Cat 438 Camshafts

[Chip-mk1]

When my car was mapped the air con was still on and had a different exhaust so my map could probably do with a tweak,but I think you will be lucky to see 170 ft/lbs that would be good for a ITB car.Maybe you have a freak engine though,my car pulls very well so if you hit the figures you are talking about you should be very happy.

There is no maybe about it, lol

 

[Gray]

I was considering 421 cat cams on my old freaky PH-1, that made 187bhp / 167ft.lb (Yozza race system, cup aux set-up, matched inlets) at RStuning in Leeds.

But, Paul advised me not to bother as he didn't think I would see any 'real' gain, so I will be really interested to see your results Laine

7:30 onwards (typo on the torque figures):



That car really, really shifted!

 

[Laine_16v]

But, Paul advised me not to bother as he didn't think I would see any 'real' gain, so I will be really interested to see your results Laine

Seems he might have been right!

Had it all mapped in at Ktec yesterday, it provides some probably slightly dissapointing results. WHen we got there we initally ran the car to see what it did on the stock map and airbox, it produced only 174bhp / 148 ft lb's! All my power gone

Mapped it up and fitted a better air filter and some other tweaking see it sat finally at 191.2bhp / 167ft lb's. So there we go, i guess if the results produced on a standard engine are good, it wont always mean good gains from cams and other such mods? (all part of the gambling game that is engine modifications..)

But... it doesn't half shift now!! Goes like a rocket! Overall perhaps not worth the overlay, but im sure as hell going to be enjoying it more now on

There are some other things that i will change (Ktec stealth and some modifications to the cat), also advised a set of matched inlets should help out a good deal.

I will post up the graph when im home tonight.

 

[Chip-mk1]

Over 190 sounds like a good result to me.
Make sure you overlay the two graphs so we can do that comparison you wanted where we can put a + or 0 figure against every 500rpm increment through the rev range for your car with the cams and without and do the same for my car with the RS2 and without just to get a good way to compare the two.
I will personally feel its an unfair comparison for the cams though as your engine was doing so well to begin with, which makes it harder for them to see gains so I think the figures may be less than others might see, so it would be better if fitted to a more average engine in the first place, so I dont think we should read too much into it yet, but still nice to just see the numbers at least.

Your peak torque figure is huge for a standard inlet what was the spread like? If you have 2Krpm of that for example then its going to pull like hell for that bit at least, just means you'll need to use the box to keep it on the boil but thats all part of the fun of driving a cammy motor anyway

Your standard inlets are whats holding it back im sure, so going to a really good port matched set is going to help no doubt, or of course you could bolt on an RS2 and it would definately piss past 200bhp then of course!

 

[Silent_Scone]

nice torque

 

[domsclio182]

My car is similar spec at the moment 438'S/cup alternator set up,has a Milltek with sports cat and v6 air box also here is a recent dyno graph at TDF ktec has the same dyno now so you should see similar results.

Not so bad then,

 

[Chip-mk1]

Lovely chunk of midrange torque in that graph but its properly dieing on its arse at high rpm, even worse that you would expect from just the inlet restriction as that you would expect to just flat line the power not to actually make it drop, that one looks like if it was held till 7500rpm like most of us do when modifying these cars that it would have really plummeted by then.

Is yours the same laine?

 

[Laine_16v]

My graph is a bit more consistent than Doms from what i can remember, it holds 160ft lb's+ for a good amount of time, and doesnt die off quite so harshly.

Ill nip to my car in 30 mins and scan it in at work

 

[Jonny1*2]

Not bad gains tbh mate. I'd be happy with that really. It'll be interesting to see the spread on the graphs though.

 

[Chip-mk1]

My graph is a bit more consistent than Doms from what i can remember, it holds 160ft lb's+ for a good amount of time, and doesnt die off quite so harshly.

Ill nip to my car in 30 mins and scan it in at work

cool

 

[domsclio182]

My map could do with a tweak as like I said before v6 box and cup set fitted afterwards,having ITBS fitted next month so not to worry.

From most of the graphs I have seen of cammed cars the torque does tend to drop of quite a bit at higher revs but this is true of most NA cars of this type

This is my graph prior to having cams fitted,sorry I don't have a overlay.

 

[Laine_16v]

Here ya go, its only black and white sorry, but it should be obvious what is what.

Unfortunately i dont have a graph comparing the 186bhp to the cammed results (gains were there but relatively minimal), this is pre and post "438 map".

 

[Fred@BTM]

not bad, comparing that to our new cams we seem to have a chunk load more torque at 3000rpm = me

 

[Chip-mk1]

Dom, TBH that looks pretty horrid, not that it will bother you as im sure the bodies will sort it out, but to drive it must be a case of:

2500rpm - 140lbft - not bad
3000rpm - 150lbft - yay its starting to pull
4000rpm - 140lbft - oh its died off slightly again
4500rpm - 150lbft - yeah man, starting to pull
5400rpm - 160lbft - awesome its properly on song
6000rpm - 150lbft - oh its dieing off again, still ok though
7000rpm - 130lbft - really dieing off now
7500rpm - 110lbft - hello? is the engine still there? why doenst the throttle work?

On the bodies it will be epic though im sure, so as a stepping stone towards a final point its well worth doing, but those cams really dont seem to be working well on the standard inlet on your engine Dom.

 

[Chip-mk1]

Laine, do you have a before graph anywhere at all? not one you can post later when you get home or something?
Just to really see the difference its made?

End result looks cracking though, certainly a lot better than Dom's one was, still dies off at the top but at least it doesnt plummet like his one does.

 

[Laine_16v]

Laine, do you have a before graph anywhere at all? not one you can post later when you get home or something?

That is the before and after?

I will do an overlay of it on my 186bhp graph when i get home if thats what you mean?

 

[domsclio182]

It will be good I am sure,don't know why you listed the above that was before the cams went in do you have problems reading.

 

[Chip-mk1]

That is the before and after?

I will do an overlay of it on my 186bhp graph when i get home if thats what you mean?

Yes I meant before the cams, as opposed to with cams but not mapped.

 

[Chip-mk1]

It will be good I am sure,don't know why you listed the above that was before the cams went in do you have problems reading.

Doms, clearly yes I did have a problem reading, sorry mate got the two graphs confused, impressive starting BHP then for a standard engine 179! Thats what threw me I think!

Very similar story even after the cams though, in terms of the dieing on its arse at high rpm, but just better figures all round in general

Did a lot more for you then they did for Laine clearly!

 

[domsclio182]

That graph shows before and after mapping of a standard car,my car has picked up gains across the rev range each time it has been mapped to suit,I would not be happy losing a massive chunk of torque low down in the rev range as seems to be the case with laine's car,that's were these cars need the torque as I am sure most people who know these car's well will agree with I am sure

Standard 174 bhp 150 ft/lbs

Remap 179.6 bhp 159.2 ft/lbs

Cams and remap 189.9 bhp 164.2 ft/lbs

 

[Laine_16v]

I havent really got an issue with low down torque IMO, you put your foot down and it still f***s off and goes! I have more to squeeze yet, matched inlets and a different exhaust setup and a few other tweaks and ill be back with a vengeance.

 

[Chip-mk1]

For a road car, 3-4K is where its at, as that is motorway speeds in 5th gear.

 

[Chip-mk1]

I havent really got an issue with low down torque IMO, you put your foot down and it still f**ks off and goes! I have more to squeeze yet, matched inlets and a different exhaust setup and a few other tweaks and ill be back with a vengeance.

I'd love to see your engine now fitted with an RS2, I really do think it would piss past 200bhp and it would fill in some of that bottom end torque too, I think possibly you might lose a little off your peak torque figure where the standard inlet has a particular VE sweetsport at 5000rpm or so, but I dont think it would be much and overall I really do think it would transform it for the better.

 

[domsclio182]

You don't make much sense sometimes mate^

 

[domsclio182]

Lifting the restriction of the standard inlet will in most cases(Itbs are the exception) lose you torque and gain bhp,a good mix of bhp and torque is what you want for a nice driving car.

438's and RS2 have been tried already make what you will of the results

http://www.cliosport.net/forum/showthread.php?552022-Project-182/page9&highlight=wazza+182

 

[Chip-mk1]

You don't make much sense sometimes mate^

Ive just read it back and it still makes sense to me, what in particular do you think doesnt make sense?

 

[Chip-mk1]

Lifting the restriction of the standard inlet will in most cases(Itbs are the exception) lose you torque and gain bhp,a good mix of bhp and torque is what you want for a nice driving car.

438's and RS2 have been tried already make what you will of the results

http://www.cliosport.net/forum/showthread.php?552022-Project-182/page9&highlight=wazza+182

One person failing to get good results isnt enough to convince me, especially when the company involved in all the tuning just happen to sell a competitor product to the RS2 that they would sooner people have instead from them (ie their own bodies package) so they have NO interest in the RS2 getting good results. Its hardly a definitive test, and the fact that C&B's worked fine for James to give over 200bhp does show that at least some cams work with the RS2

 

[domsclio182]

For a road car, 3-4K is where its at, as that is motorway speeds in 5th gear.

This mate^

 

[Chip-mk1]

3-4Krpm in 5th gear is 65-85mph, so thats where I personally think a roadcar could do with being strong.

 

[shiftspark]

Chip, what cams would you recommend for a hillclimb/sprint car as you need good low down torque for the slow corners as most of the tracks we use are 2nd/3rd gear stuff?

 

[Chip-mk1]

When you say low down torque what sort of rpm are you talking? If you are revving to 8K for example surely you never need to be under 5k as you would just change down another gear instead?

 

[Cub.]

Only just seen this thread. Alot of you guys in this thread know this, but i'll summarise mine for those interested in 438's and who may look at this thread both now and in the future.

Standard (bar exhaust and generic map) - 174.8 bhp & 157.6 lb ft
With cams, new induction and remapped - 197 bhp & 165.6 lb ft

The graphs and more details are in here;

http://www.cliosport.net/forum/showthread.php?612638-Cub-172-s-Flamer-Project

 

[shiftspark]

I run in the road class on a standard engine and cup box with a quaife diff, at some it circuits they have very tight low speed 2nd gear corners where I may be as low as 3k so having the power further up is no good as some of the quick cars on the more open circuits are slower as they don't get on the cam quick enough.

 

[Chip-mk1]

What induction are you on? standard inlet?

 

[Silent_Scone]

Is it just me or does 197 seem a tad optimistic

 

[Cub.]

What induction are you on? standard inlet?

Me or shiftspark? If it is me, i'm on standard inlets, and the induction kit is a custom creation from K-tec that i can't give too many details on as they are planning on developing the product. If you want to know more, suggest you give them a ring.

 

[Laine_16v]

Is it just me or does 197 seem a tad optimistic

i don't think so, his torque curve is very very similar to mine, he can just hold his torque an extra 100-200rpm over my engine which is how he nets the higher peak figure.

 

[Cub.]

Is it just me or does 197 seem a tad optimistic

I'm only quoting the figures from the RR. It pulls extremely well and i'm really happy with the drive. Quite a few people on here have checked the K-Tec RR against Surrey RR and had very comparable results. Have a look at my project thread which shows Danny from 519 stating this. Hardly in his interests to 'verify' the K-Tec RR is it..........

 

[Chip-mk1]

Me or shiftspark?

shiftspark I meant.

 

[Silent_Scone]

to be fair your engine made decent torque and good power standard - crying for trumpets