Notices
Engine Performance This section is for discussion on all engine building related questions.
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by: KPower

Cam tuning for boost: two tries

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Mar 6, 2009 | 05:05 PM
  #21  
Efini~FC3S's Avatar
Elite Member
iTrader: (4)
 
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,317
Total Cats: 99
From: Charlotte, NC
Default


Taken directly from those articles

"start moving both cams in opposite ways (ie retarding intake, advancing exhaust). This will have the effect of increasing or decreasing the lobe separation angles. Increasing the lobe separation angle will generally broaden your power band while reducing your peak torque and lowering your idle quality, but it's also a great solution to decrease detonation."

So it sounds like the goal would be to increase the lobe separation a little bit, but not too much.
Old Mar 6, 2009 | 07:00 PM
  #22  
JasonC SBB's Avatar
Elite Member
 
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 6,420
Total Cats: 84
Default

Originally Posted by patsmx5
Spoolup or power? Both? Maybe not?
Bottom end became more responsive and stronger. The very topend seemed to improve a tiny bit.
Old Mar 9, 2009 | 01:37 PM
  #23  
m2cupcar's Avatar
Thread Starter
Elite Member
iTrader: (5)
 
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 7,486
Total Cats: 372
From: Atlanta
Default

So I asked for advice and didn't follow the majority. I got swayed by one the of the shop guys on two of my runs. Then later realized his recommendations were based on factory turbo cams which would already have overlap dialed out. Both his suggestions rolled the cams towards each other and as expected lost power over stock timing. They did give me a free run, and would've done more I'm sure - but I was out of time myself.

What I eneded up doing was backing up what's been said here- remove the overlap, spread out the time between intake and exhaust valve action. Runs were made on a MBC which showed 15.5-16psi on the trip over in the morning, but logged at 13psi target rising 1+psi and falling with the cam adjustments during the dyno pulls. My gauge has also showed very close to logged boost.

Stock cam timing (pwr/tq are 2x line data)


Intake -2*, Exhaust +2* (crank degrees): note more power with less boost


Overlay of runs at 13psi+ (pink & light blue are with the cam timing changes)


Dynojet at 16psi+ showing the difference in curves vs. the mustang. The only differences between dynos were the new magnaflow muffler and a lower boost level. The curves are similar pre torque peak, then totally different after.


I also noticed that the mustang dyno's roller rpm calibration process was off by 300rpm at my 7k redline. The dyno ign pickup was apparently flaky.
Old May 26, 2009 | 01:15 AM
  #24  
jonny's Avatar
Junior Member
 
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 47
Total Cats: 0
From: Austria
Default

Has anyone testet the original GTX camshafts from the original mazda turbo engine? IMO this camshafts would be a good possibility. Are there any experience?
Old May 29, 2009 | 11:31 PM
  #25  
bobsaget's Avatar
Newb
iTrader: (2)
 
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 44
Total Cats: 0
From: Mississauga Ontario Canada
Default

Jonny start your own thread.......the OP is looking for advice and information on ADJUSTABLE cams, not GTX cams.
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Full_Tilt_Boogie
Build Threads
84
Apr 12, 2021 04:21 PM
StratoBlue1109
Miata parts for sale/trade
21
Sep 30, 2018 01:09 PM
tazswing
Race Prep
20
Oct 3, 2015 11:04 AM
The Gleas
MEGAsquirt
3
Oct 1, 2015 09:30 AM
brandonbkd
MEGAsquirt
0
Sep 28, 2015 11:52 PM




All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:07 AM.