New cams from Tick Performance
#221
The Scammer Hammer
iTrader: (49)
Normally the standard lobes are a little noisy due to the exhaust lobe that is used, but the milder lobes are normally(note normally) much quieter.
I've tried tracking this pattern of "valve-train" noise from cam lobe to different cam lobe, and push rod length to different push rod length, and just when I think I've found a set of lobes that are quieter than another set, a customer pops up with the "quieter" set-up that is just as loud as the ones that were louder in other set-ups.
I've tried tracking this pattern of "valve-train" noise from cam lobe to different cam lobe, and push rod length to different push rod length, and just when I think I've found a set of lobes that are quieter than another set, a customer pops up with the "quieter" set-up that is just as loud as the ones that were louder in other set-ups.
I know for a FACT my PR length and preload is spot on, and mine sounds like 8 Singer sewing machines being ran at a pants factory in China. But I don't mind, at all. I'm very well aware of the ramp rates of the cam I have. It's actually the valves opening and closing, not rocker arms or PR's.
#222
This is the view I will be using next time I hit the track. I ran the car after the monster stage 2 and Street heat stage 2 cam. I went from an 8.7@87mph to consistent 8.18@92mph. The car feels great and really has some strong pull all the way through the rev range. I cannot wait to hit a 1/4 mile track. Thanks for all the work Tick anf I look forward to porting these heads.
#225
I think you hit the nail on the head, Martin. Too many folks get caught up in the "sewing machine" noise and automatically assume it's incorrect PR length or preload.
I know for a FACT my PR length and preload is spot on, and mine sounds like 8 Singer sewing machines being ran at a pants factory in China. But I don't mind, at all. I'm very well aware of the ramp rates of the cam I have. It's actually the valves opening and closing, not rocker arms or PR's.
I know for a FACT my PR length and preload is spot on, and mine sounds like 8 Singer sewing machines being ran at a pants factory in China. But I don't mind, at all. I'm very well aware of the ramp rates of the cam I have. It's actually the valves opening and closing, not rocker arms or PR's.
This is the view I will be using next time I hit the track. I ran the car after the monster stage 2 and Street heat stage 2 cam. I went from an 8.7@87mph to consistent 8.18@92mph. The car feels great and really has some strong pull all the way through the rev range. I cannot wait to hit a 1/4 mile track. Thanks for all the work Tick anf I look forward to porting these heads.
Bumper cam GoPro Hero 3 test - YouTube
Bumper cam GoPro Hero 3 test - YouTube
#226
TECH Apprentice
#227
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (35)
I think you hit the nail on the head, Martin. Too many folks get caught up in the "sewing machine" noise and automatically assume it's incorrect PR length or preload.
I know for a FACT my PR length and preload is spot on, and mine sounds like 8 Singer sewing machines being ran at a pants factory in China. But I don't mind, at all. I'm very well aware of the ramp rates of the cam I have. It's actually the valves opening and closing, not rocker arms or PR's.
I know for a FACT my PR length and preload is spot on, and mine sounds like 8 Singer sewing machines being ran at a pants factory in China. But I don't mind, at all. I'm very well aware of the ramp rates of the cam I have. It's actually the valves opening and closing, not rocker arms or PR's.
#228
I've been talking to some valve-train manufacturers and valve-train parts distributors lately about lifters and have been hearing some very interesting and also some very disturbing things. Hopefully I will get some time and the opportunity to test the things I've been hearing about one day to verify for myself firsthand.
#230
TECH Resident
iTrader: (4)
I've been talking to some valve-train manufacturers and valve-train parts distributors lately about lifters and have been hearing some very interesting and also some very disturbing things. Hopefully I will get some time and the opportunity to test the things I've been hearing about one day to verify for myself firsthand.
#231
This also isn't just pertaining to one brand or type of lifter as well. The case where the plunger had become stuck all the way in the bottom of the lifter bore was with a high dollar aftermarket lifter!
It seems that with aggressive cam profiles and high spring pressure the lifters begin to collapse at higher engine speeds which causes a loss of valve lift, and with too little spring pressure the lifters pump up which casues the valves to over extend and not open/close when they should causing valve float and/or a loss of power.
Looking for ways to remedy this situation are endless and there are a few quick and easy ways to stop it from happening like use of milder lobes, less spring pressure and correct pre-load for performance and not so much for what is the quietest. With some of the vendors on this board recommending ever increasing aggressiveness in lobe profiles(LSK/XER) and then pushing ever stiffer springs to control them, collapsing a lifter becomes more and more of an issue and the resulting loss of valve lift that goes along with it.
Seems counter productive to me which is why I find myself trying to use less aggressive lobe profiles with my cams, less pressure from the springs I use and I've even found myself pushing aftermarket lifters more and more where as I use to be very found of stock lifters such as the LS7 lifters. Do LS7 lifters still have their place and can you make great power with them along with run great track times? Yes! I went 6.30's cam-only with stock LS1 lifters that had never been replaced!
That said if you're looking for every last bit of power, you'll run an aftermarket lifter.
#232
TECH Resident
iTrader: (4)
seems to be all about component matching. from what I've read, you're asking for trouble if you're spinning to the moon with aggressive lobes, lots of spring pressure, and enough preload that will cause pump-up / float at higher rpm when the spring pressure is (inevitably) insufficient to keep the lifter in contact with the lobe on the closing ramp. going to heavier springs helps high end control but increases risk of collapsing / lower speed lift losses when the hydraulic pressure isn't sufficient to "push back" against the spring pressure transmitted down through the pushrod. sloppy tolerances on the lifter internals don't help this bleed-down either.
seems like you need a lifter with progressive leakage rate to compensate for changes in oil pressure - something that bleeds less at lower speeds to prevent collapsing while bleeding more at higher rpm to prevent pump up.
no idea if anything I said holds water but it's interesting stuff to me, nonetheless. trying to learn some stuff.
seems like you need a lifter with progressive leakage rate to compensate for changes in oil pressure - something that bleeds less at lower speeds to prevent collapsing while bleeding more at higher rpm to prevent pump up.
no idea if anything I said holds water but it's interesting stuff to me, nonetheless. trying to learn some stuff.
Last edited by ckpitt55; 03-17-2013 at 05:06 PM.
#238
I am building a Rock Crawler, Obviously for slow speeds and I want to get up and go as well. So how is the SNS torqueMAX Stage 1 Camshaft for LS1 & LS6 Engines (Mild) at low RPM's? On the web site it requires a 2800-3200 RPM Stall Converter. Can I get away with using a 2000 RPM stall? Thanks in advance.
#240
I am building a Rock Crawler, Obviously for slow speeds and I want to get up and go as well. So how is the SNS torqueMAX Stage 1 Camshaft for LS1 & LS6 Engines (Mild) at low RPM's? On the web site it requires a 2800-3200 RPM Stall Converter. Can I get away with using a 2000 RPM stall? Thanks in advance.