Stroker & Cam. Thoughts?

[ruffy01]

Same again Desertjr with OEM cam advanced 4*:

Desertjr Comparison OEM Adv 4deg.jpg

I logged out here, logged back in on the other PC & both files are visible here mate.

[Desertjr]

Its shows for me as "Desertjr Comparison OEM adv 4deg.jpg" No pics. I thought donating would allow me to see them so I donated, plus you get those really cool stickers but still nope.
I downloaded the images and tryed to reopen them outside the forums & it only shows the codes for the forums...no pic.

[ruffy01]

Desertjr, have a look here: http://www.jeepstrokers.com/forum/viewt ... =19&t=3874
I've started another thread to help you with your .jpeg issue, we'll get it sorted

[Desertjr]

I can see em

[ruffy01]

I can see em

My efforts weren't in vain after all....

[Muad'Dib]

So from the graphs it appears that the following is true..

OEM96 > 231 > 229AC

But it also appears the difference is +-10 HP MAX.. and also advancing the cams an additional 4 degrees really doesn't do much at all.

Doesn't make me want to change cams from my Mopar Performance 229AC installed straight up.

[gradon]

I wouldn't trade it either.

[Desertjr]

To me I see the 229 as favorable..but you guys are right it seems like a 10ho gain maybe? And thats what 200 bucks vs 50 bucks, as well as 200 or so for aftermarket springs. Ruffy, can you confirm by the table page what the difference is between the to, in peak hp/ftlbs?

The 96+ advanced 4* with 1.7 roller rockers seems to be the ticket according to the program? I have 1.95/1.54 valves & a mildly ported head, so wouldn't a slightly bigger cam be better? To get the flow moving more.
Running the 96+ at 4* advance gives me 9.49 static 8.31 dynamic & a ICVA 49.95. Quench .030". I don't think theres enough overlap to run on 87oct but its not a big deal. Hell I may get away with it anyway because the quench height.