#1  
Old 06-23-2004, 11:16 AM
PONTIAC DUDE's Avatar
PONTIAC DUDE PONTIAC DUDE is offline
Ultimate Warrior
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: West Central Florida
Posts: 14,756
Default

Jim this could turn into a heavy discussion without actually going anywhere, LOL. Yes, peak can remain the same with either cam. However, from the chassis dyno pulls I have run, I see more mid to lower rpm hp #'s. And as we know peak isn't always where it's at. Same applies to heads and everyone wanted to know the peak flow #'s.
I would like to have the additional hp right where my rpm falls when I shift to pick it up.

Give me a set of heads with 10/15 cfm less peak and 15/20 more bottom and mid and I'll beat ya. LOL.

Question about those unsymmetrical Hyd cams? Wouldn't they be harder on the plunger/lifter? more so then a Hyd roller ramp with the roller absorbing the load on the quick dropping ramp with the right spring.
I would think you have more of a chance of spring bounce with a Hyd unsymmetrical cam over a Hyd roller with the same design.

Personally, I had a same design 068 cam made in a Hyd roller, but sold it as I went on to another project, so I can't tell ya. However, the dude in Hawaii might be able to give some info. Comparing specs, the quicker acceleration rate should have been worth a tenth or two. But then again speculation.

Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

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

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:23 AM.

 

About Us

The PY Online Forums is the largest online gathering of Pontiac enthusiasts anywhere in the world. Founded in 1991, it was also the first online forum for people to gather and talk about their Pontiacs. Since then, it has become the mecca of Pontiac technical data and knowledge that no other place can surpass.

 




Copyright © 2017