Cam Phasing

-
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.


Yup. 100% true.

If anyone is familiar with a Milodon or similar gear drive there is no keyway to time the cam.

I bought an ignition for a dirt bike I had. The rotor didn’t have a key slot in it.

The factories use stuff like that so they can slam that **** together.
 
Carroll Shelby's FWD racing teams ran the de-stroked 2.2L's w/o any cam key whatsoever....
 
Well hell, I guess i'll just throw that 30 dollar key in the garbage when it shows up. lol
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!
 
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 was a joke. Does this help?

20240926_143836.jpg
 
Well hell, I guess i'll just throw that 30 dollar key in the garbage when it shows up. lol
:lol:
Nah, get Your money's worth out of it!!
Locking cam & crank in place while tightening was probably facilitated by purpose made tools & practice, but they claimed it gave them flexibility, and saved a bunch of time.
All the Ford DOHC Z-tech etc. engines use no dowels or keys on the cams, they use an alignment bar that slides into slots cut into the tail end of each cam, and a screw/pin to lock the crank.
 
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.
Kitty would drive that beeotch right over the both of us. Then back up and do it again.
 
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’s just above the crank .

Couldn’t resist …lol
 
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, 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
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


And all small block cams were and are single bolt. Never seen one fail.
 
I 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

20240928_165017.jpg


20240928_165008.jpg
 
I 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 key was a victim of a catastrophic failure. Heck even the cam gave . Lol

When you say you “ran it “ another few years… what was “it” ?
 
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
That’s interesting! Love details like that .
 
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.
 
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.
I still don’t know what “this” is ?
You said the block and cam were trashed.
Was “it” the intake ?

Not trying to be snarky ….

Were the crank and rods still good ?

No way I would have run the intermediate shaft ( oil pump drive ). You lucked out there.
 
I ran this camshaft and its solid lifters in another motor. Block, crank , acouple of the rods and pistons were junk. I should have been clearer. Came out of a friends circle track motor that he blew and was tired of it taking up space, he told me what was in it but never minded to tear it apart.. so I took a chance.
 
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.

Me too. Had a key in my W5 motor with a 273/280@50 roller. Ran it lots for years. Zero issues.74-7500 at the big end every pass
 
-
Back
Top