|
|
Post by justboosted on Oct 3, 2016 16:32:50 GMT -5
Obviously when we as turbo ford guys think of cams for our cars we think of the big names, if you will. Bo port, Engle, Esslinger, etc. Are there any off-the-shelf cams worth looking into? When I say off-the-shelf I mean cams that could be ordered from summit or jegs. The reason I ask is because I have a buddy that doesn't want to spend $500 on a cam. I looked at the specs on the lunati 10700901 and it "looks" decent. The lift is a little higher than the 2277, the lsa looks good, but the duration is pretty high. He has an engine management system that will allow him to tune. Normally, I wouldnt have recommended this if he didn't have one as the afrs for such a choppy cam might give him considerable idle issues. It may not be the ideal cam, but for $300 less it seemed like a considerable improvement over stock and could potentially out do the big name cams. Thoughts? Does anyone have this cam that could post an idle video?
|
|
|
|
Post by Stinger on Oct 3, 2016 17:34:36 GMT -5
Tthe "cheap" ones are sliders (which I would never ever spend any money on since they always seem to die with current oil specs).
In general, off the shelf common brand (non-2.3 specific) cams are either small turbo cams, or large n/a cams for mini-stock guys. Large duration typically points towards n/a.
Looking at the specs, it's a slider, has way less lift than the 2277 (.454 vs .489), has a ton of duration (would be a dog down low) and wouldn't work very well at all with a "normal" 2.3 turbo and would "kinda" work with a setup running a very large turbo (minimal backpressure that acts similar to n/a). By large turbo I means something that would support 650+hp and at that point, that Lunati cam is too small to support that sort of power.
Basically for comparison's sake, it's a stage 1 cam in terms of lift but a stage 4 cam in terms of duration. So it would "sound" nasty but wouldn't actually make "nasty" power. All bark and no bite if you will. The 1.9 cam is famous for sounding bigger than the way it performs and that Lunati cam has similar lift but like 20 degrees more duration.
|
|
|
|
Post by justboosted on Oct 3, 2016 17:50:48 GMT -5
Oh I thought that had less lift. It's been a while since I looked at the specs. Alright I'll let him know.
|
|
|
|
Post by justboosted on Oct 3, 2016 17:55:32 GMT -5
Would he be better off with a stocker?
|
|
|
|
Post by Stinger on Oct 3, 2016 18:59:59 GMT -5
Depends on his goals. If he wants to get it to make power at higher rpm it would do that but it would be a dog under 4000-4500 rpm. Of course if you've got a cam made to rev, you need an intake, turbo, etc. that's also sized to make power in the same rpm range or it won't be anywhere near ideal.
|
|
|
|
Post by justboosted on Oct 3, 2016 19:18:03 GMT -5
He's got an hx35 (like me), and home ported intakes (gutted upper), FMIC, full 3 in exhaust, stock head, and ported e6. There's also the 10700503 which seems better than the other cam. Obviously, like you said, it would be better to got to roller at some point, but right now he's got a stock cam and he wants more. What do you think of that cam? As far as his goals he didn't really say. He just wants an improvement that bang for the buck. When I told him what you said about the other one he wasn't too hip on it (understandably). He wants something that's better than stock with more "usability" than the other lunati.
|
|
|
|
Post by Stinger on Oct 3, 2016 19:54:19 GMT -5
When we're talking bang for the buck, the good rollers will pick up 50-75hp so it's not like they only get you 10hp or something.
Regardless, that 10700503 cam is quite a bit better. The only catch is anything over .450" lift requires head machining and someone that knows what they are doing to get the valvetrain geometry set up right, otherwise it will spit out a follower, bend that valve, and wipe out the cam lobe. Also, he'll need new springs, followers, possibly new valves, and possibly new lash adjusters (depending on what base circle the cam is ground on). So he'll need to spend significantly more on all the "other stuff" than the cam itself.
I think Engle has a couple off the shelf slider cams (TC-55 and TC-111 maybe?) that are under .450" lift and are turbo cams.
|
|
|
|
Post by justboosted on Oct 4, 2016 1:42:41 GMT -5
If he were to go through all of the trouble of purchasing this cam and getting it set up what parts would he need? Obviously, springs, retainers, keepers, hlas (he wants to do solid), followers (he wants to do slider, idk why, his money lol). What I'm asking is who to purchase these things from.. Lunati lists a recommended spring and lifter to use. Like I said, he wants to run solid. He's planning on going ahead and having the head set up for bigger valves as well, and wants to use esslingers oversized valves. Would I be correct in thinking that he could use esslingers intake and exhaust valves with their keepers?Then use Lunati's cam, retainers, springs, and lifters? The only problem I see is that he wants to use a two step. When I bought my Esslinger stuff they recommended 330# of open pressure when running a two step. This lunati cam recommends 215# and makes no mention of what spring pressure should be used if using a two step. Can he run a two step with this cam/spring combo? Obviously he can't run the spring pressure that Esslinger suggest with this lunati due to it not being billet.
|
|
|
|
Post by justboosted on Oct 4, 2016 10:02:26 GMT -5
I should mention that he wants run some high boost numbers on race gas (30#) out of his holset. Would he need to run higher seat and open pressures to do this (and run a two step)?
|
|
|
|
Post by Stinger on Oct 4, 2016 11:04:17 GMT -5
Valve length depends on what base circle the cam is cut on. So whether Esslinger valves will work would depend on that. Spring pressure is a whole other issue. As you're finding, you need way more spring pressure than a slider cam allows when running high boost, especially when combined with a 2-step. Did I mention I would never ever run a slider cam? The reasons are numerous... Also be aware that oversized valves flow worse than stock sized unless the head is ported and the valves are unshrouded for the increase. Even then, with non-professional port work they typically flow more with stock sized valves. What keepers/retainers are interchangeable depends on how many grooves the valves/keepers have, what angle the keepers/retainers use, what height the retainers are relative to spring length, where the springs will bind, what the installed height is, etc. As I said, you either have to know how to set up valvetrain on a 2.3, otherwise you'll end up destroying the cam within a few minutes to a few hours of run time. stinger-performance.proboards.com/thread/5330/modern-performance-cam-issues |
|
|
|
Post by justboosted on Oct 4, 2016 17:08:20 GMT -5
Appreciate the help. He's gonna get the head ported by some guy here locally. I helped him price everything out and after buying Essy springs, retainers, keepers, and valves, plus the machine work and lifters he is essentially at the cap of his budget. The machinist that we have here locally does good work and is very cheap ( I know, a contradiction). I actually had him do a valve seat and seal job on a stocker and he did a good job. However, he has very little experience doing 2.3 performance stuff. We feel like if we give the machinist very little to do as far as setting up the geometry of the valvletrain (make it as easy as possible for him) he could still do a decent job. I say all this to ask.... is it possible to run a ranger cam and use all the above mentioned valvetrain stuff from Essy? As we discussed, if he wants to run high boost and and a two step he will need upwards of 300#s of open pressure. This is way more than a slider can handle, obviously. In the interest of making it as easy as possible for the machinist, I thought he could order the .550 tip valves so he doesn't have to install lash caps, just machine them down to the correct height. Also, he would run solid so the machinist wouldn't have to install shims to the lifters. Does all this sound doable? Also, if he runs this cam he would need to run stock replacement lifters because the base circle would be stock?
|
|
|
|
Post by Stinger on Oct 4, 2016 20:43:43 GMT -5
If he's doing the Ranger cam, everything will be stock size (stock length valves, stock length lash adjusters, stock roller followers, etc.), solid lifters aren't needed, and 300#'s of open pressure aren't required. As long as you get over 100# closed (125# or so would be even better) then it will be fine. You need more spring as the cam events get more "crazy" and a Ranger cam is a long ways from crazy so it doesn't need a ton of spring.
|
|
|
|
Post by justboosted on Oct 4, 2016 23:42:40 GMT -5
Oh I figured that if he wanted to run really high boost and a 2 step then he would need to have quite a bit of pressure. Thanks for the help!
|
|
|
|
Post by Stinger on Oct 4, 2016 23:58:00 GMT -5
It still requires quite a bit of pressure, stock is only like 75 lbs closed so we're talking 25-50% more pressure than stock.
|
|
|
|
Post by justboosted on Oct 5, 2016 11:43:59 GMT -5
I remember reading on the turboford forum that the factory heights are 1.512" and 1.12" (or something like that). If he were to order comps 988 springs (installed height of 1.600") would he just have to shim the spring .100" to be able to run it (to maintain stock valvetrain geometry) or is there more to it than that?Shimming lowers install height and milled the pockets raises it, right?
|
|
