Eric's cam challenge

[RustyRatRod]

Not exactly Isky had his one and only (catalog) .904 cam for our 62 413 great consistent cam then Racer Brown who ran faster or slower inconsistent
The Isky cam is still good for dialing in chassis and would make a good bracket cam but obsolete today and gone from the catalog

Well where have you been? Glad to see you back!

 

[Hysteric]

As an example of how live testing is important, and doesn’t always agree with simulations……… I think Eric had a video where he had run some of the profiles thru a sim, and DV’s cam came out on top of the “averages”.
In the live testing, it didn’t pan out that way.

It may have been the case if they were allowed to actually tune the engine to suit the cam.

 

[RustyRatRod]

Not true guys I already commented on this
Who made the first DC cams? RAcer Brown?
Even Chet Herbert and Crower had many .904 lobes back in the day
UD Harold did some for Lunati then Ultradine but not for the earlier Comp line The Lunati's were quieter than the comp and made more power
General Kenetics had mushroom tappet cams which we tried to race but got caught, well the caught us with our Engle rollers too
The Isky cam I mentioned was better than the factory 413 Super stock X ram cam especially when switched to headers
The DC cams were not max effort cams but meant to be installable by the average builder and run long and reliable
We have much better springs, lighter springs, retainers, valves, you can do much better than the vintage DC grinds oh and lighter pistons too

Yeah, but they were offered through Hustle Stuff and Direct Connection, too.

 

[Hysteric]

Mike Jones is wrong a lot. That’s just one example of it.

Maybe, maybe not. Have a think about what he says here:

"Problem is, that cam won because it was the best "Band-Aid" for the mismatched parts. Put properly sized heads, manifold and carb on it, and it's no longer the best cam, and most likely not the cam the winner would design.

When I asked Eric about the manifold and carb being too big, he said they weren't because they made the most power with the Texas Speed cam he was testing. That's when I knew he was in over his head. That's like putting in a cam with too much duration, and when you find out it likes 42 degrees of spark, you assume the same engine with a much shorter cam needs 42 degrees of spark."

Lessons learned from the Camshaft shootout -

Since when would a modern fast burn chamber need 42 degrees of timing........

 

[Newbomb Turk]

Maybe maybe not, Have a think about what he says here:

"Problem is, that cam won because it was the best "Band-Aid" for the mismatched parts. Put properly sized heads, manifold and carb on it, and it's no longer the best cam, and most likely not the cam the winner would design.

When I asked Eric about the manifold and carb being too big, he said they weren't because they made the most power with the Texas Speed cam he was testing. That's when I knew he was in over his head. That's like putting in a cam with too much duration, and when you find out it likes 42 degrees of spark, you assume the same engine with a much shorter cam needs 42 degrees of spark."

I get it. But that’s not what the test was.

That gutless clown could have entered a cam. Same as DV.

And just like DV, he had nothing to gain and everything to lose. Yet DV at least had the guts to put a cam out there.

Jones didn’t. He just ran his mouth. The guy is a clown. His lobes aren’t any better than any other lobes out there.

The one chance he had with me on a cam test he lost.

I have never seen a cam change require an increase in timing like Jones is claiming.

He got caught and is trying to cover his ***.

 

[273]

Maybe, maybe not. Have a think about what he says here:

"Problem is, that cam won because it was the best "Band-Aid" for the mismatched parts. Put properly sized heads, manifold and carb on it, and it's no longer the best cam, and most likely not the cam the winner would design.

Mismatched or not it's his job to design you the best cam he can, he don't sale to 90+% of the public that don't have a perfect combo?

 

[fishmens67]

Has anyone here ever entered a challenge, if not your opinion is just that, an opinion.

 

[Hysteric]

Mismatched or not it's his job to design you the best cam he can, he don't sale to 90+% of the public that don't have a perfect combo?

In that case FIX the combo not change the camshaft. Have you seen a cam spec card from Mike Jones and what he wants to be able to spec a cam?

Here's what he said about the info offered:

Eric said he's giving more info, then most people give.
He probably should have looked at my cam recommendation forms.
What's the bore, stroke, and rod length?
What's the rocker ratio.
Which hydraulic lifters will he be running? can the person sending in the cam, send in the lifters to be run with it?
He said the pushrods won't be changed. What base circle are they set up for ? Where they set up for "Mid Lift" geometry ?
For the .660" lift, how will that be checked ? Will he put an indicator on the retainer to check lift, or check the lift at the lobe, and multiply it by the rocker ratio?
Why is he running a 1,000cfm carb on an engine that will only pull less than 750cfm at the 7,000 peak ?
Why is he running a manifold that's too big for the RPM range he wants to make power in ?
Did Eric offer up the carb specs? Maker, venturi size, throttle bore size, Jetting, MAB, IFR, IAB, and PVCR?

Did he state the timing curve specs? What is the initial, total and advance increments?

Why he wasn't sending a cam:

Yet, I watched a 15 minute video, where he promised he'd give all the info I needed, and it was extremely lacking on info.

IMO, that's the reason why he's not going to get very many takers. It's got nothing to do with anyone being "Chicken".
The smartest person in the world can't give the correct answer to an equation that is incomplete.

I wouldn't place much faith in a Youtube personality myself. Mike has obviously done a lot of dyno testing.

 

[Hysteric]

Here's what Tuner had to say:

I thought is was odd he said the timing would be unchanged and nothing was said (or I missed it) about carb tuning. I think it is nuts to change valve timing and not determine if spark advance or jetting needs to be at least examined with customary plus and minus testing.

 

[273]

if not your opinion is just that, an opinion.

It's kind of the point of this thread, Except Hysteric it to quote others opinions

 

[Hysteric]

It's kind of the point of this thread, Except Hysteric it to quote others opinions

Sorry, I like to the hear the opinions of the more educated and experienced in the hobby than the guys who watch youtube videos and reads magazines.

To hazard a guess some people here would like to also. Funny isn't it how those more accomplish people with opinions see it how I do. Its a worthless test.

This may piss off a few people but Vizzard may have done a lot better than he did with different timing and fueling for the cam he sent in. Same goes for the other contestants.

Like I said earlier if Mike is right and that engine has a total of 42 degrees for that chamber type then ***** seriously wrong.

 

[MOPARMAGA]

It's kind of the point of this thread, Except Hysteric it to quote others opinions

He is exhausting, his evc is never

 

[273]

Sorry, I like to the hear the opinions of the more educated and experienced in the hobby than the guys who watch youtube videos and reads magazines.

That's fine but arguing with people with others words is kind of weird.

To hazard a guess some people here would like to also. Funny isn't it how those more accomplish people with opinions see it how I do. Its a worthless test.

No one is saying it's test to end them all, it's just interesting take from what you will.

This may piss off a few people but Vizzard may have done a lot better than he did with different timing and fueling for the cam he sent in. Same goes for the other contestants.

No matter how it's done you probably call it invalid. DV also could of done even worse to if tuned to your liking.

 

[MOPARMAGA]

That's fine but arguing with people with others words is kind of weird.

No one is saying it's test to end them all, it's just interesting take from what you will.

No matter how it's done you probably call it invalid. DV also could of done even worse to if tuned to your liking.

Or if he tried to tune at all. Hysteric only like dv because he's got a dumb accent like him

 

[273]

Like I said earlier if Mike is right and that engine has a total of 42 degrees for that chamber type then ***** seriously wrong.

I'm just watching Eric's video he said timing was set at 30° and AFR gauge read within 3 tenths of one another for all the engines.

 

[Newbomb Turk]

Here's what Tuner had to say:

I thought is was odd he said the timing would be unchanged and nothing was said (or I missed it) about carb tuning. I think it is nuts to change valve timing and not determine if spark advance or jetting needs to be at least examined with customary plus and minus testing.

While I agree with what he said, it doesn’t change the results or the fact that everyone knew the rules going in.

They ALL knew he wasn’t going to change a jet or pick up a timing light. That’s what the rules were.

I’m not sure they even had a curve in the timing. I suspect it was locked out but I don’t recall if Eric said one way or another.

Would tuning on it have made a difference? I suspect it would. Big to make the leap that DV would go from 14th to 1st with tuning is pretty far fetched.

He’d have to pick up power and no one else find any power while tuning for their cams.

There may have been some shuffling of the order (I still haven’t seen the final order that I can actually read) but I doubt anyone would have made that kind of leap with tuning.

I mean you can spend a ton of time finding the actual ICL it wants for every cam but you’d have to assume that where the cam was installed was pretty wrong to make a big enough difference to matter.

You could also play with the timing curve too but at some point you have to say the test is what it is and that’s good enough.

I know the types who think there is the perfect test. That’s a lie. There is always some compromise in testing.

 

[273]

I’m not sure they even had a curve in the timing. I suspect it was locked out but I don’t recall if Eric said one way or another.

It's basically lock it was set at 18° At idle and 30° anything above 2,000 rpms, 4,000-7,000 rpms was being judged.

The engine was tuned with the cam at the bottom of the cam list page.

 

[Newbomb Turk]

It's basically lock it was set at 18° At idle and 30° anything above 2,000 rpms, 4,000-7,000 rpms was being judged.

The engine was tuned with the cam at the bottom of the cam list page.

Ok, that’s essentially locked out. Could the engine benefit from a curve? I say yes, but it would benefit every cam, not just a particular cam.

 

[Hysteric]

That's fine but arguing with people with others words is kind of weird.

No they do it in academic circles all the time. In the scientific community its rampant. Imagine doing research and being forced to give credit to those who went before you from which you base your current research on.

it's just interesting take from what you will.

You can imagine and extrapolate any fantasy you wish from the data.

No matter how it's done you probably call it invalid.

Um....NO, each engine should of AT LEAST been tuned for each cam at a minimum. Timing curve and jetting.

DV also could of done even worse to if tuned to your liking.

Agree but that's not the point. I don't subscribe to DV's philosophy when it comes to engines.

 

[273]

(I still haven’t seen the final order that I can actually read)

If you right click on the images in post one and select open image in new tab there easier to read plus you can zoom in.

 

[RustyRatRod]

Ok, that’s essentially locked out. Could the engine benefit from a curve? I say yes, but it would benefit every cam, not just a particular cam.

Yeah and I don't think it would have affected the winning order much if at all. Likely all would have made a little more power.

 

[273]

No they do it in academic circles all the time. In the scientific community its rampant. Imagine doing research and being forced to give credit to those who went before you from which you vase your current research on.

Lol

Um....NO, each engine should of AT LEAST been tuned for each cam at a minimum. Timing curve and jetting.

I'm sure he would of if you paid for the extra dyno time Cost $2,800 as it is, they changed and dyno'd 23 cams in 3 days. Installed a cam brought everything up to temp and did two pulls then on to the next. You don't have to like it, if it ain't for you don't watch, all these random normal guy's got together and did a little test/competition had a little fun we got some free entertainment maybe a little more knowledge and that's it. Sorry wasn't up to your standards.

 

[Hysteric]

Lol

I'm sure he would of if you paid for the extra dyno time Cost $2,800 as it is, they changed and dyno'd 23 cams in 3 days. Installed a cam brought everything up to temp and did two pulls then on to the next. You don't have to like it, if it ain't for you don't watch, all these random normal guy's got together and did a little test/competition had a little fun we got some free entertainment maybe a little more knowledge and that's it. Sorry wasn't up to your standards.

Draw your conclusions and apply it to your engine program.

 

[Hysteric]

Better yet please feel free to share the deep insights you gained from the testing and how we can apply it to our engines.

 

[273]

Better yet please feel free to share the deep insights you gained from the testing and how we can apply it to our engines.

Never said there was some huge revelations, and already posted what areas I found interesting.

Other than being a Debbie Downer you haven't offered anything of substance to the conversation other than your usual tedious nitpicking troll behavior.