cam swap
#11
RE: cam swap
ORIGINAL: Justabear
The new issue of MMFF has a S197 Comp Cam (Stage II I believe) swap article, just read it yesterday, worth checking out, think they got about 35ish horse, had to change the springs too.
The new issue of MMFF has a S197 Comp Cam (Stage II I believe) swap article, just read it yesterday, worth checking out, think they got about 35ish horse, had to change the springs too.
Andrew
#12
RE: cam swap
ORIGINAL: androdz
Just do a search on the forums a member gained 20 hp and lost 12 tq by doing a cam swap.
Andrew
ORIGINAL: Justabear
The new issue of MMFF has a S197 Comp Cam (Stage II I believe) swap article, just read it yesterday, worth checking out, think they got about 35ish horse, had to change the springs too.
The new issue of MMFF has a S197 Comp Cam (Stage II I believe) swap article, just read it yesterday, worth checking out, think they got about 35ish horse, had to change the springs too.
Andrew
I think you may have seen "pathetic" results from some because cams are still a relatively new mod for the 3v. It takes some experience and experimenting to really learn all the tricks to unlocking a cam's potential.
I wouldn't say cams are pathetic, only that the tuners out there haven't yet learned all there is to know about working with them.
#14
RE: cam swap
Man, this thread was buried.
Anyway, yes, it was on a DynoJet. The torque as I recall was 325 (I can't find the print out). Oddly, the previous best tq was 319 (306 hp), but what it did was allow the torque band to sustain through the higher RPM range, hence the dramatic increase in hp.The car has been tuned on the same dyno throughout all my incremental mods. In any case, it's still a work in progress. I haven't had a chance to bring it back to the tuner, but they've found with other cars since mine that they can get much greater gains in tq by playing with the cam timing, so that's next on the agenda (my car was the first cammed car they'd done at the time.They tend to think getting to the mid 330's in tq and around 350 rwhp should be attainable, so we'll see.
As for tuning for cams, we were all new to it, so initially the gains were "pathetic", but what we found was that the computer was not liking the cams at first, so part of the tuning entailed preventing the computer from "resisting" the changes - I'm not a tuner, so I really can't explain all the technicalities, but suffice it to say once all the parameterswere figured out it all came together nicely. Since then, they've figured out more tricks, so I'm hoping to get it back for some fine tuning in a few weeks.
My original point was, however, that to declare cams a useless mod is a bit premature since they haven't really been available for very long and the tuners are just coming up to speed on what it takes to make them work - you can't just throw them on, play with ignition timing and fuel and expect to see a magical transformation. They have to dig pretty deep toreally unleash these things. While you had very good peak torque, it's clear that by the hp, your torque drops off dramatically in the upper RPM range. My peak torque for now is less than yours, but it maintains itself into the upper rpm range and combined with my 4.10 gear, the whole package remains very strong even past 6000 rpm where most stock engines are gasping for air.
Anyway, yes, it was on a DynoJet. The torque as I recall was 325 (I can't find the print out). Oddly, the previous best tq was 319 (306 hp), but what it did was allow the torque band to sustain through the higher RPM range, hence the dramatic increase in hp.The car has been tuned on the same dyno throughout all my incremental mods. In any case, it's still a work in progress. I haven't had a chance to bring it back to the tuner, but they've found with other cars since mine that they can get much greater gains in tq by playing with the cam timing, so that's next on the agenda (my car was the first cammed car they'd done at the time.They tend to think getting to the mid 330's in tq and around 350 rwhp should be attainable, so we'll see.
As for tuning for cams, we were all new to it, so initially the gains were "pathetic", but what we found was that the computer was not liking the cams at first, so part of the tuning entailed preventing the computer from "resisting" the changes - I'm not a tuner, so I really can't explain all the technicalities, but suffice it to say once all the parameterswere figured out it all came together nicely. Since then, they've figured out more tricks, so I'm hoping to get it back for some fine tuning in a few weeks.
My original point was, however, that to declare cams a useless mod is a bit premature since they haven't really been available for very long and the tuners are just coming up to speed on what it takes to make them work - you can't just throw them on, play with ignition timing and fuel and expect to see a magical transformation. They have to dig pretty deep toreally unleash these things. While you had very good peak torque, it's clear that by the hp, your torque drops off dramatically in the upper RPM range. My peak torque for now is less than yours, but it maintains itself into the upper rpm range and combined with my 4.10 gear, the whole package remains very strong even past 6000 rpm where most stock engines are gasping for air.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Matt's 95 Stang
5.0L (1979-1995) Mustang
2
10-05-2015 07:16 AM