TPITuned Port Injection discussion and questions. LB9 and L98 tech, porting, tuning, and bolt-on aftermarket products.
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!
We're doing some theoretical bench racing over at ne3g, and a lot of great information has surfaced, but it seems that the general consensus is that I'll never get out of the 13s with a hydraulic cam. I'd love to swap to a roller, but I'm looking at close to a grand including the cam price. That's a ton of money for a cam. I want to see how much of a difference it will make. Everybody is basically telling me that heads are a waste of money without going to a good roller cam.
I threw this in the TPI section because that's what I'm running, and it seems that TPI responds well to valves that can open and close as fast as possible.
My plans are for an accel base and SLP runners. I've got forged flat top pistons and 461 fuelie heads.
I would like to know the answer to this too. Because the guys at TPIS are telling me that there is a huge difference. One guy told me that they tested two identical cams except one was roller and the other was not and they noticed like a 20-25 horsepower gain with the roller setup. I find this hard to believe, but who knows.
__________________ 1986 Iroc-Z
built 355, Procharger, 6 speed
Well I converted my 400 to a roller motor. And I would think that the gain would be even more than 20-25. If you get a chance get a roller lifter and a flat one and any old cam then run them over the cam lobe. The roller will go so easily its amazing. Now imagine the flat but think when it has the valve springs its pushing against how hard it must be for it to go over that lobe.
The largest difference isn't even the friction, it is the cam profile you can run with the roller. With the roller you can ramp up to you max lift figure quicker, and the max figure can practically be higher. Just look at specs for similar duration profiles, and notice the difference in lift, and also know it hits that max figure much quicker. I have never seen a roller cam with identical specs as a flat tappet, that negates half of the reason you run one, so that is BS from TPIS (what a surprise). I have seen many cars with flat tappets in the mid 12's, so i don't think it is a brick wall, just harder. The roller is a better way to go, but you can hit 12's without it.
Ok I ran the numbers in Desktop Dyno 2000 to see if we could get an answer for you. I ran the three tests. One is the engine in my firebird with the hydraulic roller cam. 2 the only thing I changed was the tappet type from roller to flat tappet. the engine lost 20 hp/ and 50 lbs/ft at peak. Even more down low.
The third test I ran i went to crane cams and got a hydraulic flat tappet cam with the same duration specs at .05 (it's a pretty big cam (234/242 @.05). and used all it's specs. I can't seem to get the graphs posted so I'm cutting and pasting the tables. Now we all know that software isn't totally accurate, but the changes here are huge (though I'm guessing the differences would be less with smaller cams) so I think we can get a fairly clear picture of the answer. BTW these numbers are naturally aspirated, with nitrous they go way up . Hope this helps.
John
Oh and if you want to see what this combo can do in one of our cars I posted it at http://www.thirdgen.org/techbb2/show...threadid=88495
Hydraulic Flat Tappet.
Re: How much better is a roller cam over hydraulic?
Quote:
Originally posted by Jim85IROC I'd love to swap to a roller, but I'm looking at close to a grand including the cam price. That's a ton of money for a cam.
Just outta curiousity, how do you figure $1000 for a roller cam setup? I Just got the stuff to convert my old style block over to roller (retro-fit) and it wasn't anywhere near a grand. If it was then it would've been way out of my budget.
I just did a search on SummitRacing.com and found the following:
Retro hyd roller cam 239.95
Retro hyd roller lifters 304.95
Retro hyd roller pushrods 35.95
valve springs for above cam 82.95
That's just a bit over $600.
You could also do like an LT4 Hot cam 175.50
The LT4 Hot cam would save you $65
__________________ Doug Gulley
69 Camaro
Pete Jackson geardrive - 360 Chevy (.060 over) - Muncie 4 speed
***Future additions***
Triple black RS,
468 w/ EFI (<----any ideas are welcome )
------------------------------------
84 Olds Cutlass Supreme
383 Chevy - 10.7 - 1 c.r. - Pete Jackson *noisy* geardrive - AFR 190 64cc heads - custom ground XE270HR hyd roller (218*/224* .495"/.502" 112*) - MAF TPI - TPIS base - ported SLP runners and plenum - T5 World Class - 3.73 posi
(3) the energy that would be spent creating the heat in (2) is now available to accelerate the car instead
(4) for any given duration specs, the roller cam will spend a LOT more of that duration at full lift. More time at full lift = more airflow = more power at high RPM.
(5) no worries of wiping a lobe on breakin, wear becomes a non issue.
What all this means to hot-rodders like us is that the roller cam will let us make more HP without sacraficing drivability. And yes, the gains can be rather substancial.... For a given idle quality (mostly determined by seat-to-seat timing of the cam events), you can get a LOT more lift and duration from the roller.
However, heads are certainly not a waste of money just because you don't have a roller. Both are helpful to an engine and they work even better when used together. Last time I checked, NASCAR winston cuppers use flat tappet (albeit non-hydraulic) cams, and they can make 700hp on the non-restricted 350's.
__________________ 1991 Z28
L98/G80/G92/J65
LT1 injectors, DIY PROM, t-56, AS&M siamese runners, accel intake, F1 GS-D3's
* 14.46 @ 93.36mph, 1.98 60' 7/5/02 (stock)
* 14.89 @ 96.76mph, 2.51 60' 7/7/04 (T56, AS&M SS runners, accel intake)
...guess I need to work on that rear suspension! 1971 RS
406/4spd...a work in progress..
in the 13's @ 107mph without a posi, it's a start.
Re: Re: How much better is a roller cam over hydraulic?
Depends on brands. You picked out the cheapest of everything, and every time I do that, I wind up breaking stuff.
With an expensive cam, quality lifters pushrods and especially springs capable of over .500 lift, along with the cam button, new roller chain set, it starts pushing on $800-$1,000.
Quote:
Originally posted by 69TPI383
Just outta curiousity, how do you figure $1000 for a roller cam setup? I Just got the stuff to convert my old style block over to roller (retro-fit) and it wasn't anywhere near a grand. If it was then it would've been way out of my budget.
I just did a search on SummitRacing.com and found the following:
Retro hyd roller cam 239.95
Retro hyd roller lifters 304.95
Retro hyd roller pushrods 35.95
valve springs for above cam 82.95
Re: Re: Re: How much better is a roller cam over hydraulic?
Quote:
Originally posted by Jim85IROC Depends on brands. You picked out the cheapest of everything, and every time I do that, I wind up breaking stuff.
Well.....I guess my Comp Cams XE270HR cam from Summit is a cheapie then, as that is exactly what I priced out! I looked up the cam and followed what they recommended for the roller lifters, pushrods, and springs. Hmmm.....I always thought Comp Cams had quality stuff...learn something new everyday.
__________________ Doug Gulley
69 Camaro
Pete Jackson geardrive - 360 Chevy (.060 over) - Muncie 4 speed
***Future additions***
Triple black RS,
468 w/ EFI (<----any ideas are welcome )
------------------------------------
84 Olds Cutlass Supreme
383 Chevy - 10.7 - 1 c.r. - Pete Jackson *noisy* geardrive - AFR 190 64cc heads - custom ground XE270HR hyd roller (218*/224* .495"/.502" 112*) - MAF TPI - TPIS base - ported SLP runners and plenum - T5 World Class - 3.73 posi
Well, I looked up all crane stuff because my issue of summit doesn't show anything from Comp except for a couple camshafts. My point is, prices will range from $600 and up. $600 isn't the average. And if I want a good cam from Accel, LPE, TPIS, etc, I'm going to pay through my cornhole.
Why do you think a cam from Accel, LPE, TPIS etc. must be better? because they cost more?
comp and crane are two of the biggest names in cams out there. Half of those companies you mentioned probably have their cams ground by crane or comp anyways. crane and comp both have a very wide variety of profiles and choices and your engine won't know that you didn't buy the cam from TPIS anyways....
$600 may not be the average for trendy "designer" cams, otherwise 69TPI383 has a valid point.
comp and crane ARE good cams and equipment.
let's compare for ex. the TPIS zz9 cam vs crane 119821
TPIS: 212/226 @ 0.050, 0.483/0.520 lift, 112 lobe sep
CRN: 214/222 @0.050, 0.488/0.509 lift, 112 lobe sep
now...i bet you that you probably won't even notice the difference in these two cams. maybe a few HP, and it's hard to say which one would make more power. not worth the extra hundreds for the designer TPIS name.
BTW the crane cam is $299, hydr roller lifters that crane recommends, $379, recommended springs $88. total $767. Way closer to $600 than $1000.
You could also use the comp XR269HR which is 218/224 @ 0.050, 0.495/0.503 lift, 112 lobe sep, and STILL probably not notice much difference, and that cam is only $239.
the money you save is better spent on headers, head work, better intake, etc., and you will get lots better return (HP) for your investment ($) that way.
__________________ 1991 Z28
L98/G80/G92/J65
LT1 injectors, DIY PROM, t-56, AS&M siamese runners, accel intake, F1 GS-D3's
* 14.46 @ 93.36mph, 1.98 60' 7/5/02 (stock)
* 14.89 @ 96.76mph, 2.51 60' 7/7/04 (T56, AS&M SS runners, accel intake)
...guess I need to work on that rear suspension! 1971 RS
406/4spd...a work in progress..
in the 13's @ 107mph without a posi, it's a start.
Hmm, I was just on the Comp Cams site and it said 42 of the 43 cars in the 2002 Daytona 500 had Comp Cams in them? Must be Ward Burton's Dodge had a TPIS cam in it thats why he won. HAHA I could probably get someone to charge me $1,000 for a cam itself but that isn't going to make it better than one that costs $250 etc. I suppose since what costs more is better, that Jim85 better get rid of the IROC and go get a Corvette since it costs more.
why not just get a Custom cam from Comp cams that way you can get what you want. I just did it cost exactly the same as a regular cam. all you have to do is call Comp cams and get a grind number then call Summit or whatever and give them the numbers all it takes is another week.
Originally posted by 88Roc350TPI Hmm, I was just on the Comp Cams site and it said 42 of the 43 cars in the 2002 Daytona 500 had Comp Cams in them? Must be Ward Burton's Dodge had a TPIS cam in it thats why he won.
Yeah.....and it was ground for TPIS by Comp Cams
Sorry.....I couldn't resist....I'z just razzin' ya
__________________ Doug Gulley
69 Camaro
Pete Jackson geardrive - 360 Chevy (.060 over) - Muncie 4 speed
***Future additions***
Triple black RS,
468 w/ EFI (<----any ideas are welcome )
------------------------------------
84 Olds Cutlass Supreme
383 Chevy - 10.7 - 1 c.r. - Pete Jackson *noisy* geardrive - AFR 190 64cc heads - custom ground XE270HR hyd roller (218*/224* .495"/.502" 112*) - MAF TPI - TPIS base - ported SLP runners and plenum - T5 World Class - 3.73 posi
Christ! I'm not trying to say that more money = better performance, but of course that's what everybody needs to immediately assume. Comp and Crane may be the biggest cam makers out there, but that doesn't necessarily mean they know that works best with TPI. Accel and TPIS eat breathe and sleep TPI so it stands to reason they may know a thing or two about it. The ZZ9 camshaft continuously outperforms other grinds with similar specs. I'm not saying that the other stuff is crap, but immediately discounting the more expensive stuff is just plain dumb.
Re: How much better is a roller cam over hydraulic?
Quote:
Originally posted by Jim85IROC My plans are for an accel base and SLP runners.
What we are trying to say, and it even says it in the TPIS book, (Insider Hints maybe) to go for the cam first as it's going to give you the biggest improvement. Goods heads are nice but a better cam can help a set of heads flow more by opening the exh longer for instance.
If you're looking for that last bit of HP so you can race, then maybe the roller from TPIS is what you need. If it's for a daily driver or occaisional weekend blast, then you're not going to notice that extra few HP the TPIS spec cam *might* make. Especially not $140 worth of differance. I have the TPIS catalog and the Insider Hints book. I have the Accel catalog. In my opinion, there's not enough differance in the cams to justify paying the extra $140 over a quite simular cam costing hundreds less. TPIS cam $379 Comp Cam $240 GMPP LT4 Hot cam $175 Unless you put that engine on a dyno you couldn't feel the differance in each one of these cams. Thats all we're trying to say....no flames intended.
__________________ Doug Gulley
69 Camaro
Pete Jackson geardrive - 360 Chevy (.060 over) - Muncie 4 speed
***Future additions***
Triple black RS,
468 w/ EFI (<----any ideas are welcome )
------------------------------------
84 Olds Cutlass Supreme
383 Chevy - 10.7 - 1 c.r. - Pete Jackson *noisy* geardrive - AFR 190 64cc heads - custom ground XE270HR hyd roller (218*/224* .495"/.502" 112*) - MAF TPI - TPIS base - ported SLP runners and plenum - T5 World Class - 3.73 posi