Streetfighter Cam - Done!

[stockstandard]

Originally Posted by Fairmont_Krissy

Or that all of a sudden mine just decided to run lean (up to 17.0) at cruise.

As far as I know that is normal for a AU at cruise. My parents stock AU Fairmont runs 16.5 to 17:1 at cruise. At first I think useless is right, that the cam might not be shimmed correctly or maybe not clocked in right, but I would think that would be the first thing they would have checked when your car was not making as much power as they thought it would. I am thinking now that a sensor plug or vacuume hose might have been bumped causing the computer to have a hissy fit.

[Chris]

Originally Posted by stockstandard

I thought JMM cams were supposed (or made) to work with the standard ECU?

they must be magic, in the real world they need PCM calibrations to work properley.

About time you guys woke up.

[stockstandard]

Well that is what they claim, and seeing as how people like Sox have managed over 170 rwkw and low 14s passes without any computer mods I am inclined to believe them on this point. However, all the cammed 4.0's I have seen and driven want some form of modification to the engine management to get them working well.

[Casper]

Originally Posted by Chris

they must be magic, in the real world they need PCM calibrations to work properley.

About time you guys woke up.

Chris, that’s a pretty big assumption considering the history of JMM and the cams they have produced.
Personally I feel that a chip of some sort is a valuable tuning tool to get the best out of a car however, given the known successes of JMM cams without any chip, I would also say that there is definitely a proven case that they have the capacity to work very well, no magic included.
Given the cost of tunable chips it makes sense that if you can get a cam that will run “close” to a cars optimum setup it may not be cost effective to get one. It all depends on what the user is after. Do they want to pay $1200-$1400 just for 1/10th? How about 2/10ths? Is it worth it to them?

Someone like Jonbays who has the DEV3HL in his wagon WITHOUT a chip is still getting very impressive numbers. Certainly his A/F ratio is not perfect but it is as good as or better than a stock cammed AU. Therefore I would say that the cam is doing its job. It has produced a very noticeable improvement in power without a chip and within acceptable levels of A/F ratios. Of course a chip would optimize this even more however it is sometimes a matter of economics. Will a chip optimize it enough to make a noticeable gain that is worth the price? Only the owner of the car can make that decision. Not all of us have thousands of dollars to throw at a car that can be justified just for a few 10ths on the track. Some of us have “woken up” already and make decisions based on priorities other than how quick a car can be.
Yes, I have a chip, Yes, I justified it in my own way but that is my own choice. In the case of JMM cams it may be a better choice to use a cam that has a proven record of not needing a chip (of course this will be subject to each individual car) rather than tripling the outlay to get a cam and a chip for an extra couple rwkw’s.

[Walkinshaw]

Originally Posted by stockstandard

However, all the cammed 4.0's I have seen and driven want some form of modification to the engine management to get them working well.

What are you talking about. You heard my car, runs perfect with SPOT ON air fuel ratios.

:nutsycuck :nutsycuck

[stockstandard]

Originally Posted by Walkinshaw

What are you talking about. You heard my car, runs perfect with SPOT ON air fuel ratios.

:nutsycuck :nutsycuck

LOL - When I was linedd up behind you at AIR I was probably sucking in enough fumes from your car that I could have unplugged my injectors and kept the engine running.

I do like the sound of your car though

[Chris]

Originally Posted by stockstandard

Well that is what they claim, and seeing as how people like Sox have managed over 170 rwkw and low 14s passes without any computer mods I am inclined to believe them on this point. However, all the cammed 4.0's I have seen and driven want some form of modification to the engine management to get them working well.

You have answered your own question, havent you.

In my experience as a drag racer and an engine builder, dont worry about what other people do, its whats in your garage that counts.

[jonbays]

well on Saturday at Autotech in Granvilles dyno day I ran 136rwkw with a dev3hl and pacemakers and exhaust mods. I have now ran 120, 136, 138 and 142 all with the same mods.

There was also a really nice EB with BBM, dev3hl, extractors, exhaust and DEv5 head that ran 145rwkw. 10 rwkw from head work then!

I have to say though no E-AU falcon except the chipped cars had a decent AF ratio. Mine ran rich all they way in a bow from 10-12 to 1. the chipped cars ran 12.5 flat and showed 10rwkw gains mostly.

Loxxr6's dev5 with no head work and unichip ran 151 which shows the difference the head makes. The before unichip on the same dyno was only 133rwkw I believe. His car would be worth at least 16o with the head but interestingly I believe Sox's XH with dev5 full kit would have pulled 161rwkw without the unichip (xr6 ecu and EL like adjustable distributor!) but it broke a valve spring on the way down.

The dev4 useless car was not a good example on the day. I really doubt the dev4 cam and stock ecu will give spot on af ratios. Maybe the headwork will help.

[loxxr6]

they must be magic, in the real world they need PCM calibrations to work properley.

About time you guys woke up.

My car ran fine without the Unichip with the Dev5 installed. It did lack some of the responsiveness that the chip brought beforehand but the power was definately there and the car ran fine.

I think my expectations were different to what I thought the cam might do and that was why I was initially a bit unimpressed. I traded off my takeoff for top end go (and quite nice mid range too lol).

Looking back I think the only probs I really had were related to not running the car on premium fuel. Since changing fuel its been great.

[stockstandard]

Originally Posted by Chris

You have answered your own question, havent you.

In my experience as a drag racer and an engine builder, dont worry about what other people do, its whats in your garage that counts.

Well in that case I agree with you because I dont (and never will) run a JMM cam. I do read the experiences of those that run them and the computers seem happy enough to produce decent power without needing a chip.

[loxxr6]

Loxxr6's dev5 with no head work and unichip ran 151 which shows the difference the head makes. The before unichip on the same dyno was only 133rwkw I believe.

146rwkw.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v4...ndunichipb.jpg

But yeah, the headwork really seems to make a difference.

Hopefully mid year, I'll know for sure.

The dev4 useless car was not a good example on the day. I really doubt the dev4 cam and stock ecu will give spot on af ratios. Maybe the headwork will help.

Those of us - myself included - that haven't put the whole JMM kit together, really can't complain if we didn't get the desired output. I took a gamble just going the dev5 cam by itself and I guess I was lucky.

[EFFalcon]

its easy to keep the stock ECU, just run 114 phase cam ;)

[Chris]

closing the lobes increases cyl pressure, so does running a 114 with big duration. it depends on the specs of the cam, i have not seen any from jmm.

[jonbays]

no specs from jmm but you can guess the dev5 is a tighter lobe separation than a dev3hl just by the way they idle.

[FPVWEPN]

well 174 rwks on my ef with standard computer
might be looking at a microtech mtx-8

[Stav]

Well today I have come to the unshakeable conclusion that the dev 4 cam is friggin lemon. Not even a unichip can save it in the AU ford .I topped out at 134 rwkws after chip.The chip gain 10 -13 rwkws all the way.So the chip was a good investment,but I cant help but think that the standard cam with a chip would have yielded better results.

So what can I say??? I have had enough..

[FRDGAL]

I'm gonna ask a really stupid question because to be honest, I've forgotten what the actual issue is with your car. Ok so what is it? Is it that you're not getting the full performance from the cam? You've never actually had any vacc issue's right? It's just the performance part of it yeah?

[loxxr6]

Well today I have come to the unshakeable conclusion that the dev 4 cam is friggin lemon. Not even a unichip can save it in the AU ford .I topped out at 134 rwkws after chip.The chip gain 10 -13 rwkws all the way.So the chip was a good investment,but I cant help but think that the standard cam with a chip would have yielded better results.

Care to post up before and after dyno graphs ?

Oh and G-Tech figures.

What did Spiro reckon ?

Still, the dev4 cam isn't promoted without the headwork required is it ? It's not really fair to blame the cam alone if it isn't meant to go with a standard head.

Maybe you need to swap the dev4 for a lesser cam or even back to stock ? Keep in mind tho ur up for a retune of the chip....either that or get the head done.

[Stav]

ill start another thread mate ..not to get entangled i this one any more.See you there

http://www.fordforums.com.au/showthread.php?t=12125

[Stav]

Originally Posted by useless

Well today I have come to the unshakeable conclusion that the dev 4 cam is friggin lemon. Not even a unichip can save it in the AU ford .I topped out at 134 rwkws after chip.The chip gain 10 -13 rwkws all the way.So the chip was a good investment,but I cant help but think that the standard cam with a chip would have yielded better results.

So what can I say??? I have had enough..

Today I discovered the cam timing was .2m mm way too advanced so I take it all back!!!

[EFFalcon]

how much advanced?
havnt you had that cam dialed in about 10 times?

[Stav]

Originally Posted by EFFalcon

how much advanced?
havnt you had that cam dialed in about 10 times?

yes..now 11. it was at 1.2mm lift at tdc.

It is supposed to be .96-1mm at tdc.

Tdc is a tricky place.My eye had to be looking down at the timing marks at the perfect angle or the cam timing cam be screwed up with a poofteenth turn...just by tapping the cam

[stockstandard]

Useless - Put Down Your Tools And Step Away From The Car!!!

[EFFalcon]

why doens't my balancer have a mark on it for TDC :(

[stockstandard]

You cant trust the timing mark for finding TDC. The outer ring slips and god only know where it ends up in relation to actual TDC.

[EFFalcon]

my balancer doesn't have a mark anyway, so i'll have to try and do it the old fashioned way.

[Stav]

Originally Posted by stockstandard

Useless - Put Down Your Tools And Step Away From The Car!!!

My tdc is spot on!! Have done everything right for a change!!!

[Perana]

Check it properly the old fashined way though... don't trust what the balencer says!

[Stav]

The wooden dowl in the spark plug trick..common ive learnt from you guys..its fine!!

[loxxr6]

haha Stay tuned next week for more automotive misadventures with Useless lol.