Anyone run a custom Advanced induction cam
Thread Starter
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,456
Likes: 0
From: Brockport NY
Anyone run a custom Advanced induction cam I saw on there site that they offer a custom cam kit now and was wondering if anyone has any results from any of the grinds they offer with stock heads? I know they make some killer H/c combos just looking for any info on the cam only set ups. Link for the lazy [URL="http://www.advancedinduction.com/AiProductsCK.html"]
www.notasponsor.com
www.notasponsor.com
Last edited by Speed Density; May 4, 2008 at 10:37 PM.
Not exactly listed but was close to the 218 one with 1.52 rockers as the untouched iron heads are lift limiting. Ran 13.5 in 104F heat in St. Louis last June.
That is 275 front rubber and the slicks are on steel wheels, mechanical WP, driver has to be 280lbs, 3300stall 3.73s, swaybars on and functional. Literally the day before he was road racing it at the same track only change made between was the slicks and that is just about 500 miles from home for us.
That is 275 front rubber and the slicks are on steel wheels, mechanical WP, driver has to be 280lbs, 3300stall 3.73s, swaybars on and functional. Literally the day before he was road racing it at the same track only change made between was the slicks and that is just about 500 miles from home for us.
I ran a custom nitrous grind with a set of their 190cc heads. Cam was low 230s intake and ran the numbers in my sig. before I pulled it apart for a long block build from them.
They have some nice grinds and work with some VERY talented and reputable people for thier cams. No sledge hammer cams.
They have some nice grinds and work with some VERY talented and reputable people for thier cams. No sledge hammer cams.
Trending Topics
One that destroys the rest of the valvetrain. One other vendor makes a habit of selling mismatched parts that only last a couple thousand miles before valve start to float and such and that is what is being refered too.
Not everyone comprehends the balance that has to be struck for longevity in a street application.
Not everyone comprehends the balance that has to be struck for longevity in a street application.
LS1 Tech Stories
The Best V8 Stories One Small Block at Time
Gas Monkey Built a 6-Wheel Ferrari Testarossa With a Corvette LT4 Engine
Verdad Gallardo
7 Most Reliable High-Performance Engines GM Has Ever Built
Verdad Gallardo
Amazing '71 Camaro Restomod Is Modern Muscle Car Under the Skin
Verdad Gallardo
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
One that destroys the rest of the valvetrain. One other vendor makes a habit of selling mismatched parts that only last a couple thousand miles before valve start to float and such and that is what is being refered too.
Not everyone comprehends the balance that has to be struck for longevity in a street application.
Not everyone comprehends the balance that has to be struck for longevity in a street application.
TECH Fanatic
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 1,979
Likes: 3
From: Upstate NY
That satisfies a lot of folks but not everyone.
Some folks don't follow installation instructions because they think they know more than the company that sold them the parts, or just because they are guys and don't read instructions.
Others follow instructions to the letter and fail parts during installation. Case in point is a shaft rocker system with printed instructions that said to torque 5/16 attaching bolts to 55 lb-ft. Of course some of the bolts failed at installation. It was probably a typo and should have been 25 lb-ft. Even if the bolts did not fail during installation @ 55 lb-ft, they were way into their yield zone and may very likely fail in service. Bad scene and the supplier's fault.
In a case like valvesprings, setting the specified installed height is very critical. If there is insufficient load @ valve closed position due to springs being installed at a higher than specified seat height, valve bounce on the seat is made worse, power falls off before it was meant to, and if the springs are run like this for many miles, they basically destroy themselves. This results from FTFI or failure to follow instructions. Hey, it has happened in the past, and it will happen in the future.
If the "victim" decides to fix the problem him/herself, they often follow the military version of Newton's Third Law of motion: "For every action there is an unequal and opposite over-reaction." or my namesake Stroker McGurk's motto: "If some is good, more is better and too much is just enough." This often results in the desired increase in the top rpm range at the expense of a little power, but, more importantly it puts extra, non-essential loads on the valvetrain every revolution the engine turns at any rpm and wears things out sooner than using the correct parts/loads. In that case my educated guess is that the failure analysis will not point to the "victim's" actions.
Fortunately FTFI happens on only a small percent of the cases. It is counterproductive to try to convince the "victim" that he is the cause and his own worst enemy.
Yep, "balance" or having everything work together is critical. While that may be intuitively obvious, what is not obvious to many folks are the dynamics of valvetrains. IOW, you don't need a sledgehammer when a tack hammer used properly will do a better job. It's also easier to swing the tack hammer and doesn't tire your arm so quickly.
Some readers may get not get the parallel. Some might.
Edit: "FTFI" also has a second meaning: "Follow The Freakin' Instructions". So if you don't FTFI you may have failures because you FTFI.
Jon
Last edited by Old SStroker; May 8, 2008 at 05:15 PM.
Not everyone comprehends that parts must be installed correctly in order to function correctly in any application. This is especially true if a high level of performance is desired. The easy solution is to "dumb-down" (DD) the system so that any Swinging Richard can bolt on the parts and enjoy mediocre performance.
That satisfies a lot of folks but not everyone.
Some folks don't follow installation instructions because they think they know more than the company that sold them the parts, or just because they are guys and don't read instructions. Others follow instructions to the letter and fail parts during installation.
Case in point is a shaft rocker system with printed instructions that said to torque 5/16 attaching bolts to 55 lb-ft. Of course some of the bolts failed at installation. It was probably a typo and should have been 25 lb-ft. Even if the bolts did not fail during installation @ 55 lb-ft, they were way into their yield zone and may very likely fail in service. Bad scene and the supplier's fault.
In a case like valvesprings, setting the specified installed height is very critical. If there is insufficient load @ valve closed position due to springs being installed at a higher than specified seat height, valve bounce on the seat is made worse, power falls off before it was meant to, and if the springs are run like this for many miles, they basically destroy themselves. This results from FTFI or failure to follow instructions. Hey, it has happened in the past, and it will happen in the future.
If the "victim" decides to fix the problem him/herself, they often follow the military version of Newton's Third Law of motion: "For every action there is an unequal and opposite over-reaction." or my namesake Stroker McGurk's motto: "If some is good, more is better and too much is just enough." This often results in the desired increase in the top rpm range at the expense of a little power, but, more importantly it puts extra, non-essential loads on the valvetrain every revolution the engine turns at any rpm and wears things out sooner than using the correct parts/loads. In that case my educated guess is that the failure analysis will not point to the "victim's" actions.
Fortunately FTFI happens on only a small percent of the cases. It is counterproductive to try to convince the "victim" that he is the cause and his own worst enemy.
Yep, "balance" or having everything work together is critical. While that may be intuitively obvious, what is not obvious to many folks are the dynamics of valvetrains. IOW, you don't need a sledgehammer when a tack hammer used properly will do a better job. It's also easier to swing the tack hammer and doesn't tire your arm so quickly.
Some readers may get not get the parallel. Some might.
Jon
That satisfies a lot of folks but not everyone.
Some folks don't follow installation instructions because they think they know more than the company that sold them the parts, or just because they are guys and don't read instructions.
Others follow instructions to the letter and fail parts during installation. Case in point is a shaft rocker system with printed instructions that said to torque 5/16 attaching bolts to 55 lb-ft. Of course some of the bolts failed at installation. It was probably a typo and should have been 25 lb-ft. Even if the bolts did not fail during installation @ 55 lb-ft, they were way into their yield zone and may very likely fail in service. Bad scene and the supplier's fault.
In a case like valvesprings, setting the specified installed height is very critical. If there is insufficient load @ valve closed position due to springs being installed at a higher than specified seat height, valve bounce on the seat is made worse, power falls off before it was meant to, and if the springs are run like this for many miles, they basically destroy themselves. This results from FTFI or failure to follow instructions. Hey, it has happened in the past, and it will happen in the future.
If the "victim" decides to fix the problem him/herself, they often follow the military version of Newton's Third Law of motion: "For every action there is an unequal and opposite over-reaction." or my namesake Stroker McGurk's motto: "If some is good, more is better and too much is just enough." This often results in the desired increase in the top rpm range at the expense of a little power, but, more importantly it puts extra, non-essential loads on the valvetrain every revolution the engine turns at any rpm and wears things out sooner than using the correct parts/loads. In that case my educated guess is that the failure analysis will not point to the "victim's" actions.
Fortunately FTFI happens on only a small percent of the cases. It is counterproductive to try to convince the "victim" that he is the cause and his own worst enemy.
Yep, "balance" or having everything work together is critical. While that may be intuitively obvious, what is not obvious to many folks are the dynamics of valvetrains. IOW, you don't need a sledgehammer when a tack hammer used properly will do a better job. It's also easier to swing the tack hammer and doesn't tire your arm so quickly.
Some readers may get not get the parallel. Some might.
Jon
Thread Starter
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,456
Likes: 0
From: Brockport NY
Not everyone comprehends that parts must be installed correctly in order to function correctly in any application. This is especially true if a high level of performance is desired. The easy solution is to "dumb-down" (DD) the system so that any Swinging Richard can bolt on the parts and enjoy mediocre performance.
That satisfies a lot of folks but not everyone.
Some folks don't follow installation instructions because they think they know more than the company that sold them the parts, or just because they are guys and don't read instructions. Others follow instructions to the letter and fail parts during installation.
Case in point is a shaft rocker system with printed instructions that said to torque 5/16 attaching bolts to 55 lb-ft. Of course some of the bolts failed at installation. It was probably a typo and should have been 25 lb-ft. Even if the bolts did not fail during installation @ 55 lb-ft, they were way into their yield zone and may very likely fail in service. Bad scene and the supplier's fault.
In a case like valvesprings, setting the specified installed height is very critical. If there is insufficient load @ valve closed position due to springs being installed at a higher than specified seat height, valve bounce on the seat is made worse, power falls off before it was meant to, and if the springs are run like this for many miles, they basically destroy themselves. This results from FTFI or failure to follow instructions. Hey, it has happened in the past, and it will happen in the future.
If the "victim" decides to fix the problem him/herself, they often follow the military version of Newton's Third Law of motion: "For every action there is an unequal and opposite over-reaction." or my namesake Stroker McGurk's motto: "If some is good, more is better and too much is just enough." This often results in the desired increase in the top rpm range at the expense of a little power, but, more importantly it puts extra, non-essential loads on the valvetrain every revolution the engine turns at any rpm and wears things out sooner than using the correct parts/loads. In that case my educated guess is that the failure analysis will not point to the "victim's" actions.
Fortunately FTFI happens on only a small percent of the cases. It is counterproductive to try to convince the "victim" that he is the cause and his own worst enemy.
Yep, "balance" or having everything work together is critical. While that may be intuitively obvious, what is not obvious to many folks are the dynamics of valvetrains. IOW, you don't need a sledgehammer when a tack hammer used properly will do a better job. It's also easier to swing the tack hammer and doesn't tire your arm so quickly.
Some readers may get not get the parallel. Some might.
Jon
That satisfies a lot of folks but not everyone.
Some folks don't follow installation instructions because they think they know more than the company that sold them the parts, or just because they are guys and don't read instructions.
Others follow instructions to the letter and fail parts during installation. Case in point is a shaft rocker system with printed instructions that said to torque 5/16 attaching bolts to 55 lb-ft. Of course some of the bolts failed at installation. It was probably a typo and should have been 25 lb-ft. Even if the bolts did not fail during installation @ 55 lb-ft, they were way into their yield zone and may very likely fail in service. Bad scene and the supplier's fault.
In a case like valvesprings, setting the specified installed height is very critical. If there is insufficient load @ valve closed position due to springs being installed at a higher than specified seat height, valve bounce on the seat is made worse, power falls off before it was meant to, and if the springs are run like this for many miles, they basically destroy themselves. This results from FTFI or failure to follow instructions. Hey, it has happened in the past, and it will happen in the future.
If the "victim" decides to fix the problem him/herself, they often follow the military version of Newton's Third Law of motion: "For every action there is an unequal and opposite over-reaction." or my namesake Stroker McGurk's motto: "If some is good, more is better and too much is just enough." This often results in the desired increase in the top rpm range at the expense of a little power, but, more importantly it puts extra, non-essential loads on the valvetrain every revolution the engine turns at any rpm and wears things out sooner than using the correct parts/loads. In that case my educated guess is that the failure analysis will not point to the "victim's" actions.
Fortunately FTFI happens on only a small percent of the cases. It is counterproductive to try to convince the "victim" that he is the cause and his own worst enemy.
Yep, "balance" or having everything work together is critical. While that may be intuitively obvious, what is not obvious to many folks are the dynamics of valvetrains. IOW, you don't need a sledgehammer when a tack hammer used properly will do a better job. It's also easier to swing the tack hammer and doesn't tire your arm so quickly.
Some readers may get not get the parallel. Some might.
Jon
TECH Fanatic
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 1,979
Likes: 3
From: Upstate NY
For a living I have a CNC/grinding job shop, design and produce high-end valvetrain parts, consult for an engine/valvetrain business and sell liquor and wine at retail (aka a "package store" in some parts of the US). I'm the whisky specialist.
I'm an ex-automotive engineer with a major OEM a long time ago. I also have been drinking alcohol (legally) for 44 years. Those are my qualifications for my jobs. I'm also very old and don't look anything like my avatar (Burt Reynolds).
The last time I checked, CamaroZ28 won't let me post without running my posts thru their moderators first. It's kind of like being banned without the "banned" label under your screen name. It's the wimpy way out, IMO. I can't even get officially banned like my family did!
Jon
Last edited by Old SStroker; May 8, 2008 at 03:06 PM.
TECH Veteran
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 4,985
Likes: 112
Jon:
Good points.
I by no means am an "expert", just have wrenched on my own cars for 40 years. Having been into my LT1 as a head/cam and now a 383/head/cam motor the valve train requires EVERYTHING to be spot on in how it is set up. PR length, valve lash, spring installed height and cam, springs, lifters, RR's "designed" to work together are critical not only to performance but longevity.
Some have said installed height is a "reference" to where it should be. Lets say the spring wants to be at 1.8" but stock heads are set up for 1.7"...heck that is only 1/10 of a inch WTF would that matter....then they get a cam with lets say about .575 or higher lift...then maybe they lash valves tighter than they "think" they did....then beat on the motor to about 7000 RPM. Even with the springs installed to short the spring spec says it is good to a lift higher than the cam....well true IF THE FING SPRINGS WERE INSTALLED AT THEIR CORRECT HEIGHT....but they weren’t and also the lash may be too tight and now you have coil bind, valve float or even BOOM.
Not only have they killed their high $ springs but quite possible worn the cam lobes due to excessive spring pressure because the installed height was to low. Maybe bent PR's along the way. Then the post come...."these springs suck or don't buy brand "x" cam, bla bla"
So many times good parts are installed with parts they were not designed to perform optimally with or installed wrong.
In response to this threads author:
AI and other companies can grind a great "custom" cam but what it is installed with and how well that installation is will determine performance and durability.
Stock bottom end and head motor, the Crane 227 or Lingenfelter 211/219 and a set of Crane 10308 spring kit (AL heads) is a solid combo. Some port work on the heads and machining for alternate springs at 1.8" will allow the cam to perform better and offer a larger aftermarket spring choice.
Good points.
I by no means am an "expert", just have wrenched on my own cars for 40 years. Having been into my LT1 as a head/cam and now a 383/head/cam motor the valve train requires EVERYTHING to be spot on in how it is set up. PR length, valve lash, spring installed height and cam, springs, lifters, RR's "designed" to work together are critical not only to performance but longevity.
Some have said installed height is a "reference" to where it should be. Lets say the spring wants to be at 1.8" but stock heads are set up for 1.7"...heck that is only 1/10 of a inch WTF would that matter....then they get a cam with lets say about .575 or higher lift...then maybe they lash valves tighter than they "think" they did....then beat on the motor to about 7000 RPM. Even with the springs installed to short the spring spec says it is good to a lift higher than the cam....well true IF THE FING SPRINGS WERE INSTALLED AT THEIR CORRECT HEIGHT....but they weren’t and also the lash may be too tight and now you have coil bind, valve float or even BOOM.
Not only have they killed their high $ springs but quite possible worn the cam lobes due to excessive spring pressure because the installed height was to low. Maybe bent PR's along the way. Then the post come...."these springs suck or don't buy brand "x" cam, bla bla"
So many times good parts are installed with parts they were not designed to perform optimally with or installed wrong.
In response to this threads author:
AI and other companies can grind a great "custom" cam but what it is installed with and how well that installation is will determine performance and durability.
Stock bottom end and head motor, the Crane 227 or Lingenfelter 211/219 and a set of Crane 10308 spring kit (AL heads) is a solid combo. Some port work on the heads and machining for alternate springs at 1.8" will allow the cam to perform better and offer a larger aftermarket spring choice.
Well I personally have nothing against AI stuff as many run great times with it.
One member on this board ran 118 in the 1/4 with a different companies custom grind cama nd some barely ported heads.
I think some know who im talkign about.
One member on this board ran 118 in the 1/4 with a different companies custom grind cama nd some barely ported heads.
I think some know who im talkign about.
