Stroker & Cam. Thoughts?

[ruffy01]

Over the past few weeks I think I've read every single post here; my brain hurts

Upcoming build is:
'94 or '96 4.0L block (see other thread) & accompanying head (0630 or 7120)
Head: self port/cleanup, std valves, springs (depend on cam)
Std oil pump (don't see need for more)
4.0L rods
12cw long snout 258 crank (I have already)
zero deck & .043" gasket=.043" quench
KB 944 or 945 pistons (dependant upon cam choice)
24# injectors
62mm TB & '99+ intake
OBDII with a PM to FlyinRyan

XJ, 4.11's locked, 4.5" lift, 33's touring & offroad, but a revhead at heart

Now the big question is cam.
I've read so much about cam failures & so many appear to be Comp Cams & yet Comp Cams still appear to be mostly recommended
Anyhow I've done some Desktop Dyno 2003 sim's on 4 cams that appear the goods for my needs. The popular Comp's 231-4 & 201-4 & 505 Perf 263/265-14H & 256/256-12F.
The main reason for these comparisons is the relatively late IVC times on the 505 cams allows for a higher SCR, here's the sim's:

Comp 231-4: SCR=9.54, DCR=8.33


Comp 201-4: SCR=9.54, DCR=8.14


505 Perf 263/265-14H: SCR=10.04, DCR=8.33


505 Perf 256/256-12F: SCR=10.48, DCR=8.35


Both the Comp 201-4 & 505 Perf 263/265-14H should run with stock valve springs but the 505cam offers up an extra ~15HP & a little more TQ but not as flat a curve.
I'm leaning toward the 505 Perf 263/265.
I don't see many reports on builds with 505 Performance cams. Is there a reason I've missed?
Thoughts guys?

SilverXJ made a brief comment upon service & product from 505 in another thread, I'd like to know more.

Cheers,
Ruffy.

[CobraMarty]

Can you show a Comp 232 cam and curves?

[ruffy01]

I'll give it a run now & post back

[FlyinRyan]

I'll have to go through my notes but I'm almost positive I have a known good calibration for a 4.6 with the 231 cam ,62mm TB and 24 lb injectors.

[ruffy01]

Hey Marty.

Comp Cams 232-4: SCR=9.74, DCR=8.35


Obviously some parameters I've entered into the Sim may not be 100% accurate, but they are consistant for all comparisons & given that all cams compared operate within similar HP/TQ ranges I'd think the comparisons are valid.

[ruffy01]

I'll have to go through my notes but I'm almost positive I have a known good calibration for a 4.6 with the 231 cam ,62mm TB and 24 lb injectors.

I appreciate your reply Ryan.
When the time comes I'll be annoying the piss out of you

Cheers,
Ruffy

[SilverXJ]

I would change the induction to Tuned Port Injection, exhaust to large tube headers, and take a look at your airflow file. I believe Dino has some head flow numbers on his site you can use.

[CobraMarty]

Shows the 232 is less powerful than 231? I thought it was the other way around.

[Desertjr]

Any chance you can run the mopar 229? And the 96-04 at 4* advanced?
The mopar according to m specs was better than both the comps. The 96-04 was better than them all at 4000rpm +...so. Advancing 4* should net more low end but at very minimal lift which can be run on stock springs.

This is great info to have for people who are looking for the same info with a rough estimated curve. I wonder how accurate these things are? I'm running the dyno2000. Looks like your on the 2003?

[ruffy01]

I would change the induction to Tuned Port Injection, exhaust to large tube headers, and take a look at your airflow file. I believe Dino has some head flow numbers on his site you can use.

Ok, I've updated the Injection type, exhaust & airflow files (from Dino's site).
What about the setting for "induction flow" ? I've chosen 500cfm carb/injection.

I'll rerun some sims when I can & post results up.
I have noticed with the change to Tuned Port Injection the torque figures have increased at low RPM.

[ruffy01]

Shows the 232 is less powerful than 231? I thought it was the other way around.

Looking at the numbers here: http://www.angelfire.com/my/fan/Jeep4.0Camshafts.htm
The 231 has slightly more exhaust lift & duration than the 232, otherwise not much in it Marty.

[ruffy01]

I've revised the parameters that SilverXJ suggested & re-run the sim's. I've maintained ~8.33 DCR for all runs & have noted the corresponding SCR above each file.
We've got Comp Cams 201-4, 231-4, 232-4, 505 Perf 256/256, 263/265, 272/280 & OEM '96-'04, all installed straight up.

201-4, SCR=9.54


231-4, SCR=9.54


232-4, SCR=9.74


Jeep OEM '96-'04, SCR=10.15


505 Perf 256/256, SCR=10.04


505 Perf 263/265, SCR=10.48


And for the RevHeads, 505 Perf 272/280, SCR=10.72


Phew
Ruffy

[CobraMarty]

Looks great.
One last one, Jeep OEM '96-'04 + 1.7 roller rockers instead of 1.6?

[ruffy01]

Looks great.
One last one, Jeep OEM '96-'04 + 1.7 roller rockers instead of 1.6?

Here it is Marty:



Marginal increases as expected.
I gotta say, the OEM cam stacks up pretty well.
I also tried it with 4* advance & got further increases without moving the rev ranges much, definitely worth consideration, even without the rollers.

To be honest, I love the 505 272/280 cam but it probably won't suit my needs offroad

[Cheromaniac]

Marginal increases as expected.
I gotta say, the OEM cam stacks up pretty well.

That's why I reused my spare stock cam after one lobe on the Crane 753905 bit the dust.