Go Back  Offshoreonly.com > Technical > General Q & A
Off the shelf cam options for marine engines >

Off the shelf cam options for marine engines

Notices

Off the shelf cam options for marine engines

Thread Tools
 
Old 02-17-2016, 10:29 AM
  #361  
Geronimo36
Gold Member
 
Panther's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Elkton, MD
Posts: 11,972
Received 131 Likes on 36 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by MILD THUNDER
Imo, having a little more torque below 3500, to lose 30-40hp up top, and torque numbers from 3500 up, down as well, is that the 651 cammed combo would serve an offshore boat better. Unless of course he was pulling water skiers.
The 290 heads are the reason it made more torque. The duration carried it up top. With more duration, the 325 would make more power up top and more torque from 4000 rpm upward IMHO.

As I stated, I think the one cam was short on duration for a 540 and those heads. I would bet there was a reason, perhaps one not posted here but I'm sure we could easily find out if need be.

A friend built a similar combo and RHS heads with similar lift as the custom cam but more duration and made 750.
Panther is offline  
Old 02-17-2016, 10:34 AM
  #362  
Registered
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Traverse City MI
Posts: 3,565
Received 294 Likes on 103 Posts
Default

MT has a good point

Spending extra money for the ideal setup doesn't always equate to enough speed gain to make it worth it
offshorexcursion is offline  
Old 02-17-2016, 10:38 AM
  #363  
Geronimo36
Gold Member
 
Panther's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Elkton, MD
Posts: 11,972
Received 131 Likes on 36 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by MILD THUNDER
The 325 heads and cam combo was specd by marine kinetics..
I had a hunch this would come next when it was posted.

There's nothing that has been posted from th very beginning on this thread that didn't have undertones. As an outsider looking in, this was clear to me from the very first page.

As a result, I'm dropping out of this thread.

Good day fellas!
Panther is offline  
Old 02-17-2016, 11:20 AM
  #364  
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
 
14 apache's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Northport N.Y.
Posts: 2,139
Received 10 Likes on 10 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by offshorexcursion
MT has a good point

Spending extra money for the ideal setup doesn't always equate to enough speed gain to make it worth it
That all deepens if you keep after it and keep tweaking it making changes in the rite spots. I added 26MPH to my boat by putting the money in the right spot. Camshaft and Heads that's it.

Last edited by 14 apache; 02-17-2016 at 11:39 AM.
14 apache is offline  
Old 02-17-2016, 11:22 AM
  #365  
Gold Member
Gold Member
 
Full Force's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Olmsted Falls,Ohio Marblehead,Oh
Posts: 11,636
Likes: 0
Received 209 Likes on 133 Posts
Default

One build being mine the goal was to see props spin 5900-6000, TRS boat

Originally Posted by Panther
I don't know anything about these two combos other than what was posted but looking quickly at the duration numbers, it doesn't look right to me for a 540 with 325 AFR's. There's a lot of variables which I don't know anything about, other than two engines with different cam's and heads were dyno'd.

Perhaps the owner didn't want to spin the engine to 6K rpm so the duration numbers were adjusted to compensate? Was is a Bravo boat or Speedmaster? I personally would have wanted the engine to spin 6k rpm if it was a Bravo boat. With the larger heads it needed more duration to make power above 5500 which is where those 325's start to make power.

I just don't know what the owners goals were with either of these builds so I can't say that either combination was right or wrong.

For argument sake, what would be interesting for me to see is how the 651 did with the 325 heads and other cam did with the 290's. Or how either engine would do with similar duration numbers with everything else being similar.
Full Force is offline  
Old 02-17-2016, 11:26 AM
  #366  
Registered
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Traverse City MI
Posts: 3,565
Received 294 Likes on 103 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Panther
I had a hunch this would come next when it was posted.

There's nothing that has been posted from th very beginning on this thread that didn't have undertones. As an outsider looking in, this was clear to me from the very first page.

As a result, I'm dropping out of this thread.

Good day fellas!
The thread was started by Haxby to share other Cam options that work

Bob supporters have constantly attempted to derail it from the first few posts

Give Haxby some respect like you used to

Just because he does not partner with Bob does not make his knowledge shared less vaulable
offshorexcursion is offline  
Old 02-17-2016, 11:27 AM
  #367  
Gold Member
Gold Member
 
Full Force's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Olmsted Falls,Ohio Marblehead,Oh
Posts: 11,636
Likes: 0
Received 209 Likes on 133 Posts
Default

Ask me any reason or question I have no issue posting any info, my goal was 700hp at 6000 to spin my 25 mirage plus props to 6000 as with old engines were 600 hp spun those same props to 5500 all day. The thought was spin drives faster, less load woukd help TRS live... That was main reason shooting for 6000, now they will with a 23p prop but the design was to keep the 25's my cruise already sucks with 23's it's even worse. Boat went .2 mph less with the 23's but they went 6000

Originally Posted by Panther
The 290 heads are the reason it made more torque. The duration carried it up top. With more duration, the 325 would make more power up top and more torque from 4000 rpm upward IMHO.

As I stated, I think the one cam was short on duration for a 540 and those heads. I would bet there was a reason, perhaps one not posted here but I'm sure we could easily find out if need be.

A friend built a similar combo and RHS heads with similar lift as the custom cam but more duration and made 750.
Full Force is offline  
Old 02-17-2016, 11:45 AM
  #368  
Registered
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: MI
Posts: 2,639
Received 14 Likes on 8 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by offshorexcursion
MT has a good point

Spending extra money for the ideal setup doesn't always equate to enough speed gain to make it worth it
Do you wish you would have kept your blower motors?
JRider is offline  
Old 02-17-2016, 11:45 AM
  #369  
Registered
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Michigan
Posts: 1,268
Received 239 Likes on 92 Posts
Default

The peak velocity the exhaust port sees is at low lift. With the exhaust blowing down and loosing velocity lift IMO is no where near as important as duration. (From Post #355)

This is kinda what I was saying at the end of post 86
abones is offline  
Old 02-17-2016, 11:55 AM
  #370  
Registered
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Traverse City MI
Posts: 3,565
Received 294 Likes on 103 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by JRider
Do you wish you would have kept your blower motors?
I don't want to derail this thread and there's way more info about my build then what I have been able to share and what lies have been spread

Anyones welcome to call me anytime 231-534-5060 and maybe once everyone gets along I can openly share my story without drama so everyone can learn, no matter if they agree or not.
offshorexcursion is offline  


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.