Question about...

[timsiford at hushmail.com]

Bob,

I am running a CompCams Xtreme hydraulic roller.  I pulled the following 
specs off of Comps Site.  HOWEVER, I had this cam custom ground on a 112LSA 
(before comp offered that as a standard grind) and I am running the cam 
with 1.6 rollers as compared to the 1.5 ratings.  The specs below are for 
the 110 LSA version.  They didn't have the specs on the 112 version up yet 
...

PART # 08-422-8                                       
GRIND NUMBER: CS XR270HR-10                           
ENGINE: CHEVY SM BLK 305-350                          
	                 INTAKE   EXHAUST                     
VALVE ADJUSTMENT  HYD      HYD                        
GROSS VALVE LIFT   .495     .502                      
.006  TAPPET LIFT  270      276                      
VALVE TIMING     OPEN     CLOSE                       
AT  .006 INT     29 BTDC  61 ABDC                     
         EXH     72 BBDC  24 ATDC                     

THESE SPECS ARE FOR CAM INSTALLED                     
AT  106  INTAKE CENTER LINE                           
	                  INTAKE  EXHAUST                     
DURATION AT .050    218      224                      
LOBE LIFT         .3300    .3350                      
LOBE SEPARATION     110                               

Tim



At Thu, 16 Nov 2000 11:07:02 -500, rrauscher at nni.com wrote:

>
>
>Tim,
>
>I was wondering what cam you are running in the 350. (I think
>you once posted a CompCams). Believe it or not, with the Isky
>cam that I'm running in a 327, I am also running 42deg of
>timing at WOT (~12.6afr). Aluminum L98 heads. The difference
>in how well the engine runs going from 36/38deg to 42deg is
>substantial.
>
>I approached this value slowly and with caution. Apparently,
>with this cam and the valve timing, it likes a lot of ignition
>advance. I was surprised at my results. This is supposed to be
>due to an early intake closing.
>
>It will be interesting to get some true wot afr readings. . .
>
>BobR.
>
>>
>>Sounds like I am doing everything wrong ....
>>
>>160deg thermostat
>>AFRs at WOT similar to the STOCK AUJP chip (curve shifted, slightly 
>higher)
>
>>Mega Timing
>>
>>Oh well.  Guess if I did it correctly then maybe I would be faster? 
> Maybe
>
>>my car will live longer?
>>
>>I tried less timing.  I tried less fuel.  I tried less timing and less 
>fuel.
>
>> The car really likes this setup.  And, with 12.2's @ 112 on the stock 
>bottom
>
>>end I am *-NOT-* complaining.  I have seen very very few L98s do this 
>so
>>I must be doing something right.  Very good points made about longevity.
>> This is not my daily driver ... actually hoping that I run it into 
>the
>>ground so I have a reason to build my 420.  So, longevity is not my 
>goal
>>here.  I'll give the car what it likes in order to get the best times 
>out
>
>>of her.  Admission: What it likes and what it -needs- may be two different
>
>>things.  Understood.  But, it runs faster with what it wants.  I know 
>several
>
>>others with similar combinations (we compared bins) who are running 
>in the
>
>>11.8's/11.9's with a 383 all naturally aspirated (and those cars are 
>daily
>
>>drivers).  A good point is that I want to make is that these Air/fuel 
>ratios
>
>>and those timing numbers are only for WOT.  They are not for daily 
>driving.
>
>> They are not that way for 'normal everyday driving'.  My BLMs are 
>about
>>128 across the board and the timing is conservative.
>>
>>Somehow though ... I don't think that I am running that 'calculated' 
>AFR
>>at WOT.  I'll know in the spring when I take her to be dyno'd and get 
>a
>>WB on it for a couple pulls.
>>
>>Thanks for all the info and the heads up regarding longevity.  I appreciate
>
>>all the info.  All very good points.
>>
>>Does anyone have a similar setup and 30lb injectors??  What pulse widths
>>are you guys seeing at WOT (at what RPMs)?
>>
>>Tim
>>
>>At Wed, 15 Nov 2000 22:08:32 -0500, "Bruce Plecan" <nacelp at bright.net> 
>wrote:
>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>That's what they do with the 160d Thermostats.
>>>Notice how they normally are a let down, in measured performance, 
>but
>>>still
>>>are in business.  They exist cause the feel fast and joe average is
>>>happy
>>>with that
>>>Bruce
>>>
>>>
>>>> Seems this would be a 'trick' that unscrupulous chip makers would
>>>use. fat
>>>> top end and mega timing... risking the blueprint?
>>>
>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>> From: Bruce Plecan <nacelp at bright.net>
>>>
>>>> > Also, have said rich and too much timing feels fast yet folks 
>still
>>>do
>>>it
>>>> > all the time.
>>>> > It just feels so good, folks do it.
>>>
>>>------------------------------------------------------------------
>--
>--------------------------------------------------------------------
>--------
>To unsubscribe from gmecm, send "unsubscribe gmecm" (without the quotes)
>in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo at lists.diy-efi.org
>