Quote:
Originally Posted by Cliff R
The dyno chart I put up is a DIRECT comparison between two cams with NO OTHER CHANGES and it was done on the same dyno, same engine builder, same dyno operator.
I don't think we will ever get a better comparison between the XR276HR cam and the larger OF clone because there was only one change.
I'd also add here that the XR276HR cam made enough cylinder pressure that the 9.3 to 1 455 with professionally ported #96 heads pinged so hard it required rod bearing replacement before the dyno testing could continue. I only got involved because EVERYONE at the dyno facility including the guy who takes out the trash was blaming the Q-jet for ALL the issues.
Folks need to keep in mind here that a 455 is a huge engine and putting a relatively small cam in it not only leaves a lot of power on the table it can make them octane sensitive even with a relatively "low" static compression ratio.......FWIW....
|
Agreed, your dyno chart is what makes me want to change the cam more urgent than before I started this thread
I just cannot leave that much power on the table. I don't have a detonation probem, car runs great for 5 years now with this combination. I only use 100 octane fuel as well.
Maybe it won't help with the traction problem, but if I use 3.23 gears and change the cam this would result in more power and traction.
On the wheels that I am allowed to use on the street (15x7) I cannot go wider than 255. On the track I use 15x8 with 275 MT S/S tires... still traction problems but much better.
I also think that there are no Rhoads lifters for a hydraulic roller.
But that leads me to another question... will I have to get new roller lifters for the new cam, or can I use the lifters from the 224/230/110 cam?