anybody run crane cam
If I had ego problems, I would've made a reply like this to you:
But I didn't, did I? Your feeble attempts at trying to find one of my buttons to push haven't worked yet and, in an odd way, I find it entertaining.
O2Reaper wants to know the specs of the Crane cam that you claim to be aggressive. So do I. You did say:
and if you forgot, you said:
So, its been a few days...... where is it?
Originally Posted by XTrooper
Got your feelings hurt? Well, boo-frigging-hoo. 
STFU? Not a chance, sweet pea. I suggest if you don't like what you see being typed, best not read it.
STFU? Not a chance, sweet pea. I suggest if you don't like what you see being typed, best not read it.
O2Reaper wants to know the specs of the Crane cam that you claim to be aggressive. So do I. You did say:
Originally Posted by XTrooper
Getting back on topic, the bottom line is that the new Crane "Quick-Lift" cams don't have "lazy lobes" (whether anyone actually suggested such an idea or not) and that they are, in fact, "aggressive."
Originally Posted by XTrooper
if you didn't know all that, didn't know where to look for info on the cam's specs, and didn't have a cam card, why in hell would you make comments about it?
Personally, I try to avoid commenting about things I don't know anything about.
Personally, I try to avoid commenting about things I don't know anything about.
Crane should be open for tech calls on Monday. It would be opportune for him to post the full cam specs before Monday to demonstrate that he did know what they were before making that demeaning post. I say he will come through and post before Monday. What say you?
Originally Posted by nuzee
Crane should be open for tech calls on Monday. It would be opportune for him to post the full cam specs before Monday to demonstrate that he did know what they were before making that demeaning post. I say he will come through and post before Monday. What say you?
11 Second Club
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,320
Likes: 0
From: NE PA
Originally Posted by 02Reaper
If you are talking about xtrooper, it appears that he has a crane cam by the looks of his signature. Why don't he just grab the cam card and type it up?
FYI, it's a custom ground Cam Motion cam. Providing you the cam specs would be pointless in this discussion.
Originally Posted by XTrooper
And through what flawed reasoning did you come to that incorrect conclusion?
FYI, it's a custom ground Cam Motion cam. Providing you the cam specs would be pointless in this discussion.
FYI, it's a custom ground Cam Motion cam. Providing you the cam specs would be pointless in this discussion.
LS1 Tech Stories
The Best V8 Stories One Small Block at Time
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
Awesome K5 Blazer Restomod Comes With C7 Corvette Power
Verdad Gallardo
10 Camaros You Should Never Buy
10 LS Engine Myths That Refuse to Die
Verdad Gallardo 11 Second Club
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,320
Likes: 0
From: NE PA
Originally Posted by PREDATOR-Z
Yeap, why not give us .006 advertised lifts so we can see how "agressive " the .050 and .006 variance is?
02Reaper: If you can understand what you're looking at, you'll find that they prove you wrong.
For "The Bobbsey Twins," nuzee and blkZ28spt: You can educate yourselves by checking the same page. You'll see that, again as I already stated, the Crane cams may not be the "most aggressive," but they are far from lazy. Regarding calling Crane, you fellas can do your own homework. After all, I'm not the one that made false claims concerning the ramp rates of Crane cams.
http://www.cranecams.com/?show=newPr...a2b639a20717be
11 Second Club
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,320
Likes: 0
From: NE PA
Originally Posted by 02Reaper
I stand corrected. I see on your webpage now. Anyone care to give us specs on the lobes at .006 so we can compare?
The difficulty with your suggestion is brought up by SportSide 5.3. Crane has always used .004" for their advertised numbers so it's very hard to make direct comparisons between theirs and say Comp cams which use .006" advertised numbers. This is why the .050" numbers exist for comparison purposes.
11 Second Club
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 5,524
Likes: 1
From: The South
Originally Posted by XTrooper
BTW, this was my very first suggestion in this thread when I said, "Compare a new Crane cam's .050" duration numbers to its advertised duration numbers and get back to us" to which blkZ28spt replied, "I didn't realize that it had harsh lobes. I guess it does" so I'm not sure even he knows what he believes.
The original poster called the company and was told the lobes were soft. You don't think that's enough to go on? And I was only answering a soft vs hard lob question, I never said they had soft lobes.
Seriously, what's your problem?BTW: You implied that you knew the cam's .050" duration andvadvertised duration numbers. We have yet to see you post anything about it though.........
TECH Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 14,620
Likes: 17
From: BFE
Originally Posted by XTrooper
Not a problem.
The difficulty with your suggestion is brought up by SportSide 5.3. Crane has always used .004" for their advertised numbers so it's very hard to make direct comparisons between theirs and say Comp cams which use .006" advertised numbers. This is why the .050" numbers exist for comparison purposes.
The difficulty with your suggestion is brought up by SportSide 5.3. Crane has always used .004" for their advertised numbers so it's very hard to make direct comparisons between theirs and say Comp cams which use .006" advertised numbers. This is why the .050" numbers exist for comparison purposes.
11 Second Club
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,320
Likes: 0
From: NE PA
Originally Posted by blkZ28spt
I keep checking up on this thread for when you make cheap BS comments like this.
The original poster called the company and was told the lobes were soft. You don't think that's enough to go on? And I was only answering a soft vs hard lob question, I never said they had soft lobes. Seriously, what's your problem?
BTW: You implied that you knew the cam's .050" duration andvadvertised duration numbers. We have yet to see you post anything about it though.........
The original poster called the company and was told the lobes were soft. You don't think that's enough to go on? And I was only answering a soft vs hard lob question, I never said they had soft lobes.
Seriously, what's your problem?BTW: You implied that you knew the cam's .050" duration andvadvertised duration numbers. We have yet to see you post anything about it though.........
2. The duration numbers can be seen by simply following the link I provided in my post previous to this one. Did you really have to ask about them again? Unless you need to be spoon-fed, the link should be sufficient.
Last edited by XTrooper; May 23, 2005 at 04:49 AM.
11 Second Club
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,320
Likes: 0
From: NE PA
Originally Posted by PREDATOR-Z
Comparing 2 cams at .050 won't tell you squat relative to ramp rates.
Originally Posted by XTrooper
I agree and no one said they would. However, if you examine the difference between a cam's .050" duration and its advertised duration, this will show you how fast or slow a cam's ramp rates are.
11 Second Club
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,320
Likes: 0
From: NE PA
Originally Posted by 02Reaper
Its hard to measure the ramp rate and compare them when the other cam companys list theirs at .006 and crane starts theirs at .004. If we had cranes numbers at .006 then we would be able to give a true comparison.
It's obvious that Crane doesn't use the .004" numbers as some kind of marketing trick because it actually makes their cams look less aggressive than they really are when compared to cams using the .006" numbers. It's simply a case where they've been using .004" as their point of reference since "Day 1" and I doubt they're going to change things now after decades of doing it this way.
Xtrooper
Let's put all of the previous posts aside and get down to topic. I wanted to see the supporting information that makes you claim Crane cams to be aggressive. I had wondered if Crane had something going on above .050" lift. I was thinking maybe the duration measurements between 0.050 to 0.20" might indicate what's going on. The info presented so far cannot confirm or dispell my suspicions.
So based on Harvey Crane's lobe intensity formula where:
lobe intensity=advertised duration-duration at 0.050
Crane's lobe intensity=62
CompCam's XE=53
CompCam's XER=49
Anyone know what the other cams are? including the factory cam? Also, can you post (if you know) the lift at which the advertised duration was measured.
*********************
With old flat tappet cams, I vaguely remember a rule of thumb where they wouldn't design cams greater than a 47(???) intensity because it would start to compromise valvetrain reliability beyond that point. Some of you guys out there might remember it better than I. Anyway, does a similar rule of thumb exist for roller cams? For LS1 cams?? I'd like to know this too.
Let's put all of the previous posts aside and get down to topic. I wanted to see the supporting information that makes you claim Crane cams to be aggressive. I had wondered if Crane had something going on above .050" lift. I was thinking maybe the duration measurements between 0.050 to 0.20" might indicate what's going on. The info presented so far cannot confirm or dispell my suspicions.
So based on Harvey Crane's lobe intensity formula where:
lobe intensity=advertised duration-duration at 0.050
Crane's lobe intensity=62
CompCam's XE=53
CompCam's XER=49
Anyone know what the other cams are? including the factory cam? Also, can you post (if you know) the lift at which the advertised duration was measured.
*********************
With old flat tappet cams, I vaguely remember a rule of thumb where they wouldn't design cams greater than a 47(???) intensity because it would start to compromise valvetrain reliability beyond that point. Some of you guys out there might remember it better than I. Anyway, does a similar rule of thumb exist for roller cams? For LS1 cams?? I'd like to know this too.
11 Second Club
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,320
Likes: 0
From: NE PA
Originally Posted by nuzee
Xtrooper
Let's put all of the previous posts aside and get down to topic. I wanted to see the supporting information that makes you claim Crane cams to be aggressive. I had wondered if Crane had something going on above .050" lift. I was thinking maybe the duration measurements between 0.050 to 0.20" might indicate what's going on. The info presented so far cannot confirm or dispell my suspicions.
So based on Harvey Crane's lobe intensity formula where:
lobe intensity=advertised duration-duration at 0.050
Crane's lobe intensity=62
CompCam's XE=53
CompCam's XER=49
Anyone know what the other cams are? including the factory cam? Also, can you post (if you know) the lift at which the advertised duration was measured.
*********************
With old flat tappet cams, I vaguely remember a rule of thumb where they wouldn't design cams greater than a 47(???) intensity because it would start to compromise valvetrain reliability beyond that point. Some of you guys out there might remember it better than I. Anyway, does a similar rule of thumb exist for roller cams? For LS1 cams?? I'd like to know this too.
Let's put all of the previous posts aside and get down to topic. I wanted to see the supporting information that makes you claim Crane cams to be aggressive. I had wondered if Crane had something going on above .050" lift. I was thinking maybe the duration measurements between 0.050 to 0.20" might indicate what's going on. The info presented so far cannot confirm or dispell my suspicions.
So based on Harvey Crane's lobe intensity formula where:
lobe intensity=advertised duration-duration at 0.050
Crane's lobe intensity=62
CompCam's XE=53
CompCam's XER=49
Anyone know what the other cams are? including the factory cam? Also, can you post (if you know) the lift at which the advertised duration was measured.
*********************
With old flat tappet cams, I vaguely remember a rule of thumb where they wouldn't design cams greater than a 47(???) intensity because it would start to compromise valvetrain reliability beyond that point. Some of you guys out there might remember it better than I. Anyway, does a similar rule of thumb exist for roller cams? For LS1 cams?? I'd like to know this too.
You bring up some interesting questions which I'm sorry to say that, at this point, I have no answers for.
I might make one comment regarding the lobe intensity numbers you have listed. As I previously commented above, when making comparisons of cams that use different valve lift points of reference (.004" vs. .006"), you get a skewed view of things. The Crane cam, because its advertised duration is measured at .004", will naturally appear to be less aggressive than a similar cam whose advertised duration is measured at .006". I suspect that, like the Cam Motion cams, the Crane lobes fall somewhere between the Comp XE and XE-R in aggressiveness even though they appear to trail them both in your list.
11 Second Club
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,320
Likes: 0
From: NE PA
P.S.- I have no vested interest in the Crane cams, but I do think they're a good cam nonetheless and wouldn't hesitate to use one.
Several tuners, Vinci being the foremost, have had some very impressive results with them.
Several tuners, Vinci being the foremost, have had some very impressive results with them.