Very different. The stock 16V inlet is 'small' anyway and the exhaust is even smaller - practically a knobbly stick! I guess it's designed to spool up a small turbo T3 turbo and keep the high backpressure from reversing back into the cylinders. ie. it's not a cam for making power.

Ijust searched out this very useful graph of cam curves that Julien posted years back:





Cheers and the other week confirmed against a, so-called, "heartbreaker" Dyno Dynamics! Made Made 393 bhp / 380 lbsft @ 1.5 bar. Less than 3% difference - well within acceptable error considering different dyno, ramp rate, weather conditions, etc. So no bogus results here

damn more sorting needed, na are the same well at least I can sort the turbo cams for the bin. thanks for the cam chart.

Just to put the cat amongst the pidegons on this one 'heart breaker' results are in.

C&B Med Road Cams, standard timing, 385flbs @ 1.35bar boost at approx 5100rpm. 250lbs @ 3500rpm, 345lbs @ 4000rpm and still 350lbs @ 6000rpm.

Kj's actually got a heartbreaker printout.... So you 2 16vt heavy weights get your graphs up in this thread!!

graphs please...

Photo's of the graphs or scans? One will be tomorrow, the other Monday.

any

Power and Torque


Power and Boost


Photobucket is being stupid, it keeps putting one photo on the side regardless of the roatation.

Here you go:


VIDEO

Hi Begbie, good to see your engine does make decent torque afterall - Or at least so it seems; Unfortunately I can see from the printout that your dyno pull was done on the wrong setting! It should have been done on Shoot 4F. Shoot 6F is for 6-cylinder (RWD, IIRC) engines. So the compensation calcs were incorrect for your car, likely making your figures higher than they should be

What was you wheel bhp? Mine was 334 bhp.

Okay just so we've actually got something to talk about, lets ignore the fact that the pull was done using the wrong compensation calcs Your dyno result does show several interesting things:

First, far from being a cat amongst the pigeons It shows the importance of real tuning - as opposed to just doing a bit of mapping and calling it a day. With some effort and careful tuning it's possible to make a £100 2nd-hand cam setup produce the same performance as a £900 (that's what C&Bs seem to cost ATM) specially designed performance turbo cams. It also further convinces me that C&B cams aren't worth their crazy asking prices! Why pay nearly a Grand when you can get Catcams (my favourite make of cams so far), which cost like half the price?!

Off the topic of cams and this thread, but your dyno sheet also goes to show the worth of proper headwork. (ignoring the shootout mode problem for a moment) your Coupe, with it's gas-flowed head makes similar performance to my Coupe with it's lightly 'tickled' head, with approx. 3 psi less boost. Making an educated guess I reckon it would make approx 415-420 bhp at it's original 1.5 bar - BTW, why was that run done at 1.35 bar instead of 1.5?? Means you can't accurately compare it to your original dyno result.

Finally it also shows what you pay for in new-tech turbo wheels and ballbearing CHRAs vs old-skool turbos; On my DD power run the ramp rate made the turbo spool more slowly than it does on the road, but even so I can see that GT32 turbo spools up a good 500 rpm quicker than my T3/T04e journal bearing.

I did notice on the 6F mode and did wonder as I'm sure I had seen elsewhere that it should be 4 something or other.

Wheel BHP was 333.6BHP

Whilst the C&B cams were expensive, there wasn't any other option around when I was doing the engine build circa 2007, otherwise I might have chosen something else, but they were £750 - £800 when I bought them.

Run at 1.35bar, no idea, both times I have the car dynoed at Surrey RR, I always find that the boost level is lower, first time was pre engine blow up, I always ran 1.4bar and on the dyno it showed 1.2 and yesterday on the road, it's always 1.5bar, but again, it was less and was 1.35bar when run on the rollers.

Just looking at your torque figure, your low down torque is really low when compared against my graph. Whilst I'm 250lbs at 3500rpm your only at 140lbs, then at 4000rpm it's 345lbs vs 165lbs, it's not until you're at 5000rpm we are then as similar levels.

Is that down to your turbo?

Ah, this means that on these respective days both our cars made exactly the same power!



Ramp rate - change in roller braking load as speed increases. The DD rollers didn't load the engine enough at low revs so the turbo spooled slower than it should have.

If you look at my original Dyno Star Printout you'll see the orange torque line is much bigger than the blue line up to approx 4.5k. The only difference between those two runs was the orange run was done at a slower ramp rate. The Dyno Star result is much closer to how the turbo spools on the road.

Ah right, didn't realise about the ramp rate. I've scanned my graphs in, so it's a bit easier to read.

Both of your graphs show the same ramp rate of 15.

Does anyone know why Surrey use such a low ramp rate? I checked with my DD guy and he reckons it should be at least 100...

RR 015 is definitely NOT standard shoot out mode 4F or 6F

RR 150 was used when I had my car on a Dyno Dynamics

You could see it was under more load than the last RR I had it on, maybe not as much load as a 4th gear pull on the road but a improvement

The different Shootout modes don't just change the ramp rate, they also change the flywheel power calculations.

On Shoot 4F and Shoot 6F the ramp rates are the same but the flywheel calculations aren't. Shoot 6F is for a 6-pot engine so a higher 'intertia factor' is added than the one used in Shoot 4F, which is for 4-pots. So you're going to get a higher flywheel reading.


Note that our wheel horsepower figures were pretty much identical - just 1 hp between them. yet Begbie's Coupe 'made' 8 bhp more than mine ATF. Why? Diffeent flywheel calulations.

I merely commented on the ramp rate KJ to note they were the same, I know all about the shootout modes.

I merely replied! No need to take offence.

Besides, most other people don't so it's useful to explain these things Part of the purpose of this thread here, is so readers can also pick up useful knowledge. Not just the people taking part in the discussion!

I didn't.

I just added to my last post while you replied

So, come on then. I'm waiting to hear why I achieved the same level of torque as kj16v, with 0.15bar less boost over a longer period?

Thing is Unfortunately because your run was done on the incorrect Shootout mode, our graphs still aren't really directly comparable with mine. The only thing we know for sure is yours made similar peak bhp with 3 psi less. To make the observations I made above I had to ignore the fact the modes were different.

Why not come down to CFM Engineering in Reading, where I first dyno'd mine. Out of all the dynos I've run my Coupe on, I think that one best simulates road conditions - the cars I tune on it make the right boost for a start. Then we can actually make a worthwhile comparison. Plus we can a ride-in in each other's cars on the real road! Afterall, that's where it really matters

PM me if your up for it.

Trouble is, nothing will be repeatable in the same conditions, unless they were both run on a chassis dyno at the same time in tandem, but that wouldn't be feasible due to cost and again, figures can be fudged.

I'd be up for it, but not for a while. Job change and a weeks holiday due in a months time.

Well offer's open Run side-by-side, no fudge

hi
I have a Lancia Delta HF 2.0 16vt from 1994

I'm current on a project with stock turbo (only for now), but I will put the material.

Intake Manifold Lancia Kappa
Gear Box Lancia Kappa
HKS blow-off valve and air filter
Exhaust 2.75 (home made)
Innovatte wideband + Turbo + oil pressure gauge
remove air conditional

Fiat Tipo N/A AJUSA 93077900 camshaft lift 10.15 dur. 234º valve timming 1-45 TDC 0.8 Running clearance 0.35

Lancia Kappa 16VT camshaft Lift 8.6 dur. 223º valve timming 0-43 TDC 0.8 Running clearance 0.38

for these cams for torque I should advance (ignition) inlet came one tooth.

what do you think?

Thanks

Hi.

So you have the Tipo cam on the inlet and Kappa cam on the exhaust? That's a unique setup so you'll have to experiment on the dyno. Start with +6 deg in, +2 deg ex and go from there.

Bare in mind though, none that is worth it unless you upgrade to a turbo capable of at least 350 bhp.

From the site
http://www.wallaceracing.com/camcalc.php

puting the cam details and the result.

Original cam's
Your cam has an Overlap of 8.00 degrees
Intake Duration of 223.00 degrees.
The Exhaust Duration is 210.00 degrees.
The Inlet Cam has an Installed Centerline of 103.50 degrees ATDC.
The exhaust cam has an Installed Centerline of 105.00 degrees BTDC
intake centraline
advanced 0.75º

Intake fiat tipo / Exhaust .Inlet lancia kappa
Your cam has an Overlap of 3.00 degrees
Intake Duration of 234.00 degrees.
The Exhaust Duration is 223.00 degrees.
The Inlet Cam has an Installed Centerline of 114.00 degrees ATDC.
The exhaust cam has an Installed Centerline of 111.50 degrees BTDC.
intake centraline
retarded -1.25º

Intake fiat tipo / Exhaust Lancia delta TA
Your cam has an Overlap of 3.00 degrees
Intake Duration of 234.00 degrees.
The Exhaust Duration is 210.00 degrees.
The Inlet Cam has an Installed Centerline of 114.00 degrees ATDC.
The exhaust cam has an Installed Centerline of 105.00 degrees BTDC.
intake centraline
retarded -4.5º

Intake fiat tipo / Exhaust inlet Lancia delta TA
Your cam has an Overlap of 11.00 degrees
Intake Duration of 234.00 degrees.
The Exhaust Duration is 223.00 degrees.
The Inlet Cam has an Installed Centerline of 114.00 degrees ATDC.
The exhaust cam has an Installed Centerline of 103.50 degrees BTDC.
intake centraline
retarded -5.25º

but I still do not know what is the best option and if will work with stock pulleys?

please help

for the turbo I have thought about the GT3170 ballbearings

I'm running the same cams as yours (but with bigger turbo)

Do you plan to use the pulleys from tipo and kappa ?

If it's not the case then you can forget about the timing given by fiat/lancia as they are ok when combined with their respective pulleys...(this should be checked for all the cams but I've already checked this for 4 cams and they all have the same plot location)

Have you got vernier pulleys?

From what I have measured, the tipo cam and intake cam from kappa on exhaust(which is the same as lancia delta integrale and fiat coupe 16v turbo) both open much earlier than stock cams.

...I just noticed I should have said -6 in and -2. Advancing the cams will be terrible!