bad news...

[Turbogn86]

well guys i thought my car had just a bad lifter, but everyone knows u never get that lucky...  so i further inspected my cam and to my surprize my came is wiped... :rofl;  so now im going to put my stock one back in and redo my motor... yet again :rofl; ... wow what luck!

[87natty]

I think all of our cars are headed that way... sorry to hear bud.

[Turbogn86]

mine had less then 8,000 miles on the last rebuild  :question;

[Recklessrob]

Go figure. I got mine with 2 different cylinder heads and now
it has 170k on it. I'm still building a motor for it anyway. I'm
really not that lucky.

[ledzeppac]

hmmm do you have my car?

[Turbogn86]

lol... i dunno, but i found a cam when i went to the summit store today for 200 with lifters from competion cams Duration 260/ 260, Lift .459/ .459, what ya think?

[Ttype83]

Get the Edelbrock 204/214 Cam Kit #5487
Part number maybe wrong..that one is for a 4.1
$125 with lifters, I know a few guys running low 11's to low 10's on this cam.
I have a used one in the garage waiting to go in the new engine.
comp cams SUCK

[Recklessrob]

Get the Edelbrock 204/214 Cam Kit #5487
Part number maybe wrong..that one is for a 4.1
$125 with lifters, I know a few guys running low 11's to low 10's on this cam.
I have a used one in the garage waiting to go in the new engine.
comp cams SUCK

I've only seen one Comp Cam fail, and that was on a SBC. As for the
204/214 cam, that is a grind that has been around forever(Melling, Edelbrock,
Wolverine, Hi-Tech, etc... It was designed for a naturally aspirated
application. I used to have one in my Mazda P/U. I still have one in my Grand Prix.
It has worked well in those with a converter change (not drastic though).
The comp cam he's referring to is:206/206 at .459" lift. Those work well
in a GN when installed/broken in correctly. I once had an extensive conversation
with Jack Cotton about this once while I was at his shop. If I can't budget
a roller setup, that is the cam I'm going to install during my rebuild. There
are a few, that have run 10's with a stock cam too.They're not that bad.
Mostly depends on what your goals are.

[87natty]

I'm all about Isky. Here's the profile for their 208/208:

http://www.iskycams.com/timingchart.php?product_number=119126

[Recklessrob]

Off the top of my head the spring installed height is 1.710".They
show 1.687".They however mention a shim, but there isn't any dimension listed for it.
That cam has alot of overlap for a turbo application. I'll have to check comps
specs on that too.

[87natty]

Gotcha. I know the guru Steve Wood likes the Erson 208/208 becuase of the tapered #3 exhaust lobe. What's the profile on that one? And see the springs Isky recommends? 75#.

[87natty]

Gotcha. I know the guru Steve Wood likes the Erson 208/208 becuase of the tapered #3 exhaust lobe. What's the profile on that one? And see the springs Isky recommends? 75#.

[Recklessrob]

I don't feel 75# is enough. I also don't believe that
spring pressure is the cause of all the Buick cam
failures. I'm running 105# in the GN, 115# in the Mazda,
and 105# in the GP. I've never had a cam problem. How
many guys do you know that have had to replace weak springs on a Buick ?
They're junk from the factory. As for tapered cam lobes, all flat tappet
cams have tapered lobes to necessitate normal lifter rotation. Do you
think SW meant that the #3 lobe is offset ?

[87natty]

That's what it was I believe. I also think cam failure mostly comes from improper break ins. Like hard gaskets, I've never had an issue, but I'm anal about installing them you know? The devil is truely in the details.

[Ttype83]

Comp cams uses a 110 deg lobe seperation compared to others. I've talked to a few companys about this (Reed,Crane,crap can't remember) And they feel that a turbo should have 112deg lobe seperation for better power. Now if you start talking about a 9 sec or faster car the rules change...