Another cam question from a newbie

Newbies, and basic Stroker Recipes... Get started with your first stroker here!!
Post Reply
User avatar
Exos
Consistent
Consistent
Posts: 280
Joined: December 2nd, 2008, 1:35 pm
Stroker Displacement: 4.7L
Vehicle Year: 1998
Vehicle Make: Jeep
Vehicle Model: XJ
Location: Quebec, Canada

Another cam question from a newbie

Post by Exos »

Could someone explain to me what are the benefits of using a performance cam as opposed to my stock cam ('93) on my stroker build?

Stock cam has duration of 270/270, and gives me a better DCR than let's say Comp 232-4 (250/256). So why should I buy a new cam and stiffer springs? Is valve lift the key here?
User avatar
Mgardiner1
Donator
Donator
Posts: 574
Joined: August 2nd, 2008, 6:19 pm
Stroker Displacement: 284 CI
Location: Wading River, NY

Re: Another cam question from a newbie

Post by Mgardiner1 »

there are tons more factors involved in a camshaft then JUST duration. Lift, Duration, Lobe seperation, Ramp speed, Centerline angles.... These are all characteristics that "define" what the cam should be expected to do. If you are interested in getting more low end torque, or higher end horsepower, I'd suggest a little googling on the characteristics in a camshaft, and what each aspect effects. I think the cam, and its effects, are the trickiest part to learning of how any engine produces power. If you can get a decent understanding on that, and can even just narrow down your cam selection, then you should pat yourself on the back and have a beer :cheers: :-)
oletshot wrote:....and silvolites are only cast not hypericantspellits. :-)
User avatar
Cheromaniac
I live here
I live here
Posts: 3208
Joined: March 8th, 2008, 12:58 pm
Stroker Displacement: 4563cc
Vehicle Year: 1992
Vehicle Make: Jeep
Vehicle Model: Cherokee
Location: Cyprus
Contact:

Re: Another cam question from a newbie

Post by Cheromaniac »

While the stock '87-'95 cam does have an advertised duration of 270 degrees, the 0.050" lift duration is only 197 degrees so that indicates that the cam has a slow opening ramp rate. Valve lift is 0.424".
Given all the reliability problems associated with flat tappet cams these days, I suggest you keep the stock cam/valve springs/retainers and just replace the lifters.
1992 XJ 4.6 I6 - 5MT - Stroker build-up, Stroker "recipes" Sold
1995 Mustang GT - 4AT - Modded Sold
2006 Mustang GT - 5MT - Modded Midlife Crisis Car :mrgreen:
User avatar
Flash
I love JeepStrokers.com!!
I love JeepStrokers.com!!
Posts: 693
Joined: February 17th, 2008, 10:45 pm

Re: Another cam question from a newbie

Post by Flash »

I agree staying with the stock cam...........................But if you want more then the stock cam, you should read up in the FAQ Section on cam FAQ's..........heres the link to help you out ;)
viewtopic.php?f=27&t=145


Flash
89 XJ with 300,000 on the original eng

"I've also never completed a motor, yet. My mouth (fingers) is also writing checks my ass can't cash."
dwg86
Donator
Donator
Posts: 1233
Joined: February 13th, 2008, 6:20 pm
Stroker Displacement: 4.6
Vehicle Year: 2003
Vehicle Make: Jeep
Vehicle Model: Wrangler

Re: Another cam question from a newbie

Post by dwg86 »

Before you use your old cam, I would check all the lobes to make sure they aren't worn too bad.
User avatar
Exos
Consistent
Consistent
Posts: 280
Joined: December 2nd, 2008, 1:35 pm
Stroker Displacement: 4.7L
Vehicle Year: 1998
Vehicle Make: Jeep
Vehicle Model: XJ
Location: Quebec, Canada

Re: Another cam question from a newbie

Post by Exos »

I found this while searching : http://www.amotion.com/tech/camselect.html

...might be of interest.
User avatar
Exos
Consistent
Consistent
Posts: 280
Joined: December 2nd, 2008, 1:35 pm
Stroker Displacement: 4.7L
Vehicle Year: 1998
Vehicle Make: Jeep
Vehicle Model: XJ
Location: Quebec, Canada

Re: Another cam question from a newbie

Post by Exos »

Ok... after reading all evening about camshafts, lobe separation, duration, lift, etc.... I'm more confused than ever!!! I'll sleep on it, althought I'm leaning towards the Comp 232-4, still.
User avatar
SilverXJ
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 5790
Joined: February 14th, 2008, 7:14 am
Stroker Displacement: 4.6L
Vehicle Year: 2000
Vehicle Make: Jeep
Vehicle Model: Cherokee
Location: Radford, Va

Re: Another cam question from a newbie

Post by SilverXJ »

What ever you decide I don't think you can go wrong with the comp cam 68-231-4 or the 232-4.... why are you leaning toward the 232-4 over the 231-4? I have compared as many cams as I can on a desktop dyno and while it doesn't give real world numbers it is still represents comparable numbers and I haven't found a cam that does as well on a stroker that the comp cam.
User avatar
Exos
Consistent
Consistent
Posts: 280
Joined: December 2nd, 2008, 1:35 pm
Stroker Displacement: 4.7L
Vehicle Year: 1998
Vehicle Make: Jeep
Vehicle Model: XJ
Location: Quebec, Canada

Re: Another cam question from a newbie

Post by Exos »

Leaning towards the 232 because they say it's fuel-injected compatible, and it's probly less prone to ORBII fault codes in my opinion.

But I'm still wondering if I should keep my stock '93 cam after all... Now it's really time that I go sleep on it... ;)
User avatar
SilverXJ
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 5790
Joined: February 14th, 2008, 7:14 am
Stroker Displacement: 4.6L
Vehicle Year: 2000
Vehicle Make: Jeep
Vehicle Model: Cherokee
Location: Radford, Va

Re: Another cam question from a newbie

Post by SilverXJ »

The Jeep PCM will have no problem with the 231
Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 3 guests