Post A Reply
read DMs/my profile
login
|
join CAFords
|
search
|
faq
|
»
Northern California Ford Owners
»
Automotive
»
Tech Talk
»
JUSTAGT is now DONE with the "Ghetto Tune"
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message Icon:
Message:
HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by AaronC: [QB] [QUOTE]Originally posted by 2stangs69-91: [qb] just a sugestion boy's. Belive it or not I always try different cam timming on motors when I am trying to acomplish something. The only reason it sugested it was if he wanted to bring to RPM ranage down little so he wouldn't rev it so much. The difference is small anyhow few hundred RPM a little HP and more TQ. HP isn't a problem with my 331 traction is I ran 11.1 spinning until after 3rd gear shift. If I ever get the car to hook hard and feel I need a little more out of it up top I won't hesitate to try it out. Drews car runs awsome and I seriously doubt moving his cam either direction would make more than a slight difference anyhow. I have never delst with brian from high tech. I have seen a few FTI cams and for heaver cars he recomends advanced cam timming and lighter it is straight up. This is him not me. Wht do you think that is? I am not nearly as knoledgeable as ED Curtis but if he grinds and recomends this on his cams .... Look I am just throwing some Ideas up that I know work to try and help Drew. Not everything you try works OK and there is not Just one theroy on cams out there Does anybody here have any Dyno results on cam timming changing only? BTW that is not the only advantage to the AR plugs but if a plug gives me two advantages to running it I will do it every time ;) [/qb][/QUOTE]That's cool with the suggestions. Just wondering what your theory is on doing it. You did say you guarantee more HP and TQ by advancing it so I just wondered why. Ed knows his stuff. But if you look around at all the vendors and custom guys you'll quickly see who's good at what. Ed is a valve train genius but I believe others do better cams. Ed says brian's stuff is all wrong. IMO, if results disagree with theory, then find a new theory! Brian's cams always spec out smaller than Ed's yet make the same or more HP and torque. So if Brian's cams are smaller then I'd have to say his valve timing events are more precise of what the motor really wants. I've done a tail of the tape comparisons of several of his setups to the HiTech one's to come to an unbiased conclusion. I see Ed's different centerlines on his cam cards but it sounds to me like the setup just needs to be geared right. Heavy car, more gear, lighter car, less gear. I know for a fact that all the hitech cams being retarded or straight up hasn't resulted in a loss of torque. Dyno graphs don't lie and neither does the track. Drew's setup was made to rev. It isn't easy to make nearly 100 RWHP more than your cubic" displacement without rev's. Drew's RPM potential is from the bigger heads, and victor manifold which is designed to rev. IMO it still made tremendous torque for a setup that's supposed to "give some up" down low. [/QB][/QUOTE]
(
how?
)
Instant Emojis
Instant UBB Code
What is UBB Code?
Options
Disable smilies in this post.
*** Click here to review this topic. ***
Questions/Requests/Suggestions? email CAFords
Fueled by
Ford Mustang Owners
on CaliforniaFords.com