What's up with Comp Cams ?
05-01-2013, 05:47 AM
#222
There are certain sponsors on here that I carefully read everything I see posted from them and highly regard their advice, and some of those guys are in here. Damian and Geoff are not on that list.
05-01-2013, 06:30 AM
#223
TECH Senior Member
Censure is not the way to control facts. Consider this thread as an intelligence gathering.
A lot of people panic because they do not understand the process or cause of an issue.
Many here choose the wrong springs (by choosing highest spring lift capabilities) thinking this would be added insurance. It is a common mistake and too much spring pressures has a detrimental effect on other parts such as lifters which like LS7s are not designed to handle that much. Add to that improper install procedures and shortcuts; results are failures.
I would say over 90% of the cams I used are Comp, in all the years I've returned 1. I've used Isky, Crane, Lunati and Cam-motion. I've seen issues with Cam-motion a few years back as well. That is the industry. Sometimes QC is not always the best no matter what the brand.
A lot of people panic because they do not understand the process or cause of an issue.
Many here choose the wrong springs (by choosing highest spring lift capabilities) thinking this would be added insurance. It is a common mistake and too much spring pressures has a detrimental effect on other parts such as lifters which like LS7s are not designed to handle that much. Add to that improper install procedures and shortcuts; results are failures.
I would say over 90% of the cams I used are Comp, in all the years I've returned 1. I've used Isky, Crane, Lunati and Cam-motion. I've seen issues with Cam-motion a few years back as well. That is the industry. Sometimes QC is not always the best no matter what the brand.
05-01-2013, 07:28 AM
#224
Many here choose the wrong springs (by choosing highest spring lift capabilities) thinking this would be added insurance. It is a common mistake and too much spring pressures has a detrimental effect on other parts such as lifters which like LS7s are not designed to handle that much.
05-01-2013, 10:27 AM
#225
Launching!
iTrader: (32)
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Hinesville, Ga
Posts: 295
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Its threads like these that HELP the end user. Instead of just buying parts that are PLUG n PLAY, BIGGEST THIS/THAT the End User has a chance to slow his Parts buying spree down and do a little more research into everything and Actually learn somethings. I for one was the not so informed end user..Just buying parts because THEY said "Should be good". Well, I was not fully in the right direction till this thread. My H/C/I is on hold now till i complete my research Thoroughly.
If the vendors are so Concerned about this whole Comp Cam situation which if there isn't any shouldn't be a concern, then they and Comp Cams Need to push harder, Reach out (Be involved, point us in the right direction) to get the Customers. After all its about the Customers Right?! A Happy well informed and confident Customer is a Lifetime customer that will bring in more customers.
Forgive the Rant but Damn its irritating when a good thread with very useful information is requested to be removed so it doesn't affect "LIVELIHOOD OF VENDORS" and to protect the All Mighty Comp Cams name. That' Bull and cowardly. also makes one think.. is there something that needs to be hidden?
05-01-2013, 10:59 AM
#227
Comp doesn't need to do anything. The oil problem has been known for almost 2 decades now. Anybody familiar with older flat tappet engines is certainly aware, but with the aggressive valvetrains that are more and more common in our engines now it's becoming an issue.
Comp says it's oil. They're right. End thread.
Comp says it's oil. They're right. End thread.
05-01-2013, 11:15 AM
#228
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Since this is not an oil thread, anyone interested in oil should take a peak at this thread...
http://forums.evolutionm.net/evo-eng...run-oil-4.html
http://forums.evolutionm.net/evo-eng...run-oil-4.html
05-01-2013, 12:23 PM
#229
Launching!
iTrader: (32)
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Hinesville, Ga
Posts: 295
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Comp doesn't need to do anything. The oil problem has been known for almost 2 decades now. Anybody familiar with older flat tappet engines is certainly aware, but with the aggressive valvetrains that are more and more common in our engines now it's becoming an issue.
Comp says it's oil. They're right. End thread.
Comp says it's oil. They're right. End thread.
Everyone has their opinion. But do you really want to end the thread just on that?! Seriously?! So that's the answer to everything? Comp has a lot to lose i would think so Yes, they should do something to back their product up. They need this as a reminder to maintain if not up the standards. Keeps them fresh on their toes if that makes sense. You must have a stake in this to want this thread gone. Plus, this thread like said numerous times has other valuable info ..its not all trash talk. So I Look at the bigger picture with this thread. It puts fear into the end users mind which is a good thing! Makes them want to actually Research their options and Value their install instead of halfassedly throwing **** together. Its definitely an eye opener
for sure but in a positive way.
05-01-2013, 12:39 PM
#230
A couple of points.
Geoff has never come on here and bashed Comp. In fact, he didn't even advertise his switch to Cam Motion. And I know he doesn't want to bash Comp, but he made the switch based on several factors, including QC. He had worked extensively with Comp in the past, so he isn't some new vendor trying to bash Comp to drum up sales. In fact, I would say he hasn't done any of that. As far as I know, he doesn't come on here at all anymore.
Comp Cams is the 800lbs gorilla in the performance world. Almost everyone uses them. I can see a lot of vendors being gun-shy about bringing to light any potential problems if there were any problems, because they are much smaller than Comp. It's sort of like Windows and the PC manufacturers back in the late 90s. There were issues with the way Microsoft handled competition, quality, and treatment of industry partners. But you never heard anything from those vendors. They didn't want to be cut off. The lawsuits came from elsewhere for antitrust violations. Not saying Comp is doing that, but you have got to know there aren't going to be many if any shops willing to come forward unless the issue is quite severe. And I think the issue is probably overblown, but it does seem to exist - and there are many potential causes here in this thread - things I've been very vigilant with in my build.
I will say that for a lot of shops that don't do a ton of installs or builds or that haven't been around for long enough for the mileage to build up on the installs - your sampling size is probably too small to see problems if these issues are fairly uncommon.
At the end of the day, you need to find a vendor you feel comfortable with and let them work with you on spec'ing a combo. I think based on the feedback in this thread, you should have a pretty good idea of whether or not what they are spec'ing makes sense for you.
One last thing: I'm surprised no one from Comp has come in to say our QC rocks, oil/install errors, and yadda yadda we are great. This site still gets a lot of traffic and this thread in particular has a lot of views in a fairly short timeframe. Instead, it's left to vendors who rely on Comp to make their money to try and fight a perception issue they quite honestly don't know whether it is a real issue or an internet issue.
Geoff has never come on here and bashed Comp. In fact, he didn't even advertise his switch to Cam Motion. And I know he doesn't want to bash Comp, but he made the switch based on several factors, including QC. He had worked extensively with Comp in the past, so he isn't some new vendor trying to bash Comp to drum up sales. In fact, I would say he hasn't done any of that. As far as I know, he doesn't come on here at all anymore.
Comp Cams is the 800lbs gorilla in the performance world. Almost everyone uses them. I can see a lot of vendors being gun-shy about bringing to light any potential problems if there were any problems, because they are much smaller than Comp. It's sort of like Windows and the PC manufacturers back in the late 90s. There were issues with the way Microsoft handled competition, quality, and treatment of industry partners. But you never heard anything from those vendors. They didn't want to be cut off. The lawsuits came from elsewhere for antitrust violations. Not saying Comp is doing that, but you have got to know there aren't going to be many if any shops willing to come forward unless the issue is quite severe. And I think the issue is probably overblown, but it does seem to exist - and there are many potential causes here in this thread - things I've been very vigilant with in my build.
I will say that for a lot of shops that don't do a ton of installs or builds or that haven't been around for long enough for the mileage to build up on the installs - your sampling size is probably too small to see problems if these issues are fairly uncommon.
At the end of the day, you need to find a vendor you feel comfortable with and let them work with you on spec'ing a combo. I think based on the feedback in this thread, you should have a pretty good idea of whether or not what they are spec'ing makes sense for you.
One last thing: I'm surprised no one from Comp has come in to say our QC rocks, oil/install errors, and yadda yadda we are great. This site still gets a lot of traffic and this thread in particular has a lot of views in a fairly short timeframe. Instead, it's left to vendors who rely on Comp to make their money to try and fight a perception issue they quite honestly don't know whether it is a real issue or an internet issue.
05-01-2013, 01:30 PM
#231
Well two thing I am curious about.
1. If it is indeed newer oil (not sold on that one) then what is Comp doing to solve the problem other than saying that you must use $10/qt oil or a weight of oil that is a bit heavy for oem clearances? Have they changed their product to work with these newer oils? Have other companies changed and are thus having less issues?
2. The dual valve springs vs beehive thing was mentioned earlier. At what point is it necessary to go with larger dual valve spings in order to be able to run these cams without valve float? At this point should one step up to a "billet" cam to avoid issues? What else should I , as a consumer know?
1. If it is indeed newer oil (not sold on that one) then what is Comp doing to solve the problem other than saying that you must use $10/qt oil or a weight of oil that is a bit heavy for oem clearances? Have they changed their product to work with these newer oils? Have other companies changed and are thus having less issues?
2. The dual valve springs vs beehive thing was mentioned earlier. At what point is it necessary to go with larger dual valve spings in order to be able to run these cams without valve float? At this point should one step up to a "billet" cam to avoid issues? What else should I , as a consumer know?
05-01-2013, 02:28 PM
#232
TECH Senior Member
2. The dual valve springs vs beehive thing was mentioned earlier. At what point is it necessary to go with larger dual valve spings in order to be able to run these cams without valve float? At this point should one step up to a "billet" cam to avoid issues? What else should I , as a consumer know?
I've used mainly beehives because I'm a fan of their harmonic control (superior to duals and why they were developed).
Also because for street applications, and the fact that I try to use the lightest effective moving mass (light spring, light valves).
See, many are still wrapped up in old school SBC beliefs where bigger valves meant more power since SBC heads were marginal at best.
This is not the case with LS. My LS2 makes 480+ rwhp on stock LS6 valves 2.00/1.55 (YES the heads are ported)
Beehive failures are mainly due to improper install. Most just want something to just "drop" in with no further install work.
Heights need checked, distance from coil bind etc..... When properly done, they are as safe as duals and even make more power.
Also, ever since the appearance of Jap. products on the market, a lot of youngsters want to see outrageous rpms. Now I agree in racing applications, but on the street, it is simply not necessary. I never pass 6800 rpms, because my setups are designed to make power at a lower range and going further is counterproductive. (one of the reasons I'm successful using Reverse Split cams which unlike their bigger brothers do not max at upper rpms but more over a larger area under curve).
So at which point do I use duals? When I use bigger heavier valves. Usually not on the street since I do not need more power than I actually make.
05-01-2013, 03:12 PM
#233
My point wasn't that they're right because they said so. They're right because it's the truth. This isn't a new issue! They've been warning performance enthusiasts since the late 90s about this problem. Comp warned me on this issue back in 1998 when they recommended their XE274 flat tappet for my SBC Camaro. People were plagued with wiped lobes on the new aggressive grinds because they weren't warned. In my opinion, that's not Comp's fault.
05-01-2013, 03:47 PM
#234
IMO The main issue is not valve control between beehives and duals but more a fear of dropping a valve if spring breaks.
I've used mainly beehives because I'm a fan of their harmonic control (superior to duals and why they were developed).
Also because for street applications, and the fact that I try to use the lightest effective moving mass (light spring, light valves).
See, many are still wrapped up in old school SBC beliefs where bigger valves meant more power since SBC heads were marginal at best.
This is not the case with LS. My LS2 makes 480+ rwhp on stock LS6 valves 2.00/1.55 (YES the heads are ported)
Beehive failures are mainly due to improper install. Most just want something to just "drop" in with no further install work.
Heights need checked, distance from coil bind etc..... When properly done, they are as safe as duals and even make more power.
Also, ever since the appearance of Jap. products on the market, a lot of youngsters want to see outrageous rpms. Now I agree in racing applications, but on the street, it is simply not necessary. I never pass 6800 rpms, because my setups are designed to make power at a lower range and going further is counterproductive. (one of the reasons I'm successful using Reverse Split cams which unlike their bigger brothers do not max at upper rpms but more over a larger area under curve).
So at which point do I use duals? When I use bigger heavier valves. Usually not on the street since I do not need more power than I actually make.
I've used mainly beehives because I'm a fan of their harmonic control (superior to duals and why they were developed).
Also because for street applications, and the fact that I try to use the lightest effective moving mass (light spring, light valves).
See, many are still wrapped up in old school SBC beliefs where bigger valves meant more power since SBC heads were marginal at best.
This is not the case with LS. My LS2 makes 480+ rwhp on stock LS6 valves 2.00/1.55 (YES the heads are ported)
Beehive failures are mainly due to improper install. Most just want something to just "drop" in with no further install work.
Heights need checked, distance from coil bind etc..... When properly done, they are as safe as duals and even make more power.
Also, ever since the appearance of Jap. products on the market, a lot of youngsters want to see outrageous rpms. Now I agree in racing applications, but on the street, it is simply not necessary. I never pass 6800 rpms, because my setups are designed to make power at a lower range and going further is counterproductive. (one of the reasons I'm successful using Reverse Split cams which unlike their bigger brothers do not max at upper rpms but more over a larger area under curve).
So at which point do I use duals? When I use bigger heavier valves. Usually not on the street since I do not need more power than I actually make.
05-01-2013, 05:02 PM
#235
TECH Senior Member
What does GM use in the almighty ZR1 6.2L Supercharged?
I'll give you a hint: Not duals
What you mentioned is internet myth.
Also people regularly use too aggressive lobes for FI, not necessary. Let the boost do the work. (in street applications, racing is extreme).
I'll give you a hint: Not duals
What you mentioned is internet myth.
Also people regularly use too aggressive lobes for FI, not necessary. Let the boost do the work. (in street applications, racing is extreme).
05-01-2013, 05:04 PM
#236
Teching In
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Jonesboro AR
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just to clear up a minor thing, you have mentioned an "upgrade" to a billet cam a couple times in the thread. All the current LSx cams (including the comps) are billet cam cores. The upgrade mentioned earlier in the thread is an upgrade from a standard 5160 billet material cam core to a 8620 material. A quick google search can explain the differences but they are both billet.
05-01-2013, 05:12 PM
#237
A couple of points.
Geoff has never come on here and bashed Comp. In fact, he didn't even advertise his switch to Cam Motion. And I know he doesn't want to bash Comp, but he made the switch based on several factors, including QC. He had worked extensively with Comp in the past, so he isn't some new vendor trying to bash Comp to drum up sales. In fact, I would say he hasn't done any of that. As far as I know, he doesn't come on here at all anymore.
Comp Cams is the 800lbs gorilla in the performance world. Almost everyone uses them. I can see a lot of vendors being gun-shy about bringing to light any potential problems if there were any problems, because they are much smaller than Comp. It's sort of like Windows and the PC manufacturers back in the late 90s. There were issues with the way Microsoft handled competition, quality, and treatment of industry partners. But you never heard anything from those vendors. They didn't want to be cut off. The lawsuits came from elsewhere for antitrust violations. Not saying Comp is doing that, but you have got to know there aren't going to be many if any shops willing to come forward unless the issue is quite severe. And I think the issue is probably overblown, but it does seem to exist - and there are many potential causes here in this thread - things I've been very vigilant with in my build.
I will say that for a lot of shops that don't do a ton of installs or builds or that haven't been around for long enough for the mileage to build up on the installs - your sampling size is probably too small to see problems if these issues are fairly uncommon.
At the end of the day, you need to find a vendor you feel comfortable with and let them work with you on spec'ing a combo. I think based on the feedback in this thread, you should have a pretty good idea of whether or not what they are spec'ing makes sense for you.
One last thing: I'm surprised no one from Comp has come in to say our QC rocks, oil/install errors, and yadda yadda we are great. This site still gets a lot of traffic and this thread in particular has a lot of views in a fairly short timeframe. Instead, it's left to vendors who rely on Comp to make their money to try and fight a perception issue they quite honestly don't know whether it is a real issue or an internet issue.
Geoff has never come on here and bashed Comp. In fact, he didn't even advertise his switch to Cam Motion. And I know he doesn't want to bash Comp, but he made the switch based on several factors, including QC. He had worked extensively with Comp in the past, so he isn't some new vendor trying to bash Comp to drum up sales. In fact, I would say he hasn't done any of that. As far as I know, he doesn't come on here at all anymore.
Comp Cams is the 800lbs gorilla in the performance world. Almost everyone uses them. I can see a lot of vendors being gun-shy about bringing to light any potential problems if there were any problems, because they are much smaller than Comp. It's sort of like Windows and the PC manufacturers back in the late 90s. There were issues with the way Microsoft handled competition, quality, and treatment of industry partners. But you never heard anything from those vendors. They didn't want to be cut off. The lawsuits came from elsewhere for antitrust violations. Not saying Comp is doing that, but you have got to know there aren't going to be many if any shops willing to come forward unless the issue is quite severe. And I think the issue is probably overblown, but it does seem to exist - and there are many potential causes here in this thread - things I've been very vigilant with in my build.
I will say that for a lot of shops that don't do a ton of installs or builds or that haven't been around for long enough for the mileage to build up on the installs - your sampling size is probably too small to see problems if these issues are fairly uncommon.
At the end of the day, you need to find a vendor you feel comfortable with and let them work with you on spec'ing a combo. I think based on the feedback in this thread, you should have a pretty good idea of whether or not what they are spec'ing makes sense for you.
One last thing: I'm surprised no one from Comp has come in to say our QC rocks, oil/install errors, and yadda yadda we are great. This site still gets a lot of traffic and this thread in particular has a lot of views in a fairly short timeframe. Instead, it's left to vendors who rely on Comp to make their money to try and fight a perception issue they quite honestly don't know whether it is a real issue or an internet issue.
NO offense Jake, but have you actually ever held in your hands, installed or seen a comp cams camshaft in person or used one before? You have led the charge on this "issue" for I don't know how long now. I just would like the information that is being tossed around about an "issue" to come from those that have many repetitions in dealing with comp cams.
Well two thing I am curious about.
1. If it is indeed newer oil (not sold on that one) then what is Comp doing to solve the problem other than saying that you must use $10/qt oil or a weight of oil that is a bit heavy for oem clearances? Have they changed their product to work with these newer oils? Have other companies changed and are thus having less issues?
2. The dual valve springs vs beehive thing was mentioned earlier. At what point is it necessary to go with larger dual valve spings in order to be able to run these cams without valve float? At this point should one step up to a "billet" cam to avoid issues? What else should I , as a consumer know?
1. If it is indeed newer oil (not sold on that one) then what is Comp doing to solve the problem other than saying that you must use $10/qt oil or a weight of oil that is a bit heavy for oem clearances? Have they changed their product to work with these newer oils? Have other companies changed and are thus having less issues?
2. The dual valve springs vs beehive thing was mentioned earlier. At what point is it necessary to go with larger dual valve spings in order to be able to run these cams without valve float? At this point should one step up to a "billet" cam to avoid issues? What else should I , as a consumer know?
05-01-2013, 05:14 PM
#238
For comparison, a site that doesn't jump to conclusions that they read about on the internet:
http://www.yellowbullet.com/forum/sh...d.php?t=567943
http://www.yellowbullet.com/forum/sh...d.php?t=567943
05-01-2013, 05:19 PM
#239
Just to clear up a minor thing, you have mentioned an "upgrade" to a billet cam a couple times in the thread. All the current LSx cams (including the comps) are billet cam cores. The upgrade mentioned earlier in the thread is an upgrade from a standard 5160 billet material cam core to a 8620 material. A quick google search can explain the differences but they are both billet.
Tick Performance will now be offering a 8620 billet steel core as an up charge for those customers that wish to do so.
Any customers...future, potential or current that would like to discuss core options for a Tick Performance cam grind PM me, email me or give me a call at the shop. This is not the end of the world guys! I will take care of my customers as I always have, I promise that much.
Any customers...future, potential or current that would like to discuss core options for a Tick Performance cam grind PM me, email me or give me a call at the shop. This is not the end of the world guys! I will take care of my customers as I always have, I promise that much.
05-01-2013, 05:36 PM
#240
And depending on who you believe is not necessary on other cam manufacturers who are not experiencing these failures. I ask again, what are the other companies doing to not have to use special magic oil? Is this just a volume thing where Lunati is not having as many reported failures as other companies when using regular oils? Are some comp grinds just too thin on the hardening layer as has been suggested? Do these grinds not exist with other companies and thus they do not have the same problems when using potentially the same core manufacturer? Just questions that pop up in my head that no one seems to have the answers for.
Based on posts like this it seems their reviews are mixed as well:
For comparison, a site that doesn't jump to conclusions that they read about on the internet:
http://www.yellowbullet.com/forum/sh...d.php?t=567943
http://www.yellowbullet.com/forum/sh...d.php?t=567943
One time while working with a cam "guru" from comp the gave us a cam that mushroomed all our intake valves in 3 dyno pulls on the motor. we called and asked and the guru was not there. the guy looked it up and said thats an experimental lobe no one is suposed to get due to valve issues. LOL they didn't warentee the cam or any of our comp parts it broke. we try not to use them any more.