|
Author
|
Topic: Sac And TheBrain
|
TheBrain
I'm the Real
John Force
Member # 35
|
posted
 
 
this isn't the Brain but his buddy who let him use his computer(should of logged out LOL) I belive the 347 that picked up all the et from the custom cam also had a complete engine going through at the same time? also some more compression and a few other things maybe? Brians combo rips I doubt there is anybody else on here who runs the numbers he does that puts even half the miles on the car that he does with the AC and stereo and all the extras. As far as MPH showing potential sure it does but if you have poor traction(a tire spinning problem) then your MPH will go up in the 1/4 mile so what does that show? a poor chassi set up. MPH might show potential but ET shows results. hmmm just think what Brians little 331 will do if he ever does decide to stop using it as his everyday driver and realy gets serious about racing only. Just a little venting for you guy's like I said in the begining this isn't brian but his buddy Mike(2stangs69-91)
--------------------
1989 LX vert 342
11.662 @ 116.65 1.57 60ft. N/A
10.227 @ 134.59 1.41 60ft 200 shot 3600lbs
2003 Ranger 4 door
15.99 @ 87
Posts: 1264 | From: Back in Redding CA | Registered: Jul 2000
| :
|
|
AaronC
¯
Member # 86
|
posted
Mike's 347 had 165's and a FMS X cam before. Same compression before and after. Changes were 185's and the custom cam. Gain= 5 MPH on avg and went from a best ET of 12.33 at 114 before to 11.61 at 119.8 on NITTO DR's before and after.... 1.75 60' times on the nitto's with a best of 1.71. So translation is more MPH = better ET. If traction sucks then get better tires. Traction is another issue, but MPH does give more potential to ET better, period. I was never intentionally trying to rip his combo, just pointing out the fact that custom cams DO make more power and offer better driveability, hands down. So when he started to rip on them as if their no good, I took offense. Since I actually have experience with one and know of others too and the benefits they've gained before and after I can attest to it. You can believe what you want, but you can't dispute the facts. Brian is a hell of driver and no one disputes that, believe me. I wouldn't mind havin him wheel mine some day. I wouldn't be surprised if he got it to run better than me.
--------------------
1991 GT Convertible: Stock 157k mile shortblock, HiTech cam, AFR 165 heads, Edelbrock RPM intake, 1 3/4 headers
12.23 at 112.99
Best MPH 113.97
Posts: 776 | From: woodland | Registered: Dec 2000
| :
|
|
TheBrain
I'm the Real
John Force
Member # 35
|
posted
Mike here again sorry brian LOL a few small bolt on's like 1400.00 dollar 185 AFR heads LOL(I wish I had your money if those are a small bolt on) MPH reall doesn't have all that much to do with ET potential it is a little miss leading. Kind of like rear wheel HP numbers. alot of times the better your chassi and tires work the lower your MPH is. That is just a fact. I am not saying a good MPH is not wanted,but as Brian pointed out ET is were it is at. Unless it makes you feel better buy telling the guy who just took your money and beat you that at least you had a better MPH(ever consider racing at the salt flats? LOL you guy's all have good running cars keep after it Mike
Posts: 1264 | From: Back in Redding CA | Registered: Jul 2000
| :
|
|
TheBrain
I'm the Real
John Force
Member # 35
|
posted
Mike, will you register already and quit using my login !!! LOL
*note to self, remember to logout when using Mike's computer!!!*
Brian
Posts: 1264 | From: Back in Redding CA | Registered: Jul 2000
| :
|
|
Camara90
1%
Member # 134
|
posted
If mph has so much to do with the chasis, and traction why is it even acounted for when trying to figure out max hp numbers on a dyno calculator? Or why off of my dyno numbers was I able to exactly guess what my mph was going to be?
Exactly mph plays a big role in et!
Second of all who said the upgrade costed me much when I sold my x cam for 100, and the heads for a thousand. Damn 5mph and almost 6 tenths for 575 bucks and no bottle refills!! That is power always on demand, at about the same price as a nitrous kit. so lets think, im sure brians nitrous kit was about that much, right? Second of all the car ran harder and the driveability was still perfect. about 18-19mpg on the freeway and 11.6's.
[ October 09, 2002, 08:35 PM: Message edited by: Camara90 ]
--------------------
92GT,stock short block,9:1 TFS 170's,perf rpm,custom cam,1 5/8 shorties,C4 trans.
std. 356hp, 350tq
11.85@111.9mph on motor.
Posts: 2351 | From: 707 | Registered: Jan 2001
| :
|
|
TheBrain
I'm the Real
John Force
Member # 35
|
posted
Mike here (sorry brian LOL)my 69 mustang weighs 3450 race weight my MPH was 113 in Sac what was my ET? just curious how good your calculator is. the brain was there so he can vouch for my answer.
--------------------
1989 LX vert 342
11.662 @ 116.65 1.57 60ft. N/A
10.227 @ 134.59 1.41 60ft 200 shot 3600lbs
2003 Ranger 4 door
15.99 @ 87
Posts: 1264 | From: Back in Redding CA | Registered: Jul 2000
| :
|
|
2stangs69-91
¯
Member # 1951
|
posted
ok I am now logged in so i don't have to use brians ID. Camara the only reason I brought up your heads is that you purposley left them out in your post of upgrades on your custom cam. If somebody who didn't know any better read your thread they might of thought they could get the same results just buy putting a custom cam in there car. The head change you did opened up alot of flow you didn't have before and was a significant change. You realy have no clue how much a custom cam helped you because you never ran that combo with out it. MPH has less to do with ET then you obviously realize answer my question and lets see how close you are. I realy don't want to start a flame war with you (I don't even know who you are ) I just know what I have heard and have seen your post on the corral.
--------------------
69 Mustang on hold
1991 LX hatch getting a make over
1994 F150 4X4 351
2006 Yamaha V-max 1200 Modded
Posts: 3711 | From: Redding | Registered: Oct 2002
| :
|
|
JoeT
¯
Member # 298
|
posted
IMHO, changing headers, heads, and cam at the same time is a pretty significant change. 5 mph gain from that is great. What if it was all in the heads? we'll never know. ![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
Posts: 6785 | From: San Jose | Registered: Jun 2001
| :
|
|
AaronC
¯
Member # 86
|
posted
2stangs- your missing the point. I think your failing to realize what the word POTENTIAL means. Does brian's car have more potential to ET better on or off the nitrous? That proves my point right there! What were saying is that a car that traps 120 can run 12.2 easier than a car that runs 110. So my point again was a car with more mph has more POTENTIAL to ET. When both cars are maxed out which car would be faster? Again we said POTENTIAL, NOT actual. Your ET could range all over the place depending on 60' and traction after the 60' mark. I have no idea how good of driver you are either. If I had to guess, I'd guess 12.2-12.4 with an avg 1.80-1.90ish 60' time. Could be better, could be worse.
About the heads, of course they helped. The cam did too. Why, because it works the heads. His new cam has the added duration at .200 lift to help those heads breathe at the higher rpms. Mike's car trapped the same with the 1 5/8 headers as it did with the 1 3/4 so that didn't have much effect on traps. His best MPH came with the 1 5/8's.
You guys don't even know the specs on either of our cams. I'll give you mine straight from the cam card and YOU show me a combo out there that's made the same power with an off shelf cam that's similar in size. My specs 224/218 at .050, 273/269 at .006, .556/.528, 111 LSA. And no I didn't type it wrong! Where you gonna find a cam like that? Now that cam is much smaller than a TFS #2. Which do you think would drive better? Too my point again that a custom will make more power. Shadetree you should know.... Look what it takes the Anderson guys to make 340 RWHP from a 306.... A Cut re-welded RPM (I have standard performer), a cam of 232/240 at .050 on a 110, LMAO, and every other part in that combo is bigger than mine! It all comes down to desinging a well engineered setup.
--------------------
1991 GT Convertible: Stock 157k mile shortblock, HiTech cam, AFR 165 heads, Edelbrock RPM intake, 1 3/4 headers
12.23 at 112.99
Best MPH 113.97
Posts: 776 | From: woodland | Registered: Dec 2000
| :
|
|
JoeT
¯
Member # 298
|
posted
hey I don't claim to know anything, I just don't see a lot of fair apples-apples comparisons going on with cams. lot's of great all motor small block combos running around here. we should be proud, not bickering ![[patriot]](graemlins/patriot.gif)
I believe jmmclesk is setting the standard in his combo. TFS stage 2 heads, a TFS stage 1 cam, edelbrock performer intake (like yours). 330+ rwhp, and 12.0 timeslips @ 113+ all motor around 3300 lbs raceweight.
what about scott peters in his E-cam'd GT-40X headed combo? 12.40s @ 110+ in a full weight GT.
"custom" cams probably are great. But a nice "off the shelf" cam can work too.
do I argue with the point that $150 for a potential 10 HP or more isn't worth it? absolutely not! I'd pay $150 for 10 HP in a heartbeat! but did I? sort of.
In the end, hopefully some more of us will have some hard data, otherwise we are just opinionating ourselves to death and spoiling the waters so to speak. See ya'll at the track! ![[burnout]](graemlins/burnout.gif)
Posts: 6785 | From: San Jose | Registered: Jun 2001
| :
|
|
Stimson
_
Member # 51
|
posted
Actually Scott runs the B-cam. A big Corral.net no no ![[worship]](graemlins/worship.gif)
Posts: 2373 | Registered: Jun 2000
| :
|
|
FasterDamnit
Bad Attitude
Member # 442
|
posted
Don't need no stinkin' cam!
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
OK- gonna try one off the shelf. Then custom. back-to back. Will that help settle any debate?
JL
[ October 10, 2002, 11:29 AM: Message edited by: FasterDamnit ]
--------------------
'92 LX T5
Looked stock, went 11's 11.90 at 115mph.
'65 Mustang 347
www.fordmuscle.com
Livin' in the Carolina Pines
Posts: 2971 | From: NorCal | Registered: Sep 2001
| :
|
|
AaronC
¯
Member # 86
|
posted
Jim- Just make sure you degree both cams. Your car runs VERY hard with the stocker.
Shadetree- I wouldn't say it's all opinionating. There is data to back claims up. Jon's car has the Track Heat intake (not performer), and is in the 3100's going down the track from what he's said. It's fast, hands down, no doubt. His car runs well because of them awesome flowing heads (300 CFM) and matched intake, so he doesn't need a big cam to get flow. Same reason Jim's car runs hard. A more restricted induction/exhaust car would need something bigger to make that power. I do think Jon's car would pick up a lot with a custom cam with a tighter LSA, tad more duration, and a later intake closing point. Camara90's first setup had 165's, performer intake, B cam. No chance that setup was gonna make more than 310 RWHP with the stock 302. Nate on this board had 165's, performer RPM intake, 1 3/4 headers, comp xe274, both of us tuned by Byron etc. That's about as comparable as they get. He made 320/320. There have been several others with TFS #1/#2/E/X/B/Comp xe 270/274/Anderson's N-41 cams and the same supporting cast of parts as me and make no more than 320. I'm just pointing out the fact that my cam is dinky (drives and idles a tad above stock) but puts up the #'s. Nate's since gone the custom route and I can't wait to see his 342 run on the 26th. His car is lighter and has a tad slightly bigger cam and will run harder than Mike's car did. Actually I'm really excited to see it run. I'm not bagging on peoples combo's. I want people around here to run FASTER. Sawson's said it many times, that Norcal has some of the worst NA setups around. Byron said he's only tuned 4-5 NA cars that made more RWHP than it had for cubic inches. How sad is that. We have a few on this board that run hard (NA) but I'd like to see everyone run harder. Raise the standards. Everyone's goal is different, I realize that. But realize an off shelf has more compromised valve timing and a custom has more optimized timing. Also, it's not all about the "peak #". Customs usually start making power sooner and hold it later giving a longer more usefull power band with more AVG power. I think Jim's idea of before and after is a great idea. How long until you have the stage 1 in? I really want this debate to end because the more we get into it, nothing is getting accomplished. I'll agree that we disagree on philosophy. No biggie, I'm not gonna worry about it anymore. I've tried to make my point and others have made theirs. Hope to see ya'll at the track tomorrow
--------------------
1991 GT Convertible: Stock 157k mile shortblock, HiTech cam, AFR 165 heads, Edelbrock RPM intake, 1 3/4 headers
12.23 at 112.99
Best MPH 113.97
Posts: 776 | From: woodland | Registered: Dec 2000
| :
|
|
2stangs69-91
¯
Member # 1951
|
posted
11.55 was the ET it ran it a few times. There were some engine problems I later fixed. So I just sent the 119 MPH guy back home happy he was running me down but still losing. 60 foot in the 1.5 range. BTW in Redding it ran 11.27 at 119 after it was fixed. I am not saying mph is bad but tuning your times for the best MPH is not were it is at. Tune your combo for the best ET and use your MPH as a indicator of the HP you can put to the track. I here it all the time people say my car ran this MPH so it should run this number. Problem is we don't live in the same perfest world all the HP calculators live in. I drag race to take the win light who cares if the guy behind me is faster unless, I am watching in the rear view mirror I don't see him any how. Don't get me wrong here I think camaras combo runs pretty hard(from the sounds of it) plus anybody who takes a daily driver and puts it in the 12's is fast. BTW you can't realy compare your dyno numbers with anybody eleses unless you go back to back on the same dyno(you should no that) Dynos get out of calibration there are different types weather all kinds of variables.
[ October 10, 2002, 03:24 PM: Message edited by: 2stangs69-91 ]
--------------------
69 Mustang on hold
1991 LX hatch getting a make over
1994 F150 4X4 351
2006 Yamaha V-max 1200 Modded
Posts: 3711 | From: Redding | Registered: Oct 2002
| :
|
|
93PONY
Mr. Valve Events
Member # 60
|
posted
There's a simple reason to go custom.
Most people don't build their motors around a camshaft. The custom grind lets us build our motors then have an EXPERT (which not ONE of us are) design the cam around the motor.
Sure, lots of off-the-self grinds will work, but odds are, not as well as a custom. The majority of the off-the-self grinds are outdated...significantly! The 'alphabet' series (for instance) was never designed to work with AFR/TW heads. They were designed for the GT40 heads. Sure, you may get lucky...do your homework & pick a cam that works great with the way the heads flow, intake manifold volume, runner length, etc.
We spend Thousands on heads, intake, exhaust, fuel, etc, yet some flat out refuse to drop the extra $150 for a WELL DESIGNED CAM made specifically for their motor.
I guess that's why some run hard while others flat out haul ass!
Posts: 4265 | From: Fair Oaks, CA | Registered: Nov 2000
| :
|
|
jmcclesk
Moderator
Member # 1355
|
posted
Aaron why are you picking on my car???? what did I do to you to piss you off??? there is a few points i would like to make. track heat intake, 3100-3150 with me in the car. as for the 300 cfm that is at .600. Since the cam i have is 221-224 at .050 and 499 and 510 that 300cfm means nothing. I think the figure that should be used is the flow at .500 which is something like 250-260 (thats a guess) look on tea's web site for the flow rating. As far norcal having bad n/a combos. I will let my time slip do the talking. As far as custom cams go ask me at the track or call me it takes me too long to type my awnser. Also aaron i think my cam is as small as yours and makes the same power(or close to it) the last time i was at the dyno it was around 335 approx WITHOUT any laptop tweeks. I would also like to see the flow # for both heads up to the cams max lift as well as area under the curve. thats what i think but what the hell do i know.
[ October 10, 2002, 06:34 PM: Message edited by: jmcclesk ]
--------------------
Ford trained ASE master tech.
Posts: 4024 | From: marrysville | Registered: May 2002
| :
|
|
AaronC
¯
Member # 86
|
posted
Jon, where did I pick on you? You never pissed me off or anything. I hope I didn't offend you. I didn't try to, just tried to point out the specifics the best I could because your combo runs strong and is the 302 car to beat. I'm not talking about you when I say bad combo's. I'm talking about all the heads/cammed cars that can't even break 300 and trap 104-105 and run 13.4's at the track. Like I said, Byron said he's only tuned 4-5 cars that have made more RWHP than they have for cubic inches. Obviously you've well surpassed that. I still stand on the fact that you could gain a lot by way of a custom cam. That's all. I think you have the foundation (heads/intake etc) for mid 11's in it, that's all.
http://www.totalengineairflow.com/products/fordhead/ds_tfstw185.htm
Are these your heads? 185cc? That's where I got the rough # from. I stand corrected if these are not them.
[ October 10, 2002, 06:41 PM: Message edited by: AaronC ]
Posts: 776 | From: woodland | Registered: Dec 2000
| :
|
|
jmcclesk
Moderator
Member # 1355
|
posted
Would you agree that my off the shelf cam makes the same hp as your custom cam??? 335for me 340 for you. Is 5 hp close if not back to the dyno i go this time i will put the spurs to it.enough??? ![[Confused]](confused.gif)
[ October 10, 2002, 06:40 PM: Message edited by: jmcclesk ]
--------------------
Ford trained ASE master tech.
Posts: 4024 | From: marrysville | Registered: May 2002
| :
|
|
jmcclesk
Moderator
Member # 1355
|
posted
I stand corrected on the cfm at .500 next time i have the motor apart i will flow the heads to see for sure. Well is 335hp close enough????
--------------------
Ford trained ASE master tech.
Posts: 4024 | From: marrysville | Registered: May 2002
| :
|
|
AaronC
¯
Member # 86
|
posted
quote:
Originally posted by jmcclesk:
Would you agree that my off the shelf cam makes the same hp as your custom cam??? 335for me 340 for you. Is 5 hp close if not back to the dyno i go this time i will put the spurs to it.enough???
That's why I was comparing the whole setup. Your heads have me covered by over 50 CFM at .500" lift and you have a track heat to my performer. A higher flowing intake side will need less cam. Agree? I will have higher flowing heads, RPM intake this time around. Still not 300 CFM but 275ish. The RPM should let me peak higher allowing for more HP and extended RPM range. It's crazy how much HP can be effected if I just shifted the torque curve over 200-300 RPM. HP #'s go up dramatically. It's hard to communicate over the computer, but if you're at the track tomorrow we can chit chat about it.
Oh, 335 is very good. I know there's more in it, which is what I'm trying to point out but it's coming out wrong over the computer.
[ October 10, 2002, 06:58 PM: Message edited by: AaronC ]
--------------------
1991 GT Convertible: Stock 157k mile shortblock, HiTech cam, AFR 165 heads, Edelbrock RPM intake, 1 3/4 headers
12.23 at 112.99
Best MPH 113.97
Posts: 776 | From: woodland | Registered: Dec 2000
| :
|
|
jmcclesk
Moderator
Member # 1355
|
posted
Sorry i wont be at the track tomrrow. but will be there next wed and friday I have reasons why i use high flowing intake system and a small cam. I also think that in some cases a CUSTOM CAM works best and in some cases a off the shelf cam is very close to a custom cam within 5-10 hp with all the problems i had with the TEA stuff i do NOT think the flow figures are correct. I have no facts for this just a feeling.
[ October 10, 2002, 07:05 PM: Message edited by: jmcclesk ]
--------------------
Ford trained ASE master tech.
Posts: 4024 | From: marrysville | Registered: May 2002
| :
|
|
AaronC
¯
Member # 86
|
posted
Cool, I'll try to catch up with you at the track since it's easier to communicate in person. I have never had any beef with you and don't want to start now. I love talking tech specs and philosophies (you probably know this). Sorry if anything came across the wrong way. ![[Smile]](smile.gif)
--------------------
1991 GT Convertible: Stock 157k mile shortblock, HiTech cam, AFR 165 heads, Edelbrock RPM intake, 1 3/4 headers
12.23 at 112.99
Best MPH 113.97
Posts: 776 | From: woodland | Registered: Dec 2000
| :
|
|
jmcclesk
Moderator
Member # 1355
|
posted
Good I will have the blower car out next friday. and i am willing to try a cam swap the problem is piston to valve clearnce see you at the track
[ October 10, 2002, 07:15 PM: Message edited by: jmcclesk ]
--------------------
Ford trained ASE master tech.
Posts: 4024 | From: marrysville | Registered: May 2002
| :
|
|
jmcclesk
Moderator
Member # 1355
|
posted
BTW can we define custom cams???? are AFM cams custom??? what about hi-tec ![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
--------------------
Ford trained ASE master tech.
Posts: 4024 | From: marrysville | Registered: May 2002
| :
|
|
93PONY
Mr. Valve Events
Member # 60
|
posted
AFM does NOT make custom cams. Overpriced bastards.... Shit, all their cams have the same intake & exhaust rap-rates.
Custom would be a cam specifically MADE for your engine. Not one that'll 'work' with your applictation.
--------------------
www.advancedenginedevelopment.com
SCT dealer
Dynotuning
(916)715-7569
Posts: 4265 | From: Fair Oaks, CA | Registered: Nov 2000
| :
|
|
|
Email this post to someone!
Printer friendly view of this Ford topic
