Quote:
Cliff Ruggles:
It is not a copy of, or anything really that close to the old .470" lift flat tappet grind. The lobe profiles and lift are much more generous. The ONLY similiarities between the cams are the .050" numbers.
|
Cliff, do you think the results might have been different with a slightly larger HFT cam like the Wolverine 234/244 #5059 or the Crane #284281 234/242 duration. Or would a custom ground hydraulic flat with more lobe profile at .200 may have been able to benefit from the added flow of the RPM Intake. The results clearly show the HR with the advantage but think it might have been a more even test with an off the self HR to test against a shelf grind HFT. KRE clearly doesn't want to release the specifications probably because of the expense and time invested to TAYLOR a CUSTOM cam for certain applications. This is clearly an advantage the CUSTOM HR has over the generic Crower #60919, not to forget the HR's benefit of being tested on a recently freshened up engine. If the same time was invested designing a custom HFT for a particular set up I'm betting the results would have been a lot closer. Please understand I have no real preference in cam design and would install a roller cam just for the prevention of flat tappet lobe failures and reduced friction the roller enjoys. But I also feel testing a custom HR cam against a 041 HFT clone might be misleading. Thanks for reading
