Camshafts vs Stroker

[LamarTSi]

Someone know which camshafts set is better to put in a stroker motor (2.3/2.4) with a BIG turbo ?

A local guy in the 10's is using the stock 1G cams in his 2.4L, another local guy paid a lot of cash to get custom cams from Crower.

Also, I heard there is not much gain using HKS 272's. Like we can cut by half or more, the normal gain of these cams when put in a 2.0L with big turbo.

Someone can explain that ?!

Thanks

ps: This is not a "are the 272s good cams" thread. Everone know 272's are the perfect match for a 2.0L with big turbo.

 

[greathuskie]

bigger cams=more air

regardless of what size the motor is the cams do the same thing on all of tehm, allow more air into the motor

ergo, bigger cams on your car would be just as good as if you had them on a 2.0l

 

[LamarTSi]

bigger cams=more air

regardless of what size the motor is the cams do the same thing on all of tehm, allow more air into the motor

ergo, bigger cams on your car would be just as good as if you had them on a 2.0l

I was thinking like you before talking to the guy who asked Crower to make custom cams...

A good exemple I guess, is the race Webcams (bigger by specs), they give a poor idle without giving more hp than the HKS 272's.

My engine is a 2.3L, I want to revv it a ~8500rpm, I just bought a set of 272's and the first thing i hear is "you bought it for nothing". yay!

 

[autronicDSM]

Actually you'd be better off with custom cams. Stroke changes piston's speed therefore it may change when it draws most air so you want to match your cams to your turbo/motor. I don't know much more though. Try finding shop called Elgin cams or something like that and talk to them what would be better. I've heard guy makes very good cams. Of course any bigger cam for 2.0 should give you gain on a stroker.

 

[LamarTSi]

Actually you'd be better off with custom cams. Stroke changes piston's speed therefore it may change when it draws most air so you want to match your cams to your turbo/motor. I don't know much more though. Try finding shop called Elgin cams or something like that and talk to them what would be better. I've heard guy makes very good cams. Of course any bigger cam for 2.0 should give you gain on a stroker.

Thanks man, I found the website on google: http://www.elgincams.com/

 

[Kingdom]

i always thought that the cams would make better results on a stroker then it would on a regular engine if they were built with the same setup.

Because the stroker is probably choked more by the stock cams?

Another thing I am not sure about is the idle. On domestics when you go with a stroker motor they tend to idle better if you dont change the cam. Because your dealing with a larger motor and needs more air.

My friends has a 98 camaro ss, and he did the bolt on mod with a heads and cam package. His cam was pretty aggressive and lopey in idle, then he went 382 stroker and stayed with the same head and cam package and the car idles way better then before.

so would a 272 cams idle better on a 2.3-.4 stroker than on a regular 2.0?

 

[talonted_one]

Thanks man, I found the website on google: http://www.elgincams.com/

I had this question a while ago on another forum and they all pretty much laughed at me.


I would be very appreciative if you let us all know what Elgin says about our 2.3, and 2.4l motors when it comes to cam spec choices.

 

[sunflashx]

so would a 272 cams idle better on a 2.3-.4 stroker than on a regular 2.0?

Yes. I switched from 264/272's to 272/272's and my 2.4L is slightly less lumpy than it was in the 2.0L and pulls more vaccum at idle.

 

[anoldsman]

Someone know which camshafts set is better to put in a stroker motor (2.3/2.4) with a BIG turbo ?
A local guy in the 10's is using the stock 1G cams in his 2.4L, another local guy paid a lot of cash to get custom cams from Crower.
Also, I heard there is not much gain using HKS 272's. Like we can cut by half or more, the normal gain of these cams when put in a 2.0L with big turbo.
Someone can explain this?

You will need a larger cam to obtain the same rpm range. A larger motor will "tame" the camshaft. If you want power to ~8500 rpm you will need a fairly large camshaft. I am also assuming that you will have some type of aftermarket fuel management system. The HKS 272/272 combo will work well for the stroker but it will not pull as well all the way to 8500+ in the larger motor as it does in the 2.0L.
I do not want to turn this into an advertising forum but COMP has a couple of new grinds that will work well in the 2.3/2.4L motors. The part numbers are 101300 and 101400. They are more aggressive so I recommend aftermarket springs and retainers for the rpms that you require. The 101400 is 220/.415" intake and 220/.399" exhaust. This should do very well for your application. The camshafts were just recently finished so there is nothing on the COMP website yet. But, if you have any questions just ask. I hope that this helps.

Chris

 

[LamarTSi]

I had this question a while ago on another forum and they all pretty much laughed at me.


I would be very appreciative if you let us all know what Elgin says about our 2.3, and 2.4l motors when it comes to cam spec choices.

it's always like that, just don't care... Camshafts specifications depend of many things:

rpm range, displacement, bore, stroke, rods longer, piston pin offset, compression, head cfm air flow, valves size, intake setup, exhaust setup and more.

So, if someone say the opposite... :thumbdown

You will need a larger cam to obtain the same rpm range. A larger motor will "tame" the camshaft. If you want power to ~8500 rpm you will need a fairly large camshaft. I am also assuming that you will have some type of aftermarket fuel management system. The HKS 272/272 combo will work well for the stroker but it will not pull as well all the way to 8500+ in the larger motor as it does in the 2.0L.
I do not want to turn this into an advertising forum but COMP has a couple of new grinds that will work well in the 2.3/2.4L motors. The part numbers are 101300 and 101400. They are more aggressive so I recommend aftermarket springs and retainers for the rpms that you require. The 101400 is 220/.415" intake and 220/.399" exhaust. This should do very well for your application. The camshafts were just recently finished so there is nothing on the COMP website yet. But, if you have any questions just ask. I hope that this helps.

Chris

Yeah, I have all supporting mods, that's why i'm asking for the perfect camshafts matchs... I just speed money on HKS 272's and don't think they will give me good gain. Probably more than if I use 1G stock camshafts but I started to consider 2.4 stock camshafts too. But I really don't know if they fit on 2.0L head.

Thanks for the part number, I already have Crower Springs so I'm ready to put in any aggressive camshafts I guess. I don't know if it supose to be a secret but Crower will make cams for stroker soon, if they aren't already made...

What do you think of the RACE Webcams too? They give a poor idle on 2.0L and are very aggressive. Maybe they will be good on a stroker ?

 

[TargeT]

I also went with 272/272 HKS's on my 2.3 (or will when it gets done) I figure the extra air flow is needed, but i agree that they aren't ment for this engine,, I'm betting there will be zero idle issues due to the extra displacement.

 

[anoldsman]

Yeah, I have all supporting mods, that's why i'm asking for the perfect camshafts matchs... I just speed money on HKS 272's and don't think they will give me good gain. Probably more than if I use 1G stock camshafts but I started to consider 2.4 stock camshafts too. But I really don't know if they fit on 2.0L head.
Thanks for the part number, I already have Crower Springs so I'm ready to put in any aggressive camshafts I guess. I don't know if it supose to be a secret but Crower will make cams for stroker soon, if they aren't already made...
What do you think of the RACE Webcams too? They give a poor idle on 2.0L and are very aggressive. Maybe they will be good on a stroker ?

The HKS 272's will be way better than the factory grind. So, since you have them already, it won't cost you that much to at least try them.
I did not know that Crower would be making a stroker cam for their catalog. It would be interesting to see what the specs are.
I do not know much about the Web "Race" grinds. The info that they post on their website is useless. If you find out what they are at 0.050" valve lift, 0.006" valve lift, the maximum valve lift, and the centerlines I can get an idea on where the rpm range is and a rough idea on how aggressive they are.

Chris

 

[LamarTSi]

The HKS 272's will be way better than the factory grind. So, since you have them already, it won't cost you that much to at least try them.
I did not know that Crower would be making a stroker cam for their catalog. It would be interesting to see what the specs are.
I do not know much about the Web "Race" grinds. The info that they post on their website is useless. If you find out what they are at 0.050" valve lift, 0.006" valve lift, the maximum valve lift, and the centerlines I can get an idea on where the rpm range is and a rough idea on how aggressive they are.

Chris

I have the head in hand so I didn't want to use them to get a better price but if I can't find others cams for my stroker soon I'll stay with the HKS 272's and make a little review Cams vs Stroker

I'll try to get the specs from the guy who learned Crower are making them cams.

Anyway, it's nice to see guys sharing the same opinion as me, since others guys laughs at me on another forum too!

 

[autronicDSM]

Yes, that's the problem with kids now a days. They think they know it all.

 

[crankbender]

in addition to what has been said you may want to pay attention to the stroke:rod ratio. This is important for the piston speed and duration on the cam more than the lift.

Notice the stroker cams have a shorter duration than the 2.0 cams. This is because the larger rod length:stroke ratio puts the piston and the bottom (not really moving) for a longer time. The same happens at the top. With this you can extend the duration and take advantage of the extra linger at the ends.

Hope this helps you when talking to the guys. Just remember that not all products are good on all engine configurations.

220/.415"

how do you get that lift with such a short duration?

 

[TargeT]

in addition to what has been said you may want to pay attention to the stroke:rod ratio. This is important for the piston speed and duration on the cam more than the lift.

Notice the stroker cams have a shorter duration than the 2.0 cams. This is because the larger rod length:stroke ratio puts the piston and the bottom (not really moving) for a longer time. The same happens at the top. With this you can extend the duration and take advantage of the extra linger at the ends.

Hope this helps you when talking to the guys. Just remember that not all products are good on all engine configurations.

220/.415"

how do you get that lift with such a short duration?

so do you see any negative effects posibly from using the 272s?

 

[anoldsman]

Hope this helps you when talking to the guys. Just remember that not all products are good on all engine configurations.

220/.415"

how do you get that lift with such a short duration?

I love that line "Just remember that not all products are good on all engine configurations". The combination is more important than just one part.

220 duration at 0.050" valve lift and 0.415" maximum valve lift is easily obtained. I will not get into the calculations but, the only real limit is the head package. Too much maximum velocity and the follower contact pad can "roll" off of the valve stem. If the contact pad was roller then there would be more latitude. Also you have to look at spring dynamics and space constraints.

Chris

 

[SmoothCriminal]

does anyone know the rpm range of the comp stroker cams (101300 and 101400)? or the specs on the crower stroker cams and whether or not they're available? I'm building an aggressive street/strip stroker motor and I'd like something for the 1100-8000+ range

 

[MNGSX]

Notice the stroker cams have a shorter duration than the 2.0 cams.

Wrong

From another thread..

I work at COMP so if this is out of line just let me know. We are currently selling two sets of cams for the 4G63. The 101100 is 204 @ 0.050" valve lift, and 0.407"/0.391" vs. HKS 264 which is 203 @ 0.050" valve lift, 0.406"/0.386". The 101200 is 212 @ 0.050" valve lift, and 0.411"/0.395" vs. HKS 272 which is 213 @ 0.050" valve lift, 0.406"/0.386".

COMP has a couple of new grinds that will work well in the 2.3/2.4L motors. The part numbers are 101300 and 101400. They are more aggressive so I recommend aftermarket springs and retainers for the rpms that you require. The 101400 is 220/.415" intake and 220/.399" exhaust.

These cams have 8 degrees more duration than the 101200 comp cams and 7 more degrees than the HKS...

I don't know if he changed the centerline but on their previous cams it was the same as HKS...

 

[anoldsman]

does anyone know the rpm range of the comp stroker cams (101300 and 101400)? or the specs on the crower stroker cams and whether or not they're available? I'm building an aggressive street/strip stroker motor and I'd like something for the 1100-8000+ range

This can vary by motor and turbo so keep in mind that this is just an estimate. The 101300 will give you the same rpm in a 2.4L as the HKS264's in a 2.0L. The 101400 will give you the same rpm in a 2.4L as the HKS272's in a 2.0L. However, you will never get a cam that has a good power band from 1100-8000+. Especially in our "little" 2.0/2.4L motors. I hope that this helps.

Chris

 

[NosLaser]

Guys, you really worry about cams a little bit too much. If you were building NA motors with very specific requirements then it would warrant such in depth discussion. Any of the available cams on the market will add some power (where it adds will rely upon the cam specs of course) and that should be the only thing you worry about. The car is going to make power where the turbo makes power. I suggest using the 'street' version of whatever cams you decide to go with to get as much bottom end and mid range as possible, because if you are going to run a big turbo (which I hope you are if you bothered doing a stroker motor in the first place) because the turbo will still make power regardless of where the cams make power.

I've used this example before, but if John Sheperds car is designed to make max power at 8500rpm or whatever it is (through high rpm cams, aggressive head work, etc.) it will still die off at 5500rpm if he were to bolt a 16g on the car. If he had a stock motor, stock cams, stock head, etc. with a T66 on it, it would make power as high up in the rpm band as he dared to swing it because the turbo is still flowing a lot of air at that speed.

That said, maximize the amount of power you make throughout the powerband by not OVER camming, and let the turbo make the power at high rpm.

Regards,

 

[MNGSX]

That said, maximize the amount of power you make throughout the powerband by not OVER camming, and let the turbo make the power at high rpm.

On small/mid sized turbo cars yes.. I'd still cam up the exhaust side just like people who run 264/272 combos.. It still needs to get out of the engine..

Big turbos + small cam.. Well it will work... you wont have enough of a reduction of pre spool power lost in the band due to bigger cams to notice but you will notice it up top..

Also a stock motor, stock cams, stock head, etc. Wont have the VE to spool a T66 anywhere near as well as a car with full tilt block, headwork and cams.

Back to the 2.4 in question... Increased displacement tends to soften up a cam.. So a race cam for a 2.0 would be a streetable cam in a 2.4.

If he was going with a turbo that was "large street" on a 2.0 but putting it on a 2.4 I'd run the 101300 which as chris said was like a 264 on a 2.0... Maybe even go bigger on the exhaust side.. It would be like a 264/272 combo...

Now a turbo that is big even for a 2.4 get the biggest cams that you can.. 101400's

 

[NosLaser]

On small/mid sized turbo cars yes.. I'd still cam up the exhaust side just like people who run 264/272 combos.. It still needs to get out of the engine..

Big turbos + small cam.. Well it will work... you wont have enough of a reduction of pre spool power lost in the band due to bigger cams to notice but you will notice it up top..

Also a stock motor, stock cams, stock head, etc. Wont have the VE to spool a T66 anywhere near as well as a car with full tilt block, headwork and cams.

Everything you said is correct, however the same results can be had through tuning, and do not need to be directly controlled (or a result of) via hard parts such as the camshafts. As far as VE goes, yes again you are correct in your thinking, but I would venture to say the VE increase on the 4G63 is pretty negligable even with cams and head work when compared to other engines out there. The head ports are already pretty large, the intake runners are large, the bowls are pretty decent (however that and the chambers are where you see your largest gains) and the chambers aren't bad for stock castings. Compare that to the VE of say a stock 302 for a Mustang vs. one with a set of AFR 185's, a systemax and a Steeda 19 cam and you have a very different story.

There are most definately gains to be had on a race motor where upon shifting, it will never fall below like 5K rpm with 'race' ports and camshafts, but for most street turbo cars, I say run smaller cams to widen your powerband, and tune the turbo to make the most power across the widest powerband as well.

Regards,

 

[SmoothCriminal]

^oooh sorry, I didnt mean a powerband in that range I just wanted a set of cams that will run in that range, ie: something that would idle decently on the street but still would allow me to make power upwards of 8000rpm