|
| EB XR8 |
|
||
|
Just wondering what sort of fuel economy can be expected after getting a fairly large cam installed. I currently can achieve 540km per 68 Litre tank in my car (conservative driving) with the 5 speed manual. How much could i expect to lost after a new cam is installed (assuming the same driving style)??
_________________ 5L, 5 Speed, 2.5" exhaust, 17" EL GT's, GT body kit. Pearl Black. |
||
| Top | |
||
| EDXR8 |
|
|||
|
Purely depends on the cam. Most good aftermarket cams available will give equal if not better fuel economy if driven sensibly. GO too big though and it can really affect economy not to mention drivability.
|
|||
| Top | |
|||
| One Drone |
|
|||
|
What ED said, the stock cam is not the most efficient and many smaller cams off the shelf that I know off allow way better fuel economy.
That said, you will only find out after it's done..
_________________ There are 10 types of people in this world. |
|||
| Top | |
|||
| EDXR8 |
|
|||
|
What cam or cam specs are you looking at?
|
|||
| Top | |
|||
| KTASTRPHE |
|
|||
|
You are going to use more fuel if you go for a bigger cam.
but... really depends on your driving style. My cam (crane 286) 'kicks in' at around 2800rpm, so I try to change gears before that and never take it over that when trying to save fuel. I know I have a commonwhore but they all work the same way anyway. I get about 300-350k's out of a tank in the city and 550-600k's in the country if I keep the revs down. If Im caning it, 200-250k's in the city and 400-450k's country. |
|||
| Top | |
|||
| EDXR8 |
|
|||
|
{USERNAME} wrote: You are going to use more fuel if you go for a bigger cam.
Not exactly, larger cams if designed well will provide more efficiency and power at low rpm which will result in better fuel economy. I went from a stock cam with 440th lift 208@50th duration to 550th lift and 216@50th duration and fuel economy was quite a bit better. If you kept the revs down below 3-4000rpm is was very efficient but obviously if you give it hell, it would also use a lot more fuel. |
|||
| Top | |
|||
| EB XR8 |
|
||
|
{USERNAME} wrote: {USERNAME} wrote: You are going to use more fuel if you go for a bigger cam. Not exactly, larger cams if designed well will provide more efficiency and power at low rpm which will result in better fuel economy. I went from a stock cam with 440th lift 208@50th duration to 550th lift and 216@50th duration and fuel economy was quite a bit better. If you kept the revs down below 3-4000rpm is was very efficient but obviously if you give it hell, it would also use a lot more fuel. I'm not sure what spec i want yet but something like what you have i guess. I'm happy to plod along at low rpm when driving to work and wherever else to save fuel, but i also want to have more guts when i put the boot down (obviously i know that it will use the juice when i give it some stick but that is not too often to worry me about my fuel bills).
_________________ 5L, 5 Speed, 2.5" exhaust, 17" EL GT's, GT body kit. Pearl Black. |
||
| Top | |
||
| MrLandau |
|
|||
|
The lobe seperation measurement will give you more of an idea of effective powerband (and therefore economy). Cams with tight lobe seperation angles have narrow powerbands so most standard cams have wide lobe seperation measurements.
Shane
_________________ Weapons of choice |
|||
| Top | |
|||
| Who is online |
|---|
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 46 guests |
