Sport Side

iTrader: (6)

I couldn't get the link to work M.

mrr23

iTrader: (3)

it was a search link for this board. go to search, click advanced search. type in mark campbell for user name and you'll get all of his posts.

ta02zx10r

iTrader: (19)

Hey do you guys think that it would help the 231/237 make more power under the curve and at low ends?

BuckeyeROC

iTrader: (7)

I posted about these several months ago and even sent Vinci a message and never got a response from them. I ended up going with the TR T-Rex. Sounds like an interesting concept, but I wanted something proven and there is very little info out on these cams. And the fact that Vinci never answered my questions put me off. Bottom line, except for the truck guys, if you install a Vinci accellerated lift cam, dyno, and post about it, you'll be the first I've seen.

QuietTahoe

What's the difference how the valve opens and closes? OHC valve trains open the valve much faster than pushrod engines and close them much faster and the valves don't seem to bounce any worse and they live a long time to!! Don't they???

mrr23

iTrader: (3)

i guess the post from the one that went into the z06 vette doesn't count. maybe because he didn't post the graph? he said what the gain was. but that doesn't count? and like i said, not everyone that uses vinci's products post on this board. or even on the internet. but the same goes for every cam maker here. and having their cam in a truck doesn't count either then i guess. not in car.

i will talk with joe and roger about the non reply you say you got.

ta02zx10r

iTrader: (19)

Hey mrr,
I also didn't get a reply either. I didn't see a point in bringing it up but since someone else mentioned it.

mrr23

iTrader: (3)

what email are you guys sending to? or are you PMing joe vinci off the board?

mrr23

iTrader: (3)

they do have a toll free number you can use. better to talk in person than try to explain something over PM/email. better service that way also. 866-462-4500

jrp

iTrader: (16)

what it all comes down to is do these cams offer anything that you cant get else where. seems the whole VHP philosophy is tons of low end and under the curve power but its yet to be seen. SOTP, feels like, sounds like, ect dont count. verifiable gains are what we are looking for, and not over stock, over other cam offerings. how hard is it for VHP to borrow/purchase a tr224 and do a direct comparson to one of its comperable cams. hell, one guy installed a VHP cam and didnt even gain a full mph in the 1/4. FMS/Camotion has already proven to make great under the curve power vs bigger and smaller cams. its time for VHP to do the same.

hell, it i didnt have a custom grind ( ) i'd be tempted to buy a VHP just to post some results.

mrr23

iTrader: (3)

reason why vinci won't go and buy a tr224 and put it up against one of theirs is teh same reason why thunder racing won't go and buy a vinci cam and put it up against theirs. companies aren't going to **** in each others fruit loops.

but, on a side note, they did put a 224/224 .551/.551 114 in joe vinci's 98 z28. test 3 is the results showing the peak gains over the stock cam. http://vincihighperformance.com/JOESZ28MAINPARENT.HTML unfortunately they don't have the dyno scanned and up on the web. also, the car now has a 409 in it. joe posted his thoughts on putting the 224 in his car on this board. but people didn't like his response to it.

i've contemplated using my car to do some popular cam swaps to see what would happen. but i keep hearing all the excuses popping into my head over how cam A didn't perform as well because of this or that reason. or accusations of not tuning the car well enough to make the other cams look bad.

i tell you what though. i'll supply my 00 formy once the longtube headers go in. that way the exhaust side is finished. anyone who wants to send me a cam and have me do the comparison, i'll do all the installing and dynoing at my cost. and on the dynoing, i will be doing it in this manner. i will lock 3rd gear in and start from 5 mph. converter unlocked. that way you can see what happens under 3200 rpms. and that's where the problem with dyno sheets are. you only see 3200 and up.

now, let the excuses start flowing.

mrr23

iTrader: (3)

on another note, if you click the pink banner, you'll see i've been testing their stage packages on the wife's 99 formy. every piece that has went on has been dyno tested on her car. with no tuning. that's another thing i do. i put a part on and test it only. not looky what happened when i put this part on and tuned it. the VHP heads are next on her car to finish up stage IV. this car started with the borla exhaust already installed when dynoing. never got a baseline stock dyno. but did get a baseline timeslip. i did this so i could post for them the results of their products on an f-body. like i've stated, there are many people that use their products and not post. the head install weas suppose to happen just before thanksgiving. but i toasted the 2nd gear clutches in my 00 formy. two days after i installed the bassani prototype dual exhaust for testing. i do have dyno of it, but no track times. but won't be posting any results until told to do so by VHP and Bassani. hopefully it'll be in the pontiac enthusiasts magazine.

VHP has been around for over 35 years. their not new in this game. to you guys, they are because they only started being a supporting advertiser this year.

marc_w

Mind if I add a few cents to the mix?

I can leave it sleeping.

Sport Side

iTrader: (6)

Seeing as you own a V stick, I'd think you'd be more liable to talk than the majority of us.

marc_w

When people talk about "area under the curve" what do they mean? Low end power as seen on the dyno? Or part-throttle power felt on the street?

I always assumed it was low end power visible on a dyno graph.

I would love a comparison that will show people this... I think one major problems in this, is that (obviously) nobody dyno's a motor at 25% throttle or 50% throttle. I believe that there is where all of this area under the curve is.

I know just enough about cams to be dangerous (SS5.3 can attest to that). I had a very hard time putting the correct "results" into words in the past. When some have heard me say something to the effect of 'not having to beat on my motor to get power' - the above is what I was trying to say -- Excellent part-throttle performance.

I definitely understand your request for hard numbers... but I think everything may be in two differen areas, at least when it comes to the street oriented Asp-Kicker cams. Dyno numbers better reflect expected quarter mile performance. Street? The dyno works, but how often do you got WOT? I don't much, so I blab about part throttle performance by SOTP.

I too would like to see the drag oriented cams stacked up against others. Some may think I'm back-pedalling, but I don't know how VHP cams will compare to similar spec'd other-brand-cams at .050" and .006" numbers. VHP's run much smaller .050's, with bigger advertised... what would you go with?

A dyno from me... The shop in my area that I contacted had no interest with me running my AWD setup with the front shaft removed, on their property. I need to set a side a Saturday or weekday (very hard for me to do), to make a trip to an AWD dyno. It will happen, just not sure when.

All I've got is my "after" quarter mile time. I don't even have a true race-weight.

Do you remember who it was with the VHP cam that didn't gain one mph? You're not confusing this with Nuzee here, with the CC 206/212, are you? He got razzed a bit when his 1/4 mile results didn't reflect the results he felt on the street.

--

A while back I had some questions on gaining lift from a cam only, vs gaining lift from rockers. Answers from Mark Campbell from Crane. Starting at post 35.

--

About VHP lobes - just eyeballing them, the lobes are "fatter" and "wider" than the bigger cam's lobe's (punctuation?) that I pulled out. Thats what they're getting at when they say these cams have more duration at .1, .2 or .3 - whichever specs they quoted on the site.

You can't tell much with this, but here is a pic. Top to bottom: Comp 220/220, stock, VHP.

I noticed a large reduction in valvetrain noise when running the VHP cam. Some people (including me before I had the sticks physically in my hand) thought it was accomplished with lazier lobes. I really don't believe that to be the case at all.

Sport Side

iTrader: (6)

Well marc, here is what Roger had to say.

It seems that there has been much confusion about Crane/Vinci “Quick-Lift” cam lobes and “Quick-Lift” rocker bodies. We claim that the use of the Quick-Lift lobes with the Quick-Lift rocker bodies results in “effective valve lift” durations @ .200” valve lift equal to most other cam/rocker combinations using cams with 4-8* more duration at .050” cam lift. This is the result of the Quick-Lift Rocker body design. We do not state that our cam lobes (by themselves) give this advantage.

So no. I'm not doubting what you saw, but the TR220 has damn near 140* @ .200.

Cam alone, I believe the 047 isn't near this. Correct me if I am wrong, but 126* intake, 131* exhaust- #047

I'd bet sotp would increase, like you witnessed. But that's a pretty small camshaft you degraded to.