Thinking about getting bigger cam??

[Gnarly4X]

Surely you know enough to know it can't be determined from just that info.  Why Crower chooses not to publish their lobe positions or opening/closing specs is something you'd have to ask them.  If I was considering one of their cams I'd ask before purchasing.

As for why LCE grinds advance into their cams while other manufacturers don't, that's a great question.  When it comes to a company like Comp, I'm always skeptical that they've taken the time over the years to actually test their cams.  I'm not a fan of off the shelf Comp grinds for Pontiacs because they're very generic and aren't really suited to making best power in those engines and it looks like they may have taken a similar approach with the 22R/E cams. LCE on the other hand has been doing Toyotas for years and years, I'd trust their expertise over Comp's any day.  But then there's TRD who you'd think would be the ultimate source of knowledge about these engines...

What does your simulator say?

Your post is interesting and good info.... I will comment further later.

Gnarls.

[emsvitil]

I'm stumped on how to find listings for TRD parts for these engines?  trdusa.com doesn't list anything for cars older than '95 so if I didn't hear it here I'd assume they don't offer anything for these old engines...

If I remember correctly, the 3 TRD grinds for the 20R,22R matched the first 3 crane cams grinds (I think crane had more than 3)

[kneedownnate]

I forget who it was, but trd didn't make their own cams, it was crane or comp I believe.  As for why none of the cookie-cutter companies ground in advance, I think plainview hit the nail on the head

[kneedownnate]

If I remember correctly, the 3 TRD grinds for the 20R,22R matched the first 3 crane cams grinds (I think crane had more than 3)

Poop, you beat me to it.

[Gnarly4X]

Surely you know enough to know it can't be determined from just that info. 

Yes, I know.  I was trying to make a point about cam suppliers and their specs and what it means.... and what it should mean to us.

After years of research on these cams, I often end up having more questions than answers.

I look at the comparison numbers produced by Engine Analyzer, a very reputable desk top dyno.  I read the experiences of the guys who post.  I talk to the "expert Toyota" suppliers – LCE, 22RE Performance, engbldr.  I have had conversations with cam engineers at CompCam.  I have toured their shop and had conversations with the LCE boys in Lake Havasu City.  I have toured his shop and had multiple conversations with Tim at TCR Automotive in Tucson, AZ.  For years I've spent hundreds of hours participating on just about every popular early Toyota forum on the internet.

And, I have a little experience myself and now have my own opinions.

I have not seen one camshaft supplier who has published, or offered to share and provided, any actual certified dyno test results for the camshafts they market and sell for the 20-22R-22RE.

Has Compcam, Schneider, Crane, Crower, dyno tested their profiles for the engine and application they specify?

LCE says they have dyno'd their cams.  Jim at 22RE Performance says they have tested and dyno'd their cams.  Tod at engbldr says they have dyno's and tested their cams.

Who's experience, which expert, and what information should I believe?

Is straight up cam timing better, or is a cam that has 5 degrees of advanced cam timing in the grind the best profile?

As a critical performance engine part, the selection of the best choice still remains more of a mystery than actual practical understanding for me.

Gnarls.

[Gnarly4X]

If I remember correctly, the 3 TRD grinds for the 20R,22R matched the first 3 crane cams grinds (I think crane had more than 3)

I have all of the TRD cam specs, Crane specs, and CompCam specs.  I will look, but if I remember correctly - and it's been awhile since I compared them -  they do not match.

Gnarls.

[Gnarly4X]

H8PVMNT,

OK, I just did a 1K to 5K on that Putney 272 cam based on your skinny specs.  I swapped the cam in a stock 22R.

The numbers are shockingly low. 

I'm going to re-run it in the engine specs I've been comparing the other cams with.

Gnarls.

OK, I did 5 mock pulls on Engine Analyzer.  I have attached the Putney 272 profile with the specs you provided and added it to the Excel sheet.

Let me know what you think.

Gnarls.

[Plainview]

...

LCE says they have dyno'd their cams.  Jim at 22RE Performance says they have tested and dyno'd their cams.  Tod at engbldr says they have dyno's and tested their cams.

Who's experience, which expert, and what information should I believe?

Is straight up cam timing better, or is a cam that has 5 degrees of advanced cam timing in the grind the best profile?

As a critical performance engine part, the selection of the best choice still remains more of a mystery than actual practical understanding for me.

Gnarls.

I think you could trust any of them.  Not having talked to any of them, I'd be quite surprised if they were to say things that didn't fall in line with some fairly universal truths about cams and performance.  Things like - a longer duration cam will make more upper RPM power at the expense of lower RPM power.  I'm betting they'd also throw in a caveat that the rest of the parts in the engine need to be able to support the bigger cam.   Just putting a bigger cam in an otherwise stock engine, or one with some kind of major restriction (like the RE fuel injection system) won't necessarily get you as much power as it could.  I'd be shocked if all three of the companies you mentioned wouldn't say basically just that.  I'd also be surprised if they recommended significantly different cams for a particular application.  They each have cams that are roughly comparable so my guess is that if you were to tell them all the particulars about your engine and the vehicle it's in and how you want to use it, they'd each recommend pretty close to the same thing.

Since I hadn't looked much at the Crane profiles I bopped on over to their website for a peek.  I think the following words in their description of their smallest grind are telling:

aftermarket intake/exhaust advised, ...  8.75 to 10.5 compression ratio
advised.

What they're saying is that without these things this cam may not make the power you're expecting.

I just ran a quick calculation in my head and unless I'm doing something wrong these numbers are telling me this cam has 5 degrees of advance ground in:   Duration @ .050": 214, LSA: 110, Intake @.050" open: 2  close: 32. 

Which brings me to

Is straight up cam timing better, or is a cam that has 5 degrees of advanced cam timing in the grind the best profile?

I don't think there's any one answer for that beyond "it depends."  It depends on the particular cam grind, it depends on the engine and how it's set up.  A small duration cam may work best with no advance, a long duration cam may work best with 4 or more degrees of advance.  An engine with a higher compression ratio may like a cam with no advance, a lower compression engine might like more advance, etc. etc.

I do find it interesting that the Comp 252 seems to be the overall winner in your dyno comparisons... hmmm...

[Gnarly4X]

Hey Plainview....

You said: 

"When it comes to a company like Comp, I'm always skeptical that they've taken the time over the years to actually test their cams.  I'm not a fan of off the shelf Comp grinds for Pontiacs because they're very generic and aren't really suited to making best power in those engines and it looks like they may have taken a similar approach with the 22R/E cams."

Then you said:

"I think you could trust any of them."

So are you saying that I should trust them?  I think the "trust but verify" condition would be a good thing.  I'm looking for the "verify" part.

Yes, those blurbs are basically disclaimers and recommendations... pretty much seems to be the standard marketing poop.

Yes, there are lots of "depends".  And, its fundamental engine modification design for increasing VE and flow that the intake manifold, head, valves, exhaust ports, header, exhaust system, compression ratio, etc. are all included in that "depends".

The CompCam 252S profile.... This cam has stood out – for my desired torque increase - since day one when I first starting researching back in the late 90s.  I have talked to two guys that installed that cam. One in a 22RE and one in 22R. The 22RE reported he thought it was the best cam he has tested (at that time he had installed and compared 3 cams) for overall performance. The 22R reported that he felt a nice increase in throttle response and fuel mileage.

By the way, one thing that has somewhat puzzled me is that during my earlier research, I noticed that several cam suppliers changed their published cam specs for the same cam profile.  Also, some published specs on their website were wrong.  In other words, according the Engine Analyzer their LSA could not be correct for their stated ICL, as an example.  Or their stated open and closing numbers could not be correct for their stated duration degrees.  I assumed it was a typo?  In one case I called the supplier and asked if they could explain their specs.  They said yes, I was correct and the numbers were wrong on their website.

Great discussion.

Gnarls.

[Gnarly4X]

.... I just ran a quick calculation in my head and unless I'm doing something wrong these numbers are telling me this cam has 5 degrees of advance ground in:   Duration @ .050": 214, LSA: 110, Intake @.050" open: 2  close: 32. 

Yes... "this cam" is correct... 5 degrees advanced cam timing.

The "New' in the Tq & HP numbers are for the cam with 5 degrees advanced.

The "Last" in the Tq & HP numbers are for the cam at zero degrees, straight up.

Can I assume that advancing the cam timing with this cam in this engine is going backwards in torque and HP numbers?

Gnarls.

[Plainview]

I'm not seeing the "last" numbers, did you forget to post them?

As to my comments on who to trust - you specifically mentioned LCE, Jim at 22RE and Tod at engnbldr.  I quoted you on that and it was to that quote that I was replying.  Those guys are Toyota specialists so I would assume they know more about the particulars and quirks of these engines than a company like Comp.  The fact that Comp's 252 appears to be a great cam for these engines is beside the point - I just haven't had great experiences with their specific recommendations yet it is possible to get a good cam from them.  I especially like that you can custom order whatever you want from them for only a minor added expense.  One of the well known Pontiac gurus sells custom ground Comp Cams that are to his specs and they work great, which is an example of an individual or small company that specializes in a particular engine family and is able to put together better recommendations than Comp does themselves.

[Gnarly4X]

I'm not seeing the "last" numbers, did you forget to post them?

Sorry... I meant that the area in top right hand corner of the bottom clip of the RPM range shows the New and the Last numbers produced by the two pulls.

Gnarls.

[Gnarly4X]

.....  One of the well known Pontiac gurus sells custom ground Comp Cams that are to his specs and they work great, which is an example of an individual or small company that specializes in a particular engine family and is able to put together better recommendations than Comp does themselves.

I'm curious how he determined or came up with his own grind.  How did he optimize the profile?  And I'd love to know what cam specs he modified?  Did he start with a CompCam off-the-shelf, and then tweaked one of more of the specs?

I have, many times, optimized off-the-shelf cam specs in the EA software and seen impressive improvements in torque and HP.  The problem I have is that, for example, if I increase the valve lift, how far can I go before the piston hits the top of the valve?

Gnarls.

[Gnarly4X]

If I remember correctly, the 3 TRD grinds for the 20R,22R matched the first 3 crane cams grinds (I think crane had more than 3)

Well.....I looked at the specs I have for the what were the Toyota TRD 1, 2, and 3.  I show the LSA at 110 and straight up on the cam timing.  The TRD specs match the Crane duration and valve lift specs for their 704-0010, -12, -14 but all have 5 degrees advanced cam timing.  I would have to find some documentation on the original TRD cam specs to verify that the TRD profiles had 5 degrees of advance on the cam timing.

It seems probable that Crane supplied the TRD cams.  Perhaps Toyota had them grind a zero cam advance?  Or the original source of my TRD specs was wrong.   

Gnarls.

[Gnarly4X]

I did a quick comparison with the Crane cam 704-0012 - 224-234 duration, which has 5 degrees cam timing advanced.  I got 1 lb. of peak torque loss and 7 more HP at peak RPM with the cam timing at ZERO. 

I will run the numbers and add it to the Excel sheet and post them later to show the comparison.

Gnarls.

[Gnarly4X]

I updated the Excel sheet and added the Crane cam 704-0012. It specs on Crane's website at 5 degrees cam timing advanced.

I compared it with zero degrees cam timing.   Interesting results....

See attached Excel sheet.

Please let me know what you think.

Gnarls.

[H8PVMNT]

Thanks for the Putney 272 data.  Looks kind of peaky with peak HP way up at redline.  That's just about exactly what I am wanting for the engine this is intended for so that will be fine.  I will run it hopefully by next year in my pickup and post up my seat of the pants impressions .   I have the stock profile in the 4runner for somewhat of a comparison.

Man if I were you I would try that comp 252, it looks like exactly what you are after in a girl...

[Gnarly4X]

Thanks for the Putney 272 data.  Looks kind of peaky with peak HP way up at redline.  That's just about exactly what I am wanting for the engine this is intended for so that will be fine.  I will run it hopefully by next year in my pickup and post up my seat of the pants impressions .   I have the stock profile in the 4runner for somewhat of a comparison.

Man if I were you I would try that comp 252, it looks like exactly what you are after in a girl...

You're welcome!

Yes... CC22S... I'm very tempted just to order one and swap the 261C......  I'm pondering...

Gnarls.

[Gillesdetrail]

Well.....I looked at the specs I have for the what were the Toyota TRD 1, 2, and 3.  I show the LSA at 110 and straight up on the cam timing.  The TRD specs match the Crane duration and valve lift specs for their 704-0010, -12, -14 but all have 5 degrees advanced cam timing.  I would have to find some documentation on the original TRD cam specs to verify that the TRD profiles had 5 degrees of advance on the cam timing.

It seems probable that Crane supplied the TRD cams.  Perhaps Toyota had them grind a zero cam advance?  Or the original source of my TRD specs was wrong.   

Gnarls.

Here is the cam card from my crane 704-0014 if it helps

[emsvitil]

What would happen if you advanced the 261?

[Gnarly4X]

What would happen if you advanced the 261?

261C  - RPM Range:  1,500 to 6,000

Adv 3d = Pk Tq increase 1 lb., Avg Tq = no change, Pk HP decrease 4 lbs, Avg HP decrease 1 HP.

Adv 5d = Pk Tq increase 1 lb., Avg Tq = decrease 1 lb., Pk HP decrease 7 HP, Avg HP decrease 2 HP.

Ret 1d = Pk Tq = no change, Avg Tq = increases 1 lb., Pk HP = increase 1 HP, Avg. HP = no change

Ret 2d = Pk Tq = increase 1 lb., Avg Tq = no change, Pk HP = increase 1 HP, Avg. HP = no change

Ret 3d = Pk Tq = decrease 1lb., Avg Tq = decrease 1 lb, Pk HP = increase 1 HP, Avg. HP = decrease .3 HP

[Gnarly4X]

Here is the cam card from my crane 704-0014 if it helps

Thank you Gillesdetrail!  I don't get to see an actual cam spec sheet very often.

I think their Rocker Ratio is wrong?  Should be 1.457.

That cam shows about 9 more Pk HP (134) at 5800 RPM, and drops 2 lbs of Pk Torque compared to the CompCam252S.

It would probably be a choice if you were running most of the time near WOT in a fairly modified 22.

Actually, I'd like to see the spec sheet on a TRD cam.  I have seen Roger Brown's commentary on the TRD cam, but it doesn't tell me what the ICL is..... no way to know cam timing?

Gnarls.

[emsvitil]

Please do the crane (TRD) stage 1..........  204,214   straight up +-5


thanks

[Gnarly4X]

Here's the little piece of paper I received from engbldr when I ordered the RV head with the 261C cam installed.

Gnarls.

[Gnarly4X]

Please do the crane (TRD) stage 1..........  204,214   straight up +-5


thanks

emsvitil,

Would you like me to add it to the Excel sheet, or do a quickie like I did with the 261C below?

Gnarls.

[emsvitil]

Please add to spreadsheet

[Plainview]

Sorry... I meant that the area in top right hand corner of the bottom clip of the RPM range shows the New and the Last numbers produced by the two pulls.

Gnarls.

Oops, I missed that, thanks!

I'm curious how he determined or came up with his own grind.  How did he optimize the profile?  And I'd love to know what cam specs he modified?  Did he start with a CompCam off-the-shelf, and then tweaked one of more of the specs?

I have, many times, optimized off-the-shelf cam specs in the EA software and seen impressive improvements in torque and HP.  The problem I have is that, for example, if I increase the valve lift, how far can I go before the piston hits the top of the valve?

Gnarls.

The guy has run his own business porting heads and intakes and putting together performance combinations for over 20 years now.  He used to build complete engines but hasn't been able to get consistently good help in his shop so has scaled his operation back to specialize in CNC porting of heads and intakes and putting together top end packages.  He's done a lot of dyno testing.  No idea what he started with but I know he recently updated one of his popular smaller cam profiles with slightly different and more aggressive lobes than what he'd been using in the past so I'm sure his testing is ongoing.  If you're curious - www.sdperformance.com.  I've met him a couple times and he did a set of factory iron heads for me back around 2000.  Got over 270/180 cfm intake/exhaust out of them (stock they flow around 205/150) with minimal port volume increase.

Valve-piston clearance is definitely a concern and it becomes moreso on longer duration cams.  I don't know where the limits are on the 22R/E engines.  I know with the Pontiacs you don't worry about it 'til you get up into serious race cam territory.  I think the limiting factor with the 22R/E head is the rocker arm design. There's also the need to machine valve guides and spring seats to get a lot of lift which is why most of the aftermarket cams are limited to around .430-.440" lift.  You also run into problems with ramp angles trying to get a lot of lift out of short duration cams - the lobe can become too steep and creates too much friction or bad angles with the follower.

I note that LCE warns you to check valve-piston clearance on all of their cams...

one thing I notice in the recent simulations you've run comparing advanced vs. non-advanced is that when the cam is advanced you might see a 1lb-ft. difference in torque, no change in average torque, and a reduction in horsepower.  Without being able to see the graph or looking at the chart showing the torque numbers @ RPM, my gut tells me that advancing the cam is shifting the torque curve downward in the RPM range, which would make sense.  Since average torque isn't changing, the curve is the same shape and the engine is still making just as much torque as it would with the cam "straight up," it's just doing it at lower RPMs which explains the loss in HP.  Depending on your goals, that's not necessarily a bad thing.  In fact, to most people the engine with the advanced cam would likely feel snappier and more responsive.

[Gnarly4X]

Hey Plainview,

The guy has run his own business porting heads and intakes and putting together performance combinations for over 20 years now.  He used to build complete engines but hasn't been able to get consistently good help in his shop so has scaled his operation back to specialize in CNC porting of heads and intakes and putting together top end packages.  He's done a lot of dyno testing.  No idea what he started with but I know he recently updated one of his popular smaller cam profiles with slightly different and more aggressive lobes than what he'd been using in the past so I'm sure his testing is ongoing.  If you're curious - www.sdperformance.com.  I've met him a couple times and he did a set of factory iron heads for me back around 2000.  Got over 270/180 cfm intake/exhaust out of them (stock they flow around 205/150) with minimal port volume increase.

I will check out the site.

Those are the guys, like Ted & Tod, Jim at 22R Performance, the LCE boys, and Marlin that have contributed so much to the passionate automotive buffs and hobbyists.... and of course the highly competitive race community.

Oh yeah...tweaking and testing.... and the beat goes on... Yes... just ask one of our Master Tweakers...H8PVMNT.

CNC porting... wow... that sounds like some serious G-Code programming.

So, it seems that small amounts of change in porting and in cam specs, together with exhaust mods, can produce significant improvements.  I believe, and it's been my limited experience, that small amounts of increased torque in my 22R from stock 96 HP was VERY noticeable by my butt-dyno.  However, these very small improvements seem to be debatable and debunked by some Toyota engine builders. In other words, if I take my stock 22R and swap in a CC252S, I won't get any noticeable improvement.  I don't know the facts because I've never seen a dyno test that shows a fresh stock 22R compared to just a simple swapped camshaft.  And, it may prove to be true that no noticeable increase in torque will result?

I understand that for complete performance gains, increased flow "here" usually means you need to increase flow "there"... intake, head, valves, ports, and exhaust.

Valve-piston clearance is definitely a concern and it becomes moreso on longer duration cams.  I don't know where the limits are on the 22R/E engines.  I know with the Pontiacs you don't worry about it 'til you get up into serious race cam territory.  I think the limiting factor with the 22R/E head is the rocker arm design. There's also the need to machine valve guides and spring seats to get a lot of lift which is why most of the aftermarket cams are limited to around .430-.440" lift.  You also run into problems with ramp angles trying to get a lot of lift out of short duration cams - the lobe can become too steep and creates too much friction or bad angles with the follower.

Yes... I see the specs and what seems to be the upper limits without some serious modifications (fly cut pistons?).

I note that LCE warns you to check valve-piston clearance on all of their cams...

Disclaimer.... they may have no idea what's been done to the block or head that one of their cams is going into.

Without being able to see the graph or looking at the chart showing the torque numbers @ RPM, my gut tells me that advancing the cam is shifting the torque curve downward in the RPM range, which would make sense.  Since average torque isn't changing, the curve is the same shape and the engine is still making just as much torque as it would with the cam "straight up," it's just doing it at lower RPMs which explains the loss in HP.  Depending on your goals, that's not necessarily a bad thing.

I can post the charts (and that is WAY easier for me!) but as you can see the change in numbers is usually slight.

In fact, to most people the engine with the advanced cam would likely feel snappier and more responsive.

Hmmmmm... well this is one of those Toyota 22R/RE camshaft mysteries for me.  I'm not sure that advancing cam timing proves to be a "snappier and more responsive" feeling from the real world feedback from the guys who have played with cam timing.  Look at H8PVMNT's post and where he ended up with his cam timing.

Excellent discussion!

Gnarls.

[Gnarly4X]

Please do the crane (TRD) stage 1..........  204,214   straight up +-5

thanks

Hey emsvitil,

I believe the TRD Level 1 cam was a 214/224 duration.  But, I can plug in 204/214.  What lift would you like to use?  The Crane 704-0010 has a .416/.430 lift?

Gnarls.

[Gnarly4X]

UPDATE:  06-20-2017

I added the Crane cam 704-0010, which is supposedly the same cam that was the TRD Level 1.  I have not been able to confirm the actual TRD cam specs.

The updated Excel sheet compares that cam in 3 profiles:  1 – cam timing advanced 5 degrees, 2 – cam timing at zero degrees, and 3 – 5 cam timing 5 degrees retarded.  Duration, Valve Lift, and Over Lap remain the same.

Please look at the numbers for the entire RPM range.

See attached Excel sheet.