MC1 or standard cam - does the MC1 require a remap?

[zed4]

Hi again,

Southways have given me a good price for the cam change, so I think I’m going to go ahead with having a new one fitted.

The question is, do I go for a standard replacement cam from TVR Power, or should I go for the MC1 cam from V8 developments? What’s the difference? Will the MC1 cam require a remap/chip?

Any help appreciated. I don’t want to fit the MC1 and then have the hassle of it not running right as the map is incorrect. The standard cam from Power is cheaper than the MC1 from V8 Developments. The car is standard, except for the ACT induction hose kit, silicone elbow, carbon superflare trumpets and the plenum thermal gasket, so just a few induction mods.

Thanks,

Dan

[blitzracing]

MC1 is nice on a 3.9, it pulls well from low down, and revs out really well.- one of the local guys got 248 bhp with one with an induction kit, home porting, and no remap. The fuel curve was a bit rich for some reason, but the BHP figures where pretty good.

[skiver]

I have the MC1 with similar induction mods as you. It pulls like a train through the rev range and is particularly impressive over 3k,very driveable as well.
Mine's also a 400 and no mapping needed.

[zed4]

Spoken with V8D and they've convinced me to go for the MC1 too I think.

[mab1]

I am pleased with mine. Good low speed manners and pulls well through the rev range with a nice little kick at the top end.

[CHEF_GOLF]

I have the mc1 and a remap. She moves like s£1t off a shovel

[zed4]

My MC1 has arrived! It's going to Southways on Saturday, hopefully it won't be there too long.

[Podie]

Lovely cam. I had an MC1 in my 450 - smooth, with decent power and torque.

Far better than the peaky 224 that was in before it.

[zed4]

Podie said:

Lovely cam. I had an MC1 in my 450 - smooth, with decent power and torque.

Far better than the peaky 224 that was in before it.

Good news

[OleVix]

Fitting the mc1 soon, along with stage 3 big valve heads and carbon trumpets and ported inlet... Looking forward to that!

[SILICONEKID343HP]

OleVix said:

Fitting the mc1 soon, along with stage 3 big valve heads and carbon trumpets and ported inlet... Looking forward to that!

Would a Stealth fit ? bigger numbers at the top .. MC1 has good mid range .

[Podie]

SILICONEKID343HP said:

OleVix said:

Fitting the mc1 soon, along with stage 3 big valve heads and carbon trumpets and ported inlet... Looking forward to that!

Would a Stealth fit ? bigger numbers at the top .. MC1 has good mid range .

With those heads I'd certainly speak to V8D before settling on the MC1.

[QBee]

SILICONEKID343HP said:

OleVix said:

Fitting the mc1 soon, along with stage 3 big valve heads and carbon trumpets and ported inlet... Looking forward to that!

Would a Stealth fit ? bigger numbers at the top .. MC1 has good mid range .

Mine has a stealth cam, as a result of my request to give me torque over a wide rev range rather than out and out bhp. I wanted good pulling power on the road, and good pulling out of corners on track. I am more bothered about being fast out of the corners than 10 mph faster on the straights top end.

With all the induction mods and the Lucas ECU I have 300 bhp and 330 torques from a five litre. I have over 300 torques from under 2000 rpm to over 5000 rpm IIRC.

So I don't agree Daz. I don't get "bigger number at the top".

[K4TRV]

QBee said:

Mine has a stealth cam, as a result of my request to give me torque over a wide rev range rather than out and out bhp. I wanted good pulling power on the road, and good pulling out of corners on track. I am more bothered about being fast out of the corners than 10 mph faster on the straights top end.

With all the induction mods and the Lucas ECU I have 300 bhp and 330 torques from a five litre. I have over 300 torques from under 2000 rpm to over 5000 rpm IIRC.

So I don't agree Daz. I don't get "bigger number at the top".

Yeah, I prefer a Women with smaller breasts too.....

T

[Sardonicus]

QBee said:

Mine has a stealth cam, as a result of my request to give me torque over a wide rev range rather than out and out bhp. I wanted good pulling power on the road, and good pulling out of corners on track. I am more bothered about being fast out of the corners than 10 mph faster on the straights top end.

With all the induction mods and the Lucas ECU I have 300 bhp and 330 torques from a five litre. I have over 300 torques from under 2000 rpm to over 5000 rpm IIRC.

So I don't agree Daz. I don't get "bigger number at the top".

Thing is Anthony the Stealth amounts to a biggish cam in the 4.0 so would see better numbers up top all things being equal of course bigger engines soften cam profiles (i.e yours) I think a Stealth in a 4.0 with head & intake mods would be a stonker but there is valve to piston contact to keep in mind running this cam in a stock 4.0

Edited by Sardonicus on Friday 22 November 10:28

[phazed]

QBee said:

With all the induction mods and the Lucas ECU I have 300 bhp and 330 torques from a five litre. I have over 300 torques from under 2000 rpm to over 5000 rpm IIRC.
.

Strange thing is, your 5.0 isn't much slower then my 5.5 numbers don't tell the whole story I guess.


Or.

One just needs far more horses to make a noticeable difference!

Too late now but I would have suggested the Real Steel Typhoon.

[QBee]

Sardonicus said:

hing is Anthony the Stealth amounts to a biggish cam in the 4.0 so would see better numbers up top all things being equal of course bigger engines soften cam profiles (i.e yours) I think a Stealth in a 4.0 with head & intake mods would be a stonker but there is valve to piston contact to keep in mind running this cam in a stock 4.0

Edited by Sardonicus on Friday 22 November 10:28

That is fascinating Simon. My education (the useful bits) continues on Pistonheads, the University of Powaaaaaaah.
I was warned about the valve to piston contact when looking at upgrading my 4 litre. Are pocketed pistons the answer?

I know that Rob at V8D will not only know the answer but also warn against fitting the wrong cam, so OP, order by phone and discuss your requirements with Rob. He's a good guy.

[Chilliman]

phazed said:

QBee said:

With all the induction mods and the Lucas ECU I have 300 bhp and 330 torques from a five litre. I have over 300 torques from under 2000 rpm to over 5000 rpm IIRC.
.

Strange thing is, your 5.0 isn't much slower then my 5.5 numbers don't tell the whole story I guess.Or.One just needs far more horses to make a noticeable difference!

Apologies to the OP for going off topic here, but regarding Peter's observation above, torquestats quote the following for a 1080Kg car with 300/360 bhp (respective figures)

0-60 4.5/4.1
0-100 10.2/8.8
60-100 5.7/4.7

OK the figures are calculated, but if somewhere near correct, it does, for me, beg the question why would I spend many thousands of pounds to get from 300bhp to 360bhp just to get from standstill to 100mph 1.4 seconds quicker?

Rhetorical question obviously

[QBee]

phazed said:

Strange thing is, your 5.0 isn't much slower then my 5.5 numbers don't tell the whole story I guess.


Or.

One just needs far more horses to make a noticeable difference!

Too late now but I would have suggested the Real Steel Typhoon.

I will resurrect the Snetterton thread and get some top speed comparisons. I know for a fact that I maxed out at 125 mph at Snetterton, not helped by the sharpness of the entry corner to each straight (hence low start speed). And each time I went for more top speed than that, the entry to the next corner was, err......butt-clenching?

With the torque and 888s, my cornering speeds are quite high, maybe that's what makes the difference? Matt Poxon's 280 bhp Griff was remarkably quick on the straights even when he wasn't trying. But he was a doddle to catch round the bends due to lack of grip and fading brakes on his part.

The one I cannot get over is Mat Smith's 21 year old stock 220 bhp 4 litre. His only mods so far are DS2500 pads. I gave him a 300 yard start after the long red flag session, and it took me five laps really trying to catch him. And he was on mismatched road tyres. Ok, I had a delightful 55kg of ballast in the passenger seat, but I was really trying, and Mat must be 20 kg heavier than me due to being 8 inches taller. Even he was amazed at the speed he got out of that car.

[Chilliman]

QBee said:

The one I cannot get over is Mat Smith's 21 year old stock 220 bhp 4 litre. His only mods so far are DS2500 pads. I gave him a 300 yard start after the long red flag session, and it took me five laps really trying to catch him. And he was on mismatched road tyres. Ok, I had a delightful 55kg of ballast in the passenger seat, but I was really trying, and Mat must be 20 kg heavier than me due to being 8 inches taller. Even he was amazed at the speed he got out of that car.

Gaz Mono's