Author Topic: Thinking about getting bigger cam??  (Read 118413 times)

0 Members and 22 Guests are viewing this topic.

Gnarly4X

  • Online Gold Turtle Award
  • *
  • Turtle Points: 5134
  • Male Posts: 4,271
  • Member since Jun '16
  • 4-wheeling vicariously.
    • View Profile
    • Buy me some coffee
Re: Thinking about getting bigger cam??
« Reply #60 on: Aug 04, 2016, 08:48:40 PM »
these engines don't need more torque they are little torque monsters for their size.  what you need is to move your power UP the rpm range.  If it wont run up to 4000 before you shift then when you grab that higher gear the rpm will drop to the very bottom of that torque curve and struggle.  the factory expected you to shift at 3600 and with a stock carb, cam and exhaust most wont rev past 4500.
I love my cam. I have F150's in the back and they are real soft til they get way down there. which makes for some insane flex on the trail :disturbed:

Hi 79coyotefrg,

Great discussion....  :beerchug:

Again I think it’s a matter of perspective.

The lack of torque in the 22s is probably the most discussed topic on every Toyota forum I’ve been active on since 1999.  And, that is what I’ve experienced since my first 1986 22RE Toyota longbed automatic.  As far being  “little torque monsters”, compared to the Nissan 2.4L engine in 1988, which produced 140 HP and 152 lbs of torque at 4,400 RPM, the Toyota 22RE is “little” short monster .  So I think the 22s do lack power and especially in the low to mid RPM range. In the stock engines, after 5,000 RPM they lack enough torque to really “feel” the pull during acceleration.

In my experience, the guys that I’ve ridden with when driving their 22 powered trucks, I noticed they don’t rev them up like I’ve always done.  I’ve never babied my vehicles. I keep them well tuned and maintained, but I’m not afraid to exercise them frequently.  My 22R would easily tac to 5,500, it just wasn’t producing much torque above 5,000 RPM.

If more torque and power at the higher end of the RPM range is a power goal, then typically you will trade off some lower RPM grunt. 

Again, my target goal is to get increased power at my most used RPM range – between 2800 to 3400.  With 31” tires, 4.10 R&P, 5th gear (.85 ratio), I should be just starting into my peak torque range at 3,000 to 3,100.  If I need to shift down to 4th gear (1:1 ratio) to pass or maintain an up hill grade, I’ll be between 3400 and 3500, right end of my peak of torque curve.

There may be times when I will get into the 4,000 to 5,000 RPM range, but it will not be very often for any sustained driving.  Most likely I will tac it to 4500 or 5000 often in 1st, 2nd, and 3rd gears while getting on the freeway.

As you can see on the attached Excel sheet, the LCE cam does produce nice numbers above 3700 RPM, but sacrifices torque from off idle to about 2900 RPMs.

My research and experience tells me that I should see an increase of about 12 to 18 peak HP, and about 8 to 12 pounds of increased torque at about 3400 with this rebuild over it's stock form.

All of that is on paper, so I won’t know what this engine will really put out until I dyno it.

That's just my worthless opinion.

Gnarls. :spin:
« Last Edit: Aug 04, 2016, 09:08:27 PM by Gnarly4X »
1986 XtraCab SR5 22RE 5speed W56B, ~16,000 MI after break-in, DIM (Did It Myself) rebuilt engine - .020" over, engnbldr RV head, OS valves, 261C cam, DT Header. https://imgur.com/oACTHTR

God Bless Our Troops... Especially Our Snipers. The 2nd defends the 1st
MEMBER: WWP, T2T, VFW, NRA, GOA, SAF, Mammoth Nation, C2 Tactical, Hillsdale College, Humane Society of the U.S. - "We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used to create them." ~ Albert Einstein

 
 
 
 
 

Related Topics

0 Replies
913 Views
Last post Nov 27, 2007, 05:53:37 AM
by taco9824
11 Replies
3259 Views
Last post Feb 19, 2008, 08:38:01 AM
by superyota
1 Replies
1258 Views
Last post Jan 30, 2009, 11:24:41 AM
by IrieKidinCal
7 Replies
2200 Views
Last post Aug 06, 2011, 06:09:00 PM
by yoshaleng
10 Replies
3425 Views
Last post Oct 18, 2012, 08:50:04 PM
by lone walker