PDA

View Full Version : Original Camshaft Specs?


tockit
07-10-2012, 01:10 PM
I've seen this posted on here before, but I can't seem to find it again.

What are the specs for the stock camshaft in my 1989 Indmar 351W?


Thanks!

tockit
07-11-2012, 03:17 PM
Anybody ???

Dino Don
07-11-2012, 06:12 PM
Tried that once before and never came up with the spec's so I just replaced it anyway because I knew it wasn't what I wanted like it was. Good luck!

j.mccreight@hotmail.com
07-11-2012, 08:14 PM
my research, these are just one source and might not fit all 351W just sayin
only way to verify is for you to measure your camshaft or to get the stamping

STD 351w camshaft specs
Duration 206 int./221 exh. @ .050
Valve Lift 0.445 int./0.453 exh
115

HO 351w
Duration 210 int./221 exh. @ .050
Valve Lift 0.453 int./0.453 exh
115.5

tockit
07-12-2012, 12:56 PM
Any idea on the lobe separation?
Thanks!

thatsmrmastercraft
07-12-2012, 12:57 PM
my research
STD 351w camshaft specs
Duration 206 int./221 exh.
Valve Lift 0.445 int./0.453 exh

HO 351w
Duration 210 int./221 exh.
Valve Lift 0.453 int./0.453 exh

Wow, that really is tame.

1redTA
07-12-2012, 01:16 PM
to tame!

thatsmrmastercraft
07-12-2012, 01:56 PM
I had been planning an engine build one winter. I may have to do that sooner than later.

j.mccreight@hotmail.com
07-14-2012, 06:49 AM
Wow, that really is tame.

food for thought
just keeping it simple with basic lift and duration and ignore FI, actual valve action and all the other "car stuff"

1993 Ford SVT Lightning
351w 240 HP had GT-40 heads, hypereutectic pistons and 8.8:1 compression
hyd flat tappet camshaft
Duration 200 int./214 exh. @050
Valve Lift 0.416 int./0.445 exh

1995 Mustang Cobra "R"
351W 300 HP GT-40 heads, hypereutectic pistons, 9.0:1 compression
hyd roller camshaft
Duration 208 int./224 exh. @050
Valve Lift 0.453 int./0.453 exh but used 1.7 ratio rockers that basically made the cam a .481 lift


if I was going to do budget engine build i would something like
GT-40P heads 9.0 compression and hyd flat tappet cam
215 int./223 exh @050
0.475 int./0.496 exh.
112

I think this would be a great budget build for $750 definatly get you over the 300-325hp hump, by how much who knows.
You might pick up a couple mph but the engine will breath and perform more efficiently.

thatsmrmastercraft
07-16-2012, 04:37 PM
food for thought
just keeping it simple with basic lift and duration and ignore FI, actual valve action and all the other "car stuff"

1993 Ford SVT Lightning
351w 240 HP had GT-40 heads, hypereutectic pistons and 8.8:1 compression
hyd flat tappet camshaft
Duration 200 int./214 exh. @050
Valve Lift 0.416 int./0.445 exh

1995 Mustang Cobra "R"
351W 300 HP GT-40 heads, hypereutectic pistons, 9.0:1 compression
hyd roller camshaft
Duration 208 int./224 exh. @050
Valve Lift 0.453 int./0.453 exh but used 1.7 ratio rockers that basically made the cam a .481 lift


if I was going to do budget engine build i would something like
GT-40P heads 9.0 compression and hyd flat tappet cam
215 int./223 exh @050
0.475 int./0.496 exh.
112

I think this would be a great budget build for $750 definatly get you over the 300-325hp hump, by how much who knows.
You might pick up a couple mph but the engine will breath and perform more efficiently.

Good looking numbers.

While I was working for Jasper Engines, I had the guys build a 5.8 for my 1995 F150. Together with Ford Motorsports they used Federal Mogul hypereutectic pistons at a little over 9.0:1 and a Ford Motorsports E303 cam. The E303 has similar numbers to your recommendations. My truck ran like a million bucks, had way more torque than original, and a wider power band. HP was in the upper end of your numbers and that 300-325 HP would be pretty ideal numbers to hit.

tockit
07-17-2012, 05:43 PM
If I was going to do budget engine build i would something like
GT-40P heads 9.0 compression and hyd flat tappet cam
215 int./223 exh @050
0.475 int./0.496 exh.
112

I think this would be a great budget build for $750 definatly get you over the 300-325hp hump, by how much who knows.
You might pick up a couple mph but the engine will breath and perform more efficiently.What about the bottom end?
Do you think the original crankshaft, rods, bearings, etc, would hold up
with those heads and a hotter cam?

j.mccreight@hotmail.com
07-17-2012, 05:50 PM
What about the bottom end?
Do you think the original crankshaft, rods, bearings, etc, would hold up
with those heads and a hotter cam?

That is where the gamble arrives, a stock bottom end is capable of 400+ hp but needs to be in good shape. tt member kyle did a top end kit and left the bottom alone and his setup let go resulting in a complete rebuild and he had low hours. Check out his thread... http://mastercraft.com/teamtalk/showthread.php?t=36324

Kyle
07-17-2012, 06:04 PM
Here is the factory 1993 indmar 285hp HO cam.

I used this cam in my boat and it seems to be fine. I may add roller rockers to add a little lift in the future.

http://www.mastercraft.com/teamtalk/attachment.php?attachmentid=61379&d=1283370835

tockit
07-17-2012, 08:02 PM
That is where the gamble arrives, a stock bottom end is capable of 400+ hp but needs to be in good shape. tt member kyle did a top end kit and left the bottom alone and his setup let go resulting in a complete rebuild and he had low hours. Check out his thread... http://mastercraft.com/teamtalk/showthread.php?t=36324Wow, that really sucks!
My engine has about the same amount of time as Kyle's engine did.
Are there many people on here that have upgraded their top ends on stock bottom ends without problems?

tockit
07-17-2012, 09:34 PM
Here is the factory 1993 indmar 285hp HO cam.

I used this cam in my boat and it seems to be fine. I may add roller rockers to add a little lift in the future.

http://www.mastercraft.com/teamtalk/attachment.php?attachmentid=61379&d=1283370835You don't happen to know a Summit Racing part number for a Cam similar to that one do you?

Kyle
07-17-2012, 10:52 PM
If you want my cam then print off the card and have Comp grind you a cam.

I think I had the custom grind done for like $200 but I have slept since then.



There is a stoy on how I got the Indmar factory cam specs.


I have a friend that has a ps205 and he had a bad lobe. Indmar wanted $700 for a new cam and would NOT give out the cam specs. I sent the bad cam to comp and they did some research and measured the good lobes and found out the correct cam for me. I had them grind a new cam for my friend and I installed it in his boat. I kept the cam card and saved it. When my engine let go all I did was order the new cam for my engine. I already had the grind number and everything to refrence the previous cam grinded for a factory 285hp HO engine.

I am sure that you can go bigger and find one similar to the one that I have but if you want a factory known good cam then print out and call Comp or print out and fax a copy to Summit to get one close to the one on the cam card.



I know that there is a place mentioned on here somewhere called Cam Research in Colorado that makes cams for inboard ski boats. My friend Phantmski ordered their cam and there is a slight difference. My boat has a 1mph gain over their cam over at Cam Research. Both cams have extremely good hole shots but if I were you I would use the cam that I have.

As far as push rods and lifters.....

You will need a new set of lifters to go with the new cam. Using the old lifters with a new cam is a HUGE NO NO.....

Push rods are cheap too. Just order factory 351w push rods and put it back together.

I am using the factory GT40P head lifters on my engine and Phantmski is usning a little beefier spring. I can not tell the difference. Honestly you are not going to spin the engine enough to cause the valves to float, so you will be fine with the current springs.



Doing this should bring your RPM up to 4850 and that will be fine. Just be mindful that we did say have your bottom end looked at......

Changing the heads and intake will effect the bottom end too. If I were you, I would have the bearings replaced and a new High volume oil pump installed. Run what you have until winter and then do it right. You will have a RockStar BadA$$ engine that you will love and it will be reliable and last a real long time. My 2 cents

Kyle
07-17-2012, 10:57 PM
Wow, that really sucks!
My engine has about the same amount of time as Kyle's engine did.
Are there many people on here that have upgraded their top ends on stock bottom ends without problems?

Folks warned me about not doing the bottom end and I chose to be cheap. I found out the hard way......


I also had an extremely hard time finding another oil pan since I had a huge hole in it. I got real lucky on this site and found a dealer that sold me a used one for $60 shipped to my house that I had to sand blast and repaint. It was either that or spend like $600 for one to be built.

tockit
07-17-2012, 11:19 PM
Folks warned me about not doing the bottom end and I chose to be cheap. I found out the hard way......


I also had an extremely hard time finding another oil pan since I had a huge hole in it. I got real lucky on this site and found a dealer that sold me a used one for $60 shipped to my house that I had to sand blast and repaint. It was either that or spend like $600 for one to be built.Give me some more info on a high volume oil pump.
Do you have one you recommend and where do I get one at?

Kyle
07-17-2012, 11:28 PM
Give me some more info on a high volume oil pump.
Do you have one you recommend and where do I get one at?

I ordered mine through a friends speed shop here locally. He said this one is a good one and I said add it to the list. I did not even look at the price. I am sure it was less than $100 and I was already facing a $3000 plus bill and did not care how much it cost lol.

The only thing that I did not order from him was the distributor. If need be I can call him to find out what pump he ordered me. I have every item I have ever purchased on file up there.

Kyle
07-17-2012, 11:35 PM
Here is the one that I have if I remember correctly


http://www.summitracing.com/parts/MEL-M83HV/


I also ordered one of these bigger better oil pump driveshafts.

http://www.summitracing.com/parts/ARP-154-7901/

TRBenj
07-18-2012, 01:29 PM
HV oil pumps are a bad idea. Assuming your bottom end was built properly and doesnt have sloppy bearing clearances, that is. On the other hand, if your engine is worn out and tired, a HV oil pump may fit the bill.

tockit
07-18-2012, 01:31 PM
HV oil pumps are a bad idea. Assuming your bottom end was built properly and doesnt have sloppy bearing clearances, that is. On the other hand, if your engine is worn out and tired, a HV oil pump may fit the bill.Why are HV oil pumps a bad idea if your bottom end was built correctly?
Can you elaborate?

Thanks!

TRBenj
07-18-2012, 02:00 PM
Read this thread and pay attention to the posts from Eric Lavine and JoeinNY:

http://www.correctcraftfan.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=24565&title=oil-pump

To summarize:

As far as a HV oil pump goes - I dont give the extra hp loss a second thought, but the extra strain on the distributor gear and the timing chain keeps me up at night. Of course I have been towed home in the middle of the night because I wore through the teeth on my distributor gear... so I am little more sensitive to these things. Even just quicker wear on the gear and chain limit your ability to closely control your timing and maintain a well tuned engine.

The clearances on the engine determine pressure you will build up... if you are not going to turn the crank and or replace the main bearings and your oil pressure was on the low side to begin with there may be a case for a higher volume pump, all these things work together so they are hard to address one at a time.

Kyle
07-18-2012, 02:29 PM
This topic is starting to make me laugh.

Before getting into my current career, I used to be a certified tech turned wrenches and delt with problems daily and I hated it. When I changed careers I still liked tinkering around and help out at a friends speed shop every once in a while.

Every engine build out of that speed shop has a high vol oil pump..... The last cars that I helped rush together ran in the Texas mile and were street legal Camaro SS cars, one was a 1969 SS 195mph, 2011 SS 205mph and iirc a 2010 SS 210mph. 2 of the 3 cars had 980+hp to the wheels depending on the computer programing and type of fuel used.

I can assure you that when folks have 100K tied up in a 30k car that the car is built right and corners were not cut.

TRBenj
07-18-2012, 02:39 PM
No need to list your resume. I know a few "certified techs" that I wouldnt let work on my lawnmower. No offense! I assure you that the 2 people I quoted above have impressive resumes as well... but that is neither here nor there.

Rather, I would prefer to hear a rational technical explanation for why a HV oil pump should be used in a given build. Like many things, more isnt always better- lots of things are application specific. So when SHOULD a HV oil pump be used, and when should it NOT be used? Why?

Kyle
07-18-2012, 03:35 PM
No need to list your resume. I know a few "certified techs" that I wouldnt let work on my lawnmower. No offense! I assure you that the 2 people I quoted above have impressive resumes as well... but that is neither here nor there.

Rather, I would prefer to hear a rational technical explanation for why a HV oil pump should be used in a given build. Like many things, more isnt always better- lots of things are application specific. So when SHOULD a HV oil pump be used, and when should it NOT be used? Why?

I just have gotten in the habit of using a HV pump. IF you have a stock engine a stock pump will be just fine. Stock clearances on the crank shaft will not matter what pump that you use. It is not like we are building a race car or a offshore race boat.

I am pretty sure that there is no need for a HV pump in our little LOW hp engines but I added one anyway.

As far as wear and tear on the engine having a HV pump, that makes no sense at all. the gear on the distributor is turned by the cam. The distributor turns the pump the same amount of rotations weather you have a HV or standard pump. The differences in the two pumps are going to be internal gears or springs or a bigger pickup tube.

I did not take apart my old pump but I did measure the tube size. They were identical pumps as far as old vs new.

Kyle
07-18-2012, 03:46 PM
my research, these are just one source and might not fit all 351W just sayin
only way to verify is for you to measure your camshaft or to get the stamping

STD 351w camshaft specs
Duration 206 int./221 exh. @ .050
Valve Lift 0.445 int./0.453 exh
115

HO 351w
Duration 210 int./221 exh. @ .050
Valve Lift 0.453 int./0.453 exh
115.5

Where did you get these numbers from? They are close to my cam specs but are not the same.

TRBenj
07-18-2012, 03:51 PM
As far as wear and tear on the engine having a HV pump, that makes no sense at all. the gear on the distributor is turned by the cam. The distributor turns the pump the same amount of rotations weather you have a HV or standard pump. The differences in the two pumps are going to be internal gears or springs or a bigger pickup tube.

I did not take apart my old pump but I did measure the tube size. They were identical pumps as far as old vs new.
Lets think about that for a minute. The cam is connected to the distributor is connected to the oil pump drive. So if that pump is harder to turn, then all of those components are affected.

Of course a HV pump is going to spin at the same speed as a regular pump (its a function of engine RPM). The difference is that the HV moves more oil for every revolution it spins. Therefore its doing more work- and to drive that greater load, the components that drive it (distributor and then cam gears) see greater forces. Not a good thing.


I just have gotten in the habit of using a HV pump. IF you have a stock engine a stock pump will be just fine. Stock clearances on the crank shaft will not matter what pump that you use. It is not like we are building a race car or a offshore race boat.

I am pretty sure that there is no need for a HV pump in our little LOW hp engines but I added one anyway.
Again, the need for a HV pump is not dictated by horsepower level. it is dictated by internal engine clearances. Old tired engines have wide open clearances and may benefit from more flow. Newly rebuilt engines (at least the ones we're talking about) *should* have tight clearances. They will NOT benefit from a HV pump.

Now, does a 200mph race car have looser clearances in order to reduce friction, and thus benefit from a HV pump? Maybe. I wouldnt know much about that... but Im pretty sure thats not the application we're talking about here.

j.mccreight@hotmail.com
07-18-2012, 03:57 PM
Where did you get these numbers from? They are close to my cam specs but are not the same.

Pm sent

Kyle
07-18-2012, 06:06 PM
I just do NOT believe for one second that a HV will cause premature damage, or failure to an engine.

A HV oil pump only supplies like 10% more oil. We are not talking a lot of extra oil.

Also a HV oil pump still pumps the same amount of pressure as a stock pump. Now adding a high pressure oil pump may cause the engine to slightly work harder to pump but still. I refuse to believe that if you put a HV pump in, your engine will fall apart and wear out prematurely, have a damaged cam gear, or wear out a distributor gear. I just dont see how a very slighly larger pump would cause damage.


Honestly I replaced the cam, distributor, a new timing set, and oil pump all with new equipment. I dont see myself having any regrets or fear of my engine failing due to the oil pump.

I also dont see that the oil pump would cause me to loose mph either top end or bottom end. What does it take to run the bigger pump .25 hp?


All banter aside. It really doesnt matter in these engine aplications but I surely dont see it being a bad thing. Unnecessary possibly but not a bad thing.

j.mccreight@hotmail.com
08-27-2012, 03:36 PM
Ok folks, I measured my oem cam that came in my 1989 250HP Indmar and heres what I got
measurements @ .050"
INT OPEN -11BTDC
INT CLO 41ABDC
EXH OPEN 47BBDC
EXH CLO -5ATDC
INT LIFT .280" @ LIFTER, .448" @ 1.6:1 ROCKERS
EXH LIFT .280" @ LIFTER, .448" @ 1.6:1 ROCKERS
INT DURATION @.050" 210*
EXH DURATION @.050" 222*
LSA 116*
I ran the degree wheel about 10 times on both int and exh and different lobes to verify I was getting good numbers. It is very close to what Kyle posted for the HO engine but with slightly less lift but this could be ford's machining tolerances LOL. and very close as to what I previously posted. I called Ford for the original specs and they said to call Camshaft Machine as they are the ones who originally had the contract to make these, so I did and told me to pound sand.