Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

I still have the type Rs in the car now with a 3.0 and HKS GT-RSs making 458awkw and it makes positive boost pressure under 2k RPM :)

Love a 3.0 :D

that's interesting!! That would means theres no such thing as too small duration ( but then again, we can't make bold statement on simply one exemple.. lol). how big is your exhaust, intake piping ?

I see HKS paired their gtrs ( which should flow about 80lbs of air just like the EFR 83/74) with 264 cams ; http://www.hks-power.co.jp/en/product/turbo/actuator/gtrs/index.html

Edited by cobrAA

that's interesting!! That would means theres no such thing as too small duration ( but then again, we can't make bold statement on simply one exemple.. lol). how big is your exhaust, intake piping ?

I see HKS paired their gtrs ( which should flow about 80lbs of air just like the EFR 83/74) with 264 cams ; http://www.hks-power.co.jp/en/product/turbo/actuator/gtrs/index.html

Intake is factory except for the 105mm monster ARC intercooler and twin turbo pipe mod, exhaust is twin 3" with twin 3" cats into a single 4"

Compressor maybe but not exhaust, the GT-RSs have to small of a turbine wheel which means the manifold pressure has to be to high to make the same boost level :(

  • Like 1

Since I'm no expert on cams I would buy one from Kelfords rather than Tomei because Kellfords make a lot of custom cams and if you tell them what your set up is and what you want from it I would suggest they would supply the right gear.

but then again, we can't make bold statement on simply one exemple.. lol

If you know that much you can mock my thoughts and my accent, why are you asking anything at all?

This is the kind of thing that had me reduce the amount of involvement I had on these forums, and now why I am no longer going to be posting on here after this- it's my issue but I can't help but find it somewhat irritating when is a topic which has potential for good conversation among people who have good things to offer, you get mouth breathers mocking anyone who has a different view to offer to themselves... reminds me of the Bedford level experiment, and associated topics. People too often just don't learn how to learn, but instead learn something and proclaim that something as everything using the same evidence which suggests there is more to consider as proof that it's all there is to consider. Listen to Xklaba, he knows more than you - and seems to be be less disillusioned than me. Try and keep a more open mind, you have a shitload to learn... that much that it seems you can't even see it and don't feel like there is any reason to look.

Xklaba, may see you sometime in the near future :)

I'm out!

  • Like 1

That's what Kelford advertise, yes. Do you reckon they are lying, or wrong? What I am guessing from what they suggest in that blurb is aside from being a cammy at low rpm it's likely to have a hell of a power delivery. I haven't tried that exact cam profile so am not going to state exactly what it will perform like as fact, but on the flipside I have been involved with a few cars using Kelford cams and know that they probably know a lot more about cam design than I, and probably everyone in here, I know that their cams have always done exactly what they said they would in the cases I have been exposed to, and they tend to perform a lot better than equivalents from other brands I've seen mentioned here in cases I've seen where people have upgraded to them. I'd venture to say that comparing advertised duration and lift between Kelfords and Tomeis to guess power & delivery would be like comparing compressor sizes between Precision Gen2 CEA turbos and Turbonetics T-series to determine the same.

When you said Halford - were you talking about Kelfords? Either way, totally agree with the caveat. Goes beyond that too, the opening/closing of valves and some stuff you probably can't tell from specs will have an influence on the performance and at the end of the day unless you have some serious experience or at least theory with engine / cam design it's probably a lot safer to take into account the manufacturers description and advice on the different models to set expectations instead of casual glances at advertised lift and duration to pigeon hole cams of completely different brands and designs together... which is a lot of why I piped up in this thread.

I'm no expert in this, but I know enough to know I don't know enough to tell people how cams I've not experienced first hand are going to perform with any kind of confidence from those two numbers - I suspect most others are no more qualified, if not less to make that call. I don't mean that to be rude, I'm just pointing out that it's probably something better to go more by peoples results... ideally with the same kinds of setup overall as you are going to be using, that's probably the best way to go about choosing cams.

Just my thoughts, anyway. I should highlight the "I'm no expert" of course, if there is one in here - this would be a great place to add more if they were so kind :)

Not saying they are lying, not saying they are wrong. Just saying I don't (necessarily) believe all marketing information fed my way. For example, despite all the promises I am less than refreshed after my last beverage so who knows.

Cams are, more than most things, an exercise in matching lift/duration to all the other stuff you have going on (rev range, turbo, bore vs stroke, CR, fuel etc etc etc). A 272 may be an absolute weapon on an RB30/26 but hopeless on a 26. I don't know I haven't tried one. My limited experience was to go from Poncam B's to a 256/252 combination on a 26. Car made less power on an extra pound boost but was quicker. The biggest difference was in the low to mid range. So based on that extrapolating to 272 I cant reconcile it with what I had.

Longer duration move your torque up the rpm range, which is more power. Careful cam selection can get you a wider torque curve which is what everyone is chasing.

My rule of thumb on an RB26 test is how much power is made at 4000rpm. If it is thereabouts of 200 or more then response is pretty good. Much less and it is a bit hopeless. That is with petrol. E85 is different.

The caveat was just to remind people that duration is measured at a small amount of lift. How much lift affects how much duration. Something to be mind full of so everything is apples and apples.

Ultimately if shorter duration made more horsepower you would keep stock cams.

  • Like 1

Some great thoughts on here.

Let's over simplify things rather than complicate them.

A naturally aspirated engine makes its power due to the cam and head combo.

A turbo car makes its power due to the turbo, followed by cam and head. That's where the confusion comes in, another variable, even when simplifying it.

As per some here, I know enough about cams to know I don't know enough. It's full on. To put it in perspective a mate who is full on into drag racing (v8 big blocks) very recently paid 5000 for a cam. Is a cam itself ever worth that? No. It's the knowledge behind the cam. This is a smart dude who's knowledge and dedication and experience is immense, and he still spent the cash for someone else's knowledge on the cam. He didn't try to design his own because he knew he didn't know enough. When he got the cam he rang the supplier (In the states) as he was surprised as the cam seemed smaller than he was used to. Sure enough it was a winning setup that shouldn't have been doubted, although on paper most would have looked elsewhere.

Also As mentioned , advertised duration doesn't really mean jack, and it's the subtle differences in ramp rate etc that make all th differences, which is not reflected until it is used. And who ever changes a cam only on a turbo car and retunes for comparison? I would love to see it but most wouldn't bother, usually it's multiple changes and once.

Edited by Ben C34

If you know that much you can mock my thoughts and my accent, why are you asking anything at all?

This is the kind of thing that had me reduce the amount of involvement I had on these forums, and now why I am no longer going to be posting on here after this- it's my issue but I can't help but find it somewhat irritating when is a topic which has potential for good conversation among people who have good things to offer, you get mouth breathers mocking anyone who has a different view to offer to themselves... reminds me of the Bedford level experiment, and associated topics. People too often just don't learn how to learn, but instead learn something and proclaim that something as everything using the same evidence which suggests there is more to consider as proof that it's all there is to consider. Listen to Xklaba, he knows more than you - and seems to be be less disillusioned than me. Try and keep a more open mind, you have a shitload to learn... that much that it seems you can't even see it and don't feel like there is any reason to look.

Xklaba, may see you sometime in the near future :)

I'm out!

I get the feeling this was a typo.... ?

Judging by the general tone of the post + the typo frequency in cobra's posts

Sooooooooo...... Does anyone know what lift the Tomei cam's duration is measured at?

Advertised duration means nothing. And that's what's quoted....

On the type b neo cam card it has the duration at 1mm so I assume it would be able to be found on google for the 26.

So would I. But I couldn't find it.

Tomei:

Type
Application
Duration(IN)
Duration(EX)
lift(IN)
lift(EX)
Part number
MSRP(USD)
A
BNR32,BCNR33
260°
252°
9.15
9.15
143036
$580.00
BNR34
143037
B
BNR32,BCNR33
260°
260°
9.15
9.15
143005
BNR34
143018

* Type A
Designed to best suit the stock & N1 turbos for optimum performance balance of low to mid range torque.
The Exhaust cams duration was reduced to maintain best idling.
* Type B
By extending the duration timing compared to the Type A Poncams, both response and peak power was raised and these camshafts best compliment the mid to large size turbo charged applications.

Kelford: 182 cam, notionally a 272 degree cam at 0.35mm lift.

Duration @
1.00mm VALVE LIFT
Intake:
234
Exhaust:
234
Timing @
1.00mm VALVE LIFT
IVO:
7 BTDC
EVO:
53 BBDC

Just trying (and failing) to reconcile the two. Just like I failed with the google. Mostly returned Kasabian references.

Cheers dude.

At 1mm you get:

Poncam A

Inlet: 226 degrees.

Exhaust 218 degrees

B

Inlet 226

Exhaust 228

note: despite them both being a nominal 260 degrees on the same lift the get different numbers at 1mm lift.

256 camshaft:

Inlet 225 degrees

Exhaust 223 degrees.

Compared with 234 degrees for Kelfords 182. So the Kelfords is still quite a bit bigger.

Edited by djr81

Any duration at 0.35mm lift is broadly equivalent to the total duration or "at seat" duration.

The absolute gold standard for advertised cam duration is 50 thou of an inch. 1.27mm. Metric peoples like the Japs may well use 1mm instead.

No-one ever should ever ever ever compare cams based on the total duration because you can hide a hell of a lot of duration between zero lift and 50 thou if you have a gentle ramp rate, or you can fit a hell of a lot of flow into that low lift gap if you have a savage ramp rate - and of course you can then fit a lot of lift in between the 50 thou points. Even worse - two cams can have exactly the same duration at 50 thou, exactly the same lift, and totally different performance, based on how rapid teh ramp rate and the dwell near full lift. The cam with more area under the curve would be the one with the shorter total duration too, just to further confuse the issue. The main decider (IMHO) is the dwell near full lift. I used some cam profiles for my ALFA many many years ago based on Pat Braden's work. His were huge lift (like 13mm) and I backed off on that but kept a lot of the savage ramp rate and wide lobe top he had. Took good springs to keep them on the buckets, but they worked a treat. They had less total duration than most hot ALFA cams but made better power. The tops of them were so wide they looked flat, almost as if they had two peaks.

  • Like 1

Any duration at 0.35mm lift is broadly equivalent to the total duration or "at seat" duration.

The absolute gold standard for advertised cam duration is 50 thou of an inch. 1.27mm. Metric peoples like the Japs may well use 1mm instead.

No-one ever should ever ever ever compare cams based on the total duration because you can hide a hell of a lot of duration between zero lift and 50 thou if you have a gentle ramp rate, or you can fit a hell of a lot of flow into that low lift gap if you have a savage ramp rate - and of course you can then fit a lot of lift in between the 50 thou points. Even worse - two cams can have exactly the same duration at 50 thou, exactly the same lift, and totally different performance, based on how rapid teh ramp rate and the dwell near full lift. The cam with more area under the curve would be the one with the shorter total duration too, just to further confuse the issue. The main decider (IMHO) is the dwell near full lift. I used some cam profiles for my ALFA many many years ago based on Pat Braden's work. His were huge lift (like 13mm) and I backed off on that but kept a lot of the savage ramp rate and wide lobe top he had. Took good springs to keep them on the buckets, but they worked a treat. They had less total duration than most hot ALFA cams but made better power. The tops of them were so wide they looked flat, almost as if they had two peaks.

This

So much This

Ideally you should have the head on a flow bench, find out the lift where the flow drops off and choose your lift off that.

Then get the highest/fastest ramp rate that you are comfortable with...and whether you can get springs to control it.

Advertised duration means nothing. And that's what's quoted....

On the type b neo cam card it has the duration at 1mm so I assume it would be able to be found on google for the 26.

Any duration at 0.35mm lift is broadly equivalent to the total duration or "at seat" duration.

The absolute gold standard for advertised cam duration is 50 thou of an inch. 1.27mm. Metric peoples like the Japs may well use 1mm instead.

No-one ever should ever ever ever compare cams based on the total duration because you can hide a hell of a lot of duration between zero lift and 50 thou if you have a gentle ramp rate, or you can fit a hell of a lot of flow into that low lift gap if you have a savage ramp rate - and of course you can then fit a lot of lift in between the 50 thou points. Even worse - two cams can have exactly the same duration at 50 thou, exactly the same lift, and totally different performance, based on how rapid teh ramp rate and the dwell near full lift. The cam with more area under the curve would be the one with the shorter total duration too, just to further confuse the issue. The main decider (IMHO) is the dwell near full lift. I used some cam profiles for my ALFA many many years ago based on Pat Braden's work. His were huge lift (like 13mm) and I backed off on that but kept a lot of the savage ramp rate and wide lobe top he had. Took good springs to keep them on the buckets, but they worked a treat. They had less total duration than most hot ALFA cams but made better power. The tops of them were so wide they looked flat, almost as if they had two peaks.

Thank fek... Someone actually made some sense and got their point across effectively
  • Like 1

Yeah the Tomei stuff reads as 50 thou or 1mm - which goes to show they are sh!t at conversions.

Harsh ramp is a killer of valve trains as well as high lift, just not so much on RB's?

They quote 50 thou and 1mm. They are different values. They know what they are doing ;)

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • See if you can thermal epoxy a heatsink or two onto it?
    • The other problem was one of those "oh shit we are going to die moments". Basically the high spec Q50s have a full electric steering rack, and the povo ones had a regular hydraulic rack with an electric pump.  So couple of laps into session 5 as I came into turn 2 (big run off now, happily), the dash turned into a christmas tree and the steering became super heavy and I went well off. I assumed it was a tyre failure so limped to the pits, but everything was OK. But....the master warning light was still on so I checked the DTCs and saw – C13E6 “Heat Protection”. Yes, that bloody steering rack computer sitting where the oil cooler should be has its own sensors and error logic, and decided I was using the steering wheel too much. I really appreciated the helpful information in the manual (my bold) POSSIBLE CAUSE • Continuing the overloading steering (Sports driving in the circuit etc,) “DATA MONITOR” >> “C/M TEMPERATURE”. The rise of steering force motor internal temperature caused the protection function to operate. This is not a system malfunction. INSPECTION END So, basically the electric motor in the steering rack got to 150c, and it decided to shut down without warning for my safety. Didn't feel safe. Short term I'll see if I can duct some air to that motor (the engine bay is sealed pretty tight). Long term, depending on how often this happens, I'll look into swapping the povo spec electric/hydraulic rack in. While the rack should be fine the power supply to the pump will be a pain and might be best to deal with it when I add a PDM.
    • And finally, 2 problems I really need to sort.  Firstly as Matt said the auto trans is not happy as it gets hot - I couldn't log the temps but the gauge showed 90o. On the first day I took it out back in Feb, because the coolant was getting hot I never got to any auto trans issues; but on this day by late session 3 and then really clearly in 4 and 5 as it got hotter it just would not shift up. You can hear the issue really clearly at 12:55 and 16:20 on the vid. So the good news is, literally this week Ecutek finally released tuning for the jatco 7 speed. I'll have a chat to Racebox and see what they can do electrically to keep it cooler and to get the gears, if anything. That will likely take some R&D and can only really happen on track as it never gets even warm with road use. I've also picked up some eye wateringly expensive Redline D6 ATF to try, it had the highest viscosity I could find at 100o so we will see if that helps (just waiting for some oil pan gaskets so I can change it properly). If neither of those work I need to remove the coolant/trans interwarmer and the radiator cooler and go to an external cooler....somewhere.....(goodbye washer reservoir?), and if that fails give up on this mad idea and wait for Nissan to release the manual 400R
    • So, what else.... Power. I don't know what it is making because I haven't done a post tune dyno run yet; I will when I get a chance. It was 240rwkw dead stock. Conclusion from the day....it does not need a single kw more until I sort some other stuff. It comes on so hard that I could hear the twin N1 turbos on the R32 crying, and I just can't use what it has around a tight track with the current setup. Brakes. They are perfect. Hit them hard all day and they never felt like having an issue; you can see in the video we were making ground on much lighter cars on better tyres under brakes. They are standard (red sport) calipers, standard size discs in DBA5000 2 piece, Winmax pads and Motul RBF600 fluid, all from Matty at Racebrakes Sydney. Keeping in mind the car is more powerful than my R32 and weighs 1780, he clearly knows his shit. Suspension. This is one of the first areas I need to change. It has electronically controlled dampers from factory, but everything is just way too soft for track work even on the hardest setting (it is nice when hustling on country roads though). In particular it rolls into oversteer mid corner and pitches too much under hard braking so it becomes unstable eg in the turn 1 kink I need to brake early, turn through the kink then brake again so I don't pirouette like an AE86. I need to get some decent shocks with matched springs and sway bars ASAP, even if it is just a v1 setup until I work out a proper race/rally setup later. Tyres. I am running Yoko A052 in 235/45/18 all round, because that was what I could get in approximately the right height on wheels I had in the shed (Rays/Nismo 18x8 off the old Leaf actually!). As track tyres they are pretty poor; I note GTSBoy recently posted a porker comparo video including them where they were about the same as AD09.....that is nothing like a top line track tyre. I'll start getting that sorted but realistically I should get proper sized wheels first (likely 9.5 +38 front and 11 +55 at the rear, so a custom order, and I can't rotate them like the R32), then work out what the best tyre option is. BTW on that, Targa Tas had gone to road tyres instead of semi slicks now so that is a whole other world of choices to sort. Diff. This is the other thing that urgently needs to be addressed. It left massive 1s out of the fish hook all day, even when I was trying not too (you can also hear it reving on the video, and see the RPM rising too fast compared to speed in the data). It has an open diff that Infiniti optimistically called a B-LSD for "Brake Limited Slip Diff". It does good straight line standing start 11s but it is woeful on the track. Nismo seem to make a 2 way for it.
    • Also, I logged some data from the ECU for each session (mostly oil pressures and various temps, but also speed, revs etc, can't believe I forgot accelerator position). The Ecutek data loads nicely to datazap, I got good data from sessions 2, 3 and 4: https://datazap.me/u/duncanhandleyhgeconsultingcomau/250813-wakefield-session-2?log=0&data=7 https://datazap.me/u/duncanhandleyhgeconsultingcomau/250813-wakefield-session-3?log=0&data=6 https://datazap.me/u/duncanhandleyhgeconsultingcomau/250813-wakefield-session-4?log=0&data=6 Each session is cut into 3 files but loaded together, you can change between them in the top left. As the test sessions are mostly about the car, not me, I basically start by checking the oil pressure (good, or at least consistent all day). These have an electrically controlled oil pump which targets 25psi(!) at low load and 50 at high. I'm running a much thicker oil than recommended by nissan (they said 0w20, I'm running 10w40) so its a little higher. The main thing is that it doesn't drop too far, eg in the long left hand fish hook, or under brakes so I know I'm not getting oil surge. Good start. Then Oil and Coolant temp, plus intercooler and intake temps, like this: Keeping in mind ambient was about 5o at session 2, I'd say the oil temp is good. The coolant temp as OK but a big worry for hot days (it was getting to 110 back in Feb when it was 35o) so I need to keep addressing that. The water to air intercooler is working totally backwards where we get 5o air in the intake, squish/warm it in the turbos (unknown temp) then run it through the intercoolers which are say 65o max in this case, then the result is 20o air into the engine......the day was too atypical to draw a conclusion on that I think, in the united states of freedom they do a lot of upsizing the intercooler and heat exchanger cores to get those temps down but they were OK this time. The other interesting (but not concerning) part for me was the turbo speed vs boost graph: I circled an example from the main straight. With the tune boost peaks at around 18psi but it deliberately drops to about 14psi at redline because the turbos are tiny - they choke at high revs and just create more heat than power if you run them hard all the way. But you can also see the turbo speed at the same time; it raises from about 180,000rpm to 210,000rpm which the boost falls....imagine the turbine speed if they held 18psi to redline. The wastegates are electrically controlled so there is a heap of logic about boost target, actual boost, delta etc etc but it all seems to work well
×
×
  • Create New...