Re: Cam timing | <– Date –> <– Thread –> |
From: Steve Jenkins (steve![]() |
|
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2008 19:52:56 -0800 (PST) |
Rick: You're spot on. A couple years ago, my F40 was putting out darn close to 500 HP at the rear wheels. That's way above factory spec. The idle sounded terrible, but when you mashed the throttle, the acceleration shared the cheese out of me. I had a major done by a dealership, and they informed me that the cam timing was "way off." So they reset it to "factory specs." The idle sounds awesome. The car is way more drivable. The acceleration, however, even though it's still scary, it's not AS scary. And the HP, even though still above factory claims, is about 50 HP lower than before. I can feel it. I'm having the timing but back to "way off" this winter. :) SJ -----Original Message----- From: Rick Lindsay [mailto:rolindsay [at] yahoo.com] Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2008 2:17 PM To: Steve Jenkins Cc: 'The FerrariList' Subject: Re: [Ferrari] Cam timing An issue we haven't discussed at all but is important, is that the factory marks that happen to be there, if any factory marks are present, are a best-case 'recommendation'. Like everything else in an engine, valve timing is a compromise. To make a car perform at its maximum potential at 7000rpm means that you probably couldn't get it to idle below 2000 rpm! This is why they invented the word "drivability". And of course, that's why the most modern cars have variable cam timing. My '98 M-B SL500 had variable exhaust cams but they just had two end-member states, switching over at about 4400rpm - and you could feel it switch. My new C300 has continuously variable intake and exhaust cams and modulates valve timing continuously. That way the car takes advantage of the fluid (charge and exhaust) dynamics at all engine speeds and all loads - while honoring the limits of fuel economy and emissions (read: still a compromise). So this all begs the question; What is the right cam timing for your 308? The answer is going to be in the definition of "right". Do you want it set the way Enzo put it, for the market to which it was delivered? Or do you want it to be smoothly drivable? Or do you want a top-end screamer with drivability-be-damned? Or perhaps do you just want to pass the emissions tests? Each definition of "right" will have a different valve timing solution. And each setting is a compromise. Sorry for preaching to the choir but sometime folks (including me) get out in the weeds and forget the fundamentals - not that any of us would do that. Woohoo, rick _________________________________________________________________ To unsubscribe or modify your subscription options, please visit: http://lists.ferrarilist.com/mailman/options/ferrari/steve%40stevejenkins.co m Sponsored by BooyahMedia.com and F1 Headlines http://www.F1Headlines.com/
- Re: Cam timing, (continued)
- Re: Cam timing Peter Pless, December 3 2008
- Re: Cam timing Rui Gigante, December 4 2008
- Re: Cam timing E M, December 3 2008
- Re: Cam timing Rick Lindsay, December 3 2008
- Re: Cam timing Steve Jenkins, December 3 2008
- Re: Cam timing Hans E. Hansen, December 3 2008
- Re: Cam timing clyde romero, December 3 2008
- Re: Cam timing Gary Reed, December 4 2008
- Re: Cam timing Steve Jenkins, December 4 2008
Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.