Brian Crower Stage 1 Cams

[fooddude]

+60whp NA cams please

*ignorant request* I admit lol

[shaunsweeney]

Originally Posted by fooddude

+60whp NA cams please

*ignorant request* I admit lol

This isn't an LSx

[CajunFRS]

Originally Posted by shaunsweeney

This isn't an LSx

Don't kill his dreams!

[CajunFRS]

If it isn't at least 25whp with supporting mods. I don't see how its worth cracking open the heads.

Time will tell.

[350matt]

Trouble is it all looks a bit expensive for even 20 bhp doesn't it?

mainly because you've got to drop the motor out

so there's $1000 bill right there plus $600 - 1400 for cams & springs plus someones time to fit them its goiing to be getting on for $3K by the time your done which is nearly the price of a FI kit

[fooddude]

Originally Posted by 350matt

Trouble is it all looks a bit expensive for even 20 bhp doesn't it?

mainly because you've got to drop the motor out

so there's $1000 bill right there plus $600 - 1400 for cams & springs plus someones time to fit them its goiing to be getting on for $3K by the time your done which is nearly the price of a FI kit

I don't think anyone would shell out $2-3k for 20whp. 40'ish whp would def be worth it though (that's already similar to a mild FI setup's power); but I think even 30-40 whp from cams would be very hard to attain. I remember the NA honda days, it would be difficult to get anything over 20whp from a 1.6-2.0 dohc vtec.

[Dephective]

^ yes there are lots of things that cost much less in relation to cost/horsepower gained, but 20WHP on an n/a motor for 3k? that's nothing to scoff at if you have already maxed out your bolt on breather mods.

Also, the power gained on a FI motor will certainly be much higher than gains on an N/A motor. Being able to move more gases in a single cycle is paramount to making more power, now if you pressurize that gas and give it more "time" to breathe, then you will be making much more power indeed.

[Dephective]

Originally Posted by fooddude

I don't think anyone would shell out $2-3k for 20whp. 40'ish whp would def be worth it though; but I think even 30-40 whp from cams would be very hard to attain. I remember the NA honda days, it would be difficult to get anything over 20whp from a 1.6-2.0 dohc vtec.

Wrong, you get a lot out of cams from Honda because of their VTEC cam profiles having the ability to alter exhaust as well as intake. Unfortunately we don't have this ability, so we won't see AS MUCH of a gain. I've got my flame suit on already, but K series motors make incredible power from cams and breather mods on N/A. Even B series motors are pretty surprising.

Daily drivability is subjective. One person that says a lobe-y idle is a no-no, one person embraces it. Some people like a lot of low-end to putt around town, some people don't mind keeping in it a lower gear than what previously would have been called for while cruising.

I'm not saying it will for sure be beneficial to run n/a for a non-race application, but I am saying that power is achievable. It's just a question of how aggressive does your profile have to be to get there. If those numbers are in fact the stock specs, I suspect a 272 cam (like so many EJ's run) or even 280's for FI folks would work wonders. 272's are perfectly streetable and I wouldn't be surprised if that's what they are using for their "Stage 1" in this application.

[wparsons]

Originally Posted by Dephective

Wrong, you get a lot out of cams from Honda because of their VTEC cam profiles having the ability to alter exhaust as well as intake. Unfortunately we don't have this ability, so we won't see AS MUCH of a gain. I've got my flame suit on already, but K series motors make incredible power from cams and breather mods on N/A. Even B series motors are pretty surprising.

Daily drivability is subjective. One person that says a lobe-y idle is a no-no, one person embraces it. Some people like a lot of low-end to putt around town, some people don't mind keeping in it a lower gear than what previously would have been called for while cruising.

Woah woah woah...

VTEC does nothing for independence of intake and exhaust, even a SOHC non VTEC engine can have the intake and exhaust lobes altered independently when the cam is being ground.

Any DOHC engine can adjust the cam phasing between intake and exhaust, if it doesn't have variable valve timing you do this manually with adjustable cam sprockets.

Our engines do have independent variable valve timing on the intake and exhaust cams, so the ECU can (and does) adjust them independently.

What VTEC does do that we can't do is give two different cam profiles for different lift and duration. It lets you run a very different grind for higher RPM use than the low RPM grind, that's why they can run much more aggressive cams and still be very streetable. I don't doubt that an FA20 could make more power than a K20, but the K20 will be way more civilized at low revs.

[OrbitalEllipses]

Originally Posted by Dimman

Those figures are wonky.

They look like full duration (big numbers) and duration @ .050".

I don't think they are .26x" max lift.

@Calum Brian Crower =/= Crower. BC, as @Dimman has pointed out, grossly overrates their cams. Take a look at a BC 272 EJ cam...it's much closer to a Kelford 264 than it is to 272.

[hmong337]

Finally, a set of aftermarket cams! Anxious to see further developement with this.

[Dimman]

Originally Posted by OrbitalEllipses

@Calum Brian Crower =/= Crower. BC, as @Dimman has pointed out, grossly overrates their cams. Take a look at a BC 272 EJ cam...it's much closer to a Kelford 264 than it is to 272.

The method of total duration vs duration @ .050" is pretty standard. I wouldn't say BC is any different than the industry norm. Always look at the .050" lift duration when comparing between companies figures. Only if they don't provide duration @ .050" would I say they are deliberately trying to mask the figures. BC does so I don't have a problem with their numbers.

I think these guys just mislabeled duration @ .050" as 'lift'.

But as @arghx7 mentioned the full profile is the only thing that shows the whole cam story.

[arghx7]

Originally Posted by Dimman

The method of total duration vs duration @ .050" is pretty standard. I wouldn't say BC is any different than the industry norm. Always look at the .050" lift duration when comparing between companies figures. Only if they don't provide duration @ .050" would I say they are deliberately trying to mask the figures. BC does so I don't have a problem with their numbers.

I think these guys just mislabeled duration @ .050" as 'lift'.

But as @arghx7 mentioned the full profile is the only thing that shows the whole cam story.

Well here's where it gets tricky. .050" is about 1.25mm . That's a lot of lift to be rating your duration at. You're ignoring possibly many degrees of valve opening time. 0.05" may be standard for measuring duration for aftermarket performance cams but it's not necessarily that way in other applications of camshaft manufacturing.

Now, you might say, why should I care about duration at 0.5mm lift? or at 1mm lift? The answer is simple: overlap volume. Let's look at this picture again:



The area under the curve where the two profiles meet at a given cam phasing (cam centerlines) could be referred to as the overlap volume. This is important... if we're overlapping at say 0.5mm of lift, and the valve is actually open (not just some lash or whatever), that affects flow in the cylinder. It affects for example residual gas (knock sensitivity) affects fresh air blowthrough (scavenging), and it can affect dethrottling for pumping loss.

That's why it's important to know the full grind of the cam. You need it so you can understand the overlap volume. There's more to cams than arguing over who has the biggest number (some nominal valve lift or duration).

[Grip Ronin]

what material are these gonna be made from? i know they were saying the di cam has to be stronger then average. aggressive na cams would be nice