When is a Cam Needed?

Joe dropped 10 lbs of boost and lower EGT. This shows that more air was being let into the cylinder. From the outside looking in, I believe joe is on the edge of the rate of injection threshold for a common rail system. Ron, I do not believe you have the same limits in terms of rate of injection.

If the same power was made at 10lbs less boost, additional fuel, if it was able to be injected would have taken advantage of the additional air. This would have shown an increase in power. If limits to rate of injection(software related or mechanical) are reached then gains cannot be realized. This appears to be the case.

If that were not the case, then it could be succesfully argued that a smaller cam with less duration and lift is the way to go. I do not believe that to be accurate. But if any of you do, then do not waste your time or money on a cam.

Joe, have you been able to best those numbers or make a change in rate of injection since those tests were done?
 
Last edited:
Lift is a huge part of the equation. If you noticed lower torque in an area where you wanted to gain, then intake duration is usually too big for the application.

When is it needed? That is relative to the build and what you are trying to accomplish. IF you are trying to get a blip on the screen at the local dyno for 600hp or 700hp, you can do that with a stock cam no doubt. If that is what you are worried about, an aftermarket cam is not needed.

There are many aspects that change from cam to cam depending on what you are trying to accomplish. On the intake side of things, the duration pretty much dictates at what rpm you move the most air. The exhaust dictates how long the pressure acts on the piston, how big of a pressure pulse hits the turbine wheel and, how long the exhaust is open after TDC(overlap) which can have some low rpm and high rpm affects. Lift affects how effective that cam is for a given duration. The better your head is, the more benfit that can be gained from a given duration with more lift. All that being said, two cams with the same duration @ .050" and the same lift can act totally different, based on total open time and duration at .200".

The benefits of a cam on a street truck are as follows.

Due to changed intake placement and shape

-more clean air into the cylinder on every intake event if correct duration is chosen
-lower egt from more air
-better spool from more trapped air
-less smoke from more trapped air
-more trapped air over over awider rpm creating a wider power curve
-more trapped air creates a higher dynamc compression and more oxygen these two things in tandem, create higher compression pressures, higher compression temperature, creates an environment which decreases the time from start of injection to start of combustion. This ends the combusion process sooner, the same effect as increasing rate of injection. It is actually better than increasing timing in that it shows a lot of the benefits without the increased negative torque associated with more timing.
- higher pressure at TDC allows for a greater expansion ratio
- a greater expansion ratio can mean two things, more work done on the piston via pressure acting longer on the piston or more work done on the turbine wheel by opening at the same time as the stock cam. Opening much sooner on a performance cam done correctly (*for a street truck) is wasting pressure that should be acting on the piston to instead create excess drive pressure.


Benefits from a correctly placed improved shape exhaust

-because of more lift and better shape of exhaust lobe you will experience less pumping losses. This will allow the energy that was pushing back on the piston trying to exit the cylinder to instead be placed on the turbing wheel........ "free"energy to help spool the turbo
-later opening on a conservative cam can help increase efficiency by allowing the pressure to act on the piston longer, effectively lengthening the power stroke.
-earlier opening wastes some of the energy acting on the piston to spool up that large single or to create huge sums of drive pressure if installed with an incorrectly sized turbo. On street trucks this is usually not wanted as it gives up efficiency, but if you are not able to spool your large single, then it is a good tradeoff
-less in cylinder EGR effect when teamed with the correctly sized turbine wheel and turbine housing
-In nitrous applications, huge gains in power can be had from retarding the exhaust opening and letting the pressure act on the piston longer and then adding a lot of lift to allow the exhaust to exit without excessive pumping losses.


Gains from overlap

-Higher volumetric efficiency can be gained from more overlap if the correct cam is chosen for the correct setup. To take advantage of this, (at higher rpm) you need to have very well matched turbo with near 1:1 drive/boost pressure ratio. it can also be amplified with a long runner style exhaust header. With a long tube header, the exhaust gasses that are leaving the cylinder creater a lot of inertia, if the exhaust closes after the intake opens in the correct spot, the exiting exhaust inertia will creat a bit of a low pressure area in the cylinder. This low pressure area creates a larger pressure differential between the intake charge and the in cylinder pressure. As a result more air can be brought into the cylinder. Too much overlap and much fresh air can be wasted out the exhaust. Too much overlap with excessive drive pressure and you create an EGR effect which lengthens the time from start of injection to start of combustion. You will also lengthen the total time of combustion which can allow fuel to still be burning as the exhaust valve opens.


If all of the fuel that you are injecting is being burned and your egt's are in check, then adding more air will show little gains in power. In this instance, the gains in power that are shown will be from lower pumping losses. IF this is the case, then more fuel needs to be injected to see gains.

If you are at the limits of your turbos flow potential, then opening the intake valve longer and higher will net you little, because the turbo cannot effectively push more air into the cylinder to take advantage of the longer opening.

If you are injecting fuel very late after TDC (longer Pulse Width Duration) allowing more air to enter the cylinder will help very little with clearing the smoke or making more power. This is an instance where the cam will help little in clearing smoke or lowering EGT. There is not enough time to completely burn all of the fuel by the time the exhaust valve opens.

Good read. Thanks for sharing that. Definitely worth the time to read that. :thankyou2:
 
All of this is above my pay grade Zach. I have seen some very nice gains with cams on the bottom end and mid range, making them well worth the cost to me. I'd try another one if it wasn't for all the little clearance checking that had to be done with the 6.7.
 
I think your "pay grade" is higher than you let on. Very refreshing on a site where most people overstate their "pay grade"

A cam can remove two or three factors that limit power. Unfortunately a cam cannot tune a truck, pick turbos, pick a head, match components or change rate of injection(except p-pump). In cases when people have engaged their brains, it is shown that intellegence can trump blindly buying a cam. Cams can cover some tuning issues, but expecting a cam to "fix" a poor combination or fix rate of injection issues is short sighted.

An important question on this this and just about any other discussion on horsepower. What factors are limiting your horsepower?
 
Last edited:
I have always thought that a cam isnt something to look at until 600+hp, im sure thats the wrong way to think of it though. Also, I, like many other people have never swapped a cam in with NO other changes made to the air/fuel setup. As of recently i have thought about swapping my current cam(maxspool) for something different to see if i can gain some spoolup time for staging. The front end has to come apart to re-seal everything so it wouldnt be a bad time to do it.
 
This thread is where I'm at.....I think???

I'm making good power, and feel like it's tunes pretty well, but I need just a bit more.

Seems to have plenty of fuel, but it needs more air. I'd rather keep the current chargers, and the head's already ported, more boost doesn't help a lot either. I get the feeling that a good cam would turn it lose. I'm close to pulling the trigger on a 188/220, but I'm pretty sure that I don't have enough clearance.

Zach, based on your minimum .055" valve depth, .018" piston protrusion and a standard gasket, how much piston to valve clearance could I expect to have?
 
Last edited:
This thread is where I'm at.....I think???

I'm making good power, and feel like it's tunes pretty well, but I need just a bit more.

Seems to have plenty of fuel, but it needs more air. I'd rather keep the current chargers, and the head's already ported, more boost doesn't help a lot either. I get the feeling that a good cam would turn it lose. I'm close to pulling the trigger on a 188/220, but I'm pretty sure that I don't have enough clearance.

Zach, based on your minimum .055" valve depth, .018" piston protrusion and a standard gasket, how much piston to valve clearance could I expect to have?

About .050", but you could put it on a 101 instead of a 99 and get even more clearance. ( assuming a standard head gasket that compresses to ~.056" and 1.69:1 rocker ratio with .010"/.020" lash)

Another thing to think about if you have plenty of fuel is trying to put the same amount in a shorter window. That can help make considerably more power and make less smoke. At that point a cam can do it's job even better.

In fact, I wish the subject cc of fuel per crank degree was talked about more. I think it would push the diesel industry further, faster.
 
Last edited:
About .050", but you could put it on a 101 instead of a 99 and get even more clearance. ( assuming a standard head gasket that compresses to ~.056" and 1.69:1 rocker ratio with .010"/.020" lash).

Hmmm, that's more than I expected, that gives me hope.

Problem is, instead of having the .093" clearance used in those calculations, I've only got .073". So I'm only looking at .030" valve clearance. That's pretty tight!

I know I could do a thicker gasket or fly-cuts. But I've already decided that the next time the head comes off, I'm doing a full rebuild. And with the local track closing for good in a few months (I'll be away for a month of that), I'd pretty much lose the rest of the season. So that's not really an option right now.

Due to the time constraint, I am willing to take some calculated risks though.

Hypothetically speaking, running ~3500 rpms, 85 psi of boost, with the #165 springs, do I have a chance with .030" of clearance?

I could always retard it now, and then change it when I do a full rebuild too. How much clearance is to be gained by retarding it a degree or two?

Another thing to think about if you have plenty of fuel is trying to put the same amount in a shorter window. That can help make considerably more power and make less smoke. At that point a cam can do it's job even better.

In fact, I wish the subject cc of fuel per crank degree was talked about more. I think it would push the diesel industry further, faster.

You mean bigger injectors?
 
Injection pump cams
Bigger injectors, bigger plungers, faster cams anything to increase rate of injection. The faster you get the fuel in the cylinder, the shorter amount of time to burn, the less timing you have to run for a given HP. This creates less parasitic loss in terms of negative torque which is the amount of energy lost from the crank to compress the fuel/air charge in spite of the detonation before TDCC
The .030" is pretty tight. you could retard it and do it later. Call the office if you want specifics. I will have to bring up the file on the computer and look at how many thousandths per degree the cam is moving so that I can calculate how much clearance you would gain. Although we don't usually recommend it, you could even take the lash to .013" to buy you a bit more.
 
Last edited:
Joe dropped 10 lbs of boost and lower EGT. This shows that more air was being let into the cylinder. From the outside looking in, I believe joe is on the edge of the rate of injection threshold for a common rail system. Ron, I do not believe you have the same limits in terms of rate of injection.

If the same power was made at 10lbs less boost, additional fuel, if it was able to be injected would have taken advantage of the additional air. This would have shown an increase in power. If limits to rate of injection(software related or mechanical) are reached then gains cannot be realized. This appears to be the case.

If that were not the case, then it could be succesfully argued that a smaller cam with less duration and lift is the way to go. I do not believe that to be accurate. But if any of you do, then do not waste your time or money on a cam.

Joe, have you been able to best those numbers or make a change in rate of injection since those tests were done?


The lower boost number can not accurately used alone to predict how much air is being drawn into the cylinder.

This engine was far far from injection rate limited, the same injectors that were used during the cam test at ~ 1000 HP touched 1400HP on a single solenoid and at that point became pump limited. With 3 pumps it became block limited.
The thing was crying for more oxygen to burn.

The moral of the story, that 188/220 did not make a ounce of difference any where in my testing. NO better spooling, NO more power anywhere in the curve anywhere!

Yet it's still in the engine, why? Cause I payed $1600 fookin bones for the whole meal deal. The HP per dollar ratio of zero/$1600 is pretty nasty. I'm not bitter, was as hopeful as any that I'd see something. And would love to see any one else's data on the topic.

IMO any street truck put all your bones into the charger/s. I also believe that there has to be better valve events for a high revving engine. That same cam is going to suck ass in a street truck too.
 
The lower boost number can not accurately used alone to predict how much air is being drawn into the cylinder.

This engine was far far from injection rate limited, the same injectors that were used during the cam test at ~ 1000 HP touched 1400HP on a single solenoid and at that point became pump limited. With 3 pumps it became block limited.
The thing was crying for more oxygen to burn.

The moral of the story, that 188/220 did not make a ounce of difference any where in my testing. NO better spooling, NO more power anywhere in the curve anywhere!

Yet it's still in the engine, why? Cause I payed $1600 fookin bones for the whole meal deal. The HP per dollar ratio of zero/$1600 is pretty nasty. I'm not bitter, was as hopeful as any that I'd see something. And would love to see any one else's data on the topic.

IMO any street truck put all your bones into the charger/s. I also believe that there has to be better valve events for a high revving engine. That same cam is going to suck ass in a street truck too.

was that on the same primary charger? just curious is all
 
H2 versus 181/210.
 

Attachments

  • 001.jpg
    001.jpg
    32.3 KB · Views: 0
Cummins spent a ton of money designing a cam to perform the best for normal duty RPM. IMO the only really noticeable change in a cam is when you are no longer in the RPM range the stock cam was designed for...such as pullers, drags. In a street truck, not worth it. Then again, thats just my opinion.
 
Could a fair comparison be done with 95 degree air to 55 degree air? Now if the cam on the 95 degree air out spooled the cam on the 55 degree air call me interested.

That said I have no data to prove it but I know I lost spool and bottom end on the h2.
 
Last edited:
Injectors are a part of rate of injection. It appears that there were additional pump modifications and modification to programming to make more power. As stated before I will give you $1600 to have you put the stock cam in and dyno with no other changes
 
The dyno runs were made 8 months apart with similar temperatures but big difference in humidity. Everything was the same except for a cam swap from an H2 to a 181/210. The green line was an oddity that we were never able to duplicate with the old pump which was starting to lose rpm capability. Bottom end was much improved and in the mid range there was 200 more hp on tap at the same rpm. After this the pump was changed so I couldn't compare any more.

Note the power under the curve difference with the 6.7/ 188/220 in this graph. daily drive is much improved.
 

Attachments

  • 002.jpg
    002.jpg
    56.8 KB · Views: 0
Last edited:
I understand that big RPMs require a Cam that moves the power band and allows more lift & duration. I guess what I'm trying to find out is what street application would require an aftermarket Camshaft? And is a drop-in effective or do you really need to flycut and run a larger cam for a noticeable difference?

Any street application where you want the turbo to spool sooner. Do not need to fly cut to feel noticeable difference.
 
Back
Top