Custom Cams

[csobel]

Has anyone thought about or had custom cams made up for our platform? I know there was a company that made some for a while but doesn't anymore... can't remember the name.

I know there are a number of well known cam manufacturer's who will do custom work.

[redline380]

https://s4wiki.com/wiki/Cams

[csobel]

Thanks! Wasn’t aware of that. Seems like it’s pretty hard to find any of the aftermarket cams though.

[jpaan]

Take a look at Catcams 1004052. Catcams also advertises custom options.

[csobel]

Take a look at Catcams 1004052. Catcams also advertises custom options.

Thanks for the info—that’s perfect!

[Silverex]

What about getting a stock set or 2.8l intake cams regrind?

[james 408]

if i understand right, it's adding material most likely to increase top end breathing, need a fresh cam to avoid insanity.

[CELison]

You would need to add weld first. Custom cam options are very expensive. 100 bucks for some 2.8s is the budget friendly approach.

[Silverex]

Regrinds arnt usually expensive. I know delta used to regrind Subaru cams for about $250. Not as cheap as 2.8L but it’d be nice to have other options that are affordable.

[Silverex]

I forget if they welded them prior but even if that adds additional costs if there was a good option around 500$ I’m sure they would sell

[Drehmoment]

I forget if they welded them prior but even if that adds additional costs if there was a good option around 500$ I’m sure they would sell

Try http://www.webcamshafts.com/index.html

They do custom cams.....some regrind.......some weld........none are cheap.......there aint no $500 option.......in the end you are looking at a similar price tag then CatCams without actual proof of performance aka you are the "Developer"

Best bet is CatCams, proven up to 1000whp on the RS4, hydro or solid but you got to pay to play.

[Silverex]

I’ve had bad experiences with web back in my DSM days and would suggest not using them. Also if I remember correctly their regrinds were expensive compared to other companies.

[MacDaddy]

They dont weld anything, the hydraulic lifters will pick up the slack to a point, delta cams could regrind and have multiple profiles and could probably recommend something for you.

Generally with a turbo car you will want a power curve shifted down so you will have a bunch of N/A low end grunt, then the turbos will provide your top end power.

Older turbos things were different because they created a lot of backpressure in the manifold between the exhaust port and the turbine so you had to close the exhaust port early, nowdays and even with k03’s you can tune the cams like you would a naturally aspirated car because the turbos dont create as much backpressure.

[james 408]

True, but I imagine this is mostly about top end power anyway or you wouldn't be touching it :) Even on NA cars there's a point where too much up top kills the bottom, well, okay not really on a 6liter. And on a 2 liter you're dead in the water below turbo anyway on pump gas, so most people just raise the RPMS and lower reliability and give up on road racing/manners.


There's room on the motor to go up, provided you're not running a crazy large turbo, then you might need to re-gear and/or raise rpms. The Rs4 intake sizing and opening the exhaust up both compliment this high-end reliance, and serves as example for a moderate raise being appropriate, especially on small-mid sized turbos if you want to maintain broad performance (it's still down relative to an s4 block on same turbos, below spool, but totally tolerable).

For straight line on slicks, there's tons of room if you want to specialize it - even on pump gas with reasonable rpms or mid-large turbo size. This may not work so well at the bottom of 4th as the turbo size goes up, but still cushion and of course it still makes more hp cause it's measured in the top end by definition, tq is a slightly different matter, and again why the purpose also matters as road racing has very different demands on the responsiveness of the snails out of powerband.

Edit: you're still going to want to keep in mind the tq/hp limitations of the metal itself. In light of this, E85 a mid-large turbo with rods still makes a good case, especially once you factor in budget; and if your turbo isn't a monster, tons of room for cams here to gain hp without being stupid under spool rpms. That said I wouldn't do E85 due to availability constraints.

https://www.audizine.com/forum/showt...s-experimental

bunch of this stuff going way back, including many actual examples and dyno charts comparing. Ultimately you'll find the discussions focus on one part in isolation, however, unfortunately -- and almost never describe the drawbacks. But the drawbacks are right there in the charts and dynos, just skip the commentary if you're looking for drawbacks, everyone's usually just touting their build and poopooing everyone elses :)

[csobel]

James,

When you say mid size turbo are you referring to RS6 type?

[james 408]

i'd consider k04 mid-small, and anything larger mid-large, as my general cutoff. so stage 3 vs stage 3 plus. but like a 605 would be in the middle of that range, and a 770 at the top end of that range. It's intentionally vague as I'm just going off what info I can gather and sporatic pieces of info gathered over 15 years, and I'm not an expert. But I've read a lot of experts, including from threads like that.


really where it comes from is how it relates to me driving various examples of boosted cars, especially little 1.6 1.8 2l 2.5 and a few larger usually NA cammed. But even like an s2k gives you a good datapoint on a highstrung NA, the turbo is fantastic on these things, just small and low boost. There are tradeoffs, and evos/stis/miatas with the big snails lose a little something in unmeasured ways (well it's measured but nobody listens), and you can feel it. Kinda embarassing if you been boasting about your WHP. Shit you can tell the difference in a 2k burnout with just an exhaust upgrade if you got good cheekpad sensors.

[james 408]

I don't wanna call anybody out in any capacity, but go look at the roll race and other videos, especially those on stock fueling or drivers who let the spool drop for one reason or another, you can see it in the rpm rates, they literally almost stall and there's nothing the driver can do about it once the spool's been lost. Trace that out to their builds and what purpose it's for, paints a pretty good picture of what is on the table. You'll notice a lot of raising of rpms and better fueling are what people turn to once they realize the problem there. Only datapoints but it's all pretty predictable and explained on numerous graphs/dynos often tied to their build. Flyboy's got some good material on this too with a couple different setups, and I'm pretty sure you've seen some of what happens when you start using data, people get really defensive about their setups, even when you can literally see it in their own data too, if you know how to read the graphs and ignore the words to a certain extent, there's useful info everywhere. And of course some are more forthcoming than others. But the data doesn't lie. And hence why I'd rather reference the data broadly rather than give you a couple representative samples -- someone's gonna get mad if I link their stuff as a representative sample of what might not work for everyone, and I really don't wanna see a 4200 rpm onset dyno chart with 5 seconds of full pin on a stock gear ratio and stock rpms... and have that discussion again, especially if I have to reference a video showing bog real world just to show them.... only to be shown a video of some guy rippin flat out in scenarios that work for it... just look for yourself and decide, there's thousands of datapoints.

The range I gave is the best I've come up with so far -- at least in broad and non-specific strokes designed to serve as a broad framework :)

[james 408]

using non-s4 example for egos sakes:



Now as a driver, below 4800 rpm, this thing is dead to me. As a result I rev the piss out of it and clutchpop or else feel like (and do have) 100 hp -- even if your dyno keyboard warrior disagrees. Obviously this isn't true if you're flat out in a straight line, it works fine, properly matched.

Now you step up the turbo to 400hp, and your dyno will read boost onset 1000 rpms later, but that means that without raising the rpms by 1000, it won't work even in the straights past 3rd gear. At 500 WHP you are going to lose in a 60' drag race in slippery conditions to a stock miata cause you can't get your turbos even working without wheelspinning all the way through first or using 1% clutchlife -- because if you let those rpms fall, they literally have more hp than you do... you won't even break 200whp until nearly at factory redline at this point without prespool. Somewhere along the spectrum we swapped to a bigger cam because we've raised the rpms up enough and longsaid goodbye to the bottom end from turbo choice. The engine must be rebuilt every 10k miles, primarily rod bearings. That said, it makes a fantastic drag racing car, where you lose a fair bit on 4th, but you're running 24" drag radials in the dry so the launch is all good.

This all parallels on every platform, primarily correlated to displacement and peak starting rpm, if we ignore fuel choice.


Edit:
Point is, bringing it back:
It's been a while, but if I recall the pure rs6's are pretty mid tier, you're probably still goodish, but then again I think i've seen some pretty laggy snails in that range... people not cranking the times you would expect, lotta woosh put put in raw mid rpm accell. Kinda happened chronilogically where the platform started rasing rpms or E85, and ball bearings... as that was what was generating the speed in the face of a turbo lag softcap. 3liters... Might not be the prime candidate for going too large on the cam if you want to avoid raising the rpms on 91 octane.

[james 408]

Better parallel, the skyline r32-R34... they literally went through the same evolution with all the tuners.

http://mywikimotors.com/rb26dett/

they're pushing 8-9k rpms by the time you get to the bottom of the list, especially on non-strokers -- giving you a wide birth for powerband, and as expected, reduced reliability. Funny thing is it's literally all of the same mods, problems, and virtually identical ranges based on, you guessed it, displacement and rpm and fuel choice. Best motoring international used to touch on the pros and cons of various setups, good footage of turbo lag with footcams so you can see when they're flat but not moving and just wooshing, with all their builds kinda centering around the 500-600whp mark for road course stuff -- although many of them are strokers even at that point and/or on race gas... even still you can see the lag. Not sure if all of them have vvt etc if you look at some of the early r32 stuff, but some tuners added it. if you don't have a ton of experience on turbod cars or feel lost a bit, might swim through that stuff to get a good visual image. The s4 videos you don't get as many datapoints, you gotta watch the tach and listen and kinda guess when they're WOT -- prolly not too easy if you aren't super familiar with the experience.

The dynos, footage, and choices all mirror what you see/saw in the s4 magazine shootouts, and it's what i've kinda verbosely tried to describe.

[csobel]

Pretty interesting read... so similar down to the mixing and matching of 2.8 heads vs stroker etc.

[NOTORIOUS VR]

Oh boy...

[james 408]

yeah, the dyno charts are almost identical too. The strokers on race gas get the best reviews and turn the best times, especially when they do the tight mountain courses. Also interesting to see when the tuners show up and the cars just not working. They've got a huge sample size. That said, when you get into the super tight stuff, they almost never are WOT outside of maybe one gear change, so some of the tests are almost entirely based on the mid range versatility of the setup. You can see some pro drivers and how they deal with it, clutch slips, left foot braking without lifting throttle right at apex, etc. still wooshes, but they get the wooshing done before they try to accel, at least to the best of their abilities. Can see it in the launches too, especially if they get held up, they'll slip the clutch again to de-woosh on the bigger turbo setups to help avoid the rather obvious bog.

Now some guys on here think the b5 or their setup is some unicorn that never lags, but... if you know what you're looking at, you can see it even in short video samples. This is a large part why the standardization become 3rd-4th pulls, cause the bottom of fourth exposes top end builds a bit. Nothing like you'd see on a tight road course, but if you see the casual shifts you can see what rpm it's wooshing at.

[james 408]

https://www.gtrusablog.com/2012/12/n...no-charts.html

if you want to compare, infinite data, think a few of the dynos are the same builds on bmi so you can see em real world -- xs engineering being one that made repeated appearances and probably some evolution. Not sure how available all the dynos, buildsheets, and stuff are these days, probably still decent. They reporting down to cam size comparisons to market the parts. Basically you cam and big turbo and you're now looking at 8k rpms, and in the real world it still bogs, cause sub 5500 rpms happens, sub 4500 rpms happens, and hence you see the data you do.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DhpvSasZUjw if you wanna see xs and compare it to their dynos. Top end builds work, just, understand what the rpm raise and living there will do to longevity :)
versus the touge: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RdjDPWXMB9A there's bracket races with multiple different skylines, including xs at different stages if you wanna see exactly how it goes down IRL on different tracks. Super old school japanese though, kinda painful :)


here's the mine's car and a couple 2jzs to compare to:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t-rUFFAua0A
and the build/dyno: http://www.totalcarconcept.nl/en/con...ine-s-tcc-demo
Works pretty well with that wide powerband, although he gets himself into 4k a couple times even with a 9k limit, not a big deal as your winding up from apex and hit 5k rpms by the time you're out wide and flat out. Just don't lift too long :)
FYI mine's marketing is laced with cam not overly large, lightweight internals to increase real world spool, all these guys got into the same pissing contest as you see in the s4 market, and I'm trying to paint the picture without pissing off half the community. But you can see why E85 and mid size turbo vs large turbo + cam + heads + rpm.

[james 408]

not to bring up old wounds, but since matt pretty much shit on them saying the same thing, just a reminder what his primary complaints were as a real world car:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KLnL_RoRupU&t=534s

Now yeah matt needs to learn how to wring its neck a little bit to showcase how he's completely full of it, but... he's not saying narrow powerband 2-3 times cause it's not at least partially true. Plus there were extenuating circumstances of irritation in the builds blah blah. Plus he's right. The worst I said is that a certain build style is similar to a mine's skyline without 1500 extra rpms (and likely the handling), should be flattered by the reality check. There's no need for hurtful emoticons.

[NOTORIOUS VR]

you're like the poster child of bench racing...

[christianb5s4]

Well I'm fairly confident in saying that the B5 S4 platform has seen a miniscule fraction of the amount of R&D and investment into this platform compared to the RB/2JZ/LS etc. If we had aftermarket companies that sought to develop aftermarket solutions for our cars anywhere near the same level as the RB, our platform and builds would look totally different.

Unfortunately, companies will never offer that level of interest in the B5 platform due to the limited market and lack of willingness for most to spend the dollars on high end products.

[christianb5s4]

Side note but damn are those old Hot Version/Togue videos the best.

[csobel]

Well I'm fairly confident in saying that the B5 S4 platform has seen a miniscule fraction of the amount of R&D and investment into this platform compared to the RB/2JZ/LS etc. If we had aftermarket companies that sought to develop aftermarket solutions for our cars anywhere near the same level as the RB, our platform and builds would look totally different.

Unfortunately, companies will never offer that level of interest in the B5 platform due to the limited market and lack of willingness for most to spend the dollars on high end products.

Ain’t that the truth... outright hostility when someone comes out with a product priced over $1300. But a used Kleenex that was found in the cup holder of an RS4? Buy, buy, buy!!!

[landfill]

The go to and really only
viable cams for people doing
crazy builds is CAT-cams.

They have options for stock
valvetrain all the way to loppy
idle for solid lifters & built heads.

More heavily used in Europe
and as stated on insane builds.
Loba-motorsports was also
making cams.

The company you’re speaking
of made what I remember being
called revolver cams and from
user feedback a decade ago they
were garbage.

Both CAT and Loba are very expensive.

[james 408]

Sometimes I wonder how much actual R&D there was to be honest. Mine's pretty much just kept slapping on bigger turbos until the turbo lag monster started ripping their reputation, then they went through the tomei parts catalog and did the engine like they would any racing car. The 2JZ in the video were literally just a mid size turbo slap on a 3liter, didn't even bother doing injectors.

My guess is they just raised the limiter, threw some standard parts at it, and sold it as is. The ball bearing turbos were just off the shelf HKS units. The rest is just marketing. years later you'd read articles on just how unreliable they were. I think most of the R&D was being done real time, as the paid pros gave them feedback in these competitions. That said, by the time they were done, the R32s were just as fast as as the 2009 skylines around the circuit.

[james 408]

noto, let's not start bleeding emoticons crossthread -- argue there, or here. I'm not part of your keyboard racing BS. Mocke's shit rips, hell pretty sure I'm arguing his build is dope throughout this entire thread and never said anything otherwise. Same with yours, or what yours was or whatever (it's faster than mine, anyway, why are racing a guy that's conceded a race he never entered, I'll never understand). Don't toxify everything. If I'm wrong, make a case. I don't have beef with anybody, frankly I just don't care, just trying to share/gather info. If you're getting pissed at me, that's your problem.

[Mikse]

Best bet is CatCams, proven up to 1000whp on the RS4, hydro or solid but you got to pay to play.

Do you know what catcams these 1000hp car are using and are there that many using CATcams? Kaess at least used to have CATcams but wasn't he using custom grind?

There was some 1000bhp TTE950 car using Dbilas but never find out what specs.

[NOTORIOUS VR]

Do you know what catcams these 1000hp car are using and are there that many using CATcams? Kaess at least used to have CATcams but wasn't he using custom grind?

There was some 1000bhp TTE950 car using Dbilas but never find out what specs.

Kaess has been pretty forthcoming with the cams he used in previous videos (1-2 years old now) along with where he showcased for the first time the fancy cam gears that allowed him to adjust the exh vs intake cams which is very important with aftermarket cams. I'm guessing if someone asked him what he is using now he would tell you and maybe even share his settings for the cams. You would just need a set of cam gears like he has to set them up.

Even off the shelf Cat cams look good to me but if you're just going to install them in OE locations you're just not going to pull all the benefits out of it. Cams aren't a big mystery. You don't need turbo specific cams either. What works on NA works on turbo as long as you understand your setup around it and how the cylinder head flow is effected in regards to intake and exhaust pressures, etc.

There is a science to it and does require leg work of measuring lift/duration at the valve and most importantly lobe separation, and then testing to see what settings work with your setup.

That said most 2.7T build still seem to center around restrictive turbo setups. Stock manifolds, small turbine wheels and housings big cams don't do anything for setups like that.

[james 408]

stock manifold a game ender for gains or just mean use moderation in raising it? obviously you're leaving untapped on the top end... and what you're saying about mismatch makes perfect sense... feel like if you were after the 7500 rpm redline, on rs6s, still gotta be some room right? Pretty sure I've seen some dynos on this stuff way back, wasn't totally overwhelming but it's been all this off the shelf audi stuff.

[Mikse]

That said most 2.7T build still seem to center around restrictive turbo setups. Stock manifolds, small turbine wheels and housings big cams don't do anything for setups like that.

Agree. And I´d say this includes turbos like R770 and anything smaller...

[james 408]

Interesting. is there data somewhere on this? I did some reading, and I see there being relationships there, but it seems to be more in response to balancing for a purpose and the engine. I'm a bit confused beyond that and the data that's come accross the forums in the past with regards to numbers, not that those are giant cam changes, just not sure I follow the left turn at 880s -- now I see it in your signature, and this is why i'm sending up a flare. i might well agree with you in terms of maximum benefit...

[Mikse]

Lets ask this way, have on ever seen back to back camshaft data from R770 car let alone seeing much gains? I´d like to see that but won´t be holding my breath.

What comes to my reply to small turbine wheel/housing it is Just my opinion about this subject but I base my opinion from my backpressure sensor data. Not the whole truth and maybe not even a truth but data is data. R770 have quite restrictive turbine side and adding aggressive cams only makes things worse. But if someone can prove me wrong with real data I´m happy to be wrong.

[james 408]

I haven't seen that no, but others have cam for cam on smaller turbines, and I feel ya on it being more for a big end build. Just thinking the hybrid exists, manifold/backpressure makes sense in terms of the relationship there for cam choice, based on my limited reading.

[Mikse]

This is a quote from Loba representative almost a decade ago according about their cams with genuine porsche k16 and k24 turbos

We had 5 sets of cams made according to these specs as prototypes in order to test them in numerous cars.
Two of these cars were build and tuned by TuneTec (www.TuneTec.de), one of which is an RS4 with a 3L K16 setup. The other one is a 3L K24.
We received very positive feedback as to the cams upon testing them.

The K16 setup was equipped with OEM N/A cams before changing to our intake and exhaust cams. The power gain, according to TuneTec, was some noticeable 50 horses.

Now think a size difference of those turbos compared to RS6 hybrids most people use here or even a 770R turbine side. Not saying you wouldn´t gain anything with cams and smaller turbos but is it forth of +1500$

Here´s Loba cams with RS6/2283 setup. Boost profile 1,9-1,75bar with Rs4 cams and 1,75-1,5bar with Loba cams

That said I would like to try Loba cams but they cams haven´t been available in years thou.

[james 408]

Your argument makes perfect sense and mirrors everything I've seen.


I do question the datalog as a side by side, not that you're saying that's the effect of cams only, but I wonder if that's also tune. Marketing dynos in particular tend to only show gains, as a rule of thumb. generally speaking you're swapping bottom for top. not always I suppose, it's just how I've always seen the results outside of a marketing dyno. Looks like they've muddled the 3L in there to boot, but apples for apples, some of that camparo doesn't really make any sense. Maybe the cam is mismatched for the longer stroke to begin with (in conjunction with the manifold blah blah)...

think others have shown something similar, in terms of turbosizing hp gains on the top. Mirrored on all other cars I've seen too. In my experience, you're losing low end torque/spool and gaining high end hp (and spool response there too) on the cam swap - and that's why you did the cams to begin with. The modeling in general backs this up, as a general rule of thumb, which drives me a bit nuts when i don't see that when expecting it, and 'tuned it out' is in the fine print somewhere. Haven't seen the stroker data on this platform much though, in terms of cam comparos.

it's also worth noting, that strokers in general tend to limit rpm longevity (piston speed as the primary driver I think). You do these to increase the overall output and minimize turbo lag though.

edit: btw I just meant hybrid as a middle ground, not trying to mix up the turbos on you, that's outside my paygrade at the moment, especially in the context of the above which is also outside my paygrade :)
https://www.camcraftcams.com/tuning-...maximum-power/ this mirrored 1000 times over is about as much as I understand.