Im going to be putting a better cam in my lump soon & was wondering if anybody has any feedback on this cam yet?
Im going to be putting a better cam in my lump soon & was wondering if anybody has any feedback on this cam yet?
Buy it, send it to Andy & let him tell you how good it will beOriginally Posted by Nayls
OR not as the case may be
Its a really nice looking profile, I've had one and took basic measurements, and I have somewhere the actual catcams specification sheet (which, unlike a piper sheet is worth reading). Its something close to a Gen 4 BP285.
i've spoke to him about itBuy it, send it to Andy & let him tell you how good it will be
OR not as the case may be
hands on experience of the cam & or times/power increase would be nice to hear of though.
what turbo would suit this gt-cam.?
Scoff, is it one of the off-the-shelf Catcams sticks, or profiled to BB's spec?
It has a catcams code because they manufactured it, it's a BB spec camshaft.
is there major differences between the gt and 285.?
So none of these bad boys then: www.catcams.be/800x600/prod01Alist.htm?PN55003xx.js ?
noI can't find the lump of paper just now, I have the catcams spec sheet for it, with the catcams part number, which does not tally with any in the catcams catalogue - ie, it was made to order.
Mmmm, k mate
The catcams own profiles are pretty horrible things, as of last year and for what I'd want anyway. Maybe they have some new ones now.
The 4341570 for Tokyo Taxis look tasty.
They do some nice looking cams for my engine too mart, the milder NA ones might work quite well. Ofcourse, I need a gearbox first
Aii mateIs that why you're in the zoom zoom car for ND?
from what I remember it had similar overlap to the 285@110deg, but with 114deg LSA, which would mean that it has around 8deg more duration. Still need to measure one though.no
The cam they did for me has similar overlap to the 285@112deg but with 118deg LSA, so giving it around 12deg more duration than the 285. The ramps are Piper-esque, ie steep, so it has sufficient lift too.
I think the GT was 113° andy, but I might be wrong. One of custom ones I was talking to you about was 114° or 115°.
YupAii mate
correct, just checked my notes. So that gives it 6 deg more duration than the 285 (maybe). I've got lift at 9.45mm.
550327 is the code.
bugger me, I found the paper, and in this **** hole too.
p/n 5500327
valve lash 0.3mm
cam lift 6.5mm (in + ex) (9.8mm valve lift)
duration at 1mm 228° (in + ex)
duration at 0.1mm 262° (in + ex)
lobe angle 113°
lift at dtc 1.43mm (no valve lash)
a bit more looking gives the 327 similar overlap to a 285@109deg. I have about 220deg duration at 1mm for the 285 compared to 228deg for the 327.
correct Scoff, I got the 9.45 by calculating from the cam lift, the same way I 'measure' them. I multiply cam lift by a theoretical rocker ratio of 1.5, then subtract the recommended clearance.
so 6.5*1.5 = 9.75 less 0.3 is 9.45mm
more overlap than I had in my mind then
I'd guess that it's a bit kinder on the valve train. I think I'd like the LSA opened up a bit for high boost, but that would depend upon whether folks think the 285 Ultimate works better than the 285 traditional
The GT head doesn't really have much reason to lift over 9.5mm. My bugger is still getting better at 12mm - pity it's not possible to get the valve open much past 10.5mm in the duration available.
Mines at 114 scoff... engine will be out i guess over winter so ill send over to Andy...
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote