SS MPSTR

Post 'em up. List all these engines you've had so much success with, and developed your mechanical engineering skills on. Prove that your knowledge is more than gleanings from books or other websites.

I think it's funny that nobody else (in the know) within the industry knows who in the hell you even are!

95firehawk

So then name all the engines you have designed cams for that are "proven"! I am tired of all these Keyboard Commandos that have read a book about camshaft theory and then spout off like they are "the all knowing" of camshaft design. I don't see Comp, Crane , Lunati, or anyone else on here giving their $.02. These companies see our cars as a niche within a niche. I am sure that thousands of dollars of R&D went into the design of LT1 cams . Give me a break. You have come in here and offered no real valuable information. All I have seen is you bashing Brett and his father which, I might add, was started by you. There are plenty of 400 plus rwhp cars that Brett has supplied cams for. Thats more than credible in my book. Until we see any large cam manufacturers start injecting their opinion then let it go!

96LT1TX

come on guys, go back to the cam theory, I was learning stuff too. Dont make me buy a book, I cant read that at work.

OldSStroker

Not a Voodoo?

You are correct that this type of thread does bring out some interesting information. If your mind is open to different ways of looking at how nature works it can get you thinking OOTB. Or not.

Sometimes restating points in various ways gets those points across to more folks. We all absorb things differently. The best teachers I ever had could do that. They all also had lots of self confidence as well as ability. Funny how that goes together.

One of the unfortunate things about magazine articles is that the author only has so much space available, and that is often editied after it is written. What usually doesn't make it into an article is the detailed "whys". Magazine articles are written not for the highest common denominator of reader knowledge, but rather closer to the opposite. The article is in there to sell the rag, not necessarily to educate. More's the pity.

I talked with Mr. Vizard a while ago. He has a ton more depth of knowledge than he shows in his few-hundred word articles. Even his books have to sell and have length limits, but he does go a bit deeper than in the mag articles.

I especially liked Vizard's tongue-in-cheek comment on the cam he did for PopRod's "Budget Sledgehammer" SBC. It was short and tight with relatively good lift for Vortec-style iron heads: 224°/224° on a 108° LCA with .563 lift. The editors doubted it would achieve their goals. As you probably read, it blew them away.

http://www.popularhotrodding.com/tec...ock/index.html

Most of always faster's original goals can probably met with some performance compromises for the desired nasty lopey idle. Personally I would have a difficult time selling someone such a cam if it left some driveability (low-mid torque) on the table, but I'm not the one in the cam business. I have been in the manufacturing business longer than most posters here have been alive, and I found that there are some potential customers you just don't need...nor want. Sometimes it's easy to decide, other times not.

Brent94Z

While it appears the "who knows the most" or "who is the best" contest/arguments will never end, the good part about it is that when two parties argue back and forth the sideliners reading can learn quite a bit! So, PLEASE, keep it civil and "adult like" so all can learn

SS MPSTR

I simply asked a question. If you choose to blindly follow, that's your choice. And since you stepped up to the gauntlet, list a single cam he has 'designed'. You'll soon recognize the difference between specifying a lobe and designing one - anyone can specify a lobe and the lobe catalogs are all pretty well documented anyway so the behavior can be predicted. Do you know anything about dollars spent on R&D by anybody? And on LT1-specific cams? Who said anything about LT1 specific cams anyway? Give me a break.

So Big Bert Racing has supplied plenty of 400+ rwhp cars, eh? How many 400+ rwhp cars are out there with 'inferior' shelf grinds or others? Look it up - you might be surprised. He's not the messiah of camshaft theory, design or knowledge - he's armed with a little book knowledge and things he's regurgitated from others who do know from experience. If you're sick of keyboard commandos who spout knowledge like it is their own, then Bret should be at the top of the list.

As far as contributing, perhaps you should heed your own criticism. I've asked a question - the same one for several months now. And the major players in camshaft design wouldn't waste their time in here debating Bert - he's not a player, he's a poser. Besides, they're all in the dark anyway

sandman2100

half the info in most articles. like tv


"WHILE YOU WERE GONE ON COMMERCIAL BREAK, WE WENT AHEAD AND FILE FIT THE RINGS, INSTALLED THE PISTONS, DEGREED THE CAMSHAFT, BOLTED ON THE HEADS.. NOW WE ARE GOING TO BUTTON DOWN THE VALVE COVERS AND GET HER RUNNING. HOPE YOU ENJOYED WATCHING!"

Brent94Z

I thought I just asked nicely to "be adults"? I notice in many of your posts you refer Bret as Bert. This is a bit antagonistic don't you think? You know his name is Bret so please refer to him by his name or screen name in the future. The constant bickering gets a bit old.

SStrokerAce

Well at least someone is arguing the point not name calling like a 14year old who just learned his first swear words
Brent thanks for the interjection of civility to this. I'm trying to behave but once a little kid throws a hissy fit sometimes the only solution is to get on their level.

thesound,

Let's get back to where you started from:

To which I said:


I said that because I know that duration and LSA make overlap, obviously. Let's not work on camshaft basics 101 here.... I'm talking beyond that. I'm talking around the same lines as what you are reading from Vizzard. He has some great points but as the old man said... he can't say everything that is needed in a couple pages in a magazine article. Hence what we have here, more nitty gritty for FREE!! (which is the reason I left LS1tech and they "banned" me to save face, errr ego , but this is a whole different story.)

What I took from your first statement is that larger overlap only happens with large durations, and hence you are relating large overlap to killing low end TQ. That's what I was correcting you on. If you THINK about what I said, I'm directly relating DURATION to loss of low end TQ, when I say EVO and IVC are more important to that situation.


To me the "overlap triangle" is about 90% the function of the IVO and EVC and 10% a function of the ramps on the lobe. You over complicate it by bringing in the other valve events by using lift, duration and LSA when all though they are interconnected they are not the "OVERLAP triangle".

I really hate going back to say the same thing. I realize you didn't get what I said on the first read thru, but that doesn't mean you should argue the point more and more too fulfill Twains saying. You have the right line of thinking... just spend more time on the thinking! Think about it for a few minutes and realize what I said and this whole discussion would all be a LOT shorter. Too much of our society is about the response, rather than sitting back taking a moment and coming up with something to add to the discussion rather than adding more content to it.


Yes those variables are locked in, but if you don't look at those then you can't get where you need to be in terms of the proper, overlap, durations and in the end VALVE EVENTS. There is no big mystery but NOBODY has built a "shelf" cam that solves the mystery yet. That's my point.

Agreed 13° @ .050" will be the major reason for the idle of the CC306. All that means is between the IVO and EVC events there is that much time (duration) that's all, that's not the only two camshaft events.

I don't agree that the overlap is the ONLY thing that changes the cams operating range. In fact I've done some extremely small cams for trucks that work in durations under 210° @ .050" and I can change the overlap 11° @ .050" and completely change the TQ curve of the motor but keep the same durations AND operating range. One cam will have more TQ off idle and more average TQ the other cam is completely opposite and have more peak HP and more average HP. The point is there is no set rule that says you need xxx amount of overlap to do something, or it sets the operating range and peaks. There are lots of situations out there that will change that rule, so to me it's not set in stone enough to spout as the bible. It's a generality that's not 100%. I'm not saying you are wrong, but your not right 100% of the time either.

Why not do both? ;-) You wonder why I mention the EVO and IVC valve events..... there ya go?

Problem is when you are playing in no mans land you can be off big when you do something wrong like trying too much overlap and not enough duration in the wrong places. I'm telling you if you do all of this right you can flat out make more AVERAGE TQ and HP (usually peaks too) and have a killer idle with low RPM output that you want. I've been doing this for years!

Bret

ZL1modified

anyway, what cam should Always Faster go with?

there has to be a best for any situation...
so whats the best for him... i could care less about who knows the most...

just help the guy out...

jsetzer

Ill dig up my dyno sheet but on stock heads the cc306 doesn't have to spin to the moon.

I know I was overspinning mine, peak was pretty low.

SStrokerAce

Stock LT1 heads almost always limit the HP peak to 6200-6300rpm anyways, it's what you do up to that point is what counts.

ABA383

I still think the above cams are worth a good look at...^^^...Now back to our regularly scheduled debate....

--still Alan

OldSStroker

always could talk directly to whomever he wants to buy the cam from. That would help him out and give him a reasonable idea of what kind of lope, idle vacuum (which wasn't in his criteria, but will be important to him) as well as torque and power to expect with his particular combination.

Do I think Bret is going to quote the specs needed to order the cam in this thread? "Not hardly!" (to quote the Duke). Most folks who spec cams (very few of whom design new lobe profiles for this kind of cam, even if they have the mega$ software which make the calculations doable) aren't going to give out the specs needed to buy the cam. Even the guy who charges you $25 or whatever to "spec" your cam probably won't reveal the specs on the forum. I'd feel cheated if I paid $25 for the info then saw it published. Then again, actually doing the work to spec a cam that balances all of always' wants is more time consuming than $25 buys.

Perhaps all of the camtalk actually helps always out making his decision. We won't know unless he reveals which/whose cam he bought. He might decide to keep the source a secret for reasons of his own, like not having every other swingin' Richard with a similar car sound/perform the same as his.

SS MPSTR

antagonistic? perhaps, but it appears they've embraced it

There is no bickering, just a question that never gets answered. Brent, I honestly answered the reply above yours and walked away from the computer without reading your reply. Sometimes I type fast and get the 'e' and 'r' in the wrong locations. At least I do spell it with one 't' like it's supposed to be.