Off the shelf cam options for marine engines
#671
Registered

Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 8,439
Likes: 93
From: yorkville,il
#672
Registered

Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 8,356
Likes: 1,515
From: NW Michigan
Ran a 242/248 - 644/648 111 lsa 496's. Custom hyd roller grinds from comp with a pretty aggressive lobe design. Ended up with some valvetrain issues we diagnosed on the dyno. Without the dyno we wouldn't have caught it. Combination between recommended springs and roller lifters. I didn't spend much time chasing the problem before swapping to solid lifters and springs resulting in a tighter valve lash. Installed cams 4 deg advanced. Peak power 5,800.
#673
Registered
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 2,733
Likes: 8
From: bel air, md
#674
Ran a 242/248 - 644/648 111 lsa 496's. Custom hyd roller grinds from comp with a pretty aggressive lobe design. Ended up with some valvetrain issues we diagnosed on the dyno. Without the dyno we wouldn't have caught it. Combination between recommended springs and roller lifters. I didn't spend much time chasing the problem before swapping to solid lifters and springs resulting in a tighter valve lash. Installed cams 4 deg advanced. Peak power 5,800.
Aside from the issues you found on the dyno, was there much power difference?
#675
I thought it was cool hearing the completely different sound of the two different cams I used in these engines over the years. Both setups had the same docking mannerism's. Neither surge (I don't like surge, I tune it out), stall, fart, hickup etc. but the new one is a few mph faster than the old.
1st was with the old solid roller. 92.3 mph GPS.
https://youtu.be/nV0Kh-lk4Bw
2nd was with the hydralic roller, 95.4 mph GPS.
https://youtu.be/EeOna_qS7Fg
1st was with the old solid roller. 92.3 mph GPS.
https://youtu.be/nV0Kh-lk4Bw
2nd was with the hydralic roller, 95.4 mph GPS.
https://youtu.be/EeOna_qS7Fg
#676
Registered

Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 11,332
Likes: 73
From: chicago
I thought it was cool hearing the completely different sound of the two different cams I used in these engines over the years. Both setups had the same docking mannerism's. Neither surge (I don't like surge, I tune it out), stall, fart, hickup etc. but the new one is a few mph faster than the old.
1st was with the old solid roller. 92.3 mph GPS.
https://youtu.be/nV0Kh-lk4Bw
2nd was with the hydralic roller, 95.4 mph GPS.
https://youtu.be/EeOna_qS7Fg
1st was with the old solid roller. 92.3 mph GPS.
https://youtu.be/nV0Kh-lk4Bw
2nd was with the hydralic roller, 95.4 mph GPS.
https://youtu.be/EeOna_qS7Fg
#677
Registered
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 2,733
Likes: 8
From: bel air, md
I thought it was cool hearing the completely different sound of the two different cams I used in these engines over the years. Both setups had the same docking mannerism's. Neither surge (I don't like surge, I tune it out), stall, fart, hickup etc. but the new one is a few mph faster than the old.
1st was with the old solid roller. 92.3 mph GPS.
https://youtu.be/nV0Kh-lk4Bw
2nd was with the hydralic roller, 95.4 mph GPS.
https://youtu.be/EeOna_qS7Fg
1st was with the old solid roller. 92.3 mph GPS.
https://youtu.be/nV0Kh-lk4Bw
2nd was with the hydralic roller, 95.4 mph GPS.
https://youtu.be/EeOna_qS7Fg
#678
I believe I posted them earlier in this thread or on another thread that you commented on. However, they have similar duration specs when you account for solid vs. hydraulic with the biggest differences being 2* more lobe separation on the new cam and a bit more lift and LS firing order which was all part of the plan when putting the package together. Could have run a bigger solid cam and I'm sure it would have been the same, perhaps even more but I got sick and tired of lashing valves every season because my engines are on 32 1/2" centers.
One of the biggest differences I felt in the boat was being able to feel that there was much more torque from 3500 on up. The old cams pulled these props to 5700 and the new cams are pulling to 5900 with the same props.
One of the biggest differences I felt in the boat was being able to feel that there was much more torque from 3500 on up. The old cams pulled these props to 5700 and the new cams are pulling to 5900 with the same props.
#680
Registered

Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 11,332
Likes: 73
From: chicago
I believe I posted them earlier in this thread or on another thread that you commented on. However, they have similar duration specs when you account for solid vs. hydraulic with the biggest differences being 2* more lobe separation on the new cam and a bit more lift and LS firing order which was all part of the plan when putting the package together. Could have run a bigger solid cam and I'm sure it would have been the same, perhaps even more but I got sick and tired of lashing valves every season because my engines are on 32 1/2" centers.
One of the biggest differences I felt in the boat was being able to feel that there was much more torque from 3500 on up. The old cams pulled these props to 5700 and the new cams are pulling to 5900 with the same props.
One of the biggest differences I felt in the boat was being able to feel that there was much more torque from 3500 on up. The old cams pulled these props to 5700 and the new cams are pulling to 5900 with the same props.
If i remember the solid roller you had was pretty mild. It sounds like you certainly making more power now obviosuly. 3mph gain in a 36 apache from a cam swap if similar cams, is huge. Did you dyno them ?


