Bisimoto Turbo Cams??
02-05-2008, 08:12 AM
#1
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Cocoa, FLORIDA, USA
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bisimoto Turbo Cam??
I was researching SOHC Turbo cams and came across a thread where Bisi told someone he could make a custom turbo cam for his single cam. I'm floored at the results of his parts and the aspects of his engineering so i figured if he could do it, then theyre probably wouldnt be any better cam than his.
Does Anyone have any experience with a Bisimoto Turbo cam?
Does Anyone have any experience with a Bisimoto Turbo cam?
02-05-2008, 09:15 AM
#3
Honda-Tech Member
Re: Bisimoto Turbo Cam?? (Only1cam)
you could give them a call and see what they can do for you. BISI makes some kick *** sohc parts that are really good.
02-05-2008, 09:46 AM
#4
Re: Bisimoto Turbo Cam??
my feedback is not going to be very helpful to you since I am not a d series, but as for his f series stuff... I personally have experienced nothing but good from his product so far. others can report the same I am sure. I have his cam gear and a custom turbo cam.
do not have any numbers yet for comparison since my car is waiting on a retune but I expect it to perform well.
bump for the d series.
do not have any numbers yet for comparison since my car is waiting on a retune but I expect it to perform well.
bump for the d series.
02-05-2008, 02:06 PM
#5
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Cocoa, FLORIDA, USA
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Bisimoto Turbo Cam?? (Only1cam)
Thanks for the feedback twkd on your F-series, I've already come to the conclusion that he is the best with tuning and building F-series haha. 
I'm going to give him a call and let everyone know whats up because im sure some other people are interested in a D-series Bisi cam.
I'm going to give him a call and let everyone know whats up because im sure some other people are interested in a D-series Bisi cam.
02-07-2008, 06:57 AM
#6
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Ontario, Ca, USA
Posts: 1,792
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Bisimoto Turbo Cam?? (Only1cam)
Yes, give us a call, as we can help. The biggest mistake boosted enthusiasts make is place an N/A designed cam in their turbo'd engine: the increased duration, and lobe separation qualities cause lackluster performance due to boost blowing right through the exhaust during the overlap event.
A purposely designed cam for turbocharged applications, like our level 1.2 turbo cam, addresses the need for more exhaust lift and duration than our level 1 grinds, and wider lobe separation to allow you to build boost sooner, and retain it longer throughout the powerband.
Customers have reported excellent gains in DOHC and SOHC powerplants, with our level 1.2 cams. The single cam engines are a lot harder to master, since you have to grind in the lobe separation; it took us 13 different grinds to find the proper LS for the level 1.2...yes, I love to experiment, as my pain is your gain. I guess that is a key advantage of having my own dyno!
I hope that helps.
A purposely designed cam for turbocharged applications, like our level 1.2 turbo cam, addresses the need for more exhaust lift and duration than our level 1 grinds, and wider lobe separation to allow you to build boost sooner, and retain it longer throughout the powerband.
Customers have reported excellent gains in DOHC and SOHC powerplants, with our level 1.2 cams. The single cam engines are a lot harder to master, since you have to grind in the lobe separation; it took us 13 different grinds to find the proper LS for the level 1.2...yes, I love to experiment, as my pain is your gain. I guess that is a key advantage of having my own dyno!
I hope that helps.
02-07-2008, 07:58 AM
#7
Honda-Tech Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,153
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Bisimoto Turbo Cam?? (Bisimoto)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Bisimoto »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Yes, give us a call, as we can help. The biggest mistake boosted enthusiasts make is place an N/A designed cam in their turbo'd engine: the increased duration, and lobe separation qualities cause lackluster performance due to boost blowing right through the exhaust during the overlap event.
A purposely designed cam for turbocharged applications, like our level 1.2 turbo cam, addresses the need for more exhaust lift and duration than our level 1 grinds, and wider lobe separation to allow you to build boost sooner, and retain it longer throughout the powerband.
Customers have reported excellent gains in DOHC and SOHC powerplants, with our level 1.2 cams. The single cam engines are a lot harder to master, since you have to grind in the lobe separation; it took us 13 different grinds to find the proper LS for the level 1.2...yes, I love to experiment, as my pain is your gain. I guess that is a key advantage of having my own dyno!
I hope that helps.</TD></TR></TABLE>
Could you explain what I bolded? It doesn't seem to make any sense. The way I'm reading it seems that you are suggesting that fresh, intake air is blowing through before the exhaust valve is closed. If this is your stance, then I'm not sure I would agree since on a turbocharged engine we are constantly fighting reversion which is just a byproduct of exhaust manifold pressure.
A purposely designed cam for turbocharged applications, like our level 1.2 turbo cam, addresses the need for more exhaust lift and duration than our level 1 grinds, and wider lobe separation to allow you to build boost sooner, and retain it longer throughout the powerband.
Customers have reported excellent gains in DOHC and SOHC powerplants, with our level 1.2 cams. The single cam engines are a lot harder to master, since you have to grind in the lobe separation; it took us 13 different grinds to find the proper LS for the level 1.2...yes, I love to experiment, as my pain is your gain. I guess that is a key advantage of having my own dyno!
I hope that helps.</TD></TR></TABLE>
Could you explain what I bolded? It doesn't seem to make any sense. The way I'm reading it seems that you are suggesting that fresh, intake air is blowing through before the exhaust valve is closed. If this is your stance, then I'm not sure I would agree since on a turbocharged engine we are constantly fighting reversion which is just a byproduct of exhaust manifold pressure.
Trending Topics
02-07-2008, 08:08 AM
#8
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Cocoa, FLORIDA, USA
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Bisimoto Turbo Cam?? (Only1cam)
Thanks for responding personally Bisi. Would you need to know my setup to tailor a cam to my goals or is the 1.2 a good cam to build from and rely on for my power goals??
If so, D16Z6 port matched head, D16y8 GE sleeved block, 9:1 JE pistons, Eagle Rods, 450cc injectors, Chipped P06, Tubular Manifold (probably reverting back to a log mani soon), T3/T4, 3" DP, 2.5" thermal exhaust.
If so, D16Z6 port matched head, D16y8 GE sleeved block, 9:1 JE pistons, Eagle Rods, 450cc injectors, Chipped P06, Tubular Manifold (probably reverting back to a log mani soon), T3/T4, 3" DP, 2.5" thermal exhaust.
02-08-2008, 05:57 AM
#9
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Ontario, Ca, USA
Posts: 1,792
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Bisimoto Turbo Cam?? (Only1cam)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by nowtype »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
Could you explain what I bolded? It doesn't seem to make any sense. The way I'm reading it seems that you are suggesting that fresh, intake air is blowing through before the exhaust valve is closed. If this is your stance, then I'm not sure I would agree since on a turbocharged engine we are constantly fighting reversion which is just a byproduct of exhaust manifold pressure.</TD></TR></TABLE>
No problem, as I am here to help. In simple terms, during the induction stroke, you need to build boost in your turbo'd engine. In an N/A engine, you increase overlap to a decent extent in order to assist in inertial supercharging (taking advantage of the scavenging affect of the hopefully properly designed exhaust system) during this overlap period to allow a "cleaner" intake charge for better combustion, hence more heat, hence more power. With a turbocharged application, for a given application there is a limit to the ideal overlap period, one that many aftermarket n/a cams surpass. This is the key reason why excellent n/a designed camshafts result in a boosted application result in lazy boost/rpm curves, and loss of torque = loss in power. You mentioned reversion...this can also become exacerbated in a turbo application, with too much overlap, as exhaust can also flow the opposite way, and cause a host of problems.
Only1, you will be pleased with the level 1.2 application. In the event that you ever go full race, I can assist with out level 1.4. What is great about what we do, is that we can custom design/tailor a cam for your powerplant: street, street/strip, or full race.
Could you explain what I bolded? It doesn't seem to make any sense. The way I'm reading it seems that you are suggesting that fresh, intake air is blowing through before the exhaust valve is closed. If this is your stance, then I'm not sure I would agree since on a turbocharged engine we are constantly fighting reversion which is just a byproduct of exhaust manifold pressure.</TD></TR></TABLE>
No problem, as I am here to help. In simple terms, during the induction stroke, you need to build boost in your turbo'd engine. In an N/A engine, you increase overlap to a decent extent in order to assist in inertial supercharging (taking advantage of the scavenging affect of the hopefully properly designed exhaust system) during this overlap period to allow a "cleaner" intake charge for better combustion, hence more heat, hence more power. With a turbocharged application, for a given application there is a limit to the ideal overlap period, one that many aftermarket n/a cams surpass. This is the key reason why excellent n/a designed camshafts result in a boosted application result in lazy boost/rpm curves, and loss of torque = loss in power. You mentioned reversion...this can also become exacerbated in a turbo application, with too much overlap, as exhaust can also flow the opposite way, and cause a host of problems.
Only1, you will be pleased with the level 1.2 application. In the event that you ever go full race, I can assist with out level 1.4. What is great about what we do, is that we can custom design/tailor a cam for your powerplant: street, street/strip, or full race.
02-08-2008, 06:13 AM
#10
Honda-Tech Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,153
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Bisimoto Turbo Cam?? (Bisimoto)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Bisimoto »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
No problem, as I am here to help. In simple terms, during the induction stroke, you need to build boost in your turbo'd engine. In an N/A engine, you increase overlap to a decent extent in order to assist in inertial supercharging (taking advantage of the scavenging affect of the hopefully properly designed exhaust system) during this overlap period to allow a "cleaner" intake charge for better combustion, hence more heat, hence more power. With a turbocharged application, for a given application there is a limit to the ideal overlap period, one that many aftermarket n/a cams surpass. This is the key reason why excellent n/a designed camshafts result in a boosted application result in lazy boost/rpm curves, and loss of torque = loss in power. You mentioned reversion...this can also become exacerbated in a turbo application, with too much overlap, as exhaust can also flow the opposite way, and cause a host of problems.
</TD></TR></TABLE>
A "traditional" turbo cam has always been high duration low overlap. This was the norm for years, but also this norm went under the assumption that you were running a much higher pressure in the exhaust manifold vs the intake manifold and this was the most effective method to combat reversion. Forget about actually getting some scavenging, they were just worried about battling off reversion. Now we have proven time and time again that throwing in a high duration and moderate to high overlap cam will increase power when exhaust manifold pressure and intake manifold pressure are a 1:1 ratio because reversion is no longer this huge issue we can actually attempt to get scavenging.
Now from what you are saying is, NA cams are resulting in too much overlap which keeps pressure build up from occurring when the turbo is trying to build boost because the intake valve is open too long? I don't exactly understand this idea because if we use this idea in a NA engine, and it increases VE, which will increase exhaust output, we will have more air spinning our turbine wheel earlier in the rpms thus creating faster boost response. Is this invalid?
No problem, as I am here to help. In simple terms, during the induction stroke, you need to build boost in your turbo'd engine. In an N/A engine, you increase overlap to a decent extent in order to assist in inertial supercharging (taking advantage of the scavenging affect of the hopefully properly designed exhaust system) during this overlap period to allow a "cleaner" intake charge for better combustion, hence more heat, hence more power. With a turbocharged application, for a given application there is a limit to the ideal overlap period, one that many aftermarket n/a cams surpass. This is the key reason why excellent n/a designed camshafts result in a boosted application result in lazy boost/rpm curves, and loss of torque = loss in power. You mentioned reversion...this can also become exacerbated in a turbo application, with too much overlap, as exhaust can also flow the opposite way, and cause a host of problems.
</TD></TR></TABLE>
A "traditional" turbo cam has always been high duration low overlap. This was the norm for years, but also this norm went under the assumption that you were running a much higher pressure in the exhaust manifold vs the intake manifold and this was the most effective method to combat reversion. Forget about actually getting some scavenging, they were just worried about battling off reversion. Now we have proven time and time again that throwing in a high duration and moderate to high overlap cam will increase power when exhaust manifold pressure and intake manifold pressure are a 1:1 ratio because reversion is no longer this huge issue we can actually attempt to get scavenging.
Now from what you are saying is, NA cams are resulting in too much overlap which keeps pressure build up from occurring when the turbo is trying to build boost because the intake valve is open too long? I don't exactly understand this idea because if we use this idea in a NA engine, and it increases VE, which will increase exhaust output, we will have more air spinning our turbine wheel earlier in the rpms thus creating faster boost response. Is this invalid?
02-08-2008, 06:15 AM
#11
Honda-Tech Member
Re: Bisimoto Turbo Cam?? (Bisimoto)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Bisimoto »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">No problem, as I am here to help. In simple terms, during the induction stroke, you need to build boost in your turbo'd engine. In an N/A engine, you increase overlap to a decent extent in order to assist in inertial supercharging (taking advantage of the scavenging affect of the hopefully properly designed exhaust system) during this overlap period to allow a "cleaner" intake charge for better combustion, hence more heat, hence more power. With a turbocharged application, for a given application there is a limit to the ideal overlap period, one that many aftermarket n/a cams surpass. This is the key reason why excellent n/a designed camshafts result in a boosted application result in lazy boost/rpm curves, and loss of torque = loss in power. You mentioned reversion...this can also become exacerbated in a turbo application, with too much overlap, as exhaust can also flow the opposite way, and cause a host of problems.
</TD></TR></TABLE>
I'm not sure how much overlap the zex 59300 cam has, but i did notice much faster spoolup with the stock cam when i switched back.
</TD></TR></TABLE>
I'm not sure how much overlap the zex 59300 cam has, but i did notice much faster spoolup with the stock cam when i switched back.
02-08-2008, 06:48 AM
#12
Honda-Tech Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Witness, Protection Program
Posts: 1,074
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
are you two talking about the same n/a cam ? more aggressive n/a cam will result in what bisi is saying. i dont see this happening with a "mild" n/a cam. jst look at how well the itr cams work with boost.
this is all speculation, so keep going.
this is all speculation, so keep going.
02-09-2008, 07:52 AM
#13
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Ontario, Ca, USA
Posts: 1,792
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: (zex_cool)
Nowtype, I do not live in the realm of theory. My data, and knowledge is significantly rooted in empirical testing, and results. If you do not agree, you are entitled to your opinion...no problem from me. N/A dynamics are quite different from boosted; and even with n/a applications, increased overlap decreases VE at certain RPMs and improves it in others, particularly higher ones. You always "rob Peter to pay Paul".
Thanks for your comments, BTW, as those are what makes forums so great.
Zex, you are so right...
Modified by Bisimoto at 2:58 PM 2/10/2008
Thanks for your comments, BTW, as those are what makes forums so great.
Zex, you are so right...
Modified by Bisimoto at 2:58 PM 2/10/2008
02-09-2008, 08:03 AM
#14
Honda-Tech Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,153
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: (Bisimoto)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Bisimoto »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Nowtype, I do not live in the realm of theory. My data, and knowledge is significantly rooted in emperical testing, and results. If you do not agree, you are entitled to your opinion...no problem from me. Thanks for your comments, BTW, as those are what makes forums so great.
Zex, you are so right...</TD></TR></TABLE>
What about all of the positive results with pretty aggressive Skunk 2 cams? Tony1 and another member or two have posted significant gains with such cams when using big turbos and 1:1 IMP to EMP. Theory only matters when it is applicable and in this case the theory seems to match the actual results.
Zex, you are so right...</TD></TR></TABLE>
What about all of the positive results with pretty aggressive Skunk 2 cams? Tony1 and another member or two have posted significant gains with such cams when using big turbos and 1:1 IMP to EMP. Theory only matters when it is applicable and in this case the theory seems to match the actual results.
02-09-2008, 08:32 AM
#15
Honda-Tech Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Witness, Protection Program
Posts: 1,074
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
02-09-2008, 10:27 AM
#16
Honda-Tech Member
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Peg City, 204
Posts: 812
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: (zex_cool)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by zex_cool »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">something to consider.
https://honda-tech.com/zerothread?id=2220690</TD></TR></TABLE>
You guys are forgetting that these all motor cams are in DOHC engines that naturally have adjustable overlap. SOHC engines have the overlap dialed in to the cams, (lobe seperation angle).
Now, I've read a lot of info from smart 8cyl. guys and smart 4cyl. guys about turbos and overlap. My own personal conclusion is that every engine combination is different, and there are an infinite number of variables to consider. "All motor" cams with a narrow LSA and a good amount of overlap might work very well in certain applications, namely when the intake manifold pressure is quite high (30 poundish and higher) and the head (notably the valve job) are prepared with considerable effort against reversion... I think things like stepped headers and making the entrance to the intake port in the head slightly larger than the ports in the intake manifold, as well as trenched exhaust valves as pictured in A. Ghraham Bell's book "four stroke performance tuning" could help out a lot in concert with each other...
But in an application with low boost, stock head/intake manifold and an off the shelf exhaust manifold made by basically anyone but John@Hytech... I would take cams with ZERO overlap anyday.
https://honda-tech.com/zerothread?id=2220690</TD></TR></TABLE>
You guys are forgetting that these all motor cams are in DOHC engines that naturally have adjustable overlap. SOHC engines have the overlap dialed in to the cams, (lobe seperation angle).
Now, I've read a lot of info from smart 8cyl. guys and smart 4cyl. guys about turbos and overlap. My own personal conclusion is that every engine combination is different, and there are an infinite number of variables to consider. "All motor" cams with a narrow LSA and a good amount of overlap might work very well in certain applications, namely when the intake manifold pressure is quite high (30 poundish and higher) and the head (notably the valve job) are prepared with considerable effort against reversion... I think things like stepped headers and making the entrance to the intake port in the head slightly larger than the ports in the intake manifold, as well as trenched exhaust valves as pictured in A. Ghraham Bell's book "four stroke performance tuning" could help out a lot in concert with each other...
But in an application with low boost, stock head/intake manifold and an off the shelf exhaust manifold made by basically anyone but John@Hytech... I would take cams with ZERO overlap anyday.
02-09-2008, 08:02 PM
#17
something different
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: grand rapids/chicago, usa
Posts: 6,995
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
i've had several conversations with bisi about turbo cams, and he designed and made me a turbo grind for my f22 powered civic.
the tuner that assisted me in the street tune couldnt believe the engine. it was "by far the most efficient engine and turbo setup he had ever seen"... much of it i'd attribute to the camshaft. head was a stock f22a1, block/pistons/rods were stock, etc.
judging by fuel usage and trap speeds (124 mph, 2400 lbs with driver), we were in the 400 whp range at 11-12 psi..
while you dont HAVE to trust bisi, i certainly do. he'll be cleaning my cam up (lost oil pressure), and i cant wait to toss it back in, with a better head around it too.
i like this thread..lots of interesting info.
the tuner that assisted me in the street tune couldnt believe the engine. it was "by far the most efficient engine and turbo setup he had ever seen"... much of it i'd attribute to the camshaft. head was a stock f22a1, block/pistons/rods were stock, etc.
judging by fuel usage and trap speeds (124 mph, 2400 lbs with driver), we were in the 400 whp range at 11-12 psi..
while you dont HAVE to trust bisi, i certainly do. he'll be cleaning my cam up (lost oil pressure), and i cant wait to toss it back in, with a better head around it too.
i like this thread..lots of interesting info.
02-09-2008, 09:10 PM
#18
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Cocoa, FLORIDA, USA
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: (redzcstandardhatch)
Yes, Bisi's background and results/experience with his own cams and other products speaks bounds beyond what most people know about 4-stroke performance. I def. enjoyed starting this thread, not knowing it was going to cause such a stir in it.
Bisi, I will definitely be calling you soon to talk about a turbo cam for my D16
Bisi, I will definitely be calling you soon to talk about a turbo cam for my D16
02-09-2008, 09:13 PM
#19
Honda-Tech Member
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: ashEVILle, NC, USSR
Posts: 4,417
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: (nowtype)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by nowtype »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
What about all of the positive results with pretty aggressive Skunk 2 cams? Tony1 and another member or two have posted significant gains with such cams when using big turbos and 1:1 IMP to EMP. Theory only matters when it is applicable and in this case the theory seems to match the actual results.</TD></TR></TABLE>
There is a big difference between B and D series in regards to specific output and headflow, as well as operable powerband because of the headflow issue. Long story short, B-series can utilize much larger turbos and get away with larger overlap cam setups. That's not even touching on bore considerations, bigger bores allowing for slightly more overlap in a similar manner to which they require a few degrees more timing for the burn to correctly propagate from one side of the bore to the other.
Between small bore, small port, and small valve the D-series can be made to make great power in the 250-350 whp range and hit some decent 400-450 peak numbers with a usable powerband, but they really start becoming less efficient as those numbers increase. Bisi probably has a different view on those power levels, but his perspective is based on how his personal modifications work in the real world and my perspective is based on how the random cars I am brought perform.
There's a lot of **** I wouldn't bother to try with D-series that works well with B-series, just based on my personal experiences. Its an apples vs orangutans comparison.
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Justin Jones »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
But in an application with low boost, stock head/intake manifold and an off the shelf exhaust manifold made by basically anyone but John@Hytech... I would take cams with ZERO overlap anyday.</TD></TR></TABLE>
Let me get this straight... you're advocating swapping LS-equivalent camshafts into stock block cars with shelf turbo kits?
On that note... it's time to drink heavily.
What about all of the positive results with pretty aggressive Skunk 2 cams? Tony1 and another member or two have posted significant gains with such cams when using big turbos and 1:1 IMP to EMP. Theory only matters when it is applicable and in this case the theory seems to match the actual results.</TD></TR></TABLE>
There is a big difference between B and D series in regards to specific output and headflow, as well as operable powerband because of the headflow issue. Long story short, B-series can utilize much larger turbos and get away with larger overlap cam setups. That's not even touching on bore considerations, bigger bores allowing for slightly more overlap in a similar manner to which they require a few degrees more timing for the burn to correctly propagate from one side of the bore to the other.
Between small bore, small port, and small valve the D-series can be made to make great power in the 250-350 whp range and hit some decent 400-450 peak numbers with a usable powerband, but they really start becoming less efficient as those numbers increase. Bisi probably has a different view on those power levels, but his perspective is based on how his personal modifications work in the real world and my perspective is based on how the random cars I am brought perform.
There's a lot of **** I wouldn't bother to try with D-series that works well with B-series, just based on my personal experiences. Its an apples vs orangutans comparison.
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Justin Jones »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
But in an application with low boost, stock head/intake manifold and an off the shelf exhaust manifold made by basically anyone but John@Hytech... I would take cams with ZERO overlap anyday.</TD></TR></TABLE>
Let me get this straight... you're advocating swapping LS-equivalent camshafts into stock block cars with shelf turbo kits?
On that note... it's time to drink heavily.
02-10-2008, 02:28 AM
#20
Honda-Tech Member
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Peg City, 204
Posts: 812
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: (Joseph Davis)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Joseph Davis »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Let me get this straight... you're advocating swapping LS-equivalent camshafts into stock block cars with shelf turbo kits?</TD></TR></TABLE>
No I'm not sure where zero overlap naturally means LS equivalent? I'm actually attempting to advocate swapping generic turbo grinds into mediocre turbo cars. Relatively high lift, zero (or virtually zero) overlap, preferably shorter exhaust duration as well.
read:
Turbo Cam Design Parameters
Camshaft Duration and a Boosted Engine
this I found interesting:
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Every turbo cam I have made since 1974 has used a larger intake than exhaust.
Big exhaust durations always cool down the exhaust temperature and lower the exhaust gas velocity, two things that contribute to throttle lag in turbocharged engines.
Turbocharger engines like energetic exhausts, so they like high exhaust gas velocity and high temperature, and that is caused by smaller exhaust profiles.
I typically go from 6 to 12 degrees shorter on the exhaust, depending on a number of things, including whether or not the engine has dual or a single turbocharger.
One of my customers has a dual-turbocharged 397cid OLDS dragster running 6.59 at 207.....
Back 15-20 years or so, we pulled 2500 BHP out of a 39psi twin turbocharged 540 BBC at Accell----cam was my UD 304/290R14, 270/255 at .050, .710"/.710" gross valve lift, 114 LSA.
I put the same cam in the Olds....... </TD></TR></TABLE>
I calculated the overlap in that cam @.050, it's 34.5 degrees... nothing too crazy by N/A standards but still that's definitely a good bit of overlap.
Modified by Justin Jones at 5:43 AM 2/10/2008
No I'm not sure where zero overlap naturally means LS equivalent? I'm actually attempting to advocate swapping generic turbo grinds into mediocre turbo cars. Relatively high lift, zero (or virtually zero) overlap, preferably shorter exhaust duration as well.
read:
Turbo Cam Design Parameters
Camshaft Duration and a Boosted Engine
this I found interesting:
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Every turbo cam I have made since 1974 has used a larger intake than exhaust.
Big exhaust durations always cool down the exhaust temperature and lower the exhaust gas velocity, two things that contribute to throttle lag in turbocharged engines.
Turbocharger engines like energetic exhausts, so they like high exhaust gas velocity and high temperature, and that is caused by smaller exhaust profiles.
I typically go from 6 to 12 degrees shorter on the exhaust, depending on a number of things, including whether or not the engine has dual or a single turbocharger.
One of my customers has a dual-turbocharged 397cid OLDS dragster running 6.59 at 207.....
Back 15-20 years or so, we pulled 2500 BHP out of a 39psi twin turbocharged 540 BBC at Accell----cam was my UD 304/290R14, 270/255 at .050, .710"/.710" gross valve lift, 114 LSA.
I put the same cam in the Olds....... </TD></TR></TABLE>
I calculated the overlap in that cam @.050, it's 34.5 degrees... nothing too crazy by N/A standards but still that's definitely a good bit of overlap.
Modified by Justin Jones at 5:43 AM 2/10/2008
02-10-2008, 05:27 AM
#21
Honda-Tech Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,153
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: (Joseph Davis)
I was speaking in general terms. I wasn't speaking just about D-series or B-series and I thought Bisi was doing the same. To be completely honest, I see no point in thinking about high HP D-series engines as they've been proven significantly less efficient and cost effective once you get into the 400whp range.
02-10-2008, 05:57 AM
#22
something different
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: grand rapids/chicago, usa
Posts: 6,995
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Re: (nowtype)
kinda true, but i still love a 400 whp D.
part of me misses my old 300.08 whp stock head/cam d16a6. powerband was kinda bunky though . haha
part of me misses my old 300.08 whp stock head/cam d16a6. powerband was kinda bunky though . haha
02-10-2008, 05:59 AM
#23
Honda-Tech Member
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Dont Steal My Car, Ct, USA
Posts: 2,852
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: (nowtype)
you do see alot of d series hit a wall around 400.Some of them on setups that shouldnt have made 300.
It seems once u get to that point, mechanical limits of the engine start playing a huge rule.
It seems once u get to that point, mechanical limits of the engine start playing a huge rule.
02-10-2008, 06:27 AM
#24
Honda-Tech Member
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: ashEVILle, NC, USSR
Posts: 4,417
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: (Justin Jones)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Justin Jones »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
No I'm not sure where zero overlap naturally means LS equivalent? </TD></TR></TABLE>
When I go from technical commentary to a one liner it means I'm kidding.
Unless I'm really serious.
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Justin Jones »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
I'm actually attempting to advocate swapping generic turbo grinds into mediocre turbo cars. Relatively high lift, zero (or virtually zero) overlap, preferably shorter exhaust duration as well.</TD></TR></TABLE>
I sure do like complicated toys, but I am still the #1 biggest fan of simple, expedient setups that don't cost a whole lot of money. Mediocre turbo cars are classically budget builds, using smaller turbos that naturally create broader powerbands. Now, some people are fascinated by machines and would love to tinker on the level you propose, but I'm not one of them and most people are better off spending that money on something else.
I'll read about the theory all day long, though, with ears perked all the way. Ideas and perspective are good.
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by nowtype »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I was speaking in general terms.</TD></TR></TABLE>
You were directly comparing D's and B's, stop being sensitive. And no turning that comment back on me, either.
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by nowtype »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I wasn't speaking just about D-series or B-series and I thought Bisi was doing the same. To be completely honest, I see no point in thinking about high HP D-series engines as they've been proven significantly less efficient and cost effective once you get into the 400whp range.</TD></TR></TABLE>
There is a window of operability past 400 whp, you just need the same level of gear bolted to the D that you have on the average 600-800 whp B-series. When I say that I'm thinking intake and exhaust manifolding, cam, and other D-specific mojo. The problem with 400+ whp D-series is rooted in how they struggle to breathe in the higher power levels, much like an asthmatic they strangle themselves trying. If you can remedy that situation you can still lay ball. Sure it's not as cost effective, but neither is the average sleeved B-series build making 400+.
Hey, since we have Bisi on tap... what's your $0.02 on Y8 cylinder heads? I like them for NA builds, but they seem to have bad juju when a turbo gets bolted on.
No I'm not sure where zero overlap naturally means LS equivalent? </TD></TR></TABLE>
When I go from technical commentary to a one liner it means I'm kidding.
Unless I'm really serious.
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Justin Jones »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
I'm actually attempting to advocate swapping generic turbo grinds into mediocre turbo cars. Relatively high lift, zero (or virtually zero) overlap, preferably shorter exhaust duration as well.</TD></TR></TABLE>
I sure do like complicated toys, but I am still the #1 biggest fan of simple, expedient setups that don't cost a whole lot of money. Mediocre turbo cars are classically budget builds, using smaller turbos that naturally create broader powerbands. Now, some people are fascinated by machines and would love to tinker on the level you propose, but I'm not one of them and most people are better off spending that money on something else.
I'll read about the theory all day long, though, with ears perked all the way. Ideas and perspective are good.
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by nowtype »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I was speaking in general terms.</TD></TR></TABLE>
You were directly comparing D's and B's, stop being sensitive. And no turning that comment back on me, either.
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by nowtype »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I wasn't speaking just about D-series or B-series and I thought Bisi was doing the same. To be completely honest, I see no point in thinking about high HP D-series engines as they've been proven significantly less efficient and cost effective once you get into the 400whp range.</TD></TR></TABLE>
There is a window of operability past 400 whp, you just need the same level of gear bolted to the D that you have on the average 600-800 whp B-series. When I say that I'm thinking intake and exhaust manifolding, cam, and other D-specific mojo. The problem with 400+ whp D-series is rooted in how they struggle to breathe in the higher power levels, much like an asthmatic they strangle themselves trying. If you can remedy that situation you can still lay ball. Sure it's not as cost effective, but neither is the average sleeved B-series build making 400+.
Hey, since we have Bisi on tap... what's your $0.02 on Y8 cylinder heads? I like them for NA builds, but they seem to have bad juju when a turbo gets bolted on.
02-10-2008, 06:40 AM
#25
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: howell, mi, 48843
Posts: 89
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: (Joseph Davis)
Hey, since we have Bisi on tap... what's your $0.02 on Y8 cylinder heads? I like them for NA builds, but they seem to have bad juju when a turbo gets bolted on.
what about y7 heads compared to a6 heads?
what about y7 heads compared to a6 heads?