A few of us were talking about this recently and speculating if it could be done. Many said it couldn't be done cos the dizzy slot and drive dwoel were 60degrees out between 3.0 and 3.5. I even had the advice of a known aftermarket Mits parts outlet (in WA - you fill in the blanks :) ) to say cam drive pin and timing slot would not line up. And to top it off I had a local mechanic look at it for me and get it wrong.

Turns out 98SPORT was right all along guys. See pics below:

this one shows dizzy end from left to right 3.0, 3.5 std, Ralliart. Note how with the dizzy slots all lined up how all the lobes line up

http://img525.imageshack.us/img525/9469/img3075bp4.th.jpg (http://img525.imageshack.us/my.php?image=img3075bp4.jpg)


and here's a shot of the drive end, left to right = Ralliart, 3.5 std, 3.0. This is just the back of the previous shot. So you can see, with all dizzy slots lined up all the drive pins also line up.

http://img525.imageshack.us/img525/1214/img3076aq1.th.jpg (http://img525.imageshack.us/my.php?image=img3076aq1.jpg)


Sooooo....when someone who is ex Mits and who knows the engine engineers and they say something can be done, they know what they are talking about. And at about $500 the pair new ex Mits, this is indeed a cheap upgrade.

Now the sad part is that I didn't listen to the people who know, and went and ordered some Tighe 252's as well. So now I have a pair of NIB Ralliart cams to sell :nuts:

Finally, thanks to Brad for generously sending me the 3.0 and 3.5 cams so that the comparison was possible.

Now the sad part is that I didn't listen to the people who know, and went and ordered some Tighe 252's as well. So now I have a pair of NIB Ralliart cams to sell :nuts:

Finally, thanks to Brad for generously sending me the 3.0 and 3.5 cams so that the comparison was possible.

Glad i could help at least you put them to some use they were just sitting around at my house.

also i think you will be much happier with the 252 tighe cams i know i love mine lol

Alright so it's a bit of a thread mine but I hope this falls under the 'Useful mine category.'

I've been searching for a little while now and still cant seem to find the answer I'm after.

Would there be any benefit in installing standard cams out of a 3.5L into a 3.0L? If they can be picked up cheap enough and installed for a carton of beer, would it be worth dropping them in just for a little gain if any?

Kieran

Alright so it's a bit of a thread mine but I hope this falls under the 'Useful mine category.'

I've been searching for a little while now and still cant seem to find the answer I'm after.

Would there be any benefit in installing standard cams out of a 3.5L into a 3.0L? If they can be picked up cheap enough and installed for a carton of beer, would it be worth dropping them in just for a little gain if any?

Kieran

3.5 KE-KH/TH 3.5L cams are same as the 3.0L ones. So if your going to do it youd want to use the number "6" cams from a TJ at least but in all honesty if you are going to do a "factory" cam swap then at least fit ralliart cams as a minimum, not really worth the time and effort to fit "standard" 3.5 cam into a 3.0L

You can pick up Ralliart cams relatively cheaply still, i got some recently for a bargain, brand new as well.

3.5 KE-KH/TH 3.5L cams are same as the 3.0L ones. So if your going to do it youd want to use the number "6" cams from a TJ at least but in all honesty if you are going to do a "factory" cam swap then at least fit ralliart cams as a minimum, not really worth the time and effort to fit "standard" 3.5 cam into a 3.0L

Thanks for that mate, the ones I had my eyes on are from a TH so I guess they would be the same.

What sort of gains would we be looking at for installing ralliart cams in a 3.0 or 3.5L??

Thanks for that mate, the ones I had my eyes on are from a TH so I guess they would be the same.

TH number "4" cams are the old lazy camshafts (as we refered to them at MMAL)

What sort of gains would we be looking at for installing ralliart cams in a 3.0 or 3.5L??

Anybody?

Unless someone has done it and dynoed before and after, we woud be just guessing.

Why are you assuming "gains"? Could make the engine unhappy and peaky.

Well I know that a couple of people on here have done it, but why? Is it to gain a few KW's?

Well I know that a couple of people on here have done it, but why? Is it to gain a few KW's?

It's more a supporting modification. In TJ2+ motors, there's no real point, as the factory cams have the same timings as the Ralliart's. Pre TJ2 though, both 3.5 and 3.0L motors will benefit from the increased valve opening durations and slightly increased valve lift. To answer your question though, yes. A little bit more power and torque.

so how much for ralliarts??

basic price idea
thanks

AFAIK they are stock 6G75 cams also :) last price i got from Mitsu were $220 ea.. new.. :)

Sorry to raise old thread, but was reading through and im looking at slapping a set of cams through my 3.0L till I can afford an engine swap in time. I noticed that tighe cams were mentioned, but I cannot find a listing on there website. Do we have a contact on AMC and what prices are they in comparrison to the ralliart cams. Im looking for something quiet lumpy which is going to help with power increases, Im not after too much more torque as I have a full exhaust system on it already which has helped things in that department.

Thanks in adance,

ben

^ Dont bother with tighe cams.. its not worth your time and afford.. they are garbage!

If you want to go better than the Raiiliart cams.

Then be patient until Alan J lets us know about the special cam and spring project that is well underway.

Maybe as the $AUS is now over $US0.90 then the projected price will be closer to $A 1000!!

Gerry

Ok, ssorry for being a bit stupid but ive only just aquired a 3rd gen, ive been stuck in 2nd gen world for the last 4 years so can someone bring me up to speed, alan j is making some lumpy cams for us? and you both suggest the ralliart ones are best? As much as I hate the company are the R** ones any good?

RPW get their cams from tighe. So, no. They are no good. Ralliart/380 cams would be good for the little 3.0, more duration and lift compared to the old 6G72 cams IIRC.

Rpw has a new supplier

Wednesday, 26 August 2009

Updates on RPW Camshaft Billets

RPW has begun production of Camshaft billets with a new firm, and will be utilising the services of Camtech Engineering for future grinding of these new camshaft billets.

If you want to go better than the Raiiliart cams.

Then be patient until Alan J lets us know about the special cam and spring project that is well underway.

Maybe as the $AUS is now over $US0.90 then the projected price will be closer to $A 1000!!

Gerry

Last I heard from Graham is that a set of cams, modified sprockets and valve springs is about $1450.

Cheers,
Alan

Rpw has a new supplier

Wednesday, 26 August 2009

Updates on RPW Camshaft Billets

RPW has begun production of Camshaft billets with a new firm, and will be utilising the services of Camtech Engineering for future grinding of these new camshaft billets.

Good thing that everyone here knows to avoid RPW like bird flu then hmmmm

Back to the Ralliart cams, they do fit, Rhino has also done a set of number 6 cams and had good results from that I believe. I would only at this stage go with Ralliart or #6's until these cams from Alan J have been trialled and proven to be ok. I mainly say this because I have seen the damage that a set of RPW cams have caused because clearly the person at the other end does not know a camshaft from a toothpick and have also seen the results from Tighe (however I have been told if you get a good set that they are very good)

Good thing that everyone here knows to avoid RPW like bird flu then hmmmm

get with the times Mal... its swine flu these day :P

Good thing that everyone here knows to avoid RPW like bird flu then hmmmm

Shouldnt that be swine flu? Oink oink

Good thing that everyone here knows to avoid RPW like bird flu then hmmmm

Back to the Ralliart cams, they do fit, Rhino has also done a set of number 6 cams and had good results from that I believe. I would only at this stage go with Ralliart or #6's until these cams from Alan J have been trialled and proven to be ok. I mainly say this because I have seen the damage that a set of RPW cams have caused because clearly the person at the other end does not know a camshaft from a toothpick and have also seen the results from Tighe (however I have been told if you get a good set that they are very good)

Just an update. The set in Graham's car have now done 10,000km and no trouble with wear or noise. Generally any lobe issues become obvious within 30 min of running. They were conservative design as would be done by OEM for manufacturer of high performance exotic car. Graham now about to trial another set in a 3.8 engine. The 380 rocker geometry is a little different so needs to be verified.

Cheers,
Alan

here is a comparison between the RPW's and Graham Bell's cams
http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/nn177/lowridermagna/untitled.jpg

im looking into these myself, total cost $1500 including delivery. my car being a manual, these are currently fitted to his TL AWD, so being an auto "spec" will that be a downside compared to the RPW's stage 2 "manual" spec ones?
im not the greatest at comparing cams, but looks like greater lift with shorter duration than the stage 2's, whats throwin me is the lobe speration angle, where RPW has autos with larger angles then the manual spec, bells cams have a smaller angle than the manual RPW's ??? wats the difference?

RPW cams and spring kit, $1193.63

and another


CAM (Seat Duration) (Duration @ 0.050”) (Duration @ 0.200”) (Valve Lift)

Stock No 6 (233) (171) (72) (9.02mm)

Ralliart & 380 (238) (180) (85) ( 9.93mm)

Ralliart prototype (244 ) (191) unknown (9.75mm)

Bell (253) (197) (109) ( 10.9mm)

Tighe 294* (280 ) 221 unknown (9.2mm)

here is a comparison between the RPW's and Graham Bell's cams
http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/nn177/lowridermagna/untitled.jpg

im looking into these myself, total cost $1500 including delivery. my car being a manual, these are currently fitted to his TL AWD, so being an auto "spec" will that be a downside compared to the RPW's stage 2 "manual" spec ones?
im not the greatest at comparing cams, but looks like greater lift with shorter duration than the stage 2's, whats throwin me is the lobe speration angle, where RPW has autos with larger angles then the manual spec, bells cams have a smaller angle than the manual RPW's ??? wats the difference?

RPW cams and spring kit, $1193.63

Have RPW actually measured up their cams? The reason I ask is that when Graham visited Tighe's a year or more ago Dean told Graham that he had never seen a Magna engine or rocker gear. He didn't even know the rocker ratios. Anyway when Graham asked him how he came up with the duration and lift numbers Dean said they were calculated using Cam Doctor.

Cam Doctor, like any software, can't calculate accurately if you don't put accurate engine info in. Cam Doctor can't handle the complexities of OHC engines with finger followers so is a bit dodgy anyway and no longer exists.

Dean also inferred that the RPW guy(Graham said he thinks he said his name was Dave) didn't have any idea either and would order a Stage 2 cam from Tighe and not have a clue what cam spec he wanted or needed. Cams aren't rated by "stages". At least Dean was smart enough to know that. Are RPW smart enough to measure up cams? Has anyone using Tighe/RPW cams actually measured one up?

Lobe separation angle determines valve overlap. Big angle decreases overlap, decreases cylinder pressure and torque but improves idle and can help engine to rev on well past max hp revs. Small angle increases overlap, increases cylinder pressure and torque but hurts idle quality and can reduce over-rev hp.

Cheers,
Alan

Have RPW actually measured up their cams? The reason I ask is that when Graham visited Tighe's a year or more ago Dean told Graham that he had never seen a Magna engine or rocker gear. He didn't even know the rocker ratios. Anyway when Graham asked him how he came up with the duration and lift numbers Dean said they were calculated using Cam Doctor.

Cam Doctor, like any software, can't calculate accurately if you don't put accurate engine info in. Cam Doctor can't handle the complexities of OHC engines with finger followers so is a bit dodgy anyway and no longer exists.

Dean also inferred that the RPW guy(Graham said he thinks he said his name was Dave) didn't have any idea either and would order a Stage 2 cam from Tighe and not have a clue what cam spec he wanted or needed. Cams aren't rated by "stages". At least Dean was smart enough to know that. Are RPW smart enough to measure up cams? Has anyone using Tighe/RPW cams actually measured one up?

Lobe separation angle determines valve overlap. Big angle decreases overlap, decreases cylinder pressure and torque but improves idle and can help engine to rev on well past max hp revs. Small angle increases overlap, increases cylinder pressure and torque but hurts idle quality and can reduce over-rev hp.

Cheers,
Alan


Alan,

Both myself and Dave TJ have measured up the cams we have (Ours were supposedly the same specs. These are NOT the cams that are in my donkey engine) but Daves were different to mine when we compared the figures..

Dave maybe able to share his cams measurements with you and i can PM you the numbers i measured from mine later on this evening if you want.

Sounds like these comparisons are long overdue.

A cleanup of all these claims will give confidence to those of us considering which way to go.

Would be good as I really want to unleash the potential in my engine and cams is a cost effective mod without having to pull your engine apart!! Cant wait for Grahams cams to be available.

Would be good as I really want to unleash the potential in my engine and cams is a cost effective mod without having to pull your engine apart!! Cant wait for Grahams cams to be available.

They are available now on order. I ordered mine in mid Sept and they are ready this week being sent direct to SKR to fit to my spare engine there. Email or PM AlanJ and he will forward your enquiry onto to Graham who does not join or follow forums.

First set going into 5 sp auto AWD TJ 2 in Dec with SKR flash tune and 2nd set with GB's modified heads going into 5sp TL VRX AWD in March with SKR flash tune

im thinking of placing an order for a set, ive been in contact, let us know how you go with it, is your car manual?
EDIT: saw auto

They are available now on order. I ordered mine in mid Sept and they are ready this week being sent direct to SKR to fit to my spare engine there. Email or PM AlanJ and he will forward your enquiry onto to Graham who does not join or follow forums.

First set going into 5 sp auto AWD TJ 2 in Dec with SKR flash tune and 2nd set with GB's modified heads going into 5sp TL VRX AWD in March with SKR flash tune

Will the standards autos handle the upgrades without modification?

the auto gearbox? yeah he aint gona reah crazy figures with just cams, Apricot rocket is putting out 260KW at the fly and he has an auto box, only with an external oil cooler

Will the standards autos handle the upgrades without modification?

should do. just replace oil regularly and look after em. I have had no issues with my 5 speed since modding and have 137 kwatw.

Not sure where Lowrider got those Ralliart & Ralliart prototype #'s? there not right. Graham has informed people through Alan J that the cams dail up a fair bit different between 672/4 & 6G75. Make sure you specify weather it's the inlet or exhaust your quoting just to make it real clear thats just to avoid confusion. Not having a go at any one, just want to make that clear.
The big problem is that Tighes, RPW, Camtech etc just try to fudge an evo grind onto the V6 cams but the rocker ratio is different thats why they lack lift most have way less than standard. Not to mention the bank problem of the V6. I think the biggest problem is that they talk thou and the factory talk millimeters. Do the maths you'll see what I mean .320'' =8.128mm around .8 of a mm less than standard.
I'm sure Alan J could make it clearer than what I'm trying to say, Don't buy RPW, Tighes or anything yet! Grahams working on cams and so am I. We are doing it differently, for different reasons but not for the $$$'s
Had a member who got his car dynoed at SKR with a friend they had pretty similar mods except he had after market cams, his had less power through the range the ecu log said it was down on EV%, Breathing problem identified, checked cam intake valve vift on the internet 8mm (oh dear slightly more duration and less valve lift). We told him the problem, as you can imagine he didn't want to believe it. I got him some old 380's, he mulled it over and finally fitted them. He's happy now.
I just want everybody to beware that a cam change is a big outlay so please give it massive thought before committing and don't get sucked in buy big duration numbers.

Gee thats long! Just trying to save people money. Cheers Dave.

those figs are from graham bell. hmmm your right about the RPWs having less lift than stock cams?
why on eath would they do that, i know they had more duration but still:nuts:
(assuming the figures are right, im sure someone could confirm)

im interested in your cams dave, im looking for a set

Alan,

Both myself and Dave TJ have measured up the cams we have (Ours were supposedly the same specs. These are NOT the cams that are in my donkey engine) but Daves were different to mine when we compared the figures..

Dave maybe able to share his cams measurements with you and i can PM you the numbers i measured from mine later on this evening if you want.

Jason that would be useful for basic comparisons. I understand Dave sent some info to Graham about his Tighe cam and the Ralliart prototype.

Unfortunately measuring of finger follower OHC cams is very hit and miss. Even cheaper digital cam measuring gear, say around $10,000 and less, only really get it correct for push-rod cams and bucket type OHC/DOHC.

With an engine like the Magna the duration figures are only correct when measured directly off the roller or off a sphere the same diameter as the roller and set at the correct angle to the cam centerline. This is where the cheaper cam measuring gear falls short. Generally the measuring sphere is a generic size and its set directly above the cam centerline, but how the rocker moves relative to the cam lobe profile changes according to the diameter of the roller. Or in non-roller OHC rockers according to the radius of the rocker contact pad. This throws the measured cam duration out.

The Magna roller also isn't on the cam centerline. The inlet roller is offset to one side and the exhaust roller is offset to the opposite side of the cam. This also affects how the rocker responds to the shape of the lobe because the cam then operates as if it has a smaller base circle, adding a multiplication component to the lobe characteristics. Many cam grinders can't figure this out. Thats because most just copy the lobes of the few who actually design cams and hope for the best.

Cheers,
Alan

Not sure where Lowrider got those Ralliart & Ralliart prototype #'s? there not right. Graham has informed people through Alan J that the cams dail up a fair bit different between 672/4 & 6G75. Make sure you specify weather it's the inlet or exhaust your quoting just to make it real clear thats just to avoid confusion. Not having a go at any one, just want to make that clear.
The big problem is that Tighes, RPW, Camtech etc just try to fudge an evo grind onto the V6 cams but the rocker ratio is different thats why they lack lift most have way less than standard. Not to mention the bank problem of the V6. I think the biggest problem is that they talk thou and the factory talk millimeters. Do the maths you'll see what I mean .320'' =8.128mm around .8 of a mm less than standard.
I'm sure Alan J could make it clearer than what I'm trying to say, Don't buy RPW, Tighes or anything yet! Grahams working on cams and so am I. We are doing it differently, for different reasons but not for the $$$'s
Had a member who got his car dynoed at SKR with a friend they had pretty similar mods except he had after market cams, his had less power through the range the ecu log said it was down on EV%, Breathing problem identified, checked cam intake valve vift on the internet 8mm (oh dear slightly more duration and less valve lift). We told him the problem, as you can imagine he didn't want to believe it. I got him some old 380's, he mulled it over and finally fitted them. He's happy now.
I just want everybody to beware that a cam change is a big outlay so please give it massive thought before committing and don't get sucked in buy big duration numbers.

Gee thats long! Just trying to save people money. Cheers Dave.


Good advice there Dave. I'm not sure of the situation with Cam Tech. They were one of Graham's ports of call and they weren't interested in doing a Magna specific grind so don't know what moved them to go with RPW. They probably use the Tighe billets anyway and according to Graham his blanks don't have sufficient meat in the shoulders to do a decent size inlet lobe for the Magna. Plus there are ongoing issues with dodgy machining and heat treat.

Cheers,
Alan

Now we begin to know why these EVO grinds do not appear to work that well in the 6G series engines.


All very well having lots of duration, but makes the engine lumpy and peaky at the same time.

By actually understanding and doing :-
1) What the cylinder head is capable of flowing at varying valve lifts.
2) Figuring out the actual valve displacements in real life.
3) Designing a cam that will open the valves enough to get decent flow
4) Getting rid of the cam timing issues etc. etc.

Now we are looking at a product that will get our engines to perform.

Best of luck everyone.

Who will get the bragging rights for the first power figures from SKR??

Gerry

Excuse my ignorance..

But in regards to these Graham cams..

Will they run fine on stock ecu..?
What's the pricing on them..?
What else needs doing when installing this particular set of cams?

SuFz :ninja:

As Mal said i fitted Number 6's into my 3.0l, they are a straight in fit. So ralliarts / 380 should also go in.

I havent had the computer retuned to suit yet. I do have a base dyno figure with the old number 3 cams when i get computer done i will dyno it again on the same dyno, the base figure wasn't bad because the motor has done 210,000km and it gets flogged day in and day out. If feels like it has a little more power after 5,000 rpm and hits the limiter a lot quicker but i have lost midrange for sure, where the 3.5 would have the torque to over come it, i dont want to drive every where at 5,500rpm. Even the exhaust sounds a lot different to what it did, any one thats heard my car knows how loud it was it definatly has a deeper note. Once i finish it completely i will post the info including the dollars spent. I am just doing mine for shits and giggles.

Sorry to the guys that are doing the r & d of new cams it is good to see, however if you have a 3.0 and are thinking of putting cams in it, i personally wouldn't spend $1400 bucks on cams then lash out more money to get a reflash or piggy back for the gains. Save another 500 - 1000 get a 3.5 / 3.8 engine first. For everyday duties a 3.0 ltr is fine, want more kick go a 3.5.

For everyday duties a 3.0 ltr is fine, want more kick go a 3.5.

I will back this up, I did the 3.0->3.5 conversion and the day to day drive-ability improved immensely. The mid range torque is awesome (more tugging at the wheel on hard acceleration then the 3.0 from low in the rev range) and generally can be in 1 gear higher cruising around then you normal would.

those figs are from graham bell. hmmm your right about the RPWs having less lift than stock cams?
why on eath would they do that, i know they had more duration but still:nuts:
(assuming the figures are right, im sure someone could confirm)


I would suspect the figures are different because the cams were measured differently. You would have to confirm that Dave and Graham measured the same way. You should normally measure off the cam so as to compare properly.

If measured at the valve then the durations are much longer due to rocker arm ratio. Also in rocker type OHC engines the valve length/valve stem protrusion into the head changes the duration too. This is an old trick used in supposed stock class race engines. The scrutineers measure the cam but seldom check valve stem length.

The valve lift is low on Tighe and RPW cams because they are using lobe designs taken from other engines. The Lancer EVO has 1.72:1 rocker ratio but the Magna rockers have about 11% less ratio. A cam lobe with 5.5mm lift in an EVO has about 9.4mm valve lift, but in a Magna it will be about 1mm less. In fact all the way along the valve lift curve the Magna valves will trail behind the EVO valves by about 11%.

The other problem with using lobes designs from other engines is that the cam in the Magna's front bank has the wrong shape. The opening side of the lobe becomes the closing side and the closing side becomes the opening side. This can make the valve train noisy and increase valve seat wear as the valves are slammed back into the seats. Graham made 4 masters for his cams. An inlet and ex master for the rear bank, and an inlet and ex master for the front bank. That doubles the amount of design work and doubles the cost of getting masters machined but is the proper way to do it.



Excuse my ignorance..

But in regards to these Graham cams..

Will they run fine on stock ecu..?
What's the pricing on them..?
What else needs doing when installing this particular set of cams?

SuFz :ninja:

If you go to http://www.aussiemagna.com/forums/showthread.php?t=70179 you will find most of the info.

Graham is running his on stock ECU and I'm about to do the same with my AWD. The cams are supplied with bee-hive valve springs and modified cam sprockets. Graham can give you the exact price. Its about $1450 depending on US$ and Euro exchange rates.

Cheers,
Alan

is there any downside to his cams being made for an auto AWD and mine being a Manual FWD?

is there any downside to his cams being made for an auto AWD and mine being a Manual FWD?

I wouldn't think so. Graham designed them to suit everything with 6G74 engine, including Pajeros etc. A well designed road cam should suit any type of gearbox. When cam grinders start rating mild cams as being for autos or manuals you have to wonder about what sort of cam they are making. Way back when autos were only 3 speed there was something to it but with 5 speed autos the gear spread is reasonable. The performance car makers don't change cams spec according to what gearbox is fitted on the production line.

When you get to a wild cam, then they aren't suitable for heavy cars or autos but very few want the trouble of a wild cam in a normal road car.

Cheers,
Alan

A well designed road cam should suit any type of gearbox.
Thats correct. You will feel a gain with any box behind it. Thats not unless you are looking at huge grinds that demand a 4k stall and have a 2000 rpm power band. But then, a cam like that is totally useless in a street car.

Thats correct. You will feel a gain with any box behind it. Thats not unless you are looking at huge grinds that demand a 4k stall and have a 2000 rpm power band. But then, a cam like that is totally useless in a street car.

I dont think the cams that in the donkey engine are all that wild/rough and they have shown a nice power/torque band on the dyno and have been pretty damn good on the street.

I gave them another quick measure the other day whilst i was putting them back in (after trialing of the old tighe "294" set of cams) and max lift measured up at 9.88mm on inlets and 9.71 on exhaust (front cam) and the rear cam max lifts were close to that as well

So..

If I don't have the head shaved, is that going to cause any dramas with Graham's cams..?

SuFz :ninja:

So..

If I don't have the head shaved, is that going to cause any dramas with Graham's cams..?

SuFz :ninja:

Shouldn't do, but as you will probably have the heads off to decoke the valves, fit stem seals and valve springs you migh want to consider a light shave anyway even if just to true the deck surfaces up. Graham took a 0.025" off his to restore compression after combustion chamber enlargement.

Cheers,
Alan

As Mal said i fitted Number 6's into my 3.0l, they are a straight in fit. So ralliarts / 380 should also go in.

I havent had the computer retuned to suit yet. I do have a base dyno figure with the old number 3 cams when i get computer done i will dyno it again on the same dyno, the base figure wasn't bad because the motor has done 210,000km and it gets flogged day in and day out. If feels like it has a little more power after 5,000 rpm and hits the limiter a lot quicker but i have lost midrange for sure, where the 3.5 would have the torque to over come it, i dont want to drive every where at 5,500rpm. Even the exhaust sounds a lot different to what it did, any one thats heard my car knows how loud it was it definatly has a deeper note. Once i finish it completely i will post the info including the dollars spent. I am just doing mine for shits and giggles.



So would you consider it a worthwhile mod for a 3.0, or not bother if you had your time again?

As Mal said i fitted Number 6's into my 3.0l, they are a straight in fit. So ralliarts / 380 should also go in.

I havent had the computer retuned to suit yet. I do have a base dyno figure with the old number 3 cams when i get computer done i will dyno it again on the same dyno, the base figure wasn't bad because the motor has done 210,000km and it gets flogged day in and day out. If feels like it has a little more power after 5,000 rpm and hits the limiter a lot quicker but i have lost midrange for sure, where the 3.5 would have the torque to over come it, i dont want to drive every where at 5,500rpm. Even the exhaust sounds a lot different to what it did, any one thats heard my car knows how loud it was it definatly has a deeper note. Once i finish it completely i will post the info including the dollars spent. I am just doing mine for shits and giggles.

Sorry to the guys that are doing the r & d of new cams it is good to see, however if you have a 3.0 and are thinking of putting cams in it, i personally wouldn't spend $1400 bucks on cams then lash out more money to get a reflash or piggy back for the gains. Save another 500 - 1000 get a 3.5 / 3.8 engine first. For everyday duties a 3.0 ltr is fine, want more kick go a 3.5.

That seems very strange that No 6 cams lost mid-range torque and that you have to run the engine past 5500rpm. Were the No 6 cams timed in? or just fitted up with stock timing marks? They are an extremely mild cam so it would seem that there is something wrong with the way the cams have been phased. Or else the ECU needs a major remap with more ignition advance and fuel trim.

Before doing a remap though I would suggest the cams be advanced 6 deg.

Have the heads or block been shaved or a thinner head gasket fitted? Any of those things will retard the cams and kill torque.

Cheers,
Alan

So would you consider it a worthwhile mod for a 3.0, or not bother if you had your time again?


Yes and no, After 5000 rpm it is has more power, if you like driving that high. However i only hit that occasionaly. After the computer is remapped or an aftermarket ecu is installed, i will give a definate answer.



That seems very strange that No 6 cams lost mid-range torque and that you have to run the engine past 5500rpm. Were the No 6 cams timed in? or just fitted up with stock timing marks? They are an extremely mild cam so it would seem that there is something wrong with the way the cams have been phased. Or else the ECU needs a major remap with more ignition advance and fuel trim.

Before doing a remap though I would suggest the cams be advanced 6 deg.

Have the heads or block been shaved or a thinner head gasket fitted? Any of those things will retard the cams and kill torque.

Cheers,
Alan

I fitted the cams up to the stock marks, i have double checked the marks and all is fine. I am going to advance the cams a little anyway, the idler pulley for the timing belt is noisy so i wll do it when i do that. Atm i got a case of the cbf's! lol The motor is as stock as, been flogged and done 210,000km.

Yes and no, After 5000 rpm it is has more power, if you like driving that high. However i only hit that occasionaly. After the computer is remapped or an aftermarket ecu is installed, i will give a definate answer.






Hmmmn, ok. I have a set of No. 6's here I was thinking of putting in a mates 3.0.

Be interesting to see how you go after a remap.

I fitted the cams up to the stock marks, i have double checked the marks and all is fine. I am going to advance the cams a little anyway, the idler pulley for the timing belt is noisy so i wll do it when i do that. Atm i got a case of the cbf's! lol The motor is as stock as, been flogged and done 210,000km.

All the factory cam retard could be killing off torque. Probably needs cams advancing 8 deg(4 deg at the cam) to get the engine working.

Cheers,
Alan

Alan, when i put my ralliart cams in my 3.0 what would you suggest i set the advance to on the cam gears? and should i advance the front more than the back as has been suggested by others?

cheers luke

Is installing these cams going to be a costly little project..?

Head Shave - ?
Stem Seals - ?
Cams & Valve Springs - approx. $1500
Labour - ?

SuFz :ninja:

Is installing these cams going to be a costly little project..?

Head Shave - ?
Stem Seals - ?
Cams & Valve Springs - approx. $1500
Labour - ?

SuFz :ninja:

worth installing the new 3mm port revised tappets, to stop the famous magna tapping?
i think the biggest labour cost will be the removal/reinstallation of the heads,
i was planning on doing as much work as possible my self, going as far as removing the heads to help on labour costs.
i dont have the tools (torquq wrench ect) and will just have the heads put back on for me, and i can do the rest

Just trying to budget for the whole project before the SKR retune in February.

SuFz :ninja:

Just trying to budget for the whole project before the SKR retune in February.

SuFz :ninja:

my point was, can you do some of the work described? that will help reduce your labour costs

Not really.. HAHA!

SuFz :ninja:

Ok guys, a bit of an update.

I advanced my cams today I put them 1 tooth advanced on both cams. I have more midrange for sure it stops pulling at 6,200 - 6,300 rpm. It doesnt rev quick as it did to rev limiter before i touched them but seems more user friendly.

It has a little more kick than it did with the number 3 cams in it, but as i said previously i will wait until i get ecu flash before i give final judgement and results.

Ok guys, a bit of an update.

I advanced my cams today I put them 1 tooth advanced on both cams. I have more midrange for sure it stops pulling at 6,200 - 6,300 rpm. It doesnt rev quick as it did to rev limiter before i touched them but seems more user friendly.

It has a little more kick than it did with the number 3 cams in it, but as i said previously i will wait until i get ecu flash before i give final judgement and results.
You know one tooth = 15 degrees.
So you went from the stock 2 deg retard of the #6 cams to 13 deg advance :nuts:.
Seriously, that's way to much advance. :eek2:

Go to the wreckers and get another set of cam gears and file out the slot so your running closer to 4deg advance. Alan J has written some good info on how to do so.

It works well a couple of ppl have seen it / driven it on here. It works for my application so i am not complaining. I have more torque down low right up to 6200 but i wont be revving it that hard anyway. Plus also if the motor blows i have another sitting there anyway.

You know one tooth = 15 degrees.
So you went from the stock 2 deg retard of the #6 cams to 13 deg advance :nuts:.
Seriously, that's way to much advance. :eek2:

Go to the wreckers and get another set of cam gears and file out the slot so your running closer to 4deg advance. Alan J has written some good info on how to do so.

Correct, 13 deg cam adv is way too much. It is unusual to find an overall gain going more than 10 deg adv and generally that would only be for a long duration cam in a race class limited to a low compression engine.

For best overall performance a mild road cam works best at 2-6 deg adv. That is assuming the ignition timing is correct. If the ign is retarded then more cam adv, probably 8 deg at the most, will help fill in torque at lower rpm.

With only 9:1 comp ratio I would think the 3.5 engine would respond best to about 6 deg cam adv, but the 3.8 engine is probably best at only 2 deg adv with its higher 10:1 comp.

Cheers,
Alan

Correct, 13 deg cam adv is way too much. It is unusual to find an overall gain going more than 10 deg adv and generally that would only be for a long duration cam in a race class limited to a low compression engine.

For best overall performance a mild road cam works best at 2-6 deg adv. That is assuming the ignition timing is correct. If the ign is retarded then more cam adv, probably 8 deg at the most, will help fill in torque at lower rpm.

With only 9:1 comp ratio I would think the 3.5 engine would respond best to about 6 deg cam adv, but the 3.8 engine is probably best at only 2 deg adv with its higher 10:1 comp.

Cheers,
Alan

Then why did Mitsubishi set the Ralliart cams at 6 deg retard?
My understanding is that retarding the cams moves the power band up in the rev range, which is good because the standard 3.5L dies in the ass the further you go beyond about 5200rpm.
The manual 3.5L has plenty of torque down low anyway.

Cheers

Then why did Mitsubishi set the Ralliart cams at 6 deg retard?
My understanding is that retarding the cams moves the power band up in the rev range, which is good because the standard 3.5L dies in the ass the further you go beyond about 5200rpm.
The manual 3.5L has plenty of torque down low anyway.

Cheers

Cam retard is never good for overall engine performance. Unless some dummy has made the compression ratio too high retard does not help high rpm power. It kills low rpm performance, lowers maximum torque output and moves the torque peak higher.

Manufacturers do it to improve idle quality and lower emissions. Also for less traction control intervention and at times to compensate for transmission durability issues.

As for the 3.5 having plenty of torque down low, that would be a matter of opinion. I would disagree and I think many others would too. The 380 manual doesn't have enough down low for my liking.

Cheers,
Alan

torque is best mid-range over 3000 in the 3.5. Remember the Ralliart had higher compression which would cancel out some of the 6degrees retardation

torque is best mid-range over 3000 in the 3.5. Remember the Ralliart had higher compression which would cancel out some of the 6degrees retardation

The Ralliart increase to 9.4:1 comp would not have been enough to cancel the negative effects of 6 deg cam retard. For only 2 deg retard you need about 0.5 comp increase to come close to compensating.

Cheers,
Alan