|
| opto |
|
|||
|
If you had valve springs that were good for 600 thou lift, what is the maximum lift you can have before the valves hit the piston top on an EA to EL I6 engine ?
_________________ I post here cos the russian tank driver doesn't |
|||
| Top | |
|||
| voxace |
|
|||
|
Yep, around 600 thou.
It depends on other factors too though, you migth be able to squeeze a bit more lift out of them with smaller duration, but then that is really hard on the valve springs and seats. ALTED Stg.3 is about as big as you can go, hence the document requiring you to check clearances etc. |
|||
| Top | |
|||
| tickford_6 |
|
||
Posts: 6449 Joined: 11th Nov 2004 |
600 is limmit depending on timming and LSA.
jaysen told me with a wider LSA 600 will fit (just) and i beleive some one has one running. though with my build the wider LSA to make it fit was going to hold the engine back a litle, so i'm went witht the tighter LSA and am building the and machining the engine too suit it. i'm not entirly sure i would like to run mauch more even if it did fit. for one the port flow is just not there at higher lift then 600 and valve train strength would become an issue with that lift and valve acceleration, concidering the engine speeds the cam would be able to acheive... (jaysen if you see this i've got a story to tell about the internals for my engine  )
|
||
| Top | |
||
| opto |
|
|||
|
tickford_6 wrote: 600 is limmit depending on timming and LSA.
jaysen told me with a wider LSA 600 will fit (just) and i beleive some one has one running. though with my build the wider LSA to make it fit was going to hold the engine back a litle, so i'm went witht the tighter LSA and am building the and machining the engine too suit it. i'm not entirly sure i would like to run mauch more even if it did fit. for one the port flow is just not there at higher lift then 600 and valve train strength would become an issue with that lift and valve acceleration, concidering the engine speeds the cam would be able to acheive... What type of LSA's are we talking say wider = 114 tighter = 110 ? Yes / No ?? (jaysen if you see this i've got a story to tell about the internals for my engine )
_________________ I post here cos the russian tank driver doesn't |
|||
| Top | |
|||
| voxace |
|
|||
|
More like wider 122, tighter 118..
|
|||
| Top | |
|||
| tickford_6 |
|
||
Posts: 6449 Joined: 11th Nov 2004 |
opto wrote: tickford_6 wrote: 600 is limmit depending on timming and LSA. jaysen told me with a wider LSA 600 will fit (just) and i beleive some one has one running. though with my build the wider LSA to make it fit was going to hold the engine back a litle, so i'm went witht the tighter LSA and am building the and machining the engine too suit it. i'm not entirly sure i would like to run mauch more even if it did fit. for one the port flow is just not there at higher lift then 600 and valve train strength would become an issue with that lift and valve acceleration, concidering the engine speeds the cam would be able to acheive... What type of LSA's are we talking say wider = 114 tighter = 110 ? Yes / No ?? (jaysen if you see this i've got a story to tell about the internals for my engine )opto.... try typing out side of the quote |
||
| Top | |
||
| tickford_6 |
|
||
Posts: 6449 Joined: 11th Nov 2004 |
voxace wrote: More like wider 122, tighter 118..
mines on 120 |
||
| Top | |
||
| opto |
|
|||
|
tickford_6 wrote: voxace wrote: More like wider 122, tighter 118.. mines on 120 Okay, so why is Wade Cams showing and using LSA's of 114 to 110 ?
_________________ I post here cos the russian tank driver doesn't |
|||
| Top | |
|||
| tickford_6 |
|
||
Posts: 6449 Joined: 11th Nov 2004 |
because they do things differently to the way jaysen does.
i wouldn't pay to much attention to what wade cams do. none of there cams are very spectacular at all, i spent weeks going through cams and using various ways of working out what will and wont work for me. wade cam up bottom on the list. |
||
| Top | |
||
| mrnasty |
|
|||
|
just off hand does anyone know specs for the JMM DEV5a cam? I rang and asked him but he tried to tell me that the way the falcon cams lift they dont bother to give out lift specs cause they are completely different. I personally dont beleive him. I would have thought it would be a decent amount of lift anyhow
_________________ Cougar Zero makes my pants fit nice. |
|||
| Top | |
|||
| old_mate |
|
|||
|
of course JMM wont release cam specs
cos then the likes of Wade and Alted can just go copy them
_________________ too many rabbits in china |
|||
| Top | |
|||
| tickford_6 |
|
||
Posts: 6449 Joined: 11th Nov 2004 |
old_mate wrote: of course JMM wont release cam specs
cos then the likes of Wade and Alted can just go copy them first of all, wade already know the JMM specs. Wade grinds the jmm cams and why would anyone want to copy them?? what the point. JMM have already proven what JMM are capable of. why would any one want to limmit them selves by copying them? |
||
| Top | |
||
| EFFalcon |
|
|||
|
tickford_6 wrote: old_mate wrote: of course JMM wont release cam specs cos then the likes of Wade and Alted can just go copy them first of all, wade already know the JMM specs. Wade grinds the jmm cams and why would anyone want to copy them?? what the point. JMM have already proven what JMM are capable of. why would any one want to limmit them selves by copying them? gee i don't know... wade regrinds = $122 change over. JMM cams are a lot more. if wade were able to release the specs and grind them up and sell themselves... i wonder who would goto JMM and get the same cam for a lot more money. JMM cams cost what they cost because of the R&D in them, they need to make a profit. wade could grind them and profit off them more so then they would at the moment (i'm sure JMM pay less then what we pay for their grinding services)
_________________ FALCN6 - EF GLi Turbo, 20" Rims, Air Bag Suspension, Straight LPG, 225rwkw |
|||
| Top | |
|||
| EFFalcon |
|
|||
|
tickford_6 wrote: because they do things differently to the way jaysen does.
i wouldn't pay to much attention to what wade cams do. none of there cams are very spectacular at all, i spent weeks going through cams and using various ways of working out what will and wont work for me. wade cam up bottom on the list. ha, yeah ok i don't spose you researched that hard then. both the 1004 and 1521a have both been proven to be good cams. i don't know where you pull this s**t from but my god you can't have researched that hard.
_________________ FALCN6 - EF GLi Turbo, 20" Rims, Air Bag Suspension, Straight LPG, 225rwkw |
|||
| Top | |
|||
| Aaron_EF8 |
|
||
|
Quote: because they do things differently to the way jaysen does.
i wouldn't pay to much attention to what wade cams do. none of there cams are very spectacular at all, i spent weeks going through cams and using various ways of working out what will and wont work for me. wade cam up bottom on the list. Whatever you want and don't want must be totally different to what almost everyone else wants. It's been shown on various flowbenches that stock and ported heads usually don't flow much more past .500" valve lift, so going to .600" is just a waste of time, extra load on the valvegear, and if you widen the LSA to clear the pistons, you're simply losing power up high so you can run a high lift cam. |
||
| Top | |
||
| Who is online |
|---|
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 103 guests |
