And the stock VQ30DE cam lift is...
12-21-2002, 06:56 PM
#1
And the stock VQ30DE cam lift is...
~0.338"
I got some time to unpack and straighten out my garage. I found my dial indicator and mag base. I put them on the cam lobes and got readings from 0.335"-0.343"
I should take readings on the VQ35DE next week.
I got some time to unpack and straighten out my garage. I found my dial indicator and mag base. I put them on the cam lobes and got readings from 0.335"-0.343"
I should take readings on the VQ35DE next week.
12-21-2002, 09:19 PM
#2
Guest
Posts: n/a
The total height of the 4th gen lobes is 1.73"-1.737". The total height of the 3.5L lobes is 1.766"-1.774" (0.036" more). I'm almost positive that both engines use the same base circle on their camshafts. Therefore, since the 4th gen lift is 0.335", the 3.5L must be 0.371", or 11% more. That equates to 11% more area for the flow to enter and exit. That's a fairly decent increase in lift but not enough for your monster. Would think you'd want 0.4"+ since your engine makes well over 50% more HP than stock.
Any idea what the lift on the JWT cams is?
Any idea what the lift on the JWT cams is?
12-21-2002, 11:20 PM
#3
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 2,807
Re: And the stock VQ30DE cam lift is...
VQ 4th gen cams suck! VG30 cams have 0.385" lift and 252* duration for 2nd gen/z31s and 248* duration for 3rd gens. A cam with 248-252* duration and around 0.39" lift should make 5-8whp from 4000rpm+ in a VQ.
Originally posted by MardiGrasMax
~0.338"
I got some time to unpack and straighten out my garage. I found my dial indicator and mag base. I put them on the cam lobes and got readings from 0.335"-0.343"
I should take readings on the VQ35DE next week.
~0.338"
I got some time to unpack and straighten out my garage. I found my dial indicator and mag base. I put them on the cam lobes and got readings from 0.335"-0.343"
I should take readings on the VQ35DE next week.
12-22-2002, 05:35 AM
#4
Originally posted by Keven97SE
The total height of the 4th gen lobes is 1.73"-1.737". The total height of the 3.5L lobes is 1.766"-1.774" (0.036" more). I'm almost positive that both engines use the same base circle on their camshafts. Therefore, since the 4th gen lift is 0.335", the 3.5L must be 0.371", or 11% more. That equates to 11% more area for the flow to enter and exit. That's a fairly decent increase in lift but not enough for your monster. Would think you'd want 0.4"+ since your engine makes well over 50% more HP than stock.
Any idea what the lift on the JWT cams is?
The total height of the 4th gen lobes is 1.73"-1.737". The total height of the 3.5L lobes is 1.766"-1.774" (0.036" more). I'm almost positive that both engines use the same base circle on their camshafts. Therefore, since the 4th gen lift is 0.335", the 3.5L must be 0.371", or 11% more. That equates to 11% more area for the flow to enter and exit. That's a fairly decent increase in lift but not enough for your monster. Would think you'd want 0.4"+ since your engine makes well over 50% more HP than stock.
Any idea what the lift on the JWT cams is?
Lets be realistic though will we see gains of 15hp or 15tq from just cams, probably not. Please prove me wrong.
12-22-2002, 07:26 AM
#5
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 2,807
Plug in these #s, 0.390 lift, intake valve opens at 1*BTDC and closes at 69*ABDC, the exhaust valve opens at 59* BBDC and closes at 9*ATDC. Those are the specs on the VG/VE cams. Also here are the specs for the 94+ SR20DE lowport cams below:
Now given the 91-99 SR20 exhaust cams are the same, the only difference is in the intake cam. Here are dyno results of adding a 91-93 intake cam to a 95+ sr20de http://www.nissanperformancemag.com/...install.shtml. Given the simular cam specs it is logical to assume that the VQ would see a simular increase with a simular type cam. In this case a cam based on the VE30DE/VG30DE.
1995 cams
a=exhaust duration
b=intake duration
c=intake opens, relative to TDC
d=intake closes, relative to BDC
e=exhaust closes, relative to TDC
f=exhaust opens, relative to BDC
a= 240
b= 232
c= 5
d= 47
e= 3
f= 57
intake lift= 8.6mm (.339")
exhaust lift= 9.2mm (.362")
1992 cams
a= 240
b= 248
c= 13
d= 55
e= 3
f= 57
intake lift= 10.0mm (.394")
exhaust lift= 9.2mm (.362")
a=exhaust duration
b=intake duration
c=intake opens, relative to TDC
d=intake closes, relative to BDC
e=exhaust closes, relative to TDC
f=exhaust opens, relative to BDC
a= 240
b= 232
c= 5
d= 47
e= 3
f= 57
intake lift= 8.6mm (.339")
exhaust lift= 9.2mm (.362")
1992 cams
a= 240
b= 248
c= 13
d= 55
e= 3
f= 57
intake lift= 10.0mm (.394")
exhaust lift= 9.2mm (.362")
Originally posted by MardiGrasMax
Lets be realistic though will we see gains of 15hp or 15tq from just cams, probably not. Please prove me wrong.
Lets be realistic though will we see gains of 15hp or 15tq from just cams, probably not. Please prove me wrong.
12-22-2002, 08:09 AM
#6
Originally posted by Nismo87SE
Plug in these #s, 0.390 lift, intake valve opens at 1*BTDC and closes at 69*ABDC, the exhaust valve opens at 59* BBDC and closes at 9*ATDC. Those are the specs on the VG/VE cams. Also here are the specs for the 94+ SR20DE lowport cams below:
Now given the 91-99 SR20 exhaust cams are the same, the only difference is in the intake cam. Here are dyno results of adding a 91-93 intake cam to a 95+ sr20de http://www.nissanperformancemag.com/...install.shtml. Given the simular cam specs it is logical to assume that the VQ would see a simular increase with a simular type cam. In this case a cam based on the VE30DE/VG30DE.
Plug in these #s, 0.390 lift, intake valve opens at 1*BTDC and closes at 69*ABDC, the exhaust valve opens at 59* BBDC and closes at 9*ATDC. Those are the specs on the VG/VE cams. Also here are the specs for the 94+ SR20DE lowport cams below:
Now given the 91-99 SR20 exhaust cams are the same, the only difference is in the intake cam. Here are dyno results of adding a 91-93 intake cam to a 95+ sr20de http://www.nissanperformancemag.com/...install.shtml. Given the simular cam specs it is logical to assume that the VQ would see a simular increase with a simular type cam. In this case a cam based on the VE30DE/VG30DE.
SR20 92' showed a slight power loss.
I guess cams for the VQ are trickey.
12-22-2002, 12:27 PM
#7
Originally posted by MardiGrasMax
I pluged the JWT cam, lift 0.415" and duration of 256, info using the factory cam timing information into Desktop Dyno 2000 and the gains were not very good, 2hp & 4tq over the factory lift. Now the cam timing on the JWT cams is different, but until they release that info or we get dynos we wont know for sure if the added duration helps more or not.
Lets be realistic though will we see gains of 15hp or 15tq from just cams, probably not. Please prove me wrong.
I pluged the JWT cam, lift 0.415" and duration of 256, info using the factory cam timing information into Desktop Dyno 2000 and the gains were not very good, 2hp & 4tq over the factory lift. Now the cam timing on the JWT cams is different, but until they release that info or we get dynos we wont know for sure if the added duration helps more or not.
Lets be realistic though will we see gains of 15hp or 15tq from just cams, probably not. Please prove me wrong.
12-22-2002, 04:12 PM
#8
Originally posted by 98SEBlackMax
What type of lifter are you using for the cam portion on the Dyno2000 software? I assumed it was the roller type for the VQ30DE and got good gains with the JWT cams, much more than what you got. Maybe we should compare notes and see what the difference is between your simulation and my simulation.
What type of lifter are you using for the cam portion on the Dyno2000 software? I assumed it was the roller type for the VQ30DE and got good gains with the JWT cams, much more than what you got. Maybe we should compare notes and see what the difference is between your simulation and my simulation.
12-22-2002, 05:11 PM
#9
Originally posted by MardiGrasMax
Solid I didnt thing we had roller? I dont know for sure...
Solid I didnt thing we had roller? I dont know for sure...
Hate to bug you, But do you have a screen shot of your stock VQ30 setup? I ran all the specs from your posted picture except I used the stock cams (.338" lift) and I got a peak hp of 182 at 6000 rpms, which isnt right... we should have 190 HP @ 5600 rpms stock.
12-24-2002, 07:50 PM
#10
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 2,807
Hmmm interesting, if you plugged in his JWT cams #s based on his chart it should show some gain.
Originally posted by 98SEBlackMax
See im not sure now, when I came up with my stock VQ30 setup I guessed on the cam lift, tweaked some numbers, and eventially I came up with 190HP @ 5500 rpms. Not the best way to do things but I had to guess some stuff to run the sim.
Hate to bug you, But do you have a screen shot of your stock VQ30 setup? I ran all the specs from your posted picture except I used the stock cams (.338" lift) and I got a peak hp of 182 at 6000 rpms, which isnt right... we should have 190 HP @ 5600 rpms stock.
See im not sure now, when I came up with my stock VQ30 setup I guessed on the cam lift, tweaked some numbers, and eventially I came up with 190HP @ 5500 rpms. Not the best way to do things but I had to guess some stuff to run the sim.
Hate to bug you, But do you have a screen shot of your stock VQ30 setup? I ran all the specs from your posted picture except I used the stock cams (.338" lift) and I got a peak hp of 182 at 6000 rpms, which isnt right... we should have 190 HP @ 5600 rpms stock.
12-25-2002, 11:46 AM
#11
I really dont think its good to tweak to a number and go from their. What I think DD2k is good for is comparison's when you make a change to a set up. Do I really think that the JWT cams loose power, no I's sure they make some power ( not 1500 bucks worth
) , they must have some interesting cam timing specs that we wont know till some one buys a set and puts them on a "cam doctor" to find out.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
litch
4th Generation Maxima (1995-1999)
123
01-04-2024 07:01 PM
Kyle Lee Cleveland
6th Generation Maxima (2004-2008)
1
09-28-2015 09:01 PM