Search



Go Back   Third Generation F-Body Message Boards > Tech Boards > V6
Register Forgot Password?

V6 Discussion and questions about the base carbureted or MPFI V6's and the rare SFI Turbo V6.

Welcome to ThirdGen.org!
Welcome to ThirdGen.org.

You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community, at no cost, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is free, fast and simple, join the ThirdGen.org community today!


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 10-02-2002, 12:13 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Gainesville, FL
Posts: 3,827
Car: 1988 Chevy Camaro Hardtop
Engine: Turbocharged/Intercooled 3.1
Transmission: World Class T5 5 Speed

Classifieds Rating: (0)
Send a message via AIM to Doward
What makes a cam "computer friendly"?

Just curious... headed down to my local Auto parts store to check out camshafts, and they've got a stock cam for $99, or a "high performance" for $100.

Difference?

Cam #1 is a 195º/200º @ .050" lift
Cam #2 is a 206º/206º @ .050" lift

No specs on gross lift of the cam though, but the 206º/206º is real close to the cam specs I'm looking for.

The other cam I was looking at was the Crane 2030 - 204º/214º

I'd rather go with a single pattern cam, though, as my experience seems to show that a Chevy engine runs better on that. Now on the (real) Pontiac engines, like my '77 354, I'd go dual pattern, due to a weak exhaust setup....

Anyway, what can the stock computer take, as far as cam specs, without reprogramming it?
__________________
~$~'88 Black 3.1/5 Speed Camaro~$~

222.4 rwhp / 291.2 rwtq - 255/334 @ flywheel
Doward is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 10-02-2002, 12:22 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Gainesville, FL
Posts: 3,827
Car: 1988 Chevy Camaro Hardtop
Engine: Turbocharged/Intercooled 3.1
Transmission: World Class T5 5 Speed

Classifieds Rating: (0)
Send a message via AIM to Doward
Perhaps I should add -

This is an '88 Camaro, MAF setup. 2.8 right now, but I plan a 2.8-into-a-3.1 later.
Doward is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 10-02-2002, 12:39 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Palm Bay, Florida, USA
Posts: 3,931
Car: 95 E-150 & 07 Kawasaki ZX-6R
Engine: A slow one & a fast one
Transmission: A bad one & a good one
Axle/Gears: A weak one & a chained one

Classifieds Rating: (0)
Send a message via ICQ to Nixon1 Send a message via AIM to Nixon1
If you're gonna do an engine swap, don't waste the time doing a 2.8 to a 3.1..do a 3.4 swap. There's like a thousand and a half articles on it in here. The 3.1's only made 5 hp more than a 2.8, although the torque difference is noticeable--15-20 more. A 3.1 is simply a stroked 2.8... The 3.4 is much nicer..160 hp vs a 3.1's 140. And I believe the 3.4 is right around 200 ft/lbs.
Nixon1 is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 10-02-2002, 12:42 PM   #4
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: MO
Posts: 19

Classifieds Rating: (0)
you might want to consider the dual pattern cam since the v6/60's are known for also being weak on the exhaust side due to their small exhaust ports....
big_al_47 is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 10-02-2002, 12:55 PM   #5
Supreme Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Central NJ, USA
Posts: 13,405
Car: 1986 Firebird
Engine: 2.8 V6
Transmission: 700R4

Classifieds Rating: (0)

Supposedly, if a cam is computer (and emissions!!) friendly for a V8 TPI, a cam with a similar grind will be friendly with our computer. One such measurement is lobe separation. The higher the #, the smoother the idle- less valve overlap, and more vacuum. The lobe sep for our stock 2.8 cam (85-89) is 108 degrees. The compucam 2030 is 109 degrees, which suggests that it'll give a smooth idle. The GM performance cams have 112! Valve overlap is when both valves are open at the same time. This can be good for power because when the exhaust valve is closing, and the intake valve is opening- because the exhaust gas is leaving, it helps to suck the intake charge into the cylinder. However a computer car would see that and have a fit; the oxy sensor would probably go nuts.. not to mention the poor idle quality which would probably throw the comptuer off, too. So the less valve overlap = the more computer friendly.

Stock, for a 305, the cam with a manual trans has lobe sep of 114.5. Cam for automatic trans has lobe sep of 109 degrees. (Note, already, from the start, the v8 has higher lobe sep #s). The compucam 2030 for v8's has a lobe sep of 116 degrees. What's cool is that the advertised duration at 0.050" is the same as the 2030 grind for the 2.8/3.1! Kind suggests that since the 2030 for v8's (part #104221, from page http://www.cranecams.com/master/apps/chevy37.htm ) is emissions legal, that the 2030 for v6's might also be emissions legal.

'Course this is more of a concern for anyone in states like mine that do their emissions testing on a dyno...
__________________
-Tom P (Hot rodded 1986 Firebird 2.8l)
TomP is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 10-07-2002, 11:19 PM   #6
Supreme Member
 
devianb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Illinois
Posts: 4,009
Car: 1988 Trans Am
Engine: 305 TPI

Classifieds Rating: (0)

Send a message via AIM to devianb
Quote:
Originally posted by TomP
Supposedly, if a cam is computer (and emissions!!) friendly for a V8 TPI, a cam with a similar grind will be friendly with our computer. One such measurement is lobe separation. The higher the #, the smoother the idle- less valve overlap, and more vacuum. The lobe sep for our stock 2.8 cam (85-89) is 108 degrees. The compucam 2030 is 109 degrees, which suggests that it'll give a smooth idle. The GM performance cams have 112! Valve overlap is when both valves are open at the same time. This can be good for power because when the exhaust valve is closing, and the intake valve is opening- because the exhaust gas is leaving, it helps to suck the intake charge into the cylinder. However a computer car would see that and have a fit; the oxy sensor would probably go nuts.. not to mention the poor idle quality which would probably throw the comptuer off, too. So the less valve overlap = the more computer friendly.

Stock, for a 305, the cam with a manual trans has lobe sep of 114.5. Cam for automatic trans has lobe sep of 109 degrees. (Note, already, from the start, the v8 has higher lobe sep #s). The compucam 2030 for v8's has a lobe sep of 116 degrees. What's cool is that the advertised duration at 0.050" is the same as the 2030 grind for the 2.8/3.1! Kind suggests that since the 2030 for v8's (part #104221, from page http://www.cranecams.com/master/apps/chevy37.htm ) is emissions legal, that the 2030 for v6's might also be emissions legal.

'Course this is more of a concern for anyone in states like mine that do their emissions testing on a dyno...
I had always wondered what made a camshaft computer friendly too. I would like to have a higher lift and smoother idle. That put put put put sound of an aggressive cam scares the hell out of me. It sounds like it is going to die.
devianb is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 10-08-2002, 12:36 AM   #7
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Las Vegas, Nv. USA
Posts: 757

Classifieds Rating: (0)
There is the 2030 solid flat tappet camshaft also... (PowerMax 2030).
It's entirely different than the hydraulic roller 2030.
It has 110 LSA and does communicate well with the stock computer.
__________________

ASCD RamAir Hood / 4-bolt main Recon performance engine 708520 HD (CUSTOM 350 CI) / 2.02 Intake 1.60 Exhaust Valves / 10:1 Flat Top Hypereutectic Pistons / Moly Rings / Crane Double Roller Timing Chain / Cast Iron Crankshaft / Crane 2030 FT cam / 204/214@.050 - 110 SEP - .423/.446 LIFT INT/EXH / Non-drop base open element K&N / Holley 670CFM TBI unit 502-6 / GM#12116257 TPS connector / Custom TBI spacer made by DC Water Jet / Weiand 300-49 intake manifold / GM#1711-3433 EGR Valve / Hiflow CAT / FlowMaster 80 Catback / 180* thermostat / Radiator fan switch / KaleCo Bumper Sticker (THAT gave me 15 HP!)
Snowdog 91 Formula is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 10-08-2002, 11:32 AM   #8
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Bayville NJ and Newark at NJIT.
Posts: 1,408

Classifieds Rating: (0)
Send a message via AIM to Xenodrgn
Crower stage 2 is the way I'd go...

Crane Cams website...

Lobe separation is the distance (in camshaft degrees) that the intake and exhaust lobe centerlines (for a given cylinder) are spread apart. Lobe separation is a physical characteristic of the camshaft and cannot be changed without regrinding the lobes. This separation determines where peak torque will occur within the engine’s power range. Tight lobe separations (such as 106°) cause the peak torque to build early in basic RPM range of the cam. The torque will be concentrated, build quickly and peak out. Broader lobe separations (such as 112°) allows the torque to be spread over a broader portion of the basic RPM range and shows better power through the upper RPM.
Xenodrgn is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 10-08-2002, 05:04 PM   #9
Supreme Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Central NJ, USA
Posts: 13,405
Car: 1986 Firebird
Engine: 2.8 V6
Transmission: 700R4

Classifieds Rating: (0)

Quote:
Originally posted by Snowdog 91 Formula
There is the 2030 solid flat tappet camshaft also... (PowerMax 2030).
It's entirely different than the hydraulic roller 2030.
It has 110 LSA and does communicate well with the stock computer.
Oops, the part # I gave for the v8 cam was for a hydraulic roller? No wonder the LSA was so high (116 for the v8 cam), I wasn't comparing the right cams.

And that reminds me, didn't Crane stop calling the CompuCam a compucam, and renamed it to PowerMax?
__________________
-Tom P (Hot rodded 1986 Firebird 2.8l)
TomP is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 10-08-2002, 08:56 PM   #10
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Gainesville, FL
Posts: 3,827
Car: 1988 Chevy Camaro Hardtop
Engine: Turbocharged/Intercooled 3.1
Transmission: World Class T5 5 Speed

Classifieds Rating: (0)
Send a message via AIM to Doward
Anyone have specs, or tried the Sealed Power EP2 CS-1032R cam? That's the 208º (not 206º!) cam I'm currently looking at...
Doward is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 10-08-2002, 09:34 PM   #11
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Las Vegas, Nv. USA
Posts: 757

Classifieds Rating: (0)
Quote:
Originally posted by TomP
And that reminds me, didn't Crane stop calling the CompuCam a compucam, and renamed it to PowerMax?
Yes.
__________________

ASCD RamAir Hood / 4-bolt main Recon performance engine 708520 HD (CUSTOM 350 CI) / 2.02 Intake 1.60 Exhaust Valves / 10:1 Flat Top Hypereutectic Pistons / Moly Rings / Crane Double Roller Timing Chain / Cast Iron Crankshaft / Crane 2030 FT cam / 204/214@.050 - 110 SEP - .423/.446 LIFT INT/EXH / Non-drop base open element K&N / Holley 670CFM TBI unit 502-6 / GM#12116257 TPS connector / Custom TBI spacer made by DC Water Jet / Weiand 300-49 intake manifold / GM#1711-3433 EGR Valve / Hiflow CAT / FlowMaster 80 Catback / 180* thermostat / Radiator fan switch / KaleCo Bumper Sticker (THAT gave me 15 HP!)
Snowdog 91 Formula is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 10-08-2002, 09:34 PM
ThirdGen
1992 Camaro




Paid Advertisement


Reply

Go Back   Third Generation F-Body Message Boards > Tech Boards > V6

Tags
104221, 2030, 28, 31, cam, compucam, crane, exhaust, gm, grind, intake, opening, overlap, time, v6, v8, valves
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

 


1982 Camaro '82 || 1983 Camaro '83 || 1984 Camaro '84 || 1985 Camaro '85 || 1986 Camaro '86 || 1987 Camaro '87 || 1988 Camaro '88 || 1989 Camaro '89 || 1990 Camaro '90 || 1991 Camaro '91 || 1992 Camaro '92


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:31 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
All content copyright © 1997 - 2014 ThirdGen.org. All rights reserved. No part of this website may be reproduced without the expressed, documented, and written consent of ThirdGen.org's Administrators.

Emails & Contact Details