He killed it. Richard kills it. Vizard kills it. Morris.... Anyone recording their stuff is doing all a great gift. Thank you! Nothing's easy in this deal and it all costs hours of life...nothing is free....time or money. Thanks for the knowledge boys!
@@zacharymorris9917 you do not know what you are talking! about considering DV based his cam on his small block ford database I'm surprised he was in the middle and I am not an LCA fan
@jmflournoy386 keep telling yourself that. I couldn't possibly care less. If you think DV knows what he's talking about, then you will never learn anything just like him. What's your area of expertise that makes you think that you're qualified to assess a cam designer's level of competence???
21 entrants, including DV, did a terrible job designing a cam for this specific application. 1 entrant was a catastrophic failure. 1 entrant got it nearly perfect. Nearly perfect and mid-pack-of- terrible are not remotely close. If they were all ranked compared to the 250 hours of sims i did, the winner would be in the top 10 and within 1-3 hp of #1. DV and the other 21 would be somewhere around 5,000th. My very first educated guess beat his cam by double digits in all 4 categories. All 23 entrants should have been within 3hp of each other in every category.
I really loved this test. Eric Weingartner's efforts are greatly appreciated. I thought he did a good job of making it fair and it was really great that it was unbiased. As for the results, the person that won is no surprise to me. Day in and day out Bobby Biancaniello specs cams and sees results from countless racers, engine builders and enthusiasts. Bobby's cams are in everything from record holding class racing cars to daily drivers. He was a great student and now he is a great expert. Great job Bobby! As for people being surprised by the results, I get it! Every once in a while some dyno work surprises me too. The thing that makes it tough for many is that no one spec was the magic bullet. There was so much to consider: Durations, Lift, Lobe Centers, Lobe Designs etc. Not only does each spec have an effect, but the relationship between each spec has a synergistic effect also. The only thing I can offer to people that study this test is that the person who won has seen a lot of data and has participated in testing with me personally. It was no mistake that Bobby won and he won by quite a bit.
Eric posted every single part of the engine combination including head flows, temperature tested at and he had a cam that he tested at beginning and end which was consistent within 1 ftlbs. Was an excellent contest.
Timing - if I understood Eric correctly, there was a timing curve to ease starting, however the tests were all run form a RPM above where the distributor was at max advance with no variations between dyno runs.
Eric made a video long ago when he started his channel attempting to reach out to you or get your attention on a collaborative project testing some intakes. He also streamed this dyno session live which should be the way these tests are done today. Those people whom contributed to the event got early access to the cam cards and full results. Most of the data hasn’t been released publicly and an overview video hasn’t yet been made. If you watched the streams you where enlightened to the performance of the cams but not the cam cards (unless you contributed to the event).
What made the test very specific was the rules for the competition. Anything that arises that's seemingly unexpected simply means we have a hole in our knowledge
I guess with the LS head flow and valve configuration they need less cam timing events Vs the 23 degree SBC which needs more cam timing events to make up for less head flow cfm and design. Just like hemi heads like a whole different cam timing event .
They made 64 runs. They used Dyno headers and street headers and different sized and length collectors etc..... It came out close to what I expected. I picked the top 10 finishers but not in the order I picked them!
Absolutely there was a clear " winner ". In this case the Cold carb/intake/head flow / valve size and min CSA were overly capable. The Hot Exhaust side was nowhere near as capable, and also the headers were only 1 3/4". The event timings was skewed by the high compression as well. Thus the winner of every single test category has close to the smallest intake lobe and close to the biggest exhaust lobe , with around 20* of split. The CSA was close at 108 to enable plenty of overlap , generating the high peak Hp and Torque numbers. Absolutely no surprise the kid killed it.
Timing was locked at 30⁰ for all cams as per best results with the "control" cam that was ran first and last... No tuning changes after the first texas speed cam was tuned in...
I think everyone that wanted to enter had to send a cam and $100 entry fee. The people that donated to the test get all the cam and dyno data and more even if it was just $20. The winner got $5000 prize for winning. Anyone late tothe game will have to donate $40 to get all of that data.
Eric did everybody a monster favor. It would cost you 10K in cams and 4K in labor to do this same test. -- I wrote my own engine analysis software and it gives me information that I trust for picking runner lengths. At the end of the day though, you can always be wrong. In a race of 40 people, only one person is going to win. If you pay the tech inspection guy to let you cheat, that's great, but if you beat the guy that paid the administrators to let him cheat, you're gonna be the one who gets busted for cheating, and they'll take your victory by default.
Hey Richard....Can You Do A Review On Mast Stroker Cams...I'm Building A 408 Ls Stroker Rectangular Port Heads,10.5 Compression And I Was Thinking On A Couple Of Their Camshafts,But I Don't See Any Reviews....Are They Any Good
You should always check your cams, to make sure they are ground correctly, BEFORE YOU INSTALL THEM, some cam companys have TERRIBLE QUALITY. Some companys only grind good cams if you order them as a custom grind, even if its in their book already. A lot of cam companys can't or won't grind cams that varie less than, 1degree, plus or minus @0.050. In other words a 240 lobe could be 239 or 241. The best cams I've checked are ground on CNC Landis machines, they varie 0.5 at @0.050. I have a file on 47 cams from different companys, just to qualify my statements. ALSO THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH A MECHANICAL CAM GRINDER, like a Berco or Van Norman, if they are maintained and concisely operated. The worst cam I have checked, had 6 degrees variance on the intake lobes, and 8 degrees on the exhaust. WOW THINK ABOUT THAT MESS!!!!
You can run mid 230 duration cams easily on a stock converter its all about idle tuning,has to be electronic throttle control..theres plenty of vids on it.
@@dalethomas9307 Nope..I'm running a a 234/236 on a 112 LSA, 610 lift with smooth idle..I really do encourage people to learn how to tune Idle adaptive spark control and spark smoothing..Just about every time I tune a car that someone has been at before I find the settings have been either left stock or made worse in order to get chop..
I want BTR Brian to host a SpinTron test, open to grinders/competitors. He already has a proven 10,000 RPM Hydraulic Lifter Lobe on 1.8:1 rockers that is not only SUPER STABLE, but about 10x LESS (ie. 5 vs 50) closing valve bounce at 10,000 RPM compared to another 'POPULAR' Vendor's camshaft at 7,500 RPM........ It's true: Everything really is bigger in Texas.
Odd test results - I have seen test results on other muilti-factorial situations that had a repeatable data flier. Why do they happen? Alignment of the stars.
Because the heads were able to support higher rpm,power and flow you can keep the exhaust closed longer, extract more power and still have the flow capabilities to exhaust the exhaust efficiently. However this is for this rpm range 4-7k and knowing whats still on the table. If this engine were to go up to 8k or more the duration may need to be adjusted.
because of the 110 fuel, they could run an early intake close to max the dynamic compression then a big exhaust to hold the power after Peak. No EPA or power brake requirement so they could run lots of overlap and not care about intake flow out the exhaust (which sucks mileage but who cares and makes ex heat but so what here)
@@zacharymorris9917 Mismatch? how? that's all the rpm the lifters would do with those springs only one cam maybe floated the valves lots of road racers limit rpm as do those running non "heads up" that want to run all season It is well known that lots of my builds were for boats and trucks/ motor homes so rpm range was too high for me but...
@@jmflournoy386 the engine combination needs to match ITSELF and the application. Alternatively, the dyno parameters need to match the operating range of the engine combination. Otherwise the results are virtually meaningless. Garbage in, garbage out. This engine combination would normally run 5600-7600ish. Dynoing 4000-7000 made it mandatory to alter the camshaft dramatically in order to win within the parameters. I ran it both ways and the proper camshaft with the proper shift points picked up something like 20+ peak, 40+ average and 70 at the shift point. It's been well over a month since I looked at this so I don't remember exactly.
You mentioned too big of a cam for stock converter however many newer cars have a very high standard stall speed and then lock up particularly newer GM V8 front-wheel drive car has over 3,000 RPM
You said that you didn’t expect to see these results on some of these cams! You of all people knows how it is. This motor loved this cam. The next motor it could be garbage. You can get them kind of the same but for some reason one is different. I think this man should get more credit for what he’s done. This was great for all of us. Also was not a plain stock motor which I think makes it better.
Actually it was simulation THEN test, and the sim predicted the correct winner. EA Pro did not however predict that NK would win every single category.
Super victor but 1000 cfm big carb, dist was locked, IMHO timing does not change much as piston and combustion chamber was same for all as was intake and exhaust- so fair
Vizards cam had a 108 lsa. The winning cam had a 108.5 lsa The main difference was the split. I dont think the winning cam haf some outrageous intensity. He had been selling those lobes for the street for years.
I believe the results were engine specific if it would have been done on a 5.3 and a 6.0 with different heads you would have 3 different winners . That said kudos Eric for being the first to do tests like this Hey while you are reading this next poll should be what other mods did you do to your engine besides cam and valve springs
Since we don't really race dynos, I think avg hp from 4500 rpm to 7000rpm is way more important than peak hp.. challenge needs to be re figured for real world info.
I'm a fan since Engine Masters . I commented on Eric's Y.T. that Dyno results are available from you too . I didn't realize he sold Dyno Data until his scathing response back . I understand now he was TRIGGERED but he wasn't kind. I can forward links (I think Lol) but he's no fan of you like me . Caution.
@@richardholdener1727yeah, he generally sells a book at the end of his testing on a specific engine with all the dyno sheets, build data, changes. It’s not exorbitant, but everyone is used to instant info for free. I have a sbc dyno book somewhere and if nothing else it gave me peace of mind with my choices and was worth the $40 or whatever if I ever need to dig it out again
@Richard - Eric offered early access to the testing data, for people who contributed to the project. There's nothing nefarious going on. @Ronald - How did you think he was gonna respond to a comment like that? Get real, buddy.
@@richardholdener1727 I think Eric sells Dyno results? I don't know for sure but I replied to a commenter that you "Richard" probably has the Dyno Data for free. Well Eric replied like Eric does and wasn't kind. I think he sells Dyno results and pissed him off that I suggested your info for comparison and free. Then basically wrote a book putting your results down , probably just business but not very kind. So I'm happy to forward those comments to you if I can figure out how, not computer savvy. So I mentioned caution . Hope u understand & loyalty towards you.
You said it!!! Arm chair quarter back!! Would have gained more credibility if you commented on what was going to happen prior to the results. My criticism with Engine Masters show was that Steve Brûlée always smirked as if he knew prior to the results rather than blurt out what he knew already. Why I enjoyed Eric Weingarter because he’s seeking answers and not assumptions to finally answer why.
You might be new-I'm not lacking credibility in the dyno testing dept (nor is Steve Brule) ERic did a good job on this cam shoot out and that was conveyed
@@richardholdener1727 I know you gave credit to Eric. Not saying otherwise. And hold a lot of respect for you, Steve Brûlée and your profession. But prior to the test and the commentary, I am suggesting putting up specs with timing events etc of your own and not even necessarily submitting a cam and the reasons why your specs would work with the combination instead of after the fact.
Eric is very proud of his data. He asks for significant $$ to share what he has tested. I really appreciate how you share your learnings with us. I support your channel because of that.
I have his sbc book, it was well worth the $40 today money. I remember paying $29 2001 money for high hp sbc combinations book when I made $5.15 an hour. I still have the book, but man it was hard on a part time dq kid.
Growing up in everyone in my age group, 35-50 learned 80% of our knowledge from RH and DV’s literature. It’s amazing how much things change and how much they stay the same. I remember the boxes of 3/4 race Isky flathead cams, Navarro heads and Winfield model A stuff.
DV does not have a LS database (yet he is working on BBC) he used his SBF I am surprised he did as well as he did and he has guts entering with one hand tied behind his back (garbage in garbage out rule) I am not a fan of LCA cam picking but give DV credit for showing up. There are worse ways to choose a cam- like calling the "help" line IMHO CR was too big for pump gas and too small for E85 You can't tell what overlap or seat timing really is from .050. Compression does not start till the valve is closed Baseline was a Texas Speed, it repeated at end of competition The manifold and carb were what had worked best with the baseline cam. Jetting was fixed from the Texas speed Later a ported Victor did better (but so what) (I've never worked with either, he later also tested a dual plane) Timing and tune was set with the Texas Speed, as was pushrod length with stock base circle- Eric had three lengths of pushrods but it is unclear if any competitors requested a pushrod change Timing was dot to dot so competitors had to grind their timing in. Some indicated that their preferred timing would not fit on the core quickly available (affected LCA slightly, and advance slightly) Lifters were the Cadillac versions only one cam MIGHT have had some valve float at the very top end. No cam went over lift. The wining cam was cam doctored to check that lift was within rules all cams were dual pattern (AFIK) Valves were heavy Winner was not a max effort design according to winners Video which is worth watching see also ruclips.net/video/YRAzoDLI44Y/видео.html from GPI For the record I paid the full entry fee but could not get a cam ground in time, others were late and field was filled
@@thisisyourcaptainspeaking2259 No genius’s. They raised capital for dyno costs and raised additional purse money for those in the competition. No money was made and it cost Eric money. (common sense) As a reward for people contributing to the contest those people are getting data and getting early. The challenge was originally 10 cams and he accepted over 23! Eric had never stated that he won’t release the data for free or not. He originally never even asked people to donate but it changed over time. Most people where in agreement with the cause. Eric constantly gives FREE data away on his channel on a regular bias. He also a sells large booklets of call his dyno and flo testing information which is typically not done most head porters or head companies. Go watch his videos before criticizing him. What kinda information are providing all of us?
No he accepted donations for EARLY access to ALL the data. That’s How everything works. This was recommended by those entering the challenge along with many viewers among multiple channel communities. He also LIVE STREAMED the entire day 2-3 with day 3 being outside the dyno room facing the monitor and gave us updated after each run. All you had to do was watch. Sure you didn’t have cam cards but then donate and contribute to the free show.
This is how crowdfunding works. People who put skin in the game get early access. The rest can wait. It's the same with Patreon, YT memberships, etc. You people act like you've never seen this before.
I believe the results were engine specific if it would have been done on a 5.3 and a 6.0 with different heads you would have 3 different winners . That said kudos Eric for being the first to do tests like this
I thought this would of been a fun test where all the camshaft suppliers would of been on a simulcast and throw barbs at each other while downing a few beers. Maybe they should do that now that the tests are complete. However, armchair (keyboard) engine builders are putting a sour taste to this exercise. It's unfortunate but for me, it gave me a range of options at what my car needs and what cam would compliment it. Lots of information to consume which is what this test was designed for. Let's do heads next...modified or not. I'd like to see Frankenstein heads for head to head with AFR, Dart, Brodix...etc. I'll bring the beer 😁
Could a guy use all the data and apply The Taguchi method is a statistical approach to experimental design used for process optimization, aiming to create robust products and processes by minimizing variation in the output, even when faced with external "noise" factors, by carefully selecting and adjusting key controllable
This wouldn't be a good case for the Taguchi method. That type of DOE/analysis is usually used for when you have a specific target you'd like to hit and you need to measure your variation +/- from that target. You'd want to use a more traditional factorial design to create a predictive model here. I did a number of statistical analysis of the data, but the problem with the data set is there are no cams that "push your limits" so the models I have run pull out incorrect conclusions. For example the factorial design pulled out that avg hp and avg tq will always continue to increase as you increase exhaust duration, but we know this is not true. There needs to be a more robust data set with much "larger" and much "smaller" cams in order to create a better predictive model. But, you can pull good trends from this data set (for instance the model does predict wide splits between intake and exhaust are good for this particular application)
![Chris Langan - The Interview THEY Didn't Want You To See - CTMU [Full Version; Timestamps]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/9miVG2xT5jY/mqdefault.jpg)
Absolutely there was a winner, nothing ridiculous at all. It was a contest with all known engine data. No different than a drag race.
He killed it. Richard kills it. Vizard kills it. Morris.... Anyone recording their stuff is doing all a great gift. Thank you! Nothing's easy in this deal and it all costs hours of life...nothing is free....time or money. Thanks for the knowledge boys!
DV did terrible....
I wouldn't go that far. . @zacharymorris9917
@@zacharymorris9917 you do not know what you are talking! about considering DV based his cam on his small block ford database I'm surprised he was in the middle and I am not an LCA fan
@jmflournoy386 keep telling yourself that. I couldn't possibly care less. If you think DV knows what he's talking about, then you will never learn anything just like him.
What's your area of expertise that makes you think that you're qualified to assess a cam designer's level of competence???
21 entrants, including DV, did a terrible job designing a cam for this specific application. 1 entrant was a catastrophic failure. 1 entrant got it nearly perfect.
Nearly perfect and mid-pack-of- terrible are not remotely close. If they were all ranked compared to the 250 hours of sims i did, the winner would be in the top 10 and within 1-3 hp of #1. DV and the other 21 would be somewhere around 5,000th. My very first educated guess beat his cam by double digits in all 4 categories.
All 23 entrants should have been within 3hp of each other in every category.
I really loved this test. Eric Weingartner's efforts are greatly appreciated. I thought he did a good job of making it fair and it was really great that it was unbiased. As for the results, the person that won is no surprise to me. Day in and day out Bobby Biancaniello specs cams and sees results from countless racers, engine builders and enthusiasts. Bobby's cams are in everything from record holding class racing cars to daily drivers. He was a great student and now he is a great expert. Great job Bobby! As for people being surprised by the results, I get it! Every once in a while some dyno work surprises me too. The thing that makes it tough for many is that no one spec was the magic bullet. There was so much to consider: Durations, Lift, Lobe Centers, Lobe Designs etc. Not only does each spec have an effect, but the relationship between each spec has a synergistic effect also. The only thing I can offer to people that study this test is that the person who won has seen a lot of data and has participated in testing with me personally. It was no mistake that Bobby won and he won by quite a bit.
Winning specs: 238-259@.050, 108LSA 105 ICL, .654 lift 1.7 rockers.
The 2nd place cam specs 247-263 @.050, 109LSA, 105LC by GPI
GPI and the Winner have Videos up
@@jmflournoy386 yea NK performance has the winning cam specs on his site. He's a young dude.
Thanks!
That’s a huge spread in 2 cams
Thank you for talking about Eric's cam testing and pointing out things worth of considering!
Eric posted every single part of the engine combination including head flows, temperature tested at and he had a cam that he tested at beginning and end which was consistent within 1 ftlbs. Was an excellent contest.
Timing - if I understood Eric correctly, there was a timing curve to ease starting, however the tests were all run form a RPM above where the distributor was at max advance with no variations between dyno runs.
What surprised me was how far off the cam card the Comp Cams grind was
I believe that the power levels achieved during those tests are a tribute to the decent head flow the engine had.
The engine didn't even need that much flow. So the question is, did the extra 30-40 cfm in flow not needed actually slow or disrupt velocity?
@@rapidride2 how are you deciding it does not need the flow?
Eric made a video long ago when he started his channel attempting to reach out to you or get your attention on a collaborative project testing some intakes. He also streamed this dyno session live which should be the way these tests are done today. Those people whom contributed to the event got early access to the cam cards and full results. Most of the data hasn’t been released publicly and an overview video hasn’t yet been made. If you watched the streams you where enlightened to the performance of the cams but not the cam cards (unless you contributed to the event).
What made the test very specific was the rules for the competition.
Anything that arises that's seemingly unexpected simply means we have a hole in our knowledge
I was thinking NK performance was. The winner?
yes
I guess with the LS head flow and valve configuration they need less cam timing events Vs the 23 degree SBC which needs more cam timing events to make up for less head flow cfm and design. Just like hemi heads like a whole different cam timing event .
Overlap benefits depend on the exhaust system heaviy
They made 64 runs. They used Dyno headers and street headers and different sized and length collectors etc..... It came out close to what I expected. I picked the top 10 finishers but not in the order I picked them!
I think he said that they ran 1-3/4 chassis headers, to get real-world results, vs dyno headers.
Great video on the cam shootout. Your comments help put this in perspective
Absolutely there was a clear " winner ". In this case the Cold carb/intake/head flow / valve size and min CSA were overly capable. The Hot Exhaust side was nowhere near as capable, and also the headers were only 1 3/4". The event timings was skewed by the high compression as well. Thus the winner of every single test category has close to the smallest intake lobe and close to the biggest exhaust lobe , with around 20* of split. The CSA was close at 108 to enable plenty of overlap , generating the high peak Hp and Torque numbers. Absolutely no surprise the kid killed it.
Timing was locked at 30⁰ for all cams as per best results with the "control" cam that was ran first and last... No tuning changes after the first texas speed cam was tuned in...
I think everyone that wanted to enter had to send a cam and $100 entry fee. The people that donated to the test get all the cam and dyno data and more even if it was just $20. The winner got $5000 prize for winning. Anyone late tothe game will have to donate $40 to get all of that data.
Thats what I originally ask, would the camshaft duration increased would make no difference now or point if anymore would be too much
Independent Motorsports RUclips channel based in Australia is doing a camshaft comparison that is pretty awesome.
Eric did everybody a monster favor. It would cost you 10K in cams and 4K in labor to do this same test.
-- I wrote my own engine analysis software and it gives me information that I trust for picking runner lengths. At the end of the day though, you can always be wrong. In a race of 40 people, only one person is going to win. If you pay the tech inspection guy to let you cheat, that's great, but if you beat the guy that paid the administrators to let him cheat, you're gonna be the one who gets busted for cheating, and they'll take your victory by default.
Hey Richard....Can You Do A Review On Mast Stroker Cams...I'm Building A 408 Ls Stroker Rectangular Port Heads,10.5 Compression And I Was Thinking On A Couple Of Their Camshafts,But I Don't See Any Reviews....Are They Any Good
I'm sure they have data on those motors
@richardholdener1727 I only seen the cam specs no dyno testing no nothing...just A video or 2 on the Intakes
You should always check your cams, to make sure they are ground correctly, BEFORE YOU INSTALL THEM, some cam companys have TERRIBLE QUALITY. Some companys only grind good cams if you order them as a custom grind, even if its in their book already. A lot of cam companys can't or won't grind cams that varie less than, 1degree, plus or minus @0.050. In other words a 240 lobe could be 239 or 241. The best cams I've checked are ground on CNC Landis machines, they varie 0.5 at @0.050. I have a file on 47 cams from different companys, just to qualify my statements. ALSO THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH A MECHANICAL CAM GRINDER, like a Berco or Van Norman, if they are maintained and concisely operated. The worst cam I have checked, had 6 degrees variance on the intake lobes, and 8 degrees on the exhaust. WOW THINK ABOUT THAT MESS!!!!
Hello said timing was 18 at idle and 30 for all of them. So it would assume it would sweep.
You can run mid 230 duration cams easily on a stock converter its all about idle tuning,has to be electronic throttle control..theres plenty of vids on it.
Sure it can be done but the combo is always a turd from a dead stop.
@@dalethomas9307 and it still idles like shit
@@dalethomas9307 Nope..I'm running a a 234/236 on a 112 LSA, 610 lift with smooth idle..I really do encourage people to learn how to tune Idle adaptive spark control and spark smoothing..Just about every time I tune a car that someone has been at before I find the settings have been either left stock or made worse in order to get chop..
Yes I found it it interesting on how it made that much HP. But I was guessing the maximum was 670.. But with that small of a cam?
I want BTR Brian to host a SpinTron test, open to grinders/competitors. He already has a proven 10,000 RPM Hydraulic Lifter Lobe on 1.8:1 rockers that is not only SUPER STABLE, but about 10x LESS (ie. 5 vs 50) closing valve bounce at 10,000 RPM compared to another 'POPULAR' Vendor's camshaft at 7,500 RPM........ It's true: Everything really is bigger in Texas.
there are some unstable lobes out there for sure
When you ran lsa tests ond the more overlap the engine had the more power it had across the sweep.
Is there a chart available for all the cams, with comments, perhaps?
On Speedtalk and elsewhere
I want to see specifics! Show us the spread
What was the goal of the test? Just maximum hp? I will check it out
Winner was based on 4 categories peak HP, peak TQ, average HP/TQ
This is why I tell Richard that custom cams rule for custom setups.
And why he educates you by telling you there is no 1 cam for any combo
I noticed all the ones made good hp had at least 250+ exhaust duration and ones with good torque were in the ivc 41-48 and poor torque had 48-55.
Odd test results - I have seen test results on other muilti-factorial situations that had a repeatable data flier. Why do they happen? Alignment of the stars.
Nk performance won with something like 20+ extra duration on exhaust why did this work so well?
Because the heads were able to support higher rpm,power and flow you can keep the exhaust closed longer, extract more power and still have the flow capabilities to exhaust the exhaust efficiently.
However this is for this rpm range 4-7k and knowing whats still on the table. If this engine were to go up to 8k or more the duration may need to be adjusted.
because of the 110 fuel, they could run an early intake close to max the dynamic compression then a big exhaust to hold the power after Peak. No EPA or power brake requirement so they could run lots of overlap and not care about intake flow out the exhaust (which sucks mileage but who cares and makes ex heat but so what here)
It wasn't extra exhaust duration. It was an overly small intake lobe to conform to Eric's RPM window mismatch.
@@zacharymorris9917 Mismatch? how? that's all the rpm the lifters would do with those springs only one cam maybe floated the valves lots of road racers limit rpm as do those running non "heads up" that want to run all season It is well known that lots of my builds were for boats and trucks/ motor homes so rpm range was too high for me but...
@@jmflournoy386 the engine combination needs to match ITSELF and the application. Alternatively, the dyno parameters need to match the operating range of the engine combination. Otherwise the results are virtually meaningless. Garbage in, garbage out.
This engine combination would normally run 5600-7600ish. Dynoing 4000-7000 made it mandatory to alter the camshaft dramatically in order to win within the parameters. I ran it both ways and the proper camshaft with the proper shift points picked up something like 20+ peak, 40+ average and 70 at the shift point. It's been well over a month since I looked at this so I don't remember exactly.
It would be interesting to average all the cam specs and grind a cam to the average and then test it.
I'm sure if you look, there is already a middle of the road cam there
You need to check out the cam dr video.
Is this a small cam for a stock blower e85 lt4 223 245 .650 lift 114 lsa?
no
thank you.
You mentioned too big of a cam for stock converter however many newer cars have a very high standard stall speed and then lock up particularly newer GM V8 front-wheel drive car has over 3,000 RPM
3000 rpm stall on a stock converter?
You said that you didn’t expect to see these results on some of these cams! You of all people knows how it is. This motor loved this cam. The next motor it could be garbage. You can get them kind of the same but for some reason one is different. I think this man should get more credit for what he’s done. This was great for all of us. Also was not a plain stock motor which I think makes it better.
Was it a computer simulated test or real dyno mule pulls?
Real dyno numbers
real test
Actually it was simulation THEN test, and the sim predicted the correct winner. EA Pro did not however predict that NK would win every single category.
There was some stipulation that the cams must be safe @ 7000 or disqualified as well. But timing has never been mentioned
I'm pretty sure whatever the timing was it was not changed or optimized for each cam.
Timing was mentioned many times. 18@idle 30 degrees all in by 2500rpm
@@rogeroaks2865 exactly but I could have been wrong about my comment on locked timing
The 3412 flex fuel injectors are 50lb.
30 degrees timing all in at 2000 rpm
Super victor but 1000 cfm big carb, dist was locked, IMHO timing does not change much as piston and combustion chamber was same for all as was intake and exhaust- so fair
turns out dist was not locked but was all in early
It should duplicate or it’s not a valid test IMO
Billy does not work at Comp Cams anymore
Need to see the cam dr results on the winning camshaft .... It is not quite what you think it is
??? Please explain
@ravenwood1804 the events on the cam card for that cam will not make that power .. so the question is what are the actual events on the cam
@@scotthatch4548cam card was spot on.
Vizards cam had a 108 lsa. The winning cam had a 108.5 lsa
The main difference was the split. I dont think the winning cam haf some outrageous intensity. He had been selling those lobes for the street for years.
30 deg timing flat from 2k rpm up
I wish Eric would test or even put on the test engine. With Charlie's intake manifold
I was a two piece
I think the timing was locked out
Nope, it idled at 18° and was all in at 2500 rpm at 30°
Old school Isky 305 Mega cam
Have people conceded that one cam made the most power?
On the dyno only, yes, one cam barely won!
conceded?
@@richardholdener1727 I know dont care, most people understand.
You don't have any information but you're doing a full youtube video on it??? Really???
did you not watch?
Yes he did
@@richardholdener1727 YES, watched it live was an excellent contest
I believe the results were engine specific if it would have been done on a 5.3 and a 6.0 with different heads you would have 3 different winners . That said kudos Eric for being the first to do tests like this Hey while you are reading this next poll should be what other mods did you do to your engine besides cam and valve springs
If you are going to design a cam I think you have the overlap right on the money. My opinion.
which varies on you rpm range and many other things like intake and exhaust
@@jmflournoy386 yes
Since we don't really race dynos, I think avg hp from 4500 rpm to 7000rpm is way more important than peak hp.. challenge needs to be re figured for real world info.
Winner made highest avg hp also.
I'm a fan since Engine Masters .
I commented on Eric's Y.T. that Dyno results are available from you too . I didn't realize he sold Dyno Data until his scathing response back . I understand now he was TRIGGERED but he wasn't kind. I can forward links (I think Lol) but he's no fan of you like me . Caution.
Sold dyno data?
@@richardholdener1727yeah, he generally sells a book at the end of his testing on a specific engine with all the dyno sheets, build data, changes. It’s not exorbitant, but everyone is used to instant info for free. I have a sbc dyno book somewhere and if nothing else it gave me peace of mind with my choices and was worth the $40 or whatever if I ever need to dig it out again
@Richard - Eric offered early access to the testing data, for people who contributed to the project. There's nothing nefarious going on.
@Ronald - How did you think he was gonna respond to a comment like that? Get real, buddy.
@@michaelblacktree who said nefarious ? I believe I said Eric was triggered. Let's not get it twisted... Pay Eric for Dyno Data or free from Richard
@@richardholdener1727 I think Eric sells Dyno results? I don't know for sure but I replied to a commenter that you "Richard" probably has the Dyno Data for free. Well Eric replied like Eric does and wasn't kind. I think he sells Dyno results and pissed him off that I suggested your info for comparison and free.
Then basically wrote a book putting your results down , probably just business but not very kind. So I'm happy to forward those comments to you if I can figure out how, not computer savvy. So I mentioned caution . Hope u understand & loyalty towards you.
You said it!!! Arm chair quarter back!! Would have gained more credibility if you commented on what was going to happen prior to the results. My criticism with Engine Masters show was that Steve Brûlée always smirked as if he knew prior to the results rather than blurt out what he knew already. Why I enjoyed Eric Weingarter because he’s seeking answers and not assumptions to finally answer why.
You might be new-I'm not lacking credibility in the dyno testing dept (nor is Steve Brule) ERic did a good job on this cam shoot out and that was conveyed
There's always "that guy", LOL.
Hard to comment much on it before hand off you don't know what everyone's cam specs are
@@richardholdener1727 I know you gave credit to Eric. Not saying otherwise. And hold a lot of respect for you, Steve Brûlée and your profession. But prior to the test and the commentary, I am suggesting putting up specs with timing events etc of your own and not even necessarily submitting a cam and the reasons why your specs would work with the combination instead of after the fact.
Brûlée probably has more dyno test runs than the rest of RUclips combined. I for one like to see the results not a man’s assumption of them.
Eric is very proud of his data. He asks for significant $$ to share what he has tested. I really appreciate how you share your learnings with us. I support your channel because of that.
Compare the number of subscribers. Eric has a business to run. The time taken to do content he does takes away from his business.
I have his sbc book, it was well worth the $40 today money. I remember paying $29 2001 money for high hp sbc combinations book when I made $5.15 an hour. I still have the book, but man it was hard on a part time dq kid.
I paid 20 bucks and got the cam cards, dyno sheets and charts. For all the work he put in I feel it was more than fair.
Dude is a wealth of knowledge and shares a ton for free.
Why not find out all the info BEFORE making a video about the subject…….🤪
Why not understand the video before making a comment
Growing up in everyone in my age group, 35-50 learned 80% of our knowledge from RH and DV’s literature. It’s amazing how much things change and how much they stay the same. I remember the boxes of 3/4 race Isky flathead cams, Navarro heads and Winfield model A stuff.
DV does not have a LS database (yet he is working on BBC) he used his SBF I am surprised he did as well as he did and he has guts entering with one hand tied behind his back (garbage in garbage out rule) I am not a fan of LCA cam picking but give DV credit for showing up. There are worse ways to choose a cam- like calling the "help" line
IMHO CR was too big for pump gas and too small for E85
You can't tell what overlap or seat timing really is from .050. Compression does not start till the valve is closed
Baseline was a Texas Speed, it repeated at end of competition
The manifold and carb were what had worked best with the baseline cam. Jetting was fixed from the Texas speed
Later a ported Victor did better (but so what) (I've never worked with either, he later also tested a dual plane)
Timing and tune was set with the Texas Speed, as was pushrod length with stock base circle- Eric had three lengths of pushrods but it is unclear if any competitors requested a pushrod change
Timing was dot to dot so competitors had to grind their timing in. Some indicated that their preferred timing would not fit on the core quickly available (affected LCA slightly, and advance slightly)
Lifters were the Cadillac versions only one cam MIGHT have had some valve float at the very top end.
No cam went over lift. The wining cam was cam doctored to check that lift was within rules
all cams were dual pattern (AFIK) Valves were heavy
Winner was not a max effort design according to winners Video which is worth watching
see also ruclips.net/video/YRAzoDLI44Y/видео.html from GPI
For the record I paid the full entry fee but could not get a cam ground in time, others were late and field was filled
Thanks for this info. Go after it the next time - hard & fast!
David is given nothing but love here, but when he and I talk, we speak the truth to each other
Dyno accuracy is not important in this test. R&R (repeatability and reproducability) is!
I clicked on to see if you were a complainer crybaby but I gave you a thumbs up for a good video
Eric charged money or accepted donation to get cam specs. Alot of us are still in dark what was tested
Secret squirrel stuff. They can keep it, I don't want to know.
@@thisisyourcaptainspeaking2259
No genius’s. They raised capital for dyno costs and raised additional purse money for those in the competition. No money was made and it cost Eric money. (common sense) As a reward for people contributing to the contest those people are getting data and getting early. The challenge was originally 10 cams and he accepted over 23! Eric had never stated that he won’t release the data for free or not. He originally never even asked people to donate but it changed over time. Most people where in agreement with the cause. Eric constantly gives FREE data away on his channel on a regular bias. He also a sells large booklets of call his dyno and flo testing information which is typically not done most head porters or head companies. Go watch his videos before criticizing him. What kinda information are providing all of us?
No he accepted donations for EARLY access to ALL the data. That’s How everything works. This was recommended by those entering the challenge along with many viewers among multiple channel communities. He also LIVE STREAMED the entire day 2-3 with day 3 being outside the dyno room facing the monitor and gave us updated after each run. All you had to do was watch. Sure you didn’t have cam cards but then donate and contribute to the free show.
No darkness, all info was put out properly
This is how crowdfunding works. People who put skin in the game get early access. The rest can wait. It's the same with Patreon, YT memberships, etc. You people act like you've never seen this before.
Richard Holdener thank you for each and everything that you have done,, and shared with all of us!
I believe the results were engine specific if it would have been done on a 5.3 and a 6.0 with different heads you would have 3 different winners . That said kudos Eric for being the first to do tests like this
and you would have different cams entered
I thought this would of been a fun test where all the camshaft suppliers would of been on a simulcast and throw barbs at each other while downing a few beers. Maybe they should do that now that the tests are complete. However, armchair (keyboard) engine builders are putting a sour taste to this exercise. It's unfortunate but for me, it gave me a range of options at what my car needs and what cam would compliment it. Lots of information to consume which is what this test was designed for. Let's do heads next...modified or not. I'd like to see Frankenstein heads for head to head with AFR, Dart, Brodix...etc. I'll bring the beer 😁
...
“Yeah it was down a cylinder when they ran my camshaft so that’s to be expected “ 😂
Unfortunately your review is not good, you don't even know the engine specs tested, this is not your best work.
Could a guy use all the data and apply The Taguchi method is a statistical approach to experimental design used for process optimization, aiming to create robust products and processes by minimizing variation in the output, even when faced with external "noise" factors, by carefully selecting and adjusting key controllable
This wouldn't be a good case for the Taguchi method. That type of DOE/analysis is usually used for when you have a specific target you'd like to hit and you need to measure your variation +/- from that target. You'd want to use a more traditional factorial design to create a predictive model here. I did a number of statistical analysis of the data, but the problem with the data set is there are no cams that "push your limits" so the models I have run pull out incorrect conclusions. For example the factorial design pulled out that avg hp and avg tq will always continue to increase as you increase exhaust duration, but we know this is not true. There needs to be a more robust data set with much "larger" and much "smaller" cams in order to create a better predictive model. But, you can pull good trends from this data set (for instance the model does predict wide splits between intake and exhaust are good for this particular application)
@Thenspratt14 thx for the explanation.