length of the intake & exhaust greatly affects these harmonic waves. Thus they affect when the motor will achieve "inertial supercharging". Make a little more sense? No? Look it up. Keyword: pressure wave

Do some searching on this board. Most Heads & cam or cam only cars with LS1/LS6 intakes make peak torque at or right around 4800rpm. HP = (TQ * RPM) / 5252 therefore higher RPM power is simply a matter of pulling as much torque as high in the RPM as possible. Due to the 15inch runner intake limiting RPM (see above for why) there is only 'so far' you can pull the torque curve...so HP peaks are also limited in RPM.

I believe you have mis-understood my meaning.
The goal with my cams on these LS1/LS6 intake motors is to create as much cylinder pressure as possible. Since cylinder pressure = TQ & HP = (TQ * RPM)/5252 I think it's clear why I do this. The 'how' I 'tend' to do this is outlined in this thread. It's based on good VE's & aggressive lobes.

As I have stated before, I will not give out this kind of information. It doesn't make good buisness sense. I'm not here to create a board of 'cam gurus'.

That's not how I do things. Every application is different. Too many variable to give an easy answer & no desire to give out that kind of information.

I believe that was all your questions.

ChrisB

This is the heart of the issue - you continue to gloss over any kind of real details/comments. If you would notice, the above example was simply to disprove your statement that "a cam is just valve events". I also *noted* it was very extreme, but taking things to an extreme is generally an easy way to show the fallacy in an incorrect statement.
You probably *have* seen lobes with identical VE, but say 0.550 or 0.600 lift (or at least that is in the realm of possibility). The same factors would apply to this.



*sigh* - again, you totally glossed over what was said in order to try and come up with a cute retort! (congratulations on that by the way, very original!)
Anyway, the point you glossed over was mine on *which* harmonic you tune for, and also what your intake duration is. Tuning for a different harmonic could easily cause your "target" rpm to change *drastically*. But we can assume a 6th order harmonic here, as I assumed that is what you were using (again, yes, already asked but I saw no reply?).
And then intake duration - think about it - we have an intake event every 2 revolutions, so 720 degrees. If the valve is open for 300 degrees then it is closed for 420 degrees. At a given RPM that 420 degrees is going to turn directly into a time measurement. Now the pressure wave can only reflect off the valve when it is closed so for a given intake lobe we have just established how long that is. Obviously if we change the 300 value we are changing how long the valve is closed, so we are changing how many reflection of the pressure wave we can have. If that doesn't work for you think of it like this - the intake valve has to be *open* for the pressure wave to enter the cylinder. The longer we leave it open the longer we have for a pressure wave to enter the combustion chamber.
The point you ask? Again, that claiming these motors will make peak hp at "6200-6400" and saying it's because of inertial tuning is pretty disingenuous. As I have shown above, even ignoring the harmonic, changing the intake duration alone will effect the window we have to work with.




Again, the summation of your "reasons". You list some factors influencing cam selection, but as I am sure you are aware there is really no way to get from those factors to cam specs - again, it's the glossing over all the *real* tech content. Saying "take the intake into account, take the exhaust into account, etc." all that is pretty obvious - what it boils down to is *how* to take it into account.



So it's a question of "pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!" You want people to purchase your products, but you have no desire to share how you achieve said products, nor any examples of your product working?



Yes, I believe it does. It seems to me you don't wish to provide any hard tech - that is of course your prerogative! I will bow out now and let you continue as you were.

Best of luck!

93PONY

I've posted more cam tech on this board then any other. It may not be 'hard tech' as you call it, but it does shed some light on important theories requarding caming the LS1. I'm sure the info I've posted has helpped a few with selecting a cam for their combo.

I'm not in this for money. There is absolutely no way I can support much with the amount of cams I do & the little bit of profit I get from designing the profile. I have given cam profiles away to a select few to test for themselves....prove my theories as it were. I've made believers out of skeptics by making thier car run harder then they thought possible without sacraficing drivability, idle quality, & in some cases smogability.

The same theroies on our local mustangs have made them dominate the local tracks/streets. Blower & nitrous cars with similar mods, but 'different' cams are struggling to keep pace with our N/A cars. The Local LS1's need ported heads to keep up with our stock shortblock 302's. It's about compitition & moving the LS1 to the next level....just like what's been done with the 302.

I'm here to help you guys run hard.

Hitman#1

iTrader: (1)

*Sighs*

ChrisB, while I fully understand you wanting the low-down on the process 93PONY uses to come up with his camshaft selections, are you so obtuse as to not understand that he feels that some of the information you are searching for is proprietary? What business owners do you know of that share all of their secrets?

Let's just say for a second that you discovered some relatively simple recipe for the most delicious pizza sauce in the world. From talking to others and through your own research, you've now got a secret that the rest of the world would love to know. Now, most people have at least a vague idea of what the basic ingredients are for pizza sauce, but you have absolutely the very best and people come to your eatery in droves wanting to devour your savory 'za. Would you share this information with anyone that asked? That would be suicide, capitalistically speaking.

I realize that this little example is far from ideal, but I think you get the picture. He's got a way to make himself some money by being just a bit more knowledgeable than most of the rest of us about these valve timing events. Knowledge is power, power is money. If you seek to have this knowledge, then by all means, go and educate yourself. None of this information is Eyes-Only, Top Secret rocket science, it's out there waiting for you to find it.

Leave the man be.

SScam68

iTrader: (20)

I agree

I personally would like to see a comparison between a popular cam like the TR224 vs a grind from 93 Pony.

HumpinSS

iTrader: (1)

93 Pony, J-Rod and Chris-B

Where does the GM cams (asa, Grand am, Hot cam) fit into all this discussion about VE's? Are their VE's close to being optimized or are they grossly wrong?

93PONY

Me too!
There was going to be a nice comparison between one of my smogable grinds & the C1 hammer cam on a 112LSA. But that seems to have fallen through.

If there is anyone out there that already has one of these popular (proven powerfull) cams & would be willing to do a comparison on the dyno, street, & track between that cam & one of mine of similar size, I will make them a cam at cost.
Tests would need to be on the same dyno & track. No other mods done.... Keeping it as un-biased as possible.

For those interested, please email me.
sperry5375@earthlink.net

-Shaun

soundengineer

iTrader: (16)

If somebody gives me the specs of one I will run it on some engine dyno simulator software....

black_knight

iTrader: (1)

93pony,

Thanks for the reply, with all the crazyness in this thread, I can see how I might be overlooked. BTW have you considered selling your services to a major supplier such as TSP?

I have a full enough understanding of the theorey behind the operation of an internal combustion engine, it's just that I am not familiar with the specific calculations involved. (yet) As such, I will have to say to everyone that the ideas that 93pony has expressed are sound, though I can't check his exact numbers.

And I'm also going to have to second hitman here. The man is a businessman. You simply can't expect him to give away for free the knowledge he's spent so much effort discovering. Personally, I'd buy a cam from him if I had the cash. Maybe someday I will if he's still in business.

93PONY

Never really thought about selling my services to anybody aside from the end user. One of these days I'd like to open a musclecar shop here in Norcal. At this points it's simply a matter of $$$...I have none. LOL
For the time being I'm content to just get my name out there...help some gear heads make a little more power.
Actually I wouldn't mind working for a good shop...but those seem to be few & far between out here.

J-Rod

Well, looks like there has been plenty of discussion over the weekend. Ok, here is my take on things. I don't understand why 93Pony does what he does. I also don't know if any of it actually works or not. At this point I simply have his word that "car run harder" with his cams.

On eof the things that has intruiged me on this is he is the first person who I have seen post anyhting related to reverse splits that comes close to making any sense to me. I have seen lots of stuff about reverse splits vs standard splits, but nothing even close to a good explanation on why a reverse split may be any better. That is not to say I have changed postion from the standard split camp, but I am certainly more open to that idea than I have been previously.

For me, I'd like to take a big grind like a G5X2, then make it a reverse split and see what the results are.

As for the VE's that 93Pony says will not only make more power, but idle better, have more overlap, etc... I find these claims intruiging, hence my reason for starting this second thread on the subject.

I still question the theory, the "why". I.E. Why does 93Pony feel the way he does about these things, and what is the math he is using to come up with them. Some of you have said we shouldn't question him, but in fact I am the one who started this thread for exactly that reason.

93Pony is not a vendor. He has already stated that he is not in this as a business. So, if folks are worried that we are somehow cutting into his business they need not be, as I have not seen an actual business to cut into.

From my perspective if he did want to make a business out of doing custom grinds he'd need to have some results. I'm not knocking him for not having them, simply stating the fact that many folks won't buy into these theories until there is something a bit more concrete to back them up.


Again, using several of the cams that he has done for other folks, I can reproduce the same results, as can any company out there. It only takes one of your cams getting out to the public for folks to copy it. Campro makes that easy. So, in that respect I have issues with the whole secrecy things at this point.

I mean its easy to say "this" works... And in many cases "this" will work. But the issue becomes why does "this" work. And that the whole gist of this discussion. Why.

If there is a specific methodology for determining optimal camshaft design based on certain criteria, then what are those criteria. How do you evaluate them, and what are the calculations used to make a determination on specific VE's.

I mean its pretty simple to take an intake lobe, jack around with the exhaust lobe and the ICL, and come up with the VE's 93Pony is using. Anyone with a copy of the COMP lobe sheet can. We aren't talking rocket science.

But as for me, I'm not out to become a cam grinder either. What I am looking for is personal knowledge. Knowledge is power. That power translates into the ability to make better decisions on my engine combo, not only in the LS1 world, but in other platforms as well.

Again, this board is about the free exchange of ideas. 93Pony's theories intruige me, I feel they merit dicussion. I welcome Chris' addition to those discussions, as he has broguth up some valid points. I think there are many of us who have read these claims, and simply have an interest in the theories both from a theoretical perspective, and also in a practical aspect.

I do agree with Chris that many of the questions have been "glossed over" just a bit. Many of the questions we have posed I would consider valid. The answers are somtimes very insightful, and in some cases they are simply a great generalization.

I am torn between whether or not (3Pony has simply found a "trick" that happens to work, or if there is some solid foundation tho the claims he has made. I am hopeful that we can further this discussion to make a determination.

I tell you what, 93Pony. If you don't want to publically post your theories, I understand. How about this. If you want to discuss this over the phone I'l give you my toll free number and you can call me at no charge to discuss this. Or, you can email me privately. If I feel like your theories are sound I will publically post as such. If I disagree, I will post that too. If you don't want your specific methodology posted, then I won't post them. In this way, perhaps a bit of peer review might help validate some of these theories.


Again, I'm not trying to get into the cam business, but I think it would be to everyone's benefit. If your theories pan out, you could start a healthly little business doing custom grinds.

I will also say this. With the changes coming in cylinder heads and manifolds, the theories you have in place to day could be changing, so just because someone has what you do for one combo doesn't mean they can copy everything you do. If you can proven you have some solid theories that cross makes and models, you have a lot more potential than the LS market.



I have spent the weekend thinking about some of this. Think about the valve events in a racing engine: From the point when the valve first moves off its seat until it reaches mid-lift, the piston is either going the wrong way (that is, it is rising in the cylinder) or it's parked near TDC. The piston doesn't begin to move away from the combustion chamber with enough velocity to lower the pressure in the cylinder until the valve is nearly halfway open. Consequently it is high-lift flow that really matters in a drag racing engine.


Maybe I am reading too much into it, but I have been looking at the VE's furhter down the line to see if that may have had more to do with these calcs. I.E. the VE @ .200 is more important than the VE @ .050.

I can see where 93 Pony's VE's more the intake and exahust events, but where I am trying to apply the design is with a standard split or symetric profile cam rather than a reverse split. But I haven't quite got that licked yet.

Anyhow, I welcome comments on any of this.

93PONY

I'm sorry I can not answer some of your valid questions. I have an agreement with another cam grinder (I order my cams from him) to not post anymore tech on how I come up with these VE's. There are 2 other well known cam grinders that uses these methods & theories. By posting that info I jeprodize their buisness....and my connection to a great wealth of valuable information.

What I will say is this...
I don't focus on .050 VE's all that much. .006 & .200 are much more important IMO. .006 as this is the actual start & end of the lobes, & .200 for this is where the heads really start to flow & make power.
Make an LS1 cam with over 140 degrees of duration at .200 on the intake side & you will make some serious power.

Also, most standard split cams out there possition the majority of the overlap before TDC. This helps those cams 'jump-start' the intake airflow. Due to the smaller exhaust lobe on reverse-splits this is not ideal....Almost wasting the overlap flow if it's possitioned too early as there is more pressure in the cylinder at the end of the exhaust lobe on a reverse-split compared to the typical standard-split. So I compensate by opening the intake lobe a few degrees later. The overlap cycle on my grinds is more 'centered' around TDC for this reason.

Currently there is only 1 of my LS1 cams actually up & running. There are 2 others with cams waiting on install. One of which is another small smogable grind, the other a fairly large power-house cam. No where near as large as the G5X2, but definately not a 'sleeper' cam either. It's just a matter of time for the results.

I would also like to point out that the reverse-split idea started out with a known cam guru playing around with the LT1. Then he tryied the idea on the LS1 with the same results (very favorable), then on the 302 Ford with the same results. One of my buddies has the first and second reverse-split Ford cams that came from this guy (one smogable, one not). They are amazing little grinds when coupled with the right heads, intake, & exhaust. The Ford heads that benifit the most from these cams are AFR's as they are extremely exhaust bias heads....much like the stock LS1 heads actually. With intake & exhaust bolted on a set of box-stock AFR165 Ford heads intake to exhaust ratio is 95% at low-mid lift points & over 85% at high lift points.
AFR has the most efficient exhaust ports out there. I'm sure they won't come up short with their LS1 heads. Just be prepared for some funky-*** cam specs that make some serious power. The only real problem I see at the moment is the limited intake selection for the LS1. But I'm sure given time, there will be some very nice pieces out there.

BYBYC5

ill step up to your challeng about the cams..your cam must be similar in size as mine and complement the exsisting mods i currently have, as well i will have my cam sent to you for a valid cam pro printout as well i would expect the same from you. what do you think

93PONY

I don't have a cam pro...nor access to one or a Cam Dr. My cams are run through a Cam Dr. for verification of proper valve events, but the printouts are not sent with the cams.
The cams will however have the Comp Lobe part #'s stamped on the back of the cam. That's the only way to verify the specs...that, or degree the camshaft when it's installed...which I always recomend.

Your cam is a 224/224 110LSA 106ICL correct?
Hmmm...email me with full specs & I'll cook something up. Similar size, similar overlap, just different lobes & VE's.