340 dyno chart thoughts

[moper]

Somebody had that link a few months ago, search function for it.

 

[kowalski440]

Mewagner.com. is the adjustable pcv site.

 

[yellow rose]

I would agree that the MP cam would make 11" of vacuum on a 340, wouldn't you agree that OP's combination is not sorted out and when the timing and fuel delivery is tuned properly it should make about 14" vacuum at idle?

I don't care how much of a magician you might be, a well tuned engine with a longer duration cam and tighter lobe separation is going to have less vacuum and worse street manners than The same well tuned engine with the only change being a shorter duration cam and wider lobe separation. They both contribute to overlap which is a major factor in street manners and idle vacuum. The cam OP runs is 11 deg overlap @ .050 while the cam you're suggesting is 29 deg @ 0.050". How can you honestly think this won't have an effect?

So how do I have 255 @ .050 and 10-11 inches of vacuum at a 900 RPM idle?

It can be done, is being done and has been done.


It ain't that hard.

 

[frosty_the_punk]

So how do I have 255 @ .050 and 10-11 inches of vacuum at a 900 RPM idle?

It can be done, is being done and has been done.


It ain't that hard.

On a stock stroke 340? that vacuum figure for that much duration seems unusually high to me. two possibilities come to mind. super wide lobe separation like you'd see on a blower or nitrous camshaft.

OR a solid lifter where about 10-12 degrees of the lobe duration is taken up by valve lash.

regardless, the point remains... everything else being equal. more duration and a tighter lobe separation will increase overlap and reduce idle vacuum. Your personal anecdotes are interesting, but there's just no disputing this fact as it's probably the most basic rule there is about camshaft theory.

 

[fez440]

i have a question about the ld4b that i have on the engine. this intake has smaller ports then the 340 intakes. is the full chamber smaller on the ld4b or is it just at the opening where it enters the heads? i ask because i was told he port matched the intake to the heads so would that not make it the same as the ld340 intake or no?

 

[yellow rose]

i have a question about the ld4b that i have on the engine. this intake has smaller ports then the 340 intakes. is the full chamber smaller on the ld4b or is it just at the opening where it enters the heads? i ask because i was told he port matched the intake to the heads so would that not make it the same as the ld340 intake or no?

You can port match it, but it is different. It will never be the LD340.

I know you won't like to hear it, but when the port is small, then you make it big at the flange, it's a pretty good flow loss. It's counterintuitive but, you are better off if the intake manifold is bigger than the port. Ideally the port at the plenum should be bigger than the port at the flange. And the port at the flange should should be the same size as the port. BUT, if you have to have a mismatch, the intake should be bigger than the cylinder head, without the hour glass shape from a port match.

 

[yellow rose]

On a stock stroke 340? that vacuum figure for that much duration seems unusually high to me. two possibilities come to mind. super wide lobe separation like you'd see on a blower or nitrous camshaft.

OR a solid lifter where about 10-12 degrees of the lobe duration is taken up by valve lash.

regardless, the point remains... everything else being equal. more duration and a tighter lobe separation will increase overlap and reduce idle vacuum. Your personal anecdotes are interesting, but there's just no disputing this fact as it's probably the most basic rule there is about camshaft theory.

I've posted my cam specs several times. It's 255 at .050 on a 105 LSA installed at 105 with a STOCK STROKE 340. It will idle well at 800 but it's at 900 now, but I'd rather it be at 1100.

So, your are wrong when you say it cant be done. It's a very fast lobe for sure. None the less, it is what it is. Also lash is .014-.016 hot, so running its damn near zero lash.


Just because it is repeated over and over and over don't make it right. Too many guys are pissing away power because they won't learn camshaft and cylinder heads. In fact, if you looked at my flow sheets, you say my engine would be lucky to make 350 HP.

You can't stay in the 1980's forever.

 

[Lustle]

On a stock stroke 340? that vacuum figure for that much duration seems unusually high to me. two possibilities come to mind. super wide lobe separation like you'd see on a blower or nitrous camshaft.

OR a solid lifter where about 10-12 degrees of the lobe duration is taken up by valve lash.

regardless, the point remains... everything else being equal. more duration and a tighter lobe separation will increase overlap and reduce idle vacuum. Your personal anecdotes are interesting, but there's just no disputing this fact as it's probably the most basic rule there is about camshaft theory.

It's definitely possible. For example. Looking at hughes STL5054AS-8. It has 250/254 duration. 108LSA. Guess what the overlap is? 66. Very mild compared to the duration. My XE274H has an overlap of 60. And it's 230/236 duration with 110LSA. Comp says the XE274H has 11" at 800 rpm. 14" at 1000. So with only 6 more overlap, 10-11 inches is doable at 900.

Gotta remember that cam designs are much better now. Valve events and such aren't nearly as drastic compared to duration/lift as they once were. For example. Look at the mopar P4120655 cam. 252 @ 50 duration. 110 LSA. Yet the overlap is 76. Very similar duration to the hughes. Yet much higher overlap. And lift is down!

The whole "you can't run that cam, it's too big for the street" is LARGELY a thing of the past. Valve events in relation to duration/lift/lsa are better than they have ever been. Running that "HUGE CAM" isn't the same as it was 20-30 years ago. The sky really is the limit.

 

[AJ/FormS]

Jimbo
Your engine is a completely different animal. completely.
And why exactly would you be shopping for an adjustable PCV?

I mean that cam is pretty small for a 408, and the vacuum proves it by being pretty high at a pretty fair 850 rpm. So it should not be in the least bit sensitive to PCV flow. Are you having troubles getting the rpm lower?

 

[frosty_the_punk]

It's definitely possible. For example. Looking at hughes STL5054AS-8. It has 250/254 duration. 108LSA. Guess what the overlap is? 66. Very mild compared to the duration. My XE274H has an overlap of 60. And it's 230/236 duration with 110LSA. Comp says the XE274H has 11" at 800 rpm. 14" at 1000. So with only 6 more overlap, 10-11 inches is doable at 900.

Gotta remember that cam designs are much better now. Valve events and such aren't nearly as drastic compared to duration/lift as they once were. For example. Look at the mopar P4120655 cam. 252 @ 50 duration. 110 LSA. Yet the overlap is 76. Very similar duration to the hughes. Yet much higher overlap. And lift is down!

The whole "you can't run that cam, it's too big for the street" is LARGELY a thing of the past. Valve events in relation to duration/lift/lsa are better than they have ever been. Running that "HUGE CAM" isn't the same as it was 20-30 years ago. The sky really is the limit.

Looks like you're referring only to seat duration specs when looking at overlap, which will tell you when there is .006" of valve lift having a negative effect on vacuum. Think hard now, how much do you actually suppose this amount of valve lift effects things? It isn't very much

This is the main reason why the common spec of "0.050" exists. it is used as a point of reference where it can be considered that valve lift actually starts to perform it's function, allowing gases from the intake runner to enter the cylinder and for pressures between the two to equalize.

Put in simpler terms, how long the valve overlap period occurs can be seen with duration numbers alone. But how far they are open requires both seat duration AND duration @ .050"

We know that more degrees of overlap will reduce vacuum.
We also know that you lose more vacuum through a big hole than a small hole (like a completely open valve compared to a nearly shut valve. for an extreme example)

So if we have two camshafts with the same degrees of overlap as measured by seat-to-seat specs, but one having more overlap at 0.050". The one with more degrees of overlap @ 0.050" is reaching higher valve lifts earlier as they open and keeping them open for longer as they are on the closing side of the ramp, even if the total duration is the same. Since overlap happens at the beginning of one valve and the end of the other, this is an important factor.

Even with the same seat duration, a higher spec @ 0.050" will have the valves be open FURTHER during the overlap period and as such will have less vacuum at idle.

 

[frosty_the_punk]

I've posted my cam specs several times. It's 255 at .050 on a 105 LSA installed at 105 with a STOCK STROKE 340. It will idle well at 800 but it's at 900 now, but I'd rather it be at 1100.

So, your are wrong when you say it cant be done. It's a very fast lobe for sure. None the less, it is what it is. Also lash is .014-.016 hot, so running its damn near zero lash.


Just because it is repeated over and over and over don't make it right. Too many guys are pissing away power because they won't learn camshaft and cylinder heads. In fact, if you looked at my flow sheets, you say my engine would be lucky to make 350 HP.

You can't stay in the 1980's forever.

I literally just said in my post above that it being a solid cam would explain the higher vacuum. Your .014"/.016" isn't "virtually zero lash", it would be enough to eat up 10 degrees off the lobe spec for that solid cam's duration. Mystery solved. Turns out you're not a miracle worker after all.

 

[roccodart440]

I have 2 questions. does a engine gain power once it is "broken in" if so why? also will it gain power once the beak in oil is changed? I assume yes since it's lower viscosity. if so by how much hp and I assume oil psi will drop some as well correct ?

Yes. As a matter of fact you will often in the first couple dyno pulls see the HP going up with no other changes. This is your rings breaking in.

It will gain a little power when the oil is changed IF you go to a higher quality oil. HP change will vary. Oil PSI doesn't necessarily drop unless you drop viscosity.

I do not know why all you guys run such low idle vacuum numbers. I have a 360- 410 stroker in my aussie charger. It has a hughes 228-232 roller cam in it with 800 edelbrock carb with RPM air gap manifold. Vacuum is 14 @850 revs and 15 @ 1000revs. Plenty for power brakes to work well.

You essentially have a big block with small block heads on top of it, a small modern roller cam. Your results aren't surprising.

 

[yellow rose]

I literally just said in my post above that it being a solid cam would explain the higher vacuum. Your .014"/.016" isn't "virtually zero lash", it would be enough to eat up 10 degrees off the lobe spec for that solid cam's duration. Mystery solved. Turns out you're not a miracle worker after all.

Jesus Christ, really? 255 at .050 is small? On 340 inches? Get real. You'd argue with a stop sign.


At some point, when you grow up, you'll figure out you are wrong and admit it.


So let's play your silly game. A 292/.509 MP cam is 248 at .050. Most guys say it won't make vacuum, all that ****. My cam is 11 degrees SMALLER on the seat yet it's 8 degrees BIGGER at .050. What part of that don't you get?


You and your mixed up understanding of camshaft and induction screws people up if they listen to you. You cause those who listen to you to produce underachievers. If you are an engine builder, it's sickening to watch the same old lies and mistakes get repeated for DECADES. It's time to stop the ****.


By the way, my LSA is 105 and it's installed on a 105 ICL. By your understanding, it still won't idle.

It doesn't matter what I say or do, it's like people stuck in Scientology. They never want to admit what they knew or did for a lifetime was wrong.

It has to stop.

 

[txstang84]

But-But-the thetans!

 

[frosty_the_punk]

Jesus Christ, really? 255 at .050 is small? On 340 inches? Get real. You'd argue with a stop sign.


At some point, when you grow up, you'll figure out you are wrong and admit it.


So let's play your silly game. A 292/.509 MP cam is 248 at .050. Most guys say it won't make vacuum, all that ****. My cam is 11 degrees SMALLER on the seat yet it's 8 degrees BIGGER at .050. What part of that don't you get?


You and your mixed up understanding of camshaft and induction screws people up if they listen to you. You cause those who listen to you to produce underachievers. If you are an engine builder, it's sickening to watch the same old lies and mistakes get repeated for DECADES. It's time to stop the ****.


By the way, my LSA is 105 and it's installed on a 105 ICL. By your understanding, it still won't idle.

It doesn't matter what I say or do, it's like people stuck in Scientology. They never want to admit what they knew or did for a lifetime was wrong.

It has to stop.

I NEVER said 255 is small on a 340. I said 10" of vacuum is unusually high unless it's a solid cam with lash. then you said it WAS a solid cam with lash after all. so where exactly was i wrong, genius?

What I am saying is that 255 lobe duration in a solid cam is going to behave more like a 243 duration hydraulic cam. This is why your 255 solid cam has about the same idle vacuum as the 241 mp cam you recommended earlier.

Do yourself a favor and picture it in your head. The cam is turning, the lifter rises in it's bore. but the lash has to be taken up so the valve doesn't begin to move until the lifter has raised 0.014" on the intake and 0.016" on the exhaust. if you were to check this with a degree wheel how many crank degrees do you think this would take off the opening and closing sides? I guarantee you it would be at AT LEAST 10 degrees when combined.

That's why you're getting a good amount of vacuum, your duration and overlap is being eaten by lash. It isn't your super duper magical tuning skills, There's nothing difficult about tuning an idle. You act like you're the only one who knows how to do it.

I run a 254/254 on 108 in my 318 and it gets 10-11" vacuum too, And so it should, not because of any super duper fast rate ramp rate on the lobes, Nor because of any fancy black magic tuning skills. It's just an ancient isky Z35 with some lash.

Solid cams need to be bigger by 0.050" spec to have the same torque curve as a much smaller hydraulic grind, the more lash, the more duration is needed to compensate. If you're going to start trying to compare solids to hydraulics in a thread where everyone else is only talking about hydraulics, you probably should state what you're talking about from the get-go instead of waiting to be questioned about it.

I explained above why seat duration is virtually irrelevant to overlap specs. they're measured at 0.006" which is a lift value where a valve is barely functioning. If you have a fast ramp rate on your lobes that's great and it will help..."slightly", 0.050" specs are popular for a reason.. they're actually useful!

All your rantings and anecdotes still don't change the fact that if you keep everything else equal (no more comparing solid cams to hydraulics, wtf were you thinking?) having longer duration lobes as measured by 0.050" specs and/or a narrower lobe separation angle WILL have a higher more overlap and WILL effect idle vacuum.

Seriously, you're the one who's screwing people up by saying higher overlap @ 0.050" won't affect idle, or that you can switch from a 231/231 on 110 to 241/241 on 106 without losing any vacuum or drivability, or that saying lobe separation angle is just a function of valve events etc.

You're the one screwing people up by talking about how you ran a bigger cam and a smaller cam with the same resulting idle vacuum but neglecting to mention that one of them was a solid cam with lash and the other was hydraulic. You seem to think this doesn't make a difference, If that's the case. you're flat-out wrong.

Like i said from the start. OP's cam has 11 degrees overlap at 0.050". the cam you recommended has 29 degrees overlap @ 0.050"! How can you possibly justify your claim that this will make no difference to idle vacuum? I'm listening.. you have my attention!

IF right at the start you had said you can change from a 231/231 on 110 hydraulic to a 241/241 on 106 SOLID without losing vacuum, then i probably would have agreed with you. But you didn't you were talking about two hydraulics.

 

[harrisonm]

I think I see the problem.
The torque and HP curves crossed at 5250 RPM.
That can't be right; can it????
LOL

 

[frosty_the_punk]

Here Is a visual reference to show the difference between the camshaft OP is using and the cam YR suggested. The triangle shape between the two lobes is overlap. The faster lobe ramp rate helps slightly, but as you can clearly see there is a LOT more overlap area in the MP cam YR suggested compared to OP's cam.

This was done on engine analysis software which retails $499 USD, So you be the judge of it's accuracy.

 

[RAMM]

Here Is a visual reference to show the difference between the camshaft OP is using and the cam YR suggested. The triangle shape between the two lobes is overlap. The faster lobe ramp rate helps slightly, but as you can clearly see there is a LOT more overlap area in the MP cam YR suggested compared to OP's cam.

This was done on engine analysis software which retails $499 USD, So you be the judge of it's accuracy.

View attachment 1714996714

I was hoping someone would put up a visual of the overlap triangle. The bigger the triangle the more diluted the intake charge will be which does cause degraded idle quality and that "lumpy" sound everyone oh so loves. J.Rob

 

[IQ52]

I literally just said in my post above that it being a solid cam would explain the higher vacuum. Your .014"/.016" isn't "virtually zero lash", it would be enough to eat up 10 degrees off the lobe spec for that solid cam's duration. Mystery solved. Turns out you're not a miracle worker after all.

I agree with the direction of the math but not the duration. To get the movement at the cam you would have to divide the lash by the rocker arm ratio. So you're not going to decrease the duration 10 degrees but more like 6 degrees. Already made that mistake for myself.

 

[frosty_the_punk]

I agree with the direction of the math but not the duration. To get the movement at the cam you would have to divide the lash by the rocker arm ratio. So you're not going to decrease the duration 10 degrees but more like 6 degrees. Already made that mistake for myself.

Yes, you're 100% correct. Somewhere In this thread I hastily put my explanation out there without taking into account or mentioning rocker ratio. Thankyou for correcting this mistake.

About 5 or 6 degrees to move the lifter a factor of valve lash divided by rocker arm ratio does sound about right.

For example a lash of 0.015" and a rocker ratio of 1.5 will require the lifter to move 0.010" before the valve starts to move

Since lash comes into play twice on a lobe's rotation, once at the beginning and once at the end. That would be approx 10-12 crankshaft degrees less duration at the valve compared to at the lobe.

 

[yellow rose]

Here Is a visual reference to show the difference between the camshaft OP is using and the cam YR suggested. The triangle shape between the two lobes is overlap. The faster lobe ramp rate helps slightly, but as you can clearly see there is a LOT more overlap area in the MP cam YR suggested compared to OP's cam.

This was done on engine analysis software which retails $499 USD, So you be the judge of it's accuracy.

View attachment 1714996714

Then install the ****** 4-6* ahead. What don't you get? What I'm saying is exactly what you are either too stupid to understand or you don't want to LEARN.


We are talking two cams with relatively low overlap. If you can't make a 284 MP idle and be streetable you need to quit and go golfing.

You still have NOT explained why I can use 255 at .050 and get idle and vacuum that YOU can't? I posted my numbers. It's even on a 105 LSA. That's at least 5* ahead of what you think is the greatest thing since pussy.

Cams have come miles and miles and it's stupid to contend that a ******* passenger car head needs anything wider than a 108 is pure ignorance. And YOU continue to preach ignorance. Youre so ate up by the numbers that you can't see the numbers. ******* crazy.



Now I'm going to post WHY comp, the crap company that it is, decided 110 LSA was the best thing since pussy and it had ZERO to do with performance.


As comp grew in size to the monolithic sloth it is today, they had to do what crane had already done...own a company that made cores. If you are grinding cams at the rate comp does, you can't wait on cores. I don't recall all the machinations that went on, but comp ended up either buy a core company or went into an exclusive contract with a supplier. Now comp had all the cores it needed, all the time.


Since most HFT and SFT cores are cast iron, they are EXACTLY THAT.....cast. The lobes, and therefore POTENTIAL LSA's are already there. We all KNOW that there are times when a 100*LSA or maybe even a 98* LSA is called for. On the other end of the spectrum, especially with the onslaught
of power adders, and specifically turbos, the LSA naturally has to get wider. A mild BB turbo engine may call for 113-114 LSA. I've seen as high as 120 LSA on a turbo alky deal, but it was well over 500 CID.

So, between, let's say, 102 and 114 LSA is where most cams will fall. To make a core that will take that spread is very expensive. And, it takes longer to grind. Unless you are somewhere in the middle. So the marketing jerks got with the engineering nerds and THEY decided for COST and PRODUCTION that 110 LSA would be the de facto standard. Comp had now birthed, blessed and baptized the living abortion of the production LSA.

It saves money because the cores can be made with less LSA split between them. It took less time to grind. They could make bank. Now the marketing pukes had to sell it, and so a media blitz raised from the pits of the marketing sewer. And all the sheep went to the slaughter. With them , they brought multiplied sheep, ripe for the killing by regurgitating this vile lie. But who cares? Money is made, they average guy is happy with "what he has" because he doesn't test, and engine builders are happy because they can stock a few generic junk **** cams and the customer will swallow them down like a 2 dolla ***** on a three piece suited John.

In 2016 and beyond, it has become almost impossible to get a core that will go tighter than 107. 106 is a push. Anything narrower than 106 and you are pretty much **** out of luck, unless you are somebody who is somebody. Engine builders no longer want to spend time trying to reeducate the customer from 3 decades of marketing stupidity. So they give the customer what he wants, even though the customer, most of whom are just casual with the hobby, have no ******* idea what they want, let alone what they need.


So engines are underachievers, and all the fools applaud and say bravo to an engine that is down on power, down on torque, has the torque curve too wide and makes RPM like a flat head ford. Yes, bravo indeed.


The facts are it's not just me bitching about guys giving up power. I PAY for power. It's what I expect. Many people for years have been trying to overcome the inertial ignorance that comp has blow right up our collective asses. It's not just me.


But just like the church of Scientology, it's hard for folks to admit that what they are doing is wrong, at least from theperspective of performance. All leave the religion of it to the rest of the Gentiles to argue out.

The LSA triangle is the single most misunderstood, misapplied and abused function of cam timing I can think of. And that's because it starts with your CYLINDER HEADS. Nothing else. If you can't make that connection, I can't help you. Every single cam event is based on YOUR cylinder heads, induction and exhaust system.

Sorry for the long, sometimes gruff rant. But it is stupid to keep hashing over numbers when ONE guy takes everything LITERAL and types a tome on the nuances of his pet theories.


With that in mind, I take BACK my comment for the OP to use the 284 MP cam. F-T-P says it will never work, so therefore, it is so.


I will go back to what I always have said. Buy a CUSTOM CAM. Don't get ate up by the LSA if it is more narrow that what the brainwashed masses claim is de facto. Rise above their ignorance. The earth is NOT flat. Never was. You have been duped by production oriented manufacturing and Madison Avenue pukes.

It's time to leave the dark ages of cam timing and get to the light.

 

[mopowers]

Damn. I'll take 'anger issues' for $2,000 Alex.

 

[RAMM]

Then install the ****** 4-6* ahead. What don't you get? What I'm saying is exactly what you are either too stupid to understand or you don't want to LEARN.

How does advancing the cam change the LSA and the overlap period?


We are talking two cams with relatively low overlap. If you can't make a 284 MP idle and be streetable you need to quit and go golfing.

Love golfing, sadly haven't been out for a round in a long long time.

You still have NOT explained why I can use 255 at .050 and get idle and vacuum that YOU can't? I posted my numbers. It's even on a 105 LSA. That's at least 5* ahead of what you think is the greatest thing since pussy.

I don't believe anyone is disputing you on this.

Cams have come miles and miles and it's stupid to contend that a ******* passenger car head needs anything wider than a 108 is pure ignorance. And YOU continue to preach ignorance. Youre so ate up by the numbers that you can't see the numbers. ******* crazy.



Now I'm going to post WHY comp, the crap company that it is, decided 110 LSA was the best thing since pussy and it had ZERO to do with performance.


As comp grew in size to the monolithic sloth it is today, they had to do what crane had already done...own a company that made cores. If you are grinding cams at the rate comp does, you can't wait on cores. I don't recall all the machinations that went on, but comp ended up either buy a core company or went into an exclusive contract with a supplier. Now comp had all the cores it needed, all the time.


Since most HFT and SFT cores are cast iron, they are EXACTLY THAT.....cast.


To make a core that will take that spread is very expensive.

If we are talking about cast cores and I believe you were--this is 100% false.

And, it takes longer to grind. Unless you are somewhere in the middle. So the marketing jerks got with the engineering nerds and THEY decided for COST and PRODUCTION that 110 LSA would be the de facto standard. Comp had now birthed, blessed and baptized the living abortion of the production LSA.


In 2016 and beyond, it has become almost impossible to get a core that will go tighter than 107.

Again totally incorrect. I have a SFT Mopar cam here on a 104 LSA. When I inquired how tight I could go my contact @ Comp told me I could have it on any LSA I wanted right down into the 90's.
106 is a push. Anything narrower than 106 and you are pretty much **** out of luck,-See above. unless you are somebody who is somebody.Believe me I am a nobody. Engine builders no longer want to spend time trying to reeducate the customer from 3 decades of marketing stupidity. So they give the customer what he wants, even though the customer, most of whom are just casual with the hobby, have no ******* idea what they want, let alone what they need. Sadly this is frequently the case, but that's what we're here for right?

So engines are underachievers, and all the fools applaud and say bravo to an engine that is down on power, down on torque, has the torque curve too wide and makes RPM like a flat head ford. Never saw a flathead Ford turn 5800+ Yes, bravo indeed.

The LSA triangle is the single most misunderstood, misapplied and abused function of cam timing I can think of. And that's because it starts with your CYLINDER HEADS. Nothing else. If you can't make that connection, I can't help you. Every single cam event is based on YOUR cylinder heads, induction and exhaust system. Agree here but how you have prepped your heads to minimize reversion is not what sparked this discussion.


With that in mind, I take BACK my comment for the OP to use the 284 MP cam. F-T-P says it will never work, so therefore, it is so. Again you stated that the OP could stick that POS 284 MP cam in and have the same or slightly better idle quality with more power. I took this to mean in his engine as is cam for cam with his cylinder heads NOT prepped by you. 2 things--1. It will idle worse on account of the now much larger overlap triangle. 2. It will make less power probably everywhere--especially down low.

I will go back to what I always have said. Buy a CUSTOM CAM. Agree again if the customer is open to it. Don't get ate up by the LSA if it is more narrow that what the brainwashed masses claim is de facto. Rise above their ignorance. The earth is NOT flat. Never was. You have been duped by production oriented manufacturing and Madison Avenue pukes.

It's time to leave the dark ages of cam timing and get to the light.

I think maybe all of this cam talk should get moved into the other cam thread. I may add some fuel to the fire that's already out of control--Good thing I'm a pyro deep down. J.Rob

 

[yellow rose]

I think maybe all of this cam talk should get moved into the other cam thread. I may add some fuel to the fire that's already out of control--Good thing I'm a pyro deep down. J.Rob

Because FTP loves to muddy the waters and spew the comp marketing line this stuff gets out of whack and then people get confused.

You know goddam well the ICL doesn't change the LSA or the overlap. You KNOW that. So why make a point of it? IDK.

But you damn well ought to know the ICL changes the actual valve timing which has as much effect (or more) than LSA or overlap.

That was my point.

Start another thread. I'm ok with it. But I still will say what I always say....THE EVENTS DICTATE THE LSA. YOU CAN MOVE THE LSA A BIT, BUT THE LSA SHOULD COME FROM THE ACTUAL TIMING EVENTS.

And if you think that ICL doesn't affect idle and vacuum, we need to star another thread on that.


In fact, a tread should be started discussing ONLY the intake valve and it's events, and how they relate to the induction system, all the way out the tail pipe. We have to start somewhere that comp hasn't infect with bullshit.

 

[yellow rose]

Damn. I'll take 'anger issues' for $2,000 Alex.

Yup, it pisses me off when someone thinks it's ok to leave power on the table. Every single car EVER made comes from the factory with an ADJUSTABLE HORSEPOWER SWITCH.

It's called the THROTTLE. If you don't want all the power at any given time, use the ADJUSTABLE HORSEPOWER SWITCH.

Jesus.