I've used the keys a ton, too and never had one fail or seen one fail. Ever. I agree too that they are not meant to carry load. I'd be surprised if the load on them was even measureable.
That's not really how it works....
Modern engines, my foot. (other than that, DemonX2 is 100% right).
The key was never designed to carry load, ever.
The sprocket bolt that clamps the cam sprocket to the cam is what makes the spinny-magic happen. The clamp load from sprocket to cam is what locks the two together. I ain't doing the math but there's hundreds of pounds of force holding the cam to the sprocket when the bolt is properly torqued.
The keys are supposed to be weak. If something goes south, the intent is to shear the key and not eat up the nice expensive components (although on a small block Mopar you're likely going to trash the valves if this happens).
The key is an alignment aid only and carries no, I repeat NO load.
Well hell, I guess i'll just throw that 30 dollar key in the garbage when it shows up. lolCarroll Shelby's FWD racing teams ran the de-stroked 2.2L's w/o any cam key whatsoever....
I certainly wouldn't do that, but so far, you've not said anything to make be believe one iota that you actually know where the cam is in the engine. But alas, it's not my engine, so have at it!Well hell, I guess i'll just throw that 30 dollar key in the garbage when it shows up. lol
It was a joke. Does this help?I certainly wouldn't do that, but so far, you've not said anything to make be believe one iota that you actually know where the cam is in the engine. But alas, it's not my engine, so have at it!
It'll only help you.
Yes, YOU are beyond helpIt'll only help you.
Well hell, I guess i'll just throw that 30 dollar key in the garbage when it shows up. lol
We ALL already knew that. lolYes, YOU are beyond help
We ALL already knew that. lol
Kitty would drive that beeotch right over the both of us. Then back up and do it again.My wife would swear in court to that lol!
Of course, she'd be throwing me under the bus right along with you so there is that.
It’s just above the crank .I certainly wouldn't do that, but so far, you've not said anything to make be believe one iota that you actually know where the cam is in the engine. But alas, it's not my engine, so have at it!
That sounds like somethin I'd say. lolIt’s just above the crank .
Couldn’t resist …lol
Well, as an engineer, I don't like to assume anything "back in the day." I know the physics didn't change but I wasn't there so I hesitate to say for sure what someone was thinking for the design.That's not really how it works....
Modern engines, my foot. (other than that, DemonX2 is 100% right).
The key was never designed to carry load, ever.
The sprocket bolt that clamps the cam sprocket to the cam is what makes the spinny-magic happen. The clamp load from sprocket to cam is what locks the two together. I ain't doing the math but there's hundreds of pounds of force holding the cam to the sprocket when the bolt is properly torqued.
The keys are supposed to be weak. If something goes south, the intent is to shear the key and not eat up the nice expensive components (although on a small block Mopar you're likely going to trash the valves if this happens).
The key is an alignment aid only and carries no, I repeat NO load.
You said impregnated.Well, as an engineer, I don't like to assume anything "back in the day." I know the physics didn't change but I wasn't there so I hesitate to say for sure what someone was thinking for the design.
We're all familiar with the "3-bolt" cams vs 1-bolt. The 3-bolts were used on the more radical cams. Again, I assume the engineers decided they needed increased clampload for the harmonics associated with the bigger lobes so they went to 3 bolts to get that added clampload/friction.
I'll share this: for the crank damper joint (which also uses a key for location), there are highly complex models/calculations run to come up with a calculated value that has to meet a spec to insure the damper joint will not move. Again, the bolt supplies the clampload and the joint is then held tight by friction.
Some of you may have disassembled a modern engine and found a "gritty" washer between such a joint. We call those "diamond washers" as they are impregnated with diamond dust/chips to enhance friction and thus the integrity of the joint. You engineer things to NOT need them (unnecessary cost) but sometimes field data or a challenging design forces you to add them. FWIW
Well, as an engineer, I don't like to assume anything "back in the day." I know the physics didn't change but I wasn't there so I hesitate to say for sure what someone was thinking for the design.
We're all familiar with the "3-bolt" cams vs 1-bolt. The 3-bolts were used on the more radical cams. Again, I assume the engineers decided they needed increased clampload for the harmonics associated with the bigger lobes so they went to 3 bolts to get that added clampload/friction.
I'll share this: for the crank damper joint (which also uses a key for location), there are highly complex models/calculations run to come up with a calculated value that has to meet a spec to insure the damper joint will not move. Again, the bolt supplies the clampload and the joint is then held tight by friction.
Some of you may have disassembled a modern engine and found a "gritty" washer between such a joint. We call those "diamond washers" as they are impregnated with diamond dust/chips to enhance friction and thus the integrity of the joint. You engineer things to NOT need them (unnecessary cost) but sometimes field data or a challenging design forces you to add them. FWIW
To further that, I've seen big block cams that were assembled without the dowel and never lost timeAnd all small block cams were and are single bolt. Never seen one fail.
That key was a victim of a catastrophic failure. Heck even the cam gave . LolI bought a blew up mopar for the intake one time, shortblock was garbage, 340 heads were good except for afew bent valves, had good rockers on it. Couldn't get the cam gear off without pulling it. A piece of blown up parts got into the oil pump drive and locked up the cam, sheared the cam key and cracked the cam. I dressed everything up with a file and emerycloth and ran it for afew more years, racer brown st21 I believe
View attachment 1716309115
View attachment 1716309116
That’s interesting! Love details like that .Well, as an engineer, I don't like to assume anything "back in the day." I know the physics didn't change but I wasn't there so I hesitate to say for sure what someone was thinking for the design.
We're all familiar with the "3-bolt" cams vs 1-bolt. The 3-bolts were used on the more radical cams. Again, I assume the engineers decided they needed increased clampload for the harmonics associated with the bigger lobes so they went to 3 bolts to get that added clampload/friction.
I'll share this: for the crank damper joint (which also uses a key for location), there are highly complex models/calculations run to come up with a calculated value that has to meet a spec to insure the damper joint will not move. Again, the bolt supplies the clampload and the joint is then held tight by friction.
Some of you may have disassembled a modern engine and found a "gritty" washer between such a joint. We call those "diamond washers" as they are impregnated with diamond dust/chips to enhance friction and thus the integrity of the joint. You engineer things to NOT need them (unnecessary cost) but sometimes field data or a challenging design forces you to add them. FWIW
I still don’t know what “this” is ?I put this in a 360 circle track motor, previous owner had it in one also. Had a victor 340 intake on it and a hole in the block, think I gave $150 for it, which the intake was worth that. Ended up being a good deal. It did take afew chunks out of the oil pump drive gear but it cleaned up enough to use.
They work fine. It’s all we had before these 9 keyway sets that confuse most people.
I’ve used them with roller cams and shifted that engine at 8k for two years. It never failed.