39 replies to this topic

[Shifty]

Really as has already been said, it depend on what you want out of your engine. For a good all round cam I don't think you can beat the SW-5. Ok it may not give you the ultimate peak power but will make for a good drivable, torquey motor, which at the end of the day (in my opinion) is what you should be aiming for.

A motor that has to be screamed to get the best out of won't last that long.

I may be biased as I plan on fitting the SW5 to both my engines (1340 & 998)!!

[Sam Walters]

Im starting to think that about the final drive.

its a 3.2 at the moment i belive, with s ratio gears.

But my idle is around 1800, anything below this is a little bit too lumpy i think really.

30 is at about 1500 a touch below that.




If you want a high torque cam my suggestions are.

kent cams 266
kent cams 256
kent cams 567
kent cams 500

posibly kent cams 276


If you want a fun weekender my suggestions are:

276 and up really

Edited by flyingears2002, 19 October 2008 - 05:55 PM.

[T.Harper]

Im starting to think that about the final drive.

its a 3.2 at the moment i belive, with s ratio gears.

But my idle is around 1800, anything below this is a little bit too lumpy i think really.

30 is at about 1500 a touch below that.

1800! That's insane! Your mpg must be capoot! The idle is lumpy because you've chosen a REALLY lumpy cam!

It probably needs setting up. I really recommend ML Motorsport for this. If it's running a 296 with a tall final drive in it like that they would probably recommend that you cam it down a bit to make it more driveable.

[Sam Walters]

Nah ill wait.

ive got a list of stuff that im going to put it in there when i oink it out for a rebuild

(toung in cheek) Gotta keep up with imabitnaughtyxx now havent i?

piper bp320
lighter crank
lighter flywheel
mega jolt
And some 1.7:1 rockers if i can find some.

Edited by flyingears2002, 19 October 2008 - 06:06 PM.

[Southy]

I felt compelled to add something to this discussion about cam's, ive personally never used the 296, but from what i believe it is a fairly lumpy idle cam (even says lumpy idle in the kent catalogue), but im sure ive heard if your running it on a large bore engine (1380+) the said lumpiness isnt felt as much as it would be on a 1275 due to the difference in the amount of displacement....now i dunno if this statement is true or not, but i thought i would post it here to see if anyone else has heard this and ask for peoples views on it whether it is true.

[T.Harper]

I felt compelled to add something to this discussion about cam's, ive personally never used the 296, but from what i believe it is a fairly lumpy idle cam (even says lumpy idle in the kent catalogue), but im sure ive heard if your running it on a large bore engine (1380+) the said lumpiness isnt felt as much as it would be on a 1275 due to the difference in the amount of displacement....now i dunno if this statement is true or not, but i thought i would post it here to see if anyone else has heard this and ask for peoples views on it whether it is true.

Yes this is true. It also extends the torque band down the rev range too. In the same way a 296 in an 850 will be quite a specialist engine not really for the road!

[miniman1969]

and I thought that low mixture velocity caused by the opening overlap was to blame for poor driveability low down the revs. Makes me wonder why they didn't fit these cams as standard from the factory if all the probs associated with them can be 'tuned' out of them.

[miniman1969]

Surely the volume that Rover/Austin would have demanded could have kept the costs down - the 296 is only expensive because of the relatively low sales so therefore a high price is needed to recoup development costs!!

[mini_kel]

I`m running a 296 in a 1330 with a 45 weber, tickover is 1000-1100rpm, revs like crazy and i love it!!

[Sam Walters]

I`m running a 296 in a 1330 with a 45 weber, tickover is 1000-1100rpm, revs like crazy and i love it!!

really? i guess my timeing and fueling is off. i can get it that low but the ignition light flickers on and off.

Edited by flyingears2002, 19 October 2008 - 06:53 PM.

[wolfys_mini]

i shall deliver your humble pie too you sam!

[Sam Walters]

it would appear my rolling road operator is *rubbish* then.

[T.Harper]

I felt compelled to add something to this discussion about cam's, ive personally never used the 296, but from what i believe it is a fairly lumpy idle cam (even says lumpy idle in the kent catalogue), but im sure ive heard if your running it on a large bore engine (1380+) the said lumpiness isnt felt as much as it would be on a 1275 due to the difference in the amount of displacement....now i dunno if this statement is true or not, but i thought i would post it here to see if anyone else has heard this and ask for peoples views on it whether it is true.

Yes this is true. It also extends the torque band down the rev range too. In the same way a 296 in an 850 will be quite a specialist engine not really for the road!

Total flim flam . With the right fuelling this cam can be used in any engine, the cam is in fact recommended on both small and large bore hillclimb engines where low torque is required.
It all depends on the driver whether or not they could find this drivable in a smaller bore, we run a 286 in a 1275 as well and this is a great cam also.
whats important is that you cannot just bung these cams in without correct cam timing so you have to have adjustable timing to get it spot on and also fuel and RR tuning to acheive the correct fuelling through the range, fuel starvation at low revs causes the lumpyness which can be counterbalanced with clever tuning and needle modifying.

I'm guessing flim flam means you don't agree. Please don't be offended, nowhere have I criticised the 296 as a cam choice. I think that it is in fact a great cam with a specific purpose but I think you'll agree a hillclimb engine is not a road engine, and that the torque band does indeed move up the rev range in smaller motors. I'm glad you agree with me though that camshafts are a personal choice and that they're all down to the driver's driving style preference. We are blessed enough to have a wide choice of cams for the A series so there is literally a cam for most driving styles.

So back to the original question - it really does depend on how you want to drive the motor. Bear in mind as imabitnaughty says that cam timing is absolutely critical to get the cam spot on and working to its full potential as is a full tuning session on a rolling road!

[mini93]

I`m running a 296 in a 1330 with a 45 weber, tickover is 1000-1100rpm, revs like crazy and i love it!!

really? i guess my timeing and fueling is off. i can get it that low but the ignition light flickers on and off.

so lemme get this right, saying your engine is turning at 1100 rpm 18.3 times a second, your aux belt it turning thus turning your alternator and your light is coming on...time for a new alternator really, diode is gone on the inside, or the winding are breaking down internaly

a "lairy" cam is very dependable on alot of things! i cant see how people arent even saying that! as you open up the bore, it tends to of sorts, even out the cam making it more workable...among alot(alot alot) of other stuff

[crocks]

im running a 300 piper in a 1380 which to start with was great but now the novitey is wearing off and the lumpy jumply traffic driving is starting to get on my nervise, im looking at moving back to a 270 piper which i ran before and to be onist i found just as quick as it would go from low down and you didnt have to wait for 3000rpm for the cam to come on song and get you moving, all rolling roaded and it wouldnt let you use full throttle untill 3000rpm which the 2.7 diff might of had something to do with it