:gh:

 

Well, i'm sure it will make huge power. It's a big healthy cam. It will work, but not as efficiently as something else.

That's what this thread is about: For max-power(which we all want) there are some tricks to a turbo cam. Other stuff will get you close, maybe close enough for your taste, but the horsepower-per-dollar ratio of getting the cam "dead-on" is usually well worth it.

 

#1, I accept the apology. I have gotten 13 e-mails and numerous PM's asking me to come and post more. Like I said, I only flamed back once the first shot was fired. And if you shoot at me, I will shoot back. If you treat me like a person and respect my experience, I'll go to the end of the world for those who need/want help.

Now, on the F-cam. Again, go and read. I never even got into specs with that cam. It is the quality and the accuracy. The core flexes and it causes harmonics. How many times with a spring that was recommended, proper PR, proper preload, do you see a HR that will not rev up? I see it multiple times per day. Its the cam flexing when it seems to be unexplainable. That is why I said, Comp 8931-16 lifters, a steel billet HR cam, the *right* valve springs [which I do all of the time] and it'll blow your mind at the difference. And again, I never mentioned spec.

Headed to the dyno.......

 

those lifters are a whopping $554.39, how much is the f cam cored out of the billet hr and valve springs?

 

NOTE: The following is in no way intended to argue for or against statements in this post. Just some information to add. Take it as you will.

I never had a problem revving my motor to 6900 on shifts with the F cam and stock Ford lifters. I had 1.7 rockers, TEA springs, and stainless valves.

Rob

 

good question here

another one i would like to ask is how much power would this be expected to pick up ?

plus what changes on the specs would you change to make this cam work better than it does you dont have to give out no big secrets
just a idea .thanks

i also would like to add that any info is better than no info and especially from a professional . thanks again

 

Jay I bought the Crane link bar lifters for my motor that were $425 for the set. The Ford Motorsport lifters just could handle the boost I guess along with whatever flexing the cam was doing. What about the Bee-hive springs? Are they worth it?

 

I'm betting that the specs would change depending on the exact combo of the car.

 

The Crane's used to be the big dawg. But the vendor has changed in the past few months. That's all I say on that.

500+ bucks for Comp's? That is because you went to: www.summitracing .com. You all have been programmed that summit is the cheapest. Check out my site.

I will say this. I *appreciate* the gentleman prevacing his statement that he isn't here to argue. Then he states he had "no trouble *reving* to 6800 RPM". The problem with statements like this, is that nothing was done to improve that combination and the compare them A-B. And just because the tach is moving, that means there were no issues?

Example: My little *street* car, Project RED Death, it would rev clean, very clean, to 7500 RPM to 7800 RPM. Its a stock s/b and even though I wanted it to break, that made me nervous. I took it to the track [where it counts] and I played with nothing other than shift points. It went the quickest shifting at 6900 RPM. Thus *reving* and making power should not be confused. And lastly on this subject. I'll bet some ca$h that if the cylinder heads, valvetrain, and camshaft were inspected properly, there would serious signs of valve train deflection, valvetrain harmonics, and premature valvetrain failure.

One of the things you'll find out about me is I will NOT hand out specs. Its takes me 2 to 3 HOURS to do what I do. Now I can look at specs and in about 20 minutres I can see if they are in the ballpark or not. But to get someone closer, I am all about accuracy and accountability.

Thanks.

 

From the Alphabet cams ant TFS1-2-3, which one do you think is the best all around turbo cam? You could even include the stock OEM stick also.

 

+1 on the above question.
Not saying it's relevant, but years ago I was the engine guy when olds brought out diesels. The factory rep said that the reason they couldn't make more than 250 engines a week was because "central foundry has a 50% rejection rate." According to him, central foundry could make 500 cams/week, but only 250 were good. My point is that with what I've seen come out of ford, and what the r block comes as, let's just say it's not hard at all to believe he's right about lack of accuracy.
I am curious about the unloaded deflection Jay refers to. I'd guess it's due to out of balance created by the lobes. If that's true, it would seem that the deflection would have to occur between the bearings. I'm curious how much deflection he see's, and at what point is it considered harmgfull?
Would also like to point out that many here including myself got a similar reception. Not something I think is very bright or necessary, but does seem to happen. I value Jay's input, even though I'm not in the crowd that can run that high end of stuff.
Don't see me knowing the advantages of good stuff does me anything but good, maybe I'll know when I've gotta step up.
Welcome Jay!

 

Maybe I should be more specific... I made a bunch of 1/4 mile passes at the track and took datalogs. The ET's/MPH were consistant and the logs didn't indicate anything strange as it climbed thru the rpms in each gear. I'm far from an expert and again NOT arguing a point. To my untrained eyes there did not seem to be a problem. It's quite possible that someone much more experienced would see something though. At any rate, as I didn't perceive any problems I thus made no changes. You are correct, there is no "B" for comparison. For me, this is just a fun street car (Don Bailey has been for a ride in it). I'm not looking to squeeze every bit of potential out of it. I think it's the same story for alot of guys here.

Now, as far as betting on damage to parts, you may be correct. The heads and rockers were professionally inspected and we did find worn valve guides. I do not know if this can be attributed to the camshaft core or normal wear ( :noidea. There was nothing else notable. FWIW, I did ditch the F cam in favor of a solid roller for rpm ability.

Rob

 

I'm no valve terrain expert either, but I could see how what I think he's talking about wouldn't show on the things normally monitored. I'd like to hear his explanation of what exactly occurs under his concept of resultant damage.

 

Two things.

One: Cam specs cannot be intelligently compared or considered without knowing the combination. Just spouting specs is fashion. Understand the four cycle engine and how and why you are obtaining cylinder pressure and at what times is the key. You must know the entire engine to do that. So to say cam A, B, or C is good, as a blanket statement, is proof positive of ignorance of the internal combustion engine.

Two: Valve train stability is much more than just the cam. This summer I had an outlaw 10.5 car that was breaking rockers. Big dollar rockers, not junk. I talked to some of the best out there with BBC twin turbo combos. They all scratched their heads. After some work with Duttweiller we came to a conclusion that is was not a rocker issue, but rather a cylinder pressure issue as a consequence of cam timing. The new cam would defy all logic. But it worked, and it worked awesome. So much of the valve train is result of how you go about getting there. Who would have thought that an improperly designed cam would cause lifter failure. The cam lobes were getting dented, and the rocker stands were being ripped out of the head; serious carnage. Guess what, the car still ran 200+ mph every pass. With the new cam it didn't put up much more mph, but it sure stayed together allot longer. Knowing what lobes, how to structure timing events and the BIG PICTURE is what helps you look at a cam. If you understand that you can then begin to understand what parts of the valve train are likely to be the problem child. And then you design around your strengths and weaknesses. So if a cam pro looks at a poorly designed, mass produced cam and offers up, its likely to have issues when used in that manner, maybe, just maybe that person knows something we don't.

 

I started a thread with this type failure in mind.
https://www.theturboforums.com/smf/...389dc41c3cbe793f0f89ab642;topic=72257.new#new

 

AMEN Don. Amen.