95' Junker Drag Truck

Big Blue24 said:
Adjustable pump gear is still MIA, manufacturer said another week or two.
Click to expand...

I have a new one from Jesse I can borrow to you if that will help you out. I can ship it out Monday. I do not need it until third week of Feb at this point in time.

Chris
 
screw installing everything, and then pulling the cover again to change a gear, and setting timing again LOL.
 
Big Blue24 said:
Halfway between 59 & 140.5 is 99.75*, this is my intake lobe centerline measurement. Hamilton calls for a 99* intake centerline so the cam is ever so slightly retarded 0.75 *. After the head is installed, I'll be able to check the piston to valve clearance which should be sufficient with the cam installed within 3/4 of a degree of the intake centerline.
Click to expand...

I installed mine on a 100.25* CL for valve clearance, and was very disappointed with the cam's performance. With the new engine I'm going no more than 99*, may even go 98.5*.
 
Drothgeb said:
I installed mine on a 100.25* CL for valve clearance, and was very disappointed with the cam's performance. With the new engine I'm going no more than 99*, may even go 98.5*.
Click to expand...

Can you explain a bit more what you found
 
97rada said:
Can you explain a bit more what you found
Click to expand...

I posted some results before, but without having time slips in front of me....

There was no improvement in spooling when I compare psi/rpm while doing a boosted launch.

My 60' went from mid 1.6s to 1.7s.

I lost almost .2 in ETs, and 2 mph in trap speed.

All this was going from the stock cam, to the most popular cam out there, without any other changes other than the upgraded springs, retainers and push rods.

Even after switching from 5x18s to 5x20s afterwards. My trap speeds are lower with the cam and 5x20s, than they were with the stock cam and 5x18s.

These results were based on many passes at the track over multiple days and, I always record the temps and DA for comparison purposes. And remember, I had to retard the cam for valve clearance. If it was installed on the correct CL, I'm hoping that results would be better.
 
Last edited:
Drothgeb said:
I posted some results before, but without having time slips in front of me....

There was no improvement in spooling when I compare psi/rpm while doing a boosted launch.

My 60' went from mid 1.6s to 1.7s.

I lost almost .2 in ETs, and 2 mph in trap speed.

All this was going from the stock cam, to the most popular cam out there, without any other changes other than the upgraded springs, retainers and push rods.

Even after switching from 5x18s to 5x20s afterwards. My trap speeds are lower with the cam and 5x20s, than they were with the stock cam and 5x18s.

These results were based on many passes at the track over multiple days and, I always record the temps and DA for comparison purposes. And remember, I had to retard the cam for valve clearance. If it was installed on the correct CL, I'm hoping that results would be better.
Click to expand...



With the extensive dyno work i did comparing "the most popular cam out there" with the stock one (a common rail cam at that) you can imagine your results are no surprise and somewhat vindicating.

At best installed straight up its still not likely to show any gain's and the heavier springs are costing FMEP.

"There must be something else wrong with your combination"......LOL I just need to dump mine while its still the hottest cam out there.
 
Last edited:
So is this another statement that stock cams are best for a sub 4k rpm truck? Or any truck for that matter?
 
Joe did you notice any change in the power band or where power was made, not just if more peak power was made?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
ZERO change, I mean it wasn't even funny how perfectly the traces were together. Both on inertia only transient response and fully loaded timed sweeps.

"Spool" traces were exact copy's and that's were I really find humor in the wow spool comment's of the seat dyno's. More than likely buddy compares his truck spool in the heat to 10:00 at night after he's just spent all day changing out the cam and goes damn....look at that spool...LOL! In fact one dude has a video on here or CF in the night showing all that spool...LOL

IMO best charger sizing and aero is power and money in the bank. 5000rpm+ I've said all along there has to be better valve events, but frankly 4000 and less the stock cam is damn effective.

The more efficiently you can make charge density the less and less effect the cam will have.
 
What about egt?

Also, do you think the change is non existent compared to gassers because of the higher boost pressures diesels run? Like the air will get in there one way or another?

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk
 
Joesixpack said:
ZERO change, I mean it wasn't even funny how perfectly the traces were together. Both on inertia only transient response and fully loaded timed sweeps.

"Spool" traces were exact copy's and that's were I really find humor in the wow spool comment's of the seat dyno's. More than likely buddy compares his truck spool in the heat to 10:00 at night after he's just spent all day changing out the cam and goes damn....look at that spool...LOL! In fact one dude has a video on here or CF in the night showing all that spool...LOL

IMO best charger sizing and aero is power and money in the bank. 5000rpm+ I've said all along there has to be better valve events, but frankly 4000 and less the stock cam is damn effective.

The more efficiently you can make charge density the less and less effect the cam will have.
Click to expand...

I remember reading that whole thread when you were testing it on your truck that looked more wired up then the space shuttle. The owner of a very popular company volunteered to fly out to you and "show" you how to tune it. What happened there?
 
Joesixpack said:
ZERO change, I mean it wasn't even funny how perfectly the traces were together. Both on inertia only transient response and fully loaded timed sweeps.

"Spool" traces were exact copy's and that's were I really find humor in the wow spool comment's of the seat dyno's. More than likely buddy compares his truck spool in the heat to 10:00 at night after he's just spent all day changing out the cam and goes damn....look at that spool...LOL! In fact one dude has a video on here or CF in the night showing all that spool...LOL

IMO best charger sizing and aero is power and money in the bank. 5000rpm+ I've said all along there has to be better valve events, but frankly 4000 and less the stock cam is damn effective.

The more efficiently you can make charge density the less and less effect the cam will have.
Click to expand...


Was this head ported at all or stock? I can see using a cam on a stock head not gaining much at all. But with a ported head, I see it taking advantage of the added air flow with a cam and would "think" it would make a difference.
 
murphy41 said:
Was this head ported at all or stock? I can see using a cam on a stock head not gaining much at all. But with a ported head, I see it taking advantage of the added air flow with a cam and would "think" it would make a difference.
Click to expand...

That was my thinking too, but my head has a decent port job.

Probably one of the reasons it didn't help me, is that my build was already pretty balanced. Already spooled quick, and didn't have much smoke. The extra air the cam gave me didn't have extra fuel to burn. And I lost power due to the exhaust valve opening sooner. At least that's my guess.

For next year, I'm going to set things up so that I take full advantage of the cam (higher rpms and more fuel) and see what happens.

Anyway, I don't want to de-rail Big Blue's thread. Just wanted him to know that to have the best chance at the cam working for him, it's best to install in on the correct centerline.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top