Discussion
Ask around some of the specialist, most seem to prefer the 218 based grinds but IMHO unless you are going to have it mapped to suit then I would be tempted to stick to a standard TVR grind.
As already said Dom at power can help. Not heard too much wrong with the standard,but dated, TVR51 cam that'll probably come out of your car.
Harry
As already said Dom at power can help. Not heard too much wrong with the standard,but dated, TVR51 cam that'll probably come out of your car.
Harry
I ran about 40 cams through my simulator and whilst a couple made a bit extra top end they didn't half lose a stock of torque lower down. Went for a 218 cam initially and finally chose the 218 hybrid was the came we chose from v8D. Funnily enough, the car was already fitted with a 218 as supplied by tvr.
Boosted LS1 said:
I ran about 40 cams through my simulator and whilst a couple made a bit extra top end they didn't half lose a stock of torque lower down. Went for a 218 cam initially and finally chose the 218 hybrid was the came we chose from v8D. Funnily enough, the car was already fitted with a 218 as supplied by tvr.
Boosted have you ran the V8D MC2 through the similator yet
, again its a hybrid of their 218Hybrid . I currently have a stock 218 myself which has been fitted for nearly 2 years now
and by all accounts it goes well 
. Looking for more as usual 
. Harry
HarryW said:
I ran about 40 cams through my simulator and whilst a couple made a bit extra top end they didn't half lose a stock of torque lower down. Went for a 218 cam initially and finally chose the 218 hybrid was the came we chose from v8D. Funnily enough, the car was already fitted with a 218 as supplied by tvr.
Boosted have you ran the V8D MC2 through the similator yet
I currently have a stock 218 myself which has been fitted for nearly 2 years now
Harry
It takes to long to do because I have to input accurate details of your engine specs but I can say that when I built andymadmaks 400 se last year we perused the PC simulated charts and looked at the trade off's. The V8D 218 hybrid was the cam of choice and he's very happy. Recently he discovered that a noble couldn't out accellerate him
If V8D have refined it again it would be a tiny bit better. Boosted.
Boosted LS1 said:
Boosted LS1 said:
I ran about 40 cams through my simulator and whilst a couple made a bit extra top end they didn't half lose a stock of torque lower down. Went for a 218 cam initially and finally chose the 218 hybrid was the came we chose from v8D. Funnily enough, the car was already fitted with a 218 as supplied by tvr.
Boosted have you ran the V8D MC2 through the similator yet
I currently have a stock 218 myself which has been fitted for nearly 2 years now
Harry
It takes to long to do because I have to input accurate details of your engine specs but I can say that when I built andymadmaks 400 se last year we perused the PC simulated charts and looked at the trade off's. The V8D 218 hybrid was the cam of choice and he's very happy. Recently he discovered that a noble couldn't out accellerate him
Boosted.
Well as I understand it the evolution of the V8D hydraulic grind Cam is 218 -> 218Hybrid -> MC1 -> MC2 ---- > maybe the H404 but I think that is too far off the original 218
. Out of interst with the 400 what was predicted and what was achieved
,I feel that whilst the 218 in mine is superior to the TVR grind (435) that came out it could be improved upon....... Funny u should say that, I tend to find most things can't shift me this side of a tuscan, however I was well and truely humbled by an Evo 8 mr340 thingy up hill on a Mway not so long back hence I want more
. Harry
Harry,
I don't spend to much time looking at the predicted figures these days. Instead, I compare the torque and bhp curves. This gives a good comparison. The HP figures are quite dependendant on head flow data and without it I have to guess the efficiency. Rovers as stock are pretty poor so are they 60% efficient or more? See my dilemma. You could pm Andy as he has the printed charts.
As for my lsx's thus far they have always made more power on a dyno then on my pc so again I think I'm being conservative with the head flows:.
Boosted.
I don't spend to much time looking at the predicted figures these days. Instead, I compare the torque and bhp curves. This gives a good comparison. The HP figures are quite dependendant on head flow data and without it I have to guess the efficiency. Rovers as stock are pretty poor so are they 60% efficient or more? See my dilemma. You could pm Andy as he has the printed charts.
As for my lsx's thus far they have always made more power on a dyno then on my pc so again I think I'm being conservative with the head flows:.
Boosted.
I have the MC2 as supplied direct from kent, in my griff 500, pulls like a trian, seems smoother low down compared to the original and also seems to be, beter reving to the red line. was fitted by penninsula.
FYI, the original cam had done 34k and was total Fcuked...
edited to add....
Also had stage 3 heads fitted and the precats removed at the same time (replaced with the none reverse cones)
from what RS told me and I have read else where, what is considered a radical CAM in a 4Ltr is not in a 5, so what suites a 5Ltr car may not be the best option in a 4ltr, but i may be way off....
>> Edited by pebbledash on Monday 17th January 12:31
FYI, the original cam had done 34k and was total Fcuked...
edited to add....
Also had stage 3 heads fitted and the precats removed at the same time (replaced with the none reverse cones)
from what RS told me and I have read else where, what is considered a radical CAM in a 4Ltr is not in a 5, so what suites a 5Ltr car may not be the best option in a 4ltr, but i may be way off....
>> Edited by pebbledash on Monday 17th January 12:31
pebbledash said:
I have the MC2 as supplied direct from kent, in my griff 500, pulls like a trian, seems smoother low down compared to the original and also seems to be, beter reving to the red line. was fitted by penninsula.
FYI, the original cam had done 34k and was total Fcuked...
edited to add....
Also had stage 3 heads fitted and the precats removed at the same time (replaced with the none reverse cones)
from what RS told me and I have read else where, what is considered a radical CAM in a 4Ltr is not in a 5, so what suites a 5Ltr car may not be the best option in a 4ltr, but i may be way off....
>> Edited by pebbledash on Monday 17th January 12:31
As my 500 is in Peninsular in bits at the mo with suspected cam gone, any advice on getting a new cam....is it worth it in terms of noticable power or reliability of the new cam? Anything else I'd be better off doing now whilst there? Advice very welcome!
>> Edited by steve1c on Monday 17th January 17:40
steve1c said:
As my 500 is in Peninsular in bits at the mo with suspected cam gone, any advice on getting a new cam....is it worth it in terms of noticable power or reliability of the new cam? Anything else I'd be better off doing now whilst there? Advice very welcome!
To be honest any cam would have been better than the one that came out of mine, i would fit newer design one rather than the original equipment, CAMs seem to always be evolving and being improved.
there is also little difference in price between the MC2 and the standard one.
I beleive peninsula get cams Direct from kent, and get it as a full kit, which contains all the lifters etc and the cam, they will also fit a new vernier(sp)Pulley and chain, total parts cost of around £500 ish.
most of the difference I noticed was due to the fact that some lobs on the old CAM were worn by a few milimeters, and obviously the engine was not running optimaly at all. but now the car goes like stink..
>> Edited by pebbledash on Wednesday 19th January 16:56
jwt63 said:
Got Car back today with MC2 fitted will let you no after run in period
Nice one, as RS said they wouldn't start my cam (MC2) until he finished yours! Do let me know about any improvements please.
Had a wander around in the garage there a few days ago whilst getting some exhaust info (box open and inners removed, s/s tubes through), facinating seeing under and inside a few chims/grifs
>> Edited by steve1c on Thursday 27th January 20:18
Gassing Station | Chimaera | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff