Ferrari Mailing List: Re: Cam timing

[Steve Jenkins (steve]

I haven't touched the boost! It's still turned way up. The only thing that
changed was the timing.

SJ

-----Original Message-----
From: Gary Reed [mailto:gary [at] garyreedsales.com] 
Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2008 9:21 AM
To: Steve Jenkins
Cc: 'The FerrariList'
Subject: Re: [Ferrari] Cam timing

Hey Steve,

Maybe the 23-pounds of boost that the F40 was dialed up to, had something to
do with the high HP rating too?    ;)

Gary


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Steve Jenkins" <steve [at] stevejenkins.com>
To: "Gary Reed" <gary [at] garyreedsales.com>
Cc: "'The FerrariList'" <ferrari [at] ferrarilist.com>
Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2008 7:52 PM
Subject: Re: [Ferrari] Cam timing


> 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/
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> To unsubscribe or modify your subscription options, please visit:
>
http://lists.ferrarilist.com/mailman/options/ferrari/gary%40garyreedsales.co
m
>
> Sponsored by BooyahMedia.com
> and F1 Headlines
> http://www.F1Headlines.com/