[Fot] Camshaft recommendation

Mon Feb 17 22:02:23 MST 2020

Marcel,

If you were to reduce the tappet velocity of the lower lift cam by 13% as well as reducing the cam lift then there would be no point.  But if you grind the lower lift cam with the same lifter velocity as the high lift cam then the high ratio rockers will give you 13% higher valve speed than the high lift cam with stock rockers.

Richard

Sent from AOL Mobile Mail 
Get the new AOL app: mail.mobile.aol.com

On Wednesday, February 12, 2020 van.mulders.marcel <van.mulders.marcel at telenet.be> wrote:

Richard,dare I answer again...You say :" first decide what will be the optimum lift for your engine , then... ": in that case : what is the point of high ratio rocker arms, if you want to end at the same maximum valve lift? With a higher lobe x lower rocker ratio, the valve opening speed will be the same and you have a lower force (load) at the pushrods and lobe/cam followers. I think the only reason for a higher rocker ratio is the camfollowers having a too small a diameter to be able to get at the maximum valve lift you want?MarcelVan: "Richard Good" <goodparts at verizon.net>
Aan: "van mulders marcel" <van.mulders.marcel at telenet.be>
Cc: "fot" <fot at autox.team.net>
Verzonden: Woensdag 12 februari 2020 17:25:10
Onderwerp: Re: [Fot] Camshaft recommendation

Marcel,

Yes, if you increase rocker ratio and do not change the cam lift, the maximum lift will also increase by 13%.

Richard

Sent from AOL Mobile Mail 
Get the new AOL app: mail.mobile.aol.com
On Wednesday, February 12, 2020 van.mulders.marcel <van.mulders.marcel at telenet.be> wrote:
Richard, dare I answer this...Do you mean that, with the higher rocker ratio, the valve is moving faster in the first part of the opening phase and hence moving slower nearing the maximum lift? Suppose the cam lift of both camshafts is such that the maximum lift is 13mm for both the 1.65 and 1.50 ratio and duration at 0.050" is 240°, thus the crank has to move 120° to go from 0.050" lift to maximum lift in both cases. If the valve is opening 13% faster all the way from 0.050" lift untill maximum lift, the maximum lift will also be 13% higher! When an engine is at, say 5000rpm or any other speed, it takes the same time to move 120° (from 0.050" to maximum lift) : the rocker arm ratio does not change that and the valve that is opening 13% faster with the 1.65 ratio will end at a maximum lift that is also 13% higher. MarcelVan: "Richard Good" <goodparts at verizon.net>)
Aan: "Michael Zbarsky" <mzbarsky at yahoo.com>, gkbyrne at optusnet.com.au, "van mulders marcel" <van.mulders.marcel at telenet.be>
Cc: "fot" <fot at autox.team.net>
Verzonden: Woensdag 12 februari 2020 02:23:07
Onderwerp: Re: [Fot] Camshaft recommendation
 7.887
Michael,

People often seem to overlook the main performance benefit of increasing the rocker ratio.  That is the increase in valve velocity.  The velocity of a flat tappet is limited by it's diameter. If you grind the cam lobe for too much velocity the contact patch will move out past the edge of the lifter and things will self destruct.  So tappet velocity is limited.  However, since tappet velocity times rocker ratio equals valve velocity, increasing the rocker ratio will increase valve velocity.

First decide what will be the optimum valve lift for your engine then divide by rocker ratio to determine the net cam lift needed to achieve that valve lift.  Yes, you can grind the cam with a large enough lobe to reach desired lift using stock rockers but you are limited in how fast you can open the valve.  Now if you grind the cam with less lift then use 1.65:1 rockers to reach that same desired valve lift you will be moving the valve about 13% faster. That means it will be open further in a given period of time.  Graph it out and you will see a big difference.  Valve velocity is a huge factor in performance.  

I can understand why someone who has tried to use high ratio rockers with a cam that was already maxing out the valve lift with stock rockers would decide that high ratio does not work.  Valve lift was already at max. Increasing it further may be a detriment.  If duration was also maxed out for reasonable torque then the increase in lift during the overlap period caused by the increase in rocker ratio may reduce the low end torque.  Properly applied with the right cam profile, high ratio rockers enable performance that is just not achievable with stock rockers.

Richard Good
Good Parts Inc

Sent from AOL Mobile Mail 
Get the new AOL app: mail.mobile.aol.com
On Tuesday, February 11, 2020 Michael Zbarsky via Fot <mzbarsky at yahoo.com> wrote:
Thanks everyone! Good stuff. I’m sticking to a redline of just over 6K. I’d also like to keep the 1.65 setup rather than invest in a 1.55 so keep the intel and suggestions coming. The GP3 is a definite contender. 
Mike 

On Monday, February 10, 2020, 4:07 PM, Geoff Byrne <gkbyrne at optusnet.com.au> wrote:

Ditch the 1.65 rockers no good for racingGeoff ByrneTR6 racer down under

Sent from my iPhone

On 11 Feb 2020, at 12:52 am, van.mulders.marcel--- via Fot <fot at autox.team.net> wrote:

I also once bought a Goodparts 1.65 rocker roller assembly for a TR6 engine, but in the end I had to use a 1.55 roller rocker assembly, also from Goodparts, because, with the 1.65, it is difficult to find a race camshaft with a  lobe lift that is low enough. With lobes of 8mm or higher, I could not find valve springs to cope with the high valve lift. I bought a G5 camshaft from Schneider, they call it  the 320-F grind (duration is 268° at 0.050", timing is 57-83    87-53 , installation figure is then 103° :is that the same as the G5 grind?) with 0.340"/8.6mm cam lift and that makes for a  valve lift of 12.9mm with the 1.55 rocker arms. With 1.65 rockers , valve lift would be 14.2mm and I could not find valve springs for that lift. The valve springs I used are part no 281003-063.20 from Summit (Isky), 320lb/inch spring rate. They recommend 0.45"/11.43mm  (1.250" - 0.800"from closed to full open position, so it is about 1.4mm more in my engine, but there is no problem concerning  coil binding : the installed height is a 1mm more than 1.250 , the pressure in closed position is lower  of course, but still 34kgs (105kgs at full lift) an that seems to be enough till 7500 rpmRacetorations have a race cam with 7.6mm cam lift, probably that would work with 1.65 rocker arms. I still have the 1.65 rocker assembly, it is new and it could work with a road cam or any camshaft with a maximum of 8mm cam lift.Marcel
Van: "fot" <fot at autox.team.net>
Aan: "fot" <fot at autox.team.net>
Verzonden: Maandag 10 februari 2020 02:34:27
Onderwerp: [Fot] Camshaft recommendation

Hi all, I’m building a TR6 race engine and have a set of 1.65 ratio roller rockers from Goodparts. Any recommendations for a suitable camshaft? I will be putting in cam bearings. 
Thanks, Mike

_______________________________________________
fot at autox.team.net

http://www.fot-racing.com

Donate: http://www.team.net/donate.html
Archive: http://autox.team.net/archive http://www.team.net/pipermail/fot
Unsubscribe/Manage: http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/fot/van.mulders.marcel@telenet.be
_______________________________________________
fot at autox.team.net

http://www.fot-racing.com

Donate: http://www.team.net/donate.html
Archive: http://autox.team.net/archive http://www.team.net/pipermail/fot
Unsubscribe/Manage: http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/fot/gkbyrne@optushome.com.au

_______________________________________________
fot at autox.team.net

http://www.fot-racing.com

Donate: http://www.team.net/donate.html
Archive: http://autox.team.net/archive http://www.team.net/pipermail/fot
Unsubscribe/Manage: http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/fot/goodparts@verizon.net

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://autox.team.net/pipermail/fot/attachments/20200218/fe8b5dd8/attachment-0003.htm>