All his peak at 6600 or 6800 b/c that sim only has so many data points (10 I think) and those were two he used. He could go back and sim the cams with like 6550, 6575, 6600, and 7 more points and get a more realistic look at where the power would peak.

J.

 

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by Crazyquik:
<strong>All his peak at 6600 or 6800 b/c that sim only has so many data points (10 I think) and those were two he used. He could go back and sim the cams with like 6550, 6575, 6600, and 7 more points and get a more realistic look at where the power would peak.

J.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">DOH!!! Forgot about that. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Embarrassed]" src="gr_emb.gif" />

'Los

 

Good observation though. I wonder which peaks the highest, probably the big ARE on a 114 but thats just guessing really.

J.

 

Can we try tightening the LSA down to 108 on one of the better cams and running at an earlier intake centerline?

Thanks,

 

i too would like to see that 228 or 230/224 on a 108 with a close I/C

 

I ran the B1 and T1 right next to each starting at 5800 with 100rpm intervals. Both have pktq at 5800 but the T1 pkhp occers at 6200 while the B1 hapens at 6600 just like before. I'll go and do the rest of the cams in a little bit.

Now I've been playing with the XE-R 228 lobe with different C/L and L/S. Now the best numbers come out with a straight up 111 C/L and L/S. I've tried a 108 intake C/L with a 116 exhaust C/L to give a 112 L/S and it lost 5ftlb on the avg and 7 hp on the avg compared to the 111.

Anybody got any of the larger XE-R lobes?

LAter <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="gr_grin.gif" />

 

Your X-box is going to be soooo jealous <img border="0" title="" alt="[Razz]" src="gr_tounge.gif" />

J.

 

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by Crazyquik:
<strong>Your X-box is going to be soooo jealous <img border="0" title="" alt="[Razz]" src="gr_tounge.gif" />

J.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Oh yeah, I forgot I have that thing. I think I'll take a little break from running the "next" engine. I need I really big cam for that one <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="gr_images/icons/wink.gif" /> <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="gr_grin.gif" />

LAter <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="gr_grin.gif" />

 

Here are the specs from my R1 cam that I had in my T/A 383.

gross valve lift: .566"/.566"

advertised duration: 284/294

@ .050": 232/237 degrees of duration
intake: open 5 BTDC, close 47 ABDC
exhaust: open 58 BBDC, close -1 ATDC

114 LSA

lobe centerline: 111 intake/119 exhaust

lobe lift: .333"/.333"

 

Seems like the cams that peak alittle higher in the HP/TQ range all outgun the other cams?

Am I reading this right Bob?

JS

 

Custom Comp Cam XE-R

Gross valve lift: Int-.588 exh-.598
Duration @.006: Int-.277 exh-.283
Valve timing @.050: Int open 6 btdc, close 42 abdc
exh open 53 bbdc, close 1 atdc
108 intake center line
duration @.050: Int-.228 exh-.234
lobe lift: Int-.3460 exh-.3520
Lobe seperation 112

-Allen

 

Maybe I should sim the top cams with Desktop Dyno as well. Not really to compare numbers, but to see if the "best" cam with Bob's simulator is also the best with another.

J.

 

Interesting stuff here. I just simmed Patricks cam against the XE-R 228 111, and they were extremely close untill the peak. At the peak the 230/224 held, and then fell off a touch slower than the single pattern. Just like Patrick described it <img border="0" alt="[hail]" title="" src="graemlins/gr_hail.gif" />

J.
Bench Racing Expert

 

Man, I'm telling you, this cam has some LEGS on it! I was wondering if it was going to be peaky...it's far from that! OMG, the power from 5000 up is amazing...and that's comparing it to the already VERY GOOD TR224/224 112LSA cam. It seems to have an excellent combination of mid-range torque and high end pulling power. Remember, I made peak hp at only 6100 rpms. The fact that it carries the power cleanly to 6800 is a bonus. As a matter of fact, I only lost 4rwhp from 6100 to 6600 rpms. Turning the motor tighter is going to show up in better track times.

Patrick

 

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by Patrick G:
<strong> Remember, I made peak hp at only 6100 rpms. The fact that it carries the power cleanly to 6800 is a bonus. As a matter of fact, I only lost 4rwhp from 6100 to 6600 rpms.

Patrick</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Almost sounds like you have a restriction somewhere, hmmm.

J.

 

A restriction? If I had a restriction, it seem the power would have dropped like a stone.

 

Well, your power flatlines up top, right? Couldn't that be a restriction or is it just nearly ideal cam centerline/timing/lobe sep?

J.

 

John, I'm hoping it's the latter...ideal cam timing events, wink wink. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="gr_images/icons/wink.gif" />

I have a few obvious bottlenecks in my system that are keeping my power down. I need a fully ported throttle body, a bigger MAF, better headers (currently running mid-length 1 7/8" Whispers), ditch the gutted dual cats (flow restriction), and get a better y-collector. Having said all that, the fact I can put down 414 rwhp through and automatic with 3.73 gears is pretty good to me. If I addressed everything, I would be closer to 430 rwhp, but I feel the curve would raise at all rpm levels, just not on top. This cam seems to be very well suited for the flow of the heads. It's a monster above 5000 rpms...which is pretty much any time I go WOT with this converter, LOL! <img border="0" alt="[devil]" title="" src="graemlins/gr_devil.gif" />

 

Could be he's fighting against the tuned frequency of the LS6 intake.

We see this in the ford side when they try to use intakes with too long a runner on a combo that wants to rev out...

700rpm without gaining any HP sounds suspicous to me.

 

Bob put this one in and see what it does...

252/258 @ .050 .650/.650 @ 0 lash with a 112 lobe seperation and installed at109 centerline..... better figure in .015 lash so the lift would be .635...

<small>[ April 29, 2002, 02:58 PM: Message edited by: Joe Kizzire ]</small>