Drivetrain Camshaft Re-Grind
4th Gear
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 510
Likes: 0
From: Orange Park, Fl.
A few words about the NS2 cam, the performance design of this cam is narrowly focused, it is intended to make the most out of a highly modified head, intake & exhaust system, enhanced fueling capabilities, high rpm usage, and tune dedicated that configuration. Comparing an NS2 and NS1 on the same hardware & software configuration is missing the point. A dedicated tune for the NS2 cam is required to make the most of its capabilities more so than the NS1.
I'm sure most agree with that..!! I have the cams.. and will run BOTH to see!! but yes.. the TUNE will be the key for any major power gains.... Just like when we had carbs and distributors.. Modify... TUNE!! Modify again.. Tune again!! Yes?
Just me............................
Thumper
4th Gear
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 510
Likes: 0
From: Orange Park, Fl.
And here we are mod'ing a FWD!! LOL
Just me.........................................
Thumper
4th Gear
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 520
Likes: 0
My Performance Cylinder Head and Cam will be coming very soon...Then finally larger Injectors and a Remote Custom Tune...
Will update on what sorta power/torque this will get me...but Im sure this will be enough for a DD yes?
Im on 238BHP & 179Lbs/Ft at the moment (with meth) I dunno what that translates to WHP & WTorque...BUT THIS IS WITH STOCK TUNE and STOCK INJECTORS....
My Performance Cylinder Head and Cam will be coming very soon...Then finally larger Injectors and a Remote Custom Tune...
Will update on what sorta power/torque this will get me...but I'm sure this will be enough for a DD yes?
My Performance Cylinder Head and Cam will be coming very soon...Then finally larger Injectors and a Remote Custom Tune...
Will update on what sorta power/torque this will get me...but I'm sure this will be enough for a DD yes?
LB
4th Gear
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 520
Likes: 0
hahahah..well guys, its just numbers anyways....dont really care bout it...but I do care bout the delta thou...
Mine was done on a low reading Dyno Dynamics Chassis Dyno - Hood Down/Standard Fan blowing over radiator/ 35deg C amb temp /97% humidity
yet my car still produced these numbers..pretty good IMO
Mine was done on a low reading Dyno Dynamics Chassis Dyno - Hood Down/Standard Fan blowing over radiator/ 35deg C amb temp /97% humidity
yet my car still produced these numbers..pretty good IMO
6th Gear
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,244
Likes: 0
From: Speedway
Using the above card and referencing the posted comment about rocker arm ratios between Newman and Nitrostick and comparing the two-
Some edamucation resources I found useful:
Cam Terminology for Idiots
Cam lobe vs Valve duration
Don't be a guinea and not read both in entirety. There is some good stuff in there that makes everyone on here look stupid (me too, but less so since I did the research to get to this point). We are quite naive as a community.
Things to understand from the above
Apples to Apples
The above Nitrostick card is 176/188 @ .050. The "advertised" 264/272 measures valve lifts using (RAR) as influence. Coincidently, its even labeled "Advertised Camshaft Specifications."
To compare the Newman offerings, call Newman and ask what the duration is at .050. (the website gives "advertised" @ valve lift w/ RAR ). While you're at it, ask about lobe seperation too (see first link terms). Maybe RMW's a standup guy and will post 'em for us.
Example: I found specs for a "Race Cam" that meausured 221/217 @ .050 and a "Street Cam" that advertised 260 duration (unknown lift/RAR/ @ .050) but advertises it also retains the stock valvetrain. My research told me I would need to improve the springs and increase compression for the "Race Cam" (using other info from the card - do your own research, stupid) so the street cam is obiviously using misleading measurements to appear bigger. Using the 264/272 (NS1?), would I need to upgrade the valve train? With just that information the cam looks like a freakin rocket ship to heaven (come to Jesus) compared to the "Race Cam" I mentioned earlier. But measuring from .050 shows a different perspective on a levelized field.
Soapbox:
I can see the benefits in asking for dyno sheets to prove the performance. Its shows the designer did their homework (remember, we're stupid and can't do our own homework) and it provides an example of what (x) upgrade can potentially achieve. BUT, what is overlooked is the variables uncontrollable in and surrounding the dyno make it useless for comparison. Different upgrades, temperatures, barameteric pressures, heat soak, clutch wear, tires (if not an engine dyno), tie-downs pressing the tires to the rollers - just to name a few.
The links I provided above and a little investigative work on the part of the individual (not just stupid, but stupid and lazy) will give you the infomation you need to determine how the cam will perform without actually putting it in your engine. OMG, an educated decision - someone call Christ.
I'm unbiased between Newman and Crower and am building to suit my own specific needs (FWD can't pop wheelies so why try). I hope the information I've provided helps others make an informed desicion.
Some edamucation resources I found useful:
Cam Terminology for Idiots
Cam lobe vs Valve duration
Don't be a guinea and not read both in entirety. There is some good stuff in there that makes everyone on here look stupid (me too, but less so since I did the research to get to this point). We are quite naive as a community.
Things to understand from the above
- Advertised Duration @ (x) Lift vs. Actual Duration @ .050 (.050 is industry standard)
- Two methods to meause lift:
- at the valve (industry standard since RAR is controlled by the manufacturer to hide 'secrets' that aren't really)
- at the cam lobe (tells the truth without divulging lobe areas)
- Rocker Arm Ratio (RAR) effects on lift (1.50 is RAR industry standard)
- Durations/Lift/Separation effects on powerband <- don't be stupid about it (be realistic); this is important and won't make you a horse's a5s on the dyno or your car a dung pile to commute.
"advertised durations" are useless since you can't tell if one cam is bigger than the other if the reference point (where they take the measurement for cam duration along the valve lift) isn't the same for everyone. You can choose a point that makes your cam look big (namely advertised duration).
The above Nitrostick card is 176/188 @ .050. The "advertised" 264/272 measures valve lifts using (RAR) as influence. Coincidently, its even labeled "Advertised Camshaft Specifications."
To compare the Newman offerings, call Newman and ask what the duration is at .050. (the website gives "advertised" @ valve lift w/ RAR ). While you're at it, ask about lobe seperation too (see first link terms). Maybe RMW's a standup guy and will post 'em for us.
Example: I found specs for a "Race Cam" that meausured 221/217 @ .050 and a "Street Cam" that advertised 260 duration (unknown lift/RAR/ @ .050) but advertises it also retains the stock valvetrain. My research told me I would need to improve the springs and increase compression for the "Race Cam" (using other info from the card - do your own research, stupid) so the street cam is obiviously using misleading measurements to appear bigger. Using the 264/272 (NS1?), would I need to upgrade the valve train? With just that information the cam looks like a freakin rocket ship to heaven (come to Jesus) compared to the "Race Cam" I mentioned earlier. But measuring from .050 shows a different perspective on a levelized field.
Soapbox:
I can see the benefits in asking for dyno sheets to prove the performance. Its shows the designer did their homework (remember, we're stupid and can't do our own homework) and it provides an example of what (x) upgrade can potentially achieve. BUT, what is overlooked is the variables uncontrollable in and surrounding the dyno make it useless for comparison. Different upgrades, temperatures, barameteric pressures, heat soak, clutch wear, tires (if not an engine dyno), tie-downs pressing the tires to the rollers - just to name a few.
The links I provided above and a little investigative work on the part of the individual (not just stupid, but stupid and lazy) will give you the infomation you need to determine how the cam will perform without actually putting it in your engine. OMG, an educated decision - someone call Christ.
I'm unbiased between Newman and Crower and am building to suit my own specific needs (FWD can't pop wheelies so why try). I hope the information I've provided helps others make an informed desicion.
Last edited by goin440; Jul 19, 2009 at 07:21 AM. Reason: can't type, guess I'm a dummy
4th Gear
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 510
Likes: 0
From: Orange Park, Fl.
Basic .. Lift numbers:
LOBE Lift
.214 int
.232 exh
Lift at the Valve
.342 int.
.328 exh
Duration at .050
176* int
188* exh
LSA
114*
ICL
110*
Stock springs and retainers.
Newman cam.. I can not find all the specs from my notes
Lift at the valve
399 int
397 exh
ICL is 100*
duration numbers I cant find...
Have fun...
Just me..................
Thumper
LOBE Lift
.214 int
.232 exh
Lift at the Valve
.342 int.
.328 exh
Duration at .050
176* int
188* exh
LSA
114*
ICL
110*
Stock springs and retainers.
Newman cam.. I can not find all the specs from my notes
Lift at the valve
399 int
397 exh
ICL is 100*
duration numbers I cant find...
Have fun...
Just me..................
Thumper
I am sure as more cam become available.. the specs will be essayer to understand...!!
SOOOOoooo.... "Going440" has just verified what was said earlier.. this is also why the CAM CARD is all important!! In the "Prove it", on this site, it seems that some times the people running the cam, Or the people that DYNO the cam, are totally not BELIEVED!!. Having the cam card, and (MOST IMPORTANT) understanding the cam card is important!! You DO need to know the rocker ratio.. for the max lift at the valve!! You DO to know the LOBE lift!! You DO need the duration at .050 ( using US specs) along with other KEY specs to compare CAM "Numbers" against each other. YES??
IF you DONT understand the specs on the cam, the only other way, is to listen to the guys running the cam you are interested in, and stepping up and TRY IT!! Believe me guys... there are a LOT of guys in the V8's and other engines that have NO IDEA on what the actual cam specs are... and they swear by their cam!! Dealing with the SB Ford, and building Performance engines, ya'll would be amazed at the cams available and the NUMBERS that are available.. and yet MOST will STILL run what someone else is having good results with.. and DONT know the first thing on "Specs"
Thus the reason for me spending all day on the dyno, changing out 3-5 cams and running numbers.. for ME!! And it might help others. Try to keep an open mind ( if you dont understand Cam specs and the relation to the 1.6 SC engine) remember the old NAVY Term... "If you can not Dazzle them with Brilliance.... Then BAFFLE them with BS!!" This happens a lot on this site!! And the end result is that most dont know WHAT to believe and end up loosing a good performance mod at a reasonable price.. yes?? but then this is
JUST me.........................................
Thumper
6th Gear
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,244
Likes: 0
From: Speedway
Total Valve lift = Cam Base Circle x RAR
Where do they start measuring lift?
Originally Posted by the 2nd link in my prior post for those not keen on mouseover+click
...(assume the rocker arm ratio is 1.5 for this example cylinder head in this discussion. it is the standard as well)
As a standard cam lobe duration measuring point is .050 in., and lobe lifts are normally specified with 1.5 rocker ratio, that means the valve will always be at .075 (i.e. 1.5 x 0.5) when the lobe reaches .050" lift (when a 1.5 rocker arm is installed). By using the .075 point and determining where it occurs in relationship to the crank in degrees, a yardstick is provided from which to reference any different rocker ratios. As expected, a higher ratio rocker will allow the valve to reach the .075 lift point earlier in the lift cycle (and later in the closing cycle). As the .075 valve lift point is the industry standard when specifying cam duration (1.5 standard rocker ratio X .050 tappet rise), it becomes a valid reference point.
As a standard cam lobe duration measuring point is .050 in., and lobe lifts are normally specified with 1.5 rocker ratio, that means the valve will always be at .075 (i.e. 1.5 x 0.5) when the lobe reaches .050" lift (when a 1.5 rocker arm is installed). By using the .075 point and determining where it occurs in relationship to the crank in degrees, a yardstick is provided from which to reference any different rocker ratios. As expected, a higher ratio rocker will allow the valve to reach the .075 lift point earlier in the lift cycle (and later in the closing cycle). As the .075 valve lift point is the industry standard when specifying cam duration (1.5 standard rocker ratio X .050 tappet rise), it becomes a valid reference point.
(*whether or not 1.6/1.4 is correct as I haven't come across anything in my own research to confirm - I could just trust its 'internet' right)
Go look it up guys.
Food for thought:
Originally Posted by the genius that lies outside MINIdom, which reminds me; is the sun out?
How does Valve Lift affect the operation of an engine?
Lift is the distance the valve actually travels. It is created by the cam lobe lift, which is then increased by the rocker arm ratio. The amount of lift you have and the speed at which the valve moves is a key factor in determining the torque the engine will produce.
Lift is the distance the valve actually travels. It is created by the cam lobe lift, which is then increased by the rocker arm ratio. The amount of lift you have and the speed at which the valve moves is a key factor in determining the torque the engine will produce.
4th Gear
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 510
Likes: 0
From: Orange Park, Fl.
Yikes.... !!
The rocker ratio IS as I stated!! ( actually something like a 1.63 and 1.43 ish) THAT IS THE Ratio to use with the 1.6 SOHC MINI engine!! Using anything else is a mathematical thingy that isnt correct to the 1.6 engine... you are good on the web... search out how to determine the actual rocker ratio using lobe lift/ base circle/ lift At the valve... ( however you will need an assembled HEAD to make the correct actual measurements/ and be aware of the hyd lifter than can collapse and give wrong numbers.. suggest modify the lifter, to solid application for correct movement..) cool??
The NEWMAN specs on the web are NOT correct specs!! So using them, with out the cam to spec out, is WAY MORE misleading than suspected. Ie The ICL on the cam is 100* NOT the spec listed on their site!!
HOW ever your references are great.. and great info for cam info and discreptions... for some one getting their feet wet on cam info..
Just me.................................
Thumper
The rocker ratio IS as I stated!! ( actually something like a 1.63 and 1.43 ish) THAT IS THE Ratio to use with the 1.6 SOHC MINI engine!! Using anything else is a mathematical thingy that isnt correct to the 1.6 engine... you are good on the web... search out how to determine the actual rocker ratio using lobe lift/ base circle/ lift At the valve... ( however you will need an assembled HEAD to make the correct actual measurements/ and be aware of the hyd lifter than can collapse and give wrong numbers.. suggest modify the lifter, to solid application for correct movement..) cool??
The NEWMAN specs on the web are NOT correct specs!! So using them, with out the cam to spec out, is WAY MORE misleading than suspected. Ie The ICL on the cam is 100* NOT the spec listed on their site!!
HOW ever your references are great.. and great info for cam info and discreptions... for some one getting their feet wet on cam info..
Just me.................................
Thumper
Thread Starter
|
6th Gear
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 1,629
Likes: 7
From: Pipe Creek, Texas
Thank you goin440 for the links. Ramp angle and area under the valve lift curve are dimensions that never receive mention in public discussions. I’ve been reluctant to share those links myself for a few reasons, one is the cams used for discussion are not roller cams, another is information overload for the average reader, and compression ratio (or cylinder pressures) don’t get enough attention.
It is true “advertised” specs are a marketing tool, but they also provide a reference point for what the general retail audience is familiar with. Notice the information on a Crower cam card includes pertinent degreeing information, and although the duration numbers appear conservative there, other geometries combine to improve performance beyond what the published numbers infer.
Something no manufacturer or designer will share is the engineering information; everyone’s optimistic “specs” really get whittled down with those numbers.
Last edited by k-huevo; Jul 19, 2009 at 01:06 PM.
6th Gear
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,244
Likes: 0
From: Speedway
It wasn't intended as personal attack just not to trust what you read on the net but follow up with your own research independently.
Diversion tactic is the phrase I think you're looking for. Not correct to our specific RAR; when given the info basic alegabra can solve for our RAR.
I'm not so concerned with RAR because to my knowledge (so far) we don't have anything to change it so I'm leaving it as a constent in my comparisons and focusing more at the lobe lift @ .050. I can use this data and plug whatever RAR into it later if I choose to do so. Comparing from .050 will also help determine spring rates from acceleration rates, ramp speed and action.
They're correct, we just don't know where they are measuring valve lift from on the lobe. Given the other info though, I'm sure there is a way to calculate from .050, I just haven't come across it yet - specifically how to determine lobe durations from data modified by RAR. I've probably even found it, but don't know it yet.
thanks for pointing this out. I'd like to reitterate, I really have no idea what I've gotten into. I couldn't stand the bickering so I decided to find out on my own and given the laughable resources for NA MINI tuning I had to. After several hits, I found the provided links to contain something useful.
Totally agreed. Thanks for clicking the link (re: roller cams) - thats actually the next step for me to discover their interaction and influence on what I've read.
I'm not so concerned with RAR because to my knowledge (so far) we don't have anything to change it so I'm leaving it as a constent in my comparisons and focusing more at the lobe lift @ .050. I can use this data and plug whatever RAR into it later if I choose to do so. Comparing from .050 will also help determine spring rates from acceleration rates, ramp speed and action.
They're correct, we just don't know where they are measuring valve lift from on the lobe. Given the other info though, I'm sure there is a way to calculate from .050, I just haven't come across it yet - specifically how to determine lobe durations from data modified by RAR. I've probably even found it, but don't know it yet.
Originally Posted by k-huevo
Ramp angle and area under the valve lift curve are dimensions that never receive mention in public discussions. I’ve been reluctant to share those links myself for a few reasons, one is the cams used for discussion are not roller cams, another is information overload for the average reader, and compression ratio (or cylinder pressures) don’t get enough attention.
4th Gear
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 510
Likes: 0
From: Orange Park, Fl.
......They're correct, we just don't know where they are measuring valve lift from on the lobe. Given the other info though, I'm sure there is a way to calculate from .050, I just haven't come across it yet - specifically how to determine lobe durations from data modified by RAR. I've probably even found it, but don't know it yet."
Actually.. one of the designers of the Newman cam said...." the specs are NOT correct on the INTERNET!" also I spec'd the cam out using the SAE USA specs to compare the Newman spec to the Crower spec for the two roller cams ( roller on the rocker vs a lifter).. As it is easier to compare apples to apples vs going back and forth with the .040 vs the .050 vs all the other spec the Eu uses, as shown in your lit. cool??
Please if I use caps and !! it is just a typing habbit... cool?? you are fine as I hope I am, and we are just sharing info for the masses.. cool??
Thanks
Just me...................................
Thumper
Actually.. one of the designers of the Newman cam said...." the specs are NOT correct on the INTERNET!" also I spec'd the cam out using the SAE USA specs to compare the Newman spec to the Crower spec for the two roller cams ( roller on the rocker vs a lifter).. As it is easier to compare apples to apples vs going back and forth with the .040 vs the .050 vs all the other spec the Eu uses, as shown in your lit. cool??
Please if I use caps and !! it is just a typing habbit... cool?? you are fine as I hope I am, and we are just sharing info for the masses.. cool??
Thanks
Just me...................................
Thumper
6th Gear
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,244
Likes: 0
From: Speedway
Actually.. one of the designers of the Newman cam said...." the specs are NOT correct on the INTERNET!" also I spec'd the cam out using the SAE USA specs to compare the Newman spec to the Crower spec for the two roller cams ( roller on the rocker vs a lifter).. As it is easier to compare apples to apples vs going back and forth with the .040 vs the .050 vs all the other spec the Eu uses, as shown in your lit. cool??
What did you find with SAE on the Newman offerings?
4th Gear
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 510
Likes: 0
From: Orange Park, Fl.
Degree the Newman has been an eye opener... however, to post the actual SAE numbers will only add confusion to what is out there already!! IF some one was interested in the actual numbers, then he /They would degree it to find out. But to most... it will just be "Numbers" that mean nothing to them!! The Newman cam is almost the exclusive cam run in the UK, and those guys are busting a lot of records...
However, the Crower /NS1 cam is also a great cam, with GREAT results here in the US.. and for a $240/250.00 cost (?) is a great deal in the US. I have 4 cams to run on my 06, to get the results that "I" need, and to be able recommend a cam to those that ask me... and for my own applications. Because I dont sell any of the cams.. I have nothing to gain. But, to throw out numbers with NO dyno back up numbers , ON THIS SITE, turns into a 10 page debate. yes??
There are a bazillion "specs" that will yield the SAME power numbers.. would it not be exciting if all 4 cams I have ( from different sources) all pull within a FEW power numbers?? Then to me... it would be the COST of the cams ..yes?? And that is the real issue here, I feel!! LOL, but who cares??
Just me................................
Thumper
However, the Crower /NS1 cam is also a great cam, with GREAT results here in the US.. and for a $240/250.00 cost (?) is a great deal in the US. I have 4 cams to run on my 06, to get the results that "I" need, and to be able recommend a cam to those that ask me... and for my own applications. Because I dont sell any of the cams.. I have nothing to gain. But, to throw out numbers with NO dyno back up numbers , ON THIS SITE, turns into a 10 page debate. yes??
There are a bazillion "specs" that will yield the SAME power numbers.. would it not be exciting if all 4 cams I have ( from different sources) all pull within a FEW power numbers?? Then to me... it would be the COST of the cams ..yes?? And that is the real issue here, I feel!! LOL, but who cares??
Just me................................
Thumper
6th Gear
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,184
Likes: 0
From: bryan tx
well I've been gone at a race so I wasn't able to post anything on the cam yet. Keith installed my cam and I wasnt REALLY able to test my car out until yesterday. Im trying to get the dyno results from my tune so I can go dyno again for some numbers but its not looking good.The cam is just wonderful, in all rpm the car feels more lively but at 4500+ it just comes alive. I dont have any other experience with cams in a cooper besides mine so I can't really say much else. I highly recommend trying the ns1 for your cooper.
Banned
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,862
Likes: 3
From: Fresno Ca.
There are a bazillion "specs" that will yield the SAME power numbers.. would it not be exciting if all 4 cams I have ( from different sources) all pull within a FEW power numbers?? Then to me... it would be the COST of the cams ..yes?? And that is the real issue here, I feel!! LOL, but who cares??
Just me................................
Thumper
Just me................................
Thumper
Anyone can twist, manipulate, finagle, influence, direct, finesse, maneuver, mold, shape, and steer numbers anyway they want. I would bet all of these, "road" cams are within 5-10% of eachother in performance, so as you said it comes down to cost effectiveness or brand loyalty or whatever makes "your boat float" Lets get over ourselfs and have fun with our cars 
Last edited by JIMINNI; Jul 21, 2009 at 02:42 PM. Reason: finagle
4th Gear
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 520
Likes: 0
Good post Anyone can twist, manipulate, finagle, influence, direct, finesse, maneuver, mold, shape, and steer numbers anyway they want. I would bet all of these, "road" cams are within 5-10% of each other in performance, so as you said it comes down to cost effectiveness or brand loyalty or whatever makes "your boat float" Lets get over ourselfs and have fun with our cars
Anyone can twist, manipulate, finagle, influence, direct, finesse, maneuver, mold, shape, and steer numbers anyway they want. I would bet all of these, "road" cams are within 5-10% of each other in performance, so as you said it comes down to cost effectiveness or brand loyalty or whatever makes "your boat float" Lets get over ourselfs and have fun with our cars Brilliant post!