I got a good question for you cam guys
Thread Starter
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 2,803
Likes: 1
From: Seminole County, Florida
I got a good question for you cam guys Ok so if you were putting a new cam in and you know you want maybe .938 net lift (or any random number). Would it make it difference if you got a cam with a lift of .521 X 1.8 rockers or a can with .551 X 1.7 rockers. they both equal pretty much the same net lift.
with both cams go ahead and assume the LSA, ground in advance and other variables are the same (unless you think that would come into play)
Im not sure that there is a diff but with the smaller cam and 1.8 rockers you would have less velocity (or range of movement) on the lifters and pushrod but more pressure (i think)
And then with the bigger cam and 1.7 rockers you would have more velocity velocity (or range of movement) but less pressure on them ( i think)
Please feel free to elaborate as much as you feel like on this idea and your opinion on it, or just tell me im an idiot and it doest make a differece. Or if i stumped you, let me know so i feel good about myself.
with both cams go ahead and assume the LSA, ground in advance and other variables are the same (unless you think that would come into play)
Im not sure that there is a diff but with the smaller cam and 1.8 rockers you would have less velocity (or range of movement) on the lifters and pushrod but more pressure (i think)
And then with the bigger cam and 1.7 rockers you would have more velocity velocity (or range of movement) but less pressure on them ( i think)
Please feel free to elaborate as much as you feel like on this idea and your opinion on it, or just tell me im an idiot and it doest make a differece. Or if i stumped you, let me know so i feel good about myself.
9 Second Club
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 1,295
Likes: 1
From: VA
total lift will be the same... rate of lift will be what changes .. How a rocker arm is made ( pivot point, bearing type) can affect rate of lift also ,not just the ratio itself...
To answer the question simply though ,total lift will be roughly same.
To answer the question simply though ,total lift will be roughly same.
Last edited by Joe Overton; Oct 22, 2005 at 09:29 AM.
someone correct me if im wrong but if you are comparing two cams and both have the same specs except one has more lift than the other, wouldnt the cam with more lift have more aggressive lobes? As in the cam with more lift will open and close the valve faster than the smaller cam?
Thanks
Rob
Thanks
Rob
9 Second Club
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 1,295
Likes: 1
From: VA
Originally Posted by Robs98SS
someone correct me if im wrong but if you are comparing two cams and both have the same specs except one has more lift than the other, wouldnt the cam with more lift have more aggressive lobes? As in the cam with more lift will open and close the valve faster than the smaller cam?
Thanks
Rob
Thanks
Rob
9 Second Club
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 1,295
Likes: 1
From: VA
Originally Posted by LSONE
from what I've read, a higher ratio is undesirable because it throws off your valve train geometry.
Originally Posted by Robs98SS
someone correct me if im wrong but if you are comparing two cams and both have the same specs except one has more lift than the other, wouldnt the cam with more lift have more aggressive lobes? As in the cam with more lift will open and close the valve faster than the smaller cam?
Thanks
Rob
Thanks
Rob
But like I said, I could be wrong, as I'm certainly no expert.
Josh
Trending Topics
9 Second Club
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 1,295
Likes: 1
From: VA
Originally Posted by Josh
I don't think that's necessarily true, but I could be wrong. You could, theoretically, have a lobe shapped exactly like a "V" with .800" lift and a lobe shaped like a "U" with .400" lift, with the "U" lobe having more aggressive ramp rates despite having less lift.
But like I said, I could be wrong, as I'm certainly no expert.
Josh
But like I said, I could be wrong, as I'm certainly no expert.
Josh
LS1 Tech Stories
The Best V8 Stories One Small Block at Time
Gas Monkey Built a 6-Wheel Ferrari Testarossa With a Corvette LT4 Engine
Verdad Gallardo
7 Most Reliable High-Performance Engines GM Has Ever Built
Verdad Gallardo
Amazing '71 Camaro Restomod Is Modern Muscle Car Under the Skin
Verdad Gallardo
6 Common C5 Corvette Failures and What's Involved In Repairing Them
Pouria Savadkouei
Retro Modern Bandit Pontiac Trans AM Comes With Burt Reynolds' Autograph
Verdad Gallardo
Top 10 Greatest Cadillac V Series Performance Models Ever, Ranked
Pouria Savadkouei
Top 10 Most Powerful Chevy Trucks Ever Made!
Hennessey's New Supercharged Silverado ZR2 Has 700 HP
Verdad Gallardo
Coachbuilt N2A Anteros Is an LS2-Powered C6 Corvette In Italian Clothes
Verdad Gallardo Joe and Josh,
Thanks for the correction, now that I think about it you are definately correct. I was looking at it without taking into account a number of other factors. In the example Josh gave, of the cam with a V vs. the cam with the U lobes, what would these different characteristics be considered? Are these the ramp rates? and would the cam w/ the U lobe be considered to have more overall duration or would they both have the same duration?
I would think they would have the same duration at .05" lift but very different characteristics once the valves started opening more.
Thanks for the correction. I'm relatively new to this stuff and trying very hard to learn so bear with me please =).
I love this new forum, I learn new stuff everyday here.
Rob
Thanks for the correction, now that I think about it you are definately correct. I was looking at it without taking into account a number of other factors. In the example Josh gave, of the cam with a V vs. the cam with the U lobes, what would these different characteristics be considered? Are these the ramp rates? and would the cam w/ the U lobe be considered to have more overall duration or would they both have the same duration?
I would think they would have the same duration at .05" lift but very different characteristics once the valves started opening more.
Thanks for the correction. I'm relatively new to this stuff and trying very hard to learn so bear with me please =).
I love this new forum, I learn new stuff everyday here.
Rob
Last edited by Robs98SS; Oct 22, 2005 at 01:27 PM.
Thread Starter
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 2,803
Likes: 1
From: Seminole County, Florida
I guess what i really wanted to know is: is one set-up more efficient, or more durable, or have a better power characteristics than the other? if you think so please tell me why.
9 Second Club
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 1,295
Likes: 1
From: VA
Power,Yes if the heads flow well in the low lift ( off the seat) .200- .300 .400 a higher ratio rocker would show some gains over a stock ratio rocker arm using same lobe design most of the time, lift being only variable .....then again you may not see anything...efficiency would increase ..durability would be up to the valve train components used....
9 Second Club
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 1,295
Likes: 1
From: VA
Originally Posted by Robs98SS
Joe and Josh,
Thanks for the correction, now that I think about it you are definately correct. I was looking at it without taking into account a number of other factors. In the example Josh gave, of the cam with a V vs. the cam with the U lobes, what would these different characteristics be considered? Are these the ramp rates? and would the cam w/ the U lobe be considered to have more overall duration or would they both have the same duration?
I would think they would have the same duration at .05" lift but very different characteristics once the valves started opening more.
Thanks for the correction. I'm relatively new to this stuff and trying very hard to learn so bear with me please =).
I love this new forum, I learn new stuff everyday here.
Rob
Thanks for the correction, now that I think about it you are definately correct. I was looking at it without taking into account a number of other factors. In the example Josh gave, of the cam with a V vs. the cam with the U lobes, what would these different characteristics be considered? Are these the ramp rates? and would the cam w/ the U lobe be considered to have more overall duration or would they both have the same duration?
I would think they would have the same duration at .05" lift but very different characteristics once the valves started opening more.
Thanks for the correction. I'm relatively new to this stuff and trying very hard to learn so bear with me please =).
I love this new forum, I learn new stuff everyday here.
Rob
A lot of this is covered in these different Cam Threads:
https://ls1tech.com/forums/advanced-engineering-tech/396086-camshaft-discussion-part-ii.html
https://ls1tech.com/forums/advanced-engineering-tech/394934-camshaft-discussion-part-iii.html
All though there is a lot of text, It will go over a lot of details such as cam lobe shape. A quick brief explanation:
Lobe A) Comp Lobe # 3728
285* duration @ .006
236* duration @ .050
157* duration @ .200
.602 lift with a 1.7 rocker
Lobe B) Comp Lobe # 6580
261* duration @ .006
235* duration @ .050
153* duration @ .200
.595 lift with a 1.7 rocker
Lobe A has +24* duration at .006
Lobe A has +1* duration at .050
Lobe A has +4* duration at .200
Lobe A has .007 more total lift.
What lobe is more aggressive?
https://ls1tech.com/forums/advanced-engineering-tech/396086-camshaft-discussion-part-ii.html
https://ls1tech.com/forums/advanced-engineering-tech/394934-camshaft-discussion-part-iii.html
All though there is a lot of text, It will go over a lot of details such as cam lobe shape. A quick brief explanation:
Lobe A) Comp Lobe # 3728
285* duration @ .006
236* duration @ .050
157* duration @ .200
.602 lift with a 1.7 rocker
Lobe B) Comp Lobe # 6580
261* duration @ .006
235* duration @ .050
153* duration @ .200
.595 lift with a 1.7 rocker
Lobe A has +24* duration at .006
Lobe A has +1* duration at .050
Lobe A has +4* duration at .200
Lobe A has .007 more total lift.
What lobe is more aggressive?
I believe at some point of small base circle/high lift lobes the lifter is moved two far down (while it follows the base circle) and the oil ring travels past the lifter bore and in some instances the lifter can come out of the plastic lifter guides. This will cause low oil pressure issue and/or turning of the lifter. One way to solve this, besides the correct lifter oiling ring location and oiling whole or using a lifter with a much longer body (ala morel), is to use a lower lobe lift/generally larger base circle cams with a higher ratio rocker. Ofcourse this is ls1 specific as traditional sbc has a much different provision of oil to the lifters.
I'm about 80% sure of this from what I've read on here, experts chime in to negate or reinforce
I'm about 80% sure of this from what I've read on here, experts chime in to negate or reinforce
TECH Fanatic
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 1,979
Likes: 3
From: Upstate NY
Higher rocker arm ratios (RAR) can/are used to get the desired valve lift with limited lobe lifts. Flat lifters (NASCAR Cup engines) have a maximum amount of lift per degree of rotation (called Cam Velocity) based on lifter diameter. If you try to exceed this the edge of the lifter digs into the lobe flank and everything goes BOOM!
Roller lifters don't have the same cam velocity problem, but they create sideloads on the lifter bore that the flat lifters don't, so there is a practical limit to cam velocity with rollers. too. Max Cam Velocity limits the lift you can get with a certain duration, so if you need more lift you up the RAR. Some enignes use 2.0, 2.1, 2.2 and maybe more. Those aren't engines we drive around however.
If you are at the edge of the envelope, where almost all successful racers are, you need lobes designed for the RAR you are using. It's valve motion that we are concerned about, not just lifter motion.
There's no free lunch with RAR, because a higher RAR multiplies the valve spring loads into the pushrod and lifter. So with a 2:1 RAR and 600# over the nose, the pushrod sees 1200# static and much more dynamically. No wimpy 5/16 or 3/8 pushrods here if 8000++ is your goal.
Bonus question: If you are at max lobe lift you can get, and max RAR, and still need more valve lift, what do you do? Easy answer, but tough execution.
Roller lifters don't have the same cam velocity problem, but they create sideloads on the lifter bore that the flat lifters don't, so there is a practical limit to cam velocity with rollers. too. Max Cam Velocity limits the lift you can get with a certain duration, so if you need more lift you up the RAR. Some enignes use 2.0, 2.1, 2.2 and maybe more. Those aren't engines we drive around however.
If you are at the edge of the envelope, where almost all successful racers are, you need lobes designed for the RAR you are using. It's valve motion that we are concerned about, not just lifter motion.
There's no free lunch with RAR, because a higher RAR multiplies the valve spring loads into the pushrod and lifter. So with a 2:1 RAR and 600# over the nose, the pushrod sees 1200# static and much more dynamically. No wimpy 5/16 or 3/8 pushrods here if 8000++ is your goal.
Bonus question: If you are at max lobe lift you can get, and max RAR, and still need more valve lift, what do you do? Easy answer, but tough execution.
Last edited by Old SStroker; Oct 23, 2005 at 10:42 AM.
Launching!
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 210
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by camaroextra
Ok so if you were putting a new cam in and you know you want maybe .938 net lift (or any random number). Would it make it difference if you got a cam with a lift of .521 X 1.8 rockers or a can with .551 X 1.7 rockers. they both equal pretty much the same net lift.
with both cams go ahead and assume the LSA, ground in advance and other variables are the same (unless you think that would come into play)
Im not sure that there is a diff but with the smaller cam and 1.8 rockers you would have less velocity (or range of movement) on the lifters and pushrod but more pressure (i think)
And then with the bigger cam and 1.7 rockers you would have more velocity velocity (or range of movement) but less pressure on them ( i think)
Please feel free to elaborate as much as you feel like on this idea and your opinion on it, or just tell me im an idiot and it doest make a differece. Or if i stumped you, let me know so i feel good about myself.
with both cams go ahead and assume the LSA, ground in advance and other variables are the same (unless you think that would come into play)
Im not sure that there is a diff but with the smaller cam and 1.8 rockers you would have less velocity (or range of movement) on the lifters and pushrod but more pressure (i think)
And then with the bigger cam and 1.7 rockers you would have more velocity velocity (or range of movement) but less pressure on them ( i think)
Please feel free to elaborate as much as you feel like on this idea and your opinion on it, or just tell me im an idiot and it doest make a differece. Or if i stumped you, let me know so i feel good about myself.
larger base circles can be utilized since the lobe lift is down; the cam will actually 'fit' in the block since there is less of a difference in base circle size vs. lobe size; thus lowering the ratio of lobe circle/base circle; and opening possibilities for more radical ramp rates and lift numbers.
more net lift is attained as well, since in many cases the valve lash number stays the same as the ratio increases; making the valve lash effectively less in the grander scheme.
that's it, i'm all out of bullshit.
Launching!
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 210
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by Old SStroker
I guess we don't see exactly eye-to-eye, steve.
Good timing on our posts though.
Good timing on our posts though.
TECH Regular
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 430
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by Old SStroker
...Bonus question: If you are at max lobe lift you can get, and max RAR, and still need more valve lift, what do you do? Easy answer, but tough execution.
Besides being a fine judge of character, per your kind words in the dynamic compression thread, you also gave the exact explanation I would have re the limits of lifter velocity and acceleration.
Re the bonus question: How do you get more lift? The same way as when you want to jump higher, you pole-vault! It's risky and tricky, but with the right stuff, at high RPM the pushrod goes 'sproing' as the acceleration turns negative approaching max lift and the valve soars 50 or 100 thous. higher than the lobe lift times RAR dictates. Then, if all goes well, the components comer back together and gently touch down on the closing flank, just like a ski jumper. (and, just like a skier that out-jumps the hill, if the landing is on the base circle, bad stuff ensues....)