Drivetrain RMW Cam Confusion. Jan?
6th Gear
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 3,957
Likes: 2
From: a canyon, south Bay Area
I've been away from NAM for quite some time, but being a long-timer, I'll add some quick commentary.
Like "this" or not, such threads have surfaced in the past also, and the essence of those were the same - integrity, not of the product per se, but of the company's claims. I recall heated discussions regarding tuners/vendors where they asserted that a product was of their creation, made domestically, or not made somewhere else, etc. There were many pages of grief and the take home message was that some folks appreciate and even expect honesty more than others.
So, here were are again. Call it fact-finding, a witch hunt, or whatever... It's our Community, and this goes back to even before NAM, when it was called MCO. What I see here is just the consistent application of what has always happened; again, like it or not. One might not like all of the calls (fouls) made in a hoops game for example, but it is more reassuring that the whistle gets blown on the other team(s) also. Sorry, college hoops season...
I don't know squat about this cam, or if different, these two cams. I'm guessing that it/they do make for performance gains. But, as the OP said, that is not the bone of contention here.
If the Community has been provided information in this public setting that is misleading at best, then it would only seem appropriate to address this matter in this same forum where such assertions were made. And given MCO's / NAM's track record on these matters, it would also seem only fair.
Our relationships, at least the good ones, are forged by trust. If that has been breached or compromised, then that is an issue for many, if not all of us. And IF that is the case here with respect to cam claims, this is a topic of interest to me as a potential cam buyer, but also as one wanting to better know our vendors / tuners. I’ve always contended that one needs to shop for a vendor / tuner just as they would for the products they seek; with scrutiny. If the truth can be compromised in one instance, that always begs the question, where else might have I been misinformed.
Carry-on, respectfully, please.
Like "this" or not, such threads have surfaced in the past also, and the essence of those were the same - integrity, not of the product per se, but of the company's claims. I recall heated discussions regarding tuners/vendors where they asserted that a product was of their creation, made domestically, or not made somewhere else, etc. There were many pages of grief and the take home message was that some folks appreciate and even expect honesty more than others.
So, here were are again. Call it fact-finding, a witch hunt, or whatever... It's our Community, and this goes back to even before NAM, when it was called MCO. What I see here is just the consistent application of what has always happened; again, like it or not. One might not like all of the calls (fouls) made in a hoops game for example, but it is more reassuring that the whistle gets blown on the other team(s) also. Sorry, college hoops season...
I don't know squat about this cam, or if different, these two cams. I'm guessing that it/they do make for performance gains. But, as the OP said, that is not the bone of contention here.
If the Community has been provided information in this public setting that is misleading at best, then it would only seem appropriate to address this matter in this same forum where such assertions were made. And given MCO's / NAM's track record on these matters, it would also seem only fair.
Our relationships, at least the good ones, are forged by trust. If that has been breached or compromised, then that is an issue for many, if not all of us. And IF that is the case here with respect to cam claims, this is a topic of interest to me as a potential cam buyer, but also as one wanting to better know our vendors / tuners. I’ve always contended that one needs to shop for a vendor / tuner just as they would for the products they seek; with scrutiny. If the truth can be compromised in one instance, that always begs the question, where else might have I been misinformed.
Carry-on, respectfully, please.
I've been away from NAM for quite some time, but being a long-timer, I'll add some quick commentary.
Like "this" or not, such threads have surfaced in the past also, and the essence of those were the same - integrity, not of the product per se, but of the company's claims. I recall heated discussions regarding tuners/vendors where they asserted that a product was of their creation, made domestically, or not made somewhere else, etc. There were many pages of grief and the take home message was that some folks appreciate and even expect honesty more than others.
So, here were are again. Call it fact-finding, a witch hunt, or whatever... It's our Community, and this goes back to even before NAM, when it was called MCO. What I see here is just the consistent application of what has always happened; again, like it or not. One might not like all of the calls (fouls) made in a hoops game for example, but it is more reassuring that the whistle gets blown on the other team(s) also. Sorry, college hoops season...
I don't know squat about this cam, or if different, these two cams. I'm guessing that it/they do make for performance gains. But, as the OP said, that is not the bone of contention here.
If the Community has been provided information in this public setting that is misleading at best, then it would only seem appropriate to address this matter in this same forum where such assertions were made. And given MCO's / NAM's track record on these matters, it would also seem only fair.
Our relationships, at least the good ones, are forged by trust. If that has been breached or compromised, then that is an issue for many, if not all of us. And IF that is the case here with respect to cam claims, this is a topic of interest to me as a potential cam buyer, but also as one wanting to better know our vendors / tuners. I’ve always contended that one needs to shop for a vendor / tuner just as they would for the products they seek; with scrutiny. If the truth can be compromised in one instance, that always begs the question, where else might have I been misinformed.
Carry-on, respectfully, please.
Like "this" or not, such threads have surfaced in the past also, and the essence of those were the same - integrity, not of the product per se, but of the company's claims. I recall heated discussions regarding tuners/vendors where they asserted that a product was of their creation, made domestically, or not made somewhere else, etc. There were many pages of grief and the take home message was that some folks appreciate and even expect honesty more than others.
So, here were are again. Call it fact-finding, a witch hunt, or whatever... It's our Community, and this goes back to even before NAM, when it was called MCO. What I see here is just the consistent application of what has always happened; again, like it or not. One might not like all of the calls (fouls) made in a hoops game for example, but it is more reassuring that the whistle gets blown on the other team(s) also. Sorry, college hoops season...
I don't know squat about this cam, or if different, these two cams. I'm guessing that it/they do make for performance gains. But, as the OP said, that is not the bone of contention here.
If the Community has been provided information in this public setting that is misleading at best, then it would only seem appropriate to address this matter in this same forum where such assertions were made. And given MCO's / NAM's track record on these matters, it would also seem only fair.
Our relationships, at least the good ones, are forged by trust. If that has been breached or compromised, then that is an issue for many, if not all of us. And IF that is the case here with respect to cam claims, this is a topic of interest to me as a potential cam buyer, but also as one wanting to better know our vendors / tuners. I’ve always contended that one needs to shop for a vendor / tuner just as they would for the products they seek; with scrutiny. If the truth can be compromised in one instance, that always begs the question, where else might have I been misinformed.
Carry-on, respectfully, please.
As a site admin I am given a certain freedom of interpretation, in this case my views and the views of Internet Brands did not meet at the same point. Paul Webster’s account is reinstated as it was, the post has been put back and I have sent Paul a note apologizing for my actions.
In fact the entire way I've handled this is not the way IB would have liked. My views on this entire cam matter including the removal of a previous thread were called into question. I acted on my own without direct interaction from IB. I take full responsibility and apologize for my actions.
I want to make it clear I was trying hard not be biased. I do know Jan. I also know many other vendors on NAM personally and feel I have acted in a similar manner before, however in this instance I was wrong.
My actions were my own, I take full responsibility and apologize to all.
In fact the entire way I've handled this is not the way IB would have liked. My views on this entire cam matter including the removal of a previous thread were called into question. I acted on my own without direct interaction from IB. I take full responsibility and apologize for my actions.
I want to make it clear I was trying hard not be biased. I do know Jan. I also know many other vendors on NAM personally and feel I have acted in a similar manner before, however in this instance I was wrong.
My actions were my own, I take full responsibility and apologize to all.
Last edited by gnatster; Jan 28, 2009 at 12:12 PM. Reason: changed "if" to "of" in 1st sentence
My views on this entire cam matter including the removal of a previous thread were called into question. I acted on my own without direct interaction from IB. I take full responsibility and apologize for my actions....
My actions were my own, I take full responsibility and apologize to all.
My actions were my own, I take full responsibility and apologize to all.
I don't think the truth from vendors or holding them accountable for their actions when they are misleading the public is too much to ask
wow this thread went crazy I think the OP just wanted Jan to clear up if his cam was the same as the Newman cam or different that's it not bashing one or the other. people are to sensitive when it comes to a vender they like who cares if it is or is not the same! just a straight answer would be nice! its a simple yes/no question. and from the lack of imput from Jan I would think that it is the same part. why does this matter?? it dosnt! UNLESS Jan is selling them as a part made for and sold ONLY by him, when it is not.
5th Gear
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 620
Likes: 0
From: San Juan, PR
wow this thread went crazy I think the OP just wanted Jan to clear up if his cam was the same as the Newman cam or different that's it not bashing one or the other. people are to sensitive when it comes to a vender they like who cares if it is or is not the same! just a straight answer would be nice! its a simple yes/no question. and from the lack of imput from Jan I would think that it is the same part. why does this matter?? it dosnt! UNLESS Jan is selling them as a part made for and sold ONLY by him, when it is not.
Well, if you have been around here long enough and/or read through older threads you realize that there is some history here and, even though the original post might be read as an "innocent" question, well, I'm not going to speculate on onasled's intentions.
I agree a straight answer would put this all to rest, though. But sometimes I guess it's just not that simple.
Banned
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 194
Likes: 0
Well, if you have been around here long enough and/or read through older threads you realize that there is some history here and, even though the original post might be read as an "innocent" question, well, I'm not going to speculate on onasled's intentions.
I agree a straight answer would put this all to rest, though. But sometimes I guess it's just not that simple.
I agree a straight answer would put this all to rest, though. But sometimes I guess it's just not that simple.
Banned
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,640
Likes: 0
From: Flitwick UK
As a site admin I am given a certain freedom of interpretation, in this case my views and the views of Internet Brands did not meet at the same point. Paul Webster’s account is reinstated as it was, the post has been put back and I have sent Paul a note apologizing for my actions.
In fact the entire way I've handled this is not the way IB would have liked. My views on this entire cam matter including the removal of a previous thread were called into question. I acted on my own without direct interaction from IB. I take full responsibility and apologize for my actions.
I want to make it clear I was trying hard not be biased. I do know Jan. I also know many other vendors on NAM personally and feel I have acted in a similar manner before, however in this instance I was wrong.
My actions were my own, I take full responsibility and apologize to all.
In fact the entire way I've handled this is not the way IB would have liked. My views on this entire cam matter including the removal of a previous thread were called into question. I acted on my own without direct interaction from IB. I take full responsibility and apologize for my actions.
I want to make it clear I was trying hard not be biased. I do know Jan. I also know many other vendors on NAM personally and feel I have acted in a similar manner before, however in this instance I was wrong.
My actions were my own, I take full responsibility and apologize to all.
Been to bed for some sleep, so really dont know what happened having to do a Hubie and work in the day and during the night as well
No problem though, I have loads of respect for you Nate and have learned a lot from your goodself, and I enjoy your articles (whens the next one)
Oh and I wouldn't want your job (moderator of E & D) even if they paid me
6th Gear
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 2,097
Likes: 8
From: Knoxville, TN
Ok, I'll join in here.
As a RMW customer and having purchased this cam, i did a lot of research , and frankly made my decision based on results (midrange power vs. high rpm) and the type of driving I mostly do (spirited street) and decided the RMW cam best fit my needs. I could care less who grinds the cam, and until recently, never even heard of the Newman.
So, if I was a new customer and found out that they were the same cams, would I choose to save a few bucks and order the Newman from the UK or purchase from a US vendor who will back the product, I would choose the latter.
As a RMW customer and having purchased this cam, i did a lot of research , and frankly made my decision based on results (midrange power vs. high rpm) and the type of driving I mostly do (spirited street) and decided the RMW cam best fit my needs. I could care less who grinds the cam, and until recently, never even heard of the Newman.
So, if I was a new customer and found out that they were the same cams, would I choose to save a few bucks and order the Newman from the UK or purchase from a US vendor who will back the product, I would choose the latter.
I am just curious why Jan has not answered. It IS a very simple question. it dosen't matter who manufactures it.Is it a grind that he came up with or is it something that was already out there that he is saying is his own? I am interested in doing a cam upgrade and have heard great things about his stuff but if its just a rebadge and I could get it cheaper than I would like to know this ahead of time. I just find it odd that after this thread has gone on for this long and he has not answered. which would make me beleve it is an off the shelf part that he is claming is his own design and dosnt want to admit that. I am not tring to start anything just want a simple yes or no answer.
yeah....same here, but this post certainly makes it seem like there's something proprietary going on. I remember talking to Jan about the cam back then on the phone and he told me he was getting them from the UK, so it's no big secret. As for the details of the RMW app vs. the Newman p/n off the shelf, only Jan or Newman can answer (unless someone has an RMW cam and it has the p/n stamped).
As mentioned earlier this is the information I posted previously but it mysteriously got deleted
4th Gear
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 520
Likes: 0
Got the same info from Newman, hence Im getting the Cams from them (cos its cheap ; ))
but will still order the RMW shorty header anyways...
on the basis that Jan has been very helpful, note that he has never slandered other vendors when we're in dialog via email...
(ive got parts like Alta, GTT, GRS, Borla in my mini and hoping to get Newman and RMW to my list)
but will still order the RMW shorty header anyways...
on the basis that Jan has been very helpful, note that he has never slandered other vendors when we're in dialog via email...
(ive got parts like Alta, GTT, GRS, Borla in my mini and hoping to get Newman and RMW to my list)
4th Gear
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 505
Likes: 0
From: Harrisburg, PA
Got the same info from Newman, hence Im getting the Cams from them (cos its cheap ; ))
but will still order the RMW shorty header anyways...
on the basis that Jan has been very helpful, note that he has never slandered other vendors when we're in dialog via email...
(ive got parts like Alta, GTT, GRS, Borla in my mini and hoping to get Newman and RMW to my list)
but will still order the RMW shorty header anyways...
on the basis that Jan has been very helpful, note that he has never slandered other vendors when we're in dialog via email...
(ive got parts like Alta, GTT, GRS, Borla in my mini and hoping to get Newman and RMW to my list)