maximizing the area under the curve
12-30-2003, 09:46 AM
#21
TECH Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 10,341
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When I went to the 230/230 112LSA XE-R cam I picked up power everywhere in comparision to both my B1 cam and the 226/234 cam I had in there.
There wasn't anywhere on the curve that the smaller cam did better than the larger
There wasn't anywhere on the curve that the smaller cam did better than the larger
12-30-2003, 10:00 AM
#22
TECH Regular
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Spring Hill, TN
Posts: 451
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Chris,
What were the lift and LSA numbers for all 3 cams? Also, the ramp was more aggressive on the XE-R cam (I assume) so that factor alone could have given you more power throughout as your valves came off the seats faster. That's another variable we haven't talked about much in this thread.
What were the lift and LSA numbers for all 3 cams? Also, the ramp was more aggressive on the XE-R cam (I assume) so that factor alone could have given you more power throughout as your valves came off the seats faster. That's another variable we haven't talked about much in this thread.
12-30-2003, 10:07 AM
#23
? ? ? ? ? ?
iTrader: (16)
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: East of Dallas
Posts: 7,056
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Maybe I should qualify my post with an "all things being equal" statement. 
Say a TR220 cam on a 112 compared to a TR220 on a 116.
I'd say that Chris' 230 XER cam had lots more lift and more aggressive lobes than the B1 for sure and probably the 226/234 cam too.
Say a TR220 cam on a 112 compared to a TR220 on a 116. I'd say that Chris' 230 XER cam had lots more lift and more aggressive lobes than the B1 for sure and probably the 226/234 cam too.
