Eric's cam challenge

-
Icetech said:
"rip" is relative :) I have bout 20 miles on it... i got new mufflers yesterday, the gibsons were too loud.. it's going ok.. the 318 is a turd so far :) Trans won't kickdown at all and shifts into 2nd too soon no matter the throttle i give it, so something is wrong there.. all in all it's coming along.
Click to expand...
Can't wait to hear how works out once you get all the bugs out of it :)
 
Last edited:
273 said:
Can't to how works out once you get all the bugs out of it :)
Click to expand...
Yeah.. i'm just happy to drive it.. ended up with some super cheap summit mufflers and it's SOOO much quieter, those MWA's were stupid loud.. no droning also which i was worried bout.. tons of leaks in the video though had put it together to test the sound before i make it perm..
imgur.com

New mufflers, much quieter.. - Album on Imgur

Discover the magic of the internet at Imgur, a community powered entertainment destination. Lift your spirits with funny jokes, trending memes, entertaining gifs, inspiring stories, viral videos, and so much more from users like Icetech3.
imgur.com imgur.com
 
One interesting thing I notice was Summits entry 242/251 116 even though cam is in 21st out of 23. It basically made similar power as the bottom 13 cams, they all looked to make similar power and torque. So unless you order your cam from the top 5/10 you would of basically had same power and torque as the others just picking a cam from Summit.
 
I haven’t looked very hard at the results, but my take on the Summit cam is it was “engineered” to be more tune friendly when used with EFI.

If I understand correctly where that cam came from, it wasn’t selected specifically for the contest……..someone had it already, and sent it in.
 
Icetech said:
This is what happens when you work on engines that don't have a purple shaft to choose from... Ma Mopar gave us perfection.. there is no reason to stray.
View attachment 1716320043
Click to expand...
I agree 100%! They were all well ahead of their time! They were the FIRST camshafts ground to take advantage of the .904 lifter.
 
Icetech said:
Yeah.. i'm just happy to drive it.. ended up with some super cheap summit mufflers and it's SOOO much quieter, those MWA's were stupid loud.. no droning also which i was worried bout.. tons of leaks in the video though had put it together to test the sound before i make it perm..
imgur.com

New mufflers, much quieter.. - Album on Imgur

Discover the magic of the internet at Imgur, a community powered entertainment destination. Lift your spirits with funny jokes, trending memes, entertaining gifs, inspiring stories, viral videos, and so much more from users like Icetech3.
imgur.com imgur.com
Click to expand...
Sounds lumpy!
 
RustyRatRod said:
I agree 100%! They were all well ahead of their time! They were the FIRST camshafts ground to take advantage of the .904 lifter.
Click to expand...
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
 
Newbomb Turk said:
He doesn’t get it because his hero didn’t win, place or show.

If he did he’d be blowing DV silly about how great he is.

I thought Winegartner laid out what the test was all about.

And then you had clowns like Mike Jones who bad mouthed the test and everything else but didn’t send in a cam because he knew he’d suck.

And he’s saying the same **** the DV defenders are saying.

The upshot of the testing was because he was tired of calling 10 different cam companies and getting 15 different answers.

The reason he didn’t degree the cams is because most guys STILL don’t degree the cam. They throw it in and line up the dots and send it. His testing reflected that group of end users.

Same thing with tuning. The vast majority of guys don’t even start out on the dyno. They just gut it out.

You can do it but it takes 10 times longer. Maybe more if you have an inconsistent driver.

So it’s dot to dot, leave the tuning alone and see what happens.

To claim his testing is invalid and/or pointless is ignorant. It makes perfect sense when you think about it.

Then you have the “wine and cheese” crowd, the long haired dope smokers and the nattering naybobs who pick apart ANY testing not done with a multi-million dollar setup because any and all testing is invalid.

That just makes me laugh. I get that if you need to meter fuel with an eye dropper or you need to be working out to the fourth digit you need that type of accuracy.

I still argue that that’s still mostly mental masturbation unless they are duplicating the exact conditions in the dyno room to the track.

And, that information only matches IF the track weather is exactly like it was in the dyno cell.

I have watched the testing more to watch the people with no skin in the game *****, whine and snivel about how it’s all wrong and proves nothing.

That’s what losers say when they get beat.
Click to expand...
too much spin here but
DV based his cam on his SBF database, he is currently working on BBC I'm surprised he did as well as he did. Jones is correct on the combo compression is too high for pump gas and too low for E85 Jones did not want to take the time for the mismatched build
BTW I paid the entry fee but could not get my cam ground in time, but maybe if I had know about the substitution rules.
BTW Jones would not have sucked
 
273 said:
Apparently the guy that won used streetable lobe profile also.
Click to expand...
very streetable lobe profile but would have lots of overlap flow thru so maybe not so great gas mileage and lots of ex heat This test did not care about overlap also since running 110 it was low on compression so an early intake closing really helps
great video by the winner and also from 2ed place
 
RustyRatRod said:
I would like to see all of them be able to tune for their given cams. That said, that won't make a difference from 20th to 1st place. He got his *** handed to him. On a platter.
Click to expand...
combustion chamber and piston top was the same for all I doubt that carb tuning or ignition timing would have made much differences
Some competitors have said they would make changes based on what the know now, even as to cam advance which would have helped many but they chose their advance ground in
 
RustyRatRod said:
I agree 100%! They were all well ahead of their time! They were the FIRST camshafts ground to take advantage of the .904 lifter.
Click to expand...
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
 
Wyrmrider said:
very streetable lobe profile but would have lots of overlap flow thru so maybe not so great gas mileage and lots of ex heat This test did not care about overlap also since running 110 it was low on compression so an early intake closing really helps
great video by the winner and also from 2ed place
Click to expand...

Mike Jones is wrong a lot. That’s just one example of it. The compression used in that test should have been done on pump gas.

Using 110 should have lost power but I don’t know if Eric ever tested that.
 
Last edited:
The follow up from Eric hisself. I agree that we’re all winners from what was learned, but it’s probably not very relevant for those of us who aren’t running an LS.
 
Imo, running the 110 fuel opened up the doors for people to get creative with the intake closing point…….. while at the same time protecting the engine from detonation induced damage.
I think it was a good call.
Plus, it was used for all cams.
 
PRH said:
Imo, running the 110 fuel opened up the doors for people to get creative with the intake closing point…….. while at the same time protecting the engine from detonation induced damage.
I think it was a good call.
Plus, it was used for all cams.
Click to expand...


I agree with all that. I’m disagreeing with Jones it had too much compression for pump gas.

Everyone got the same fuel. That’s fair.

My point was and is that’s a pump gas compression ratio. The way Eric explained it, the engine was typical of a street engine. That would be pump gas.

It certainly made the testing easier (and probably more accurate) because he did use 110. Nothing wrong with that either.
 
I understand what your saying, but…….imo, It’s not going to respond favorably to the same type of cams I’d use in a 505” RB BBM with a set of std port RPM heads on it.
 
Garrett Ellison said:
The follow up from Eric hisself. I agree that we’re all winners from what was learned, but it’s probably not very relevant for those of us who aren’t running an LS.
Click to expand...


Ya, it really don't give you much of a lesson that will make your next cam choice easier unless your building this exact engine but even then most would spin it higher than 7,000 rpm.

But if your willing to play with your engine, it show if you fine tune the valve events there's probably decent gains to be had unless you happened to pick the best cam on 1st try and installed it where it likes it best.


Some seemed to have the right ish exhaust specs and made good hp and others had the intake more dial in and got torque but most had a mixed bag of results.

Question is how to improve upon the cams you/we already got ?

Seems to me if we play with the ICL and find what the engine likes for IVO and EVC plus guesstimate the right durations based on what we got we should be able have a cam cut to fit our exact application or am I missing something ?
 
273 said:
or am I missing something ?
Click to expand...
You're missing a LOT. There's a software program called "Dream Engine" It can work out every last detail down to how many ppm of HC and how fast the flame front will travel in relation to crank angle and calculate timing requirements down to the last 10th of a degree. Only problem is it hasn't been invented yet and OEMs have to spend Billions on Engine R&D..........

Oh and a jet change on a Holley increases the fuel load 4%. As for timing I've been told that as much as a 10th of a degree change can be noticeable so if a tenth can make a difference what will 1 or 2 degrees make? People spend lots of money dyno tuning their engines for a reason. What a worthless test.

Funny how the biggest cam didn't make the most power.....It was nothing but a guessing contest.
 
Seems to me if we play with the ICL and find what the engine likes for IVO and EVC plus guesstimate the right durations based on what we got we should be able have a cam cut to fit our exact application or am I missing something ?
Click to expand...

The only way you’ll really know how good the selection is, is to test it.
Unless you’re copying a complete known combo bolt for bolt.
 
Hysteric said:
You're missing a LOT. There's a software program called "Dream Engine" It can work out every last detail down to how many ppm of HC and how fast the flame front will travel in relation to crank angle and calculate timing requirements down to the last 10th of a degree. Only problem is it hasn't been invented yet and OEMs have to spend Billions on Engine R&D..........

Oh and a jet change on a Holley increases the fuel load 4%. As for timing I've been told that as much as a 10th of a degree change can be noticeable so if a tenth can make a difference what will 1 or 2 degrees make? People spend lots of money dyno tuning their engines for a reason. What a worthless test.

Funny how the biggest cam didn't make the most power.....It was nothing but a guessing contest.
Click to expand...
Zero to do with what I said lol

1729980173439.png
 
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.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top