wot cam?

[andymadmak]

Engine rebuild on the 400 going well.
The old cam was a 214, can't decide on the new one - anyone got any suggestions?

Andy 400se

[rev-erend]

P404 - full nutter cam (V8 developments).

[andymadmak]

rev-erend said:

P404 - full nutter cam (V8 developments).

Is that a solid or hydraulic grind? Got any power/torque curves for it?

Cheers
Andy

[GreenV8S]

I understand the 404 is a solid grind. What do you want to change compared to the 214? When I had the 214 hybrid in the 3.9 it gave lots of top-end but the bottom end torque really suffered as a result. The base engine wasn't specced to use that sort of revs all the time, so it made it quite nice on a track but a bit awkward on the road. The 218 I replaced it with is a milder cam and was much easier to drive. Maybe not ultimately as much peak power if you're prepared to rev the nuts off the 214H, but the power band it had was more useable. So, you aiming for a little screamer with high peak power, or more of a stump puller?

[streaky]

Hardcastle's book on tuning Rover V8s contains some useful info on cam timings and effects - Streaky

>> Edited by streaky on Monday 24th November 13:13

[andymadmak]

Not sure what I want Peter, to be honest!

We've got the engine in bits now, and it's a bit of a funny combo to say the least.
It's standard bottom end, Rover P6 pistons (pocketed!)
Standard valves, VERY WELL ported heads, and it currently runs a 214.

I'm upspeccing the bottom end with a stud kit for the mains, and using some total seal rings on the pistons.
The block has been decked to give better squish and improve the compression ration a bit (pistons were running well down the bore)
I always liked the engines good bottom end, and the fact it would run nicely to 5500 rpm. I suppose I just want a cam (if there is one) with a bit more punch in the 2500 - 5500 rpm range and that will take best advantage of the better squish, higher Compression and total seal rings. I'll happily fit another 214 if thats best for the job, just been wondering about a 216 or 218, or even some stuff from Isky.

Andy 400se

[jmorgan]

I have the 218. Live with it very well. Driveable at slow speeds and when you need it, its cry havoc etc. Nothing to compare it though as the previous one was badgered.

when it works

[HarryW]

andymadmak said:

Thanks all. If I read this right then the 218 is a softer 214, anyone got any ideas what the 216 is like? The curves look very good, with even more poke down low than the 214, and not much less up top! Andy 400se

Not sure I agree with the 218 being softer, it may on paper appear to be but in practice it works better in the engine. I think if you speak to Tim Lamont or Ray at V8D they'll explain, in a more technical term .
If you wnat to go more extreme there's the 224 or 234 but not sure how they'll go in 400.
When investigating the same topic a little while back 218(ish) seemed like the best alround cam for a 4ltr, nothings really changed my mind yet.

Alos see if 'Boosted LS1' will post he seems to have the software to let you know the theory behind selecting a suitable cam, but at the end of hte day its what its like in the engine, which is why I say speak to the likes of Ray they have done hundereds of RV8's have have enough actual engine bench dyno history to point you in the right direction.

AIMHO.........

Harry

[andymadmak]

Thanks Harry,
I make a few calls.......
Cheers
Andy 400se

[griffman]

would fully recommend Ray at v8 developments. he did my 4.0 griff this year and made a world of differance. final figures was from 208bhp to 258bhp. have a mate with a 5.0 griff and he recently got very p****d when i stuck to his rear(the cars) and he could not lose me.

[GreenV8S]

HarryW said:

Not sure I agree with the 218 being softer, it may on paper appear to be but in practice it works better in the engine

The 214 hybrid (I assume that's what we're all talking about here?) is a funny one because despite the name it's actually a very long period cam, apparently it actually has the period you'd expect from a 234 cam. So despite the name, it is actually a much wilder cam than the 218. This effect less pronounced on bigger engines but very dramatic on a 4 liter. Personally, based on my experience with it I'd say it is a bit too wild for a roadgoing 4 liter and a 218 is a better bet.

[wedg1e]

Just my 2p....
I have an RP1 cam from RPI in my 3948cc. Standard '3.9' Rangey pistons with valve pockets, porting work by NCK, dual springs on standard valves and 'flapper' injection.
In a rough on-road comparison with tvrbob's 4.0 Chimaera, the Chimaera is more torquey and the 390SE more revvy. It will happily go past 6000 rpm through the gears. The idle is also a little lumpy. Nobody has ever been able to tell me how the RP1 compares on the '214/218' type scale. It's offered as a 'fast road' cam: I think I'd prefer more grunt lower down, though it is fun to suddenly hurtle away as the power comes in...

Ian

[andymadmak]

I've done it! finally picked my cam - it's a V8 developments MC1.
Reassembly work starts next week. Can't wait!

Andy 400se

[AM400]

What the characteristics of that cam then Andy?

I may be changing my cam sometime next year so will be interested to know the results.

Andy.

[andymadmak]

Well it's basically a 218 profile, with a bit of fiddling to stabilise the idle and plump up the torque curve a bit.
I had a 214 before. I've been camparing dozens of cams (which is tough, cos definative data and truly comparable data is hard to come by) and it came sown to this one, a standard 218 or an Isky 282.
The MC1 is available off the shelf, and the boys at V8 Developments were really responsive and helpful. (also my inbuilt BS detection meter didn't go "off the clock" when I spoke to them! )

I'll let you all know how the final results look!

Andy 400se

[HarryW]

Good to see , if I was to do it again myself then the MC1 would win over the 218. Top chaps at V8D, Ray/Sean they know their onions and don't need to b*llsh*t.

Harry