ENGNBLDR CAM's
09-19-2006, 07:42 AM
#1
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Idaho
Posts: 4,655
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ENGNBLDR CAM's
Eventhough its about 5 months out, I am already researching like mad for my 22RE rebuild.
I have narrowed the cam down to an engnblr cam, and O/S valves.
As far as the cams go he has two of them I am looking at.
I have been e-mailing with ted at engnblr and this is what I have gotten from him. He thinks the 268 will be the best for my application, but I want to run it by you guys first, mainly since I have the time to do so.
STOCK: Stock is 198°, .398" lift, 110° center.
268C/T: I would suggest the 268C/T for best combo of econmy/power in the
midrange. It is 218° & .425" lift, 110° center.
261C:The 261C has more duration @.050" lobe lift, 222°. It has less lift,
.410", and faster ramp speed, so it recovers quickly off idle and has more
RPM portential..Perhaps 3-4 H/P less at peak but longer powerband.
The 261C sounds like a better cam for my application (mostly city/hwy, but with 35's. I wheel a decent amount, not as much as I want. I never have much of a load, and am more concerned about bottom end than top end. I also have a heavy flywheel to help the lowend grunt), but twice Ted has suggested the 268.
What do you guys have, and how do they work.
Thanks for the input.
I have narrowed the cam down to an engnblr cam, and O/S valves.
As far as the cams go he has two of them I am looking at.
I have been e-mailing with ted at engnblr and this is what I have gotten from him. He thinks the 268 will be the best for my application, but I want to run it by you guys first, mainly since I have the time to do so.
STOCK: Stock is 198°, .398" lift, 110° center.
268C/T: I would suggest the 268C/T for best combo of econmy/power in the
midrange. It is 218° & .425" lift, 110° center.
261C:The 261C has more duration @.050" lobe lift, 222°. It has less lift,
.410", and faster ramp speed, so it recovers quickly off idle and has more
RPM portential..Perhaps 3-4 H/P less at peak but longer powerband.
The 261C sounds like a better cam for my application (mostly city/hwy, but with 35's. I wheel a decent amount, not as much as I want. I never have much of a load, and am more concerned about bottom end than top end. I also have a heavy flywheel to help the lowend grunt), but twice Ted has suggested the 268.
What do you guys have, and how do they work.
Thanks for the input.
Last edited by AH64ID; 09-22-2006 at 06:16 AM.
09-19-2006, 09:12 AM
#2
Registered User
I went through this same decision about 2 months ago. Here's the situation I was facing:
175,000 Miles, original chain guides finally broke. I'd been planning and saving to upgrade for a few years, so I went ahead and ordered a StreetRV head with O/S valves.
When it came to the camshaft, I went with the 261C (Crawler). I considered the 268 (Torkr), but I like to be able to wind out the engine to get on the freeway, and drop it into 3rd for the steep hills on the freeways around here. Apparently the 268 is all out of ideas at 4000RPM, whereas the 261 keeps the factory rev range. The only thing I didn't like about the 261 was that I was going to have to bump up the idle a little. As it turns out, I didn't have to since my head and block were original height, and the cam timing was spot on.
As for drivability, here are my impressions: It doesn't rev as quickly, but it revs more strongly and evenly. It's FAR smoother at all points on the tachometer, and MUCH happier in the upper RPMs than before. It would pull redline no problem, but it sounded a little ragged doing it.
The truck (87 4WD Xcab 235/70R/15 - basically stock) doesn't feel as quick, but it does feel faster, if that makes any sense. Slightly slower acceleration, but better speed holding in high gears. Can be driven right off idle if you want to.
About a week after putting the head on, I had to make my couple times yearly trip to college. 360 miles, all freeway, lots of hills. The biggest difference was going up 1-5. In years past, if there was a headwind, I could barely maintain 60 floored in 3rd gear. No headwind, 70 required 3/4 throttle in 5th. This time (no headwind) I was doing 70-75 with the AC on with 1/3-1/2 throttle.
In conclusion, the truck isn't suddenly a rocket ship that pins you back in your seat, but it is a lot happier and more useable on the freeway.
175,000 Miles, original chain guides finally broke. I'd been planning and saving to upgrade for a few years, so I went ahead and ordered a StreetRV head with O/S valves.
When it came to the camshaft, I went with the 261C (Crawler). I considered the 268 (Torkr), but I like to be able to wind out the engine to get on the freeway, and drop it into 3rd for the steep hills on the freeways around here. Apparently the 268 is all out of ideas at 4000RPM, whereas the 261 keeps the factory rev range. The only thing I didn't like about the 261 was that I was going to have to bump up the idle a little. As it turns out, I didn't have to since my head and block were original height, and the cam timing was spot on.
As for drivability, here are my impressions: It doesn't rev as quickly, but it revs more strongly and evenly. It's FAR smoother at all points on the tachometer, and MUCH happier in the upper RPMs than before. It would pull redline no problem, but it sounded a little ragged doing it.
The truck (87 4WD Xcab 235/70R/15 - basically stock) doesn't feel as quick, but it does feel faster, if that makes any sense. Slightly slower acceleration, but better speed holding in high gears. Can be driven right off idle if you want to.
About a week after putting the head on, I had to make my couple times yearly trip to college. 360 miles, all freeway, lots of hills. The biggest difference was going up 1-5. In years past, if there was a headwind, I could barely maintain 60 floored in 3rd gear. No headwind, 70 required 3/4 throttle in 5th. This time (no headwind) I was doing 70-75 with the AC on with 1/3-1/2 throttle.
In conclusion, the truck isn't suddenly a rocket ship that pins you back in your seat, but it is a lot happier and more useable on the freeway.
09-22-2006, 06:11 AM
#4
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Idaho
Posts: 4,655
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I got another email from Ted, the 261 has a longer powerband and a sportier idle, but the 268 has a bit more power in the mid, but not as long of legs.
The 261 looks more like what I want to get.
stock87, what was your mpg before and after? Thanks
The 261 looks more like what I want to get.
stock87, what was your mpg before and after? Thanks
09-22-2006, 09:04 AM
#5
Registered User
It's hard to say on MPG. The long freeway trip to school is always at higher speeds than the truck was designed to do, and with about 500lbs of my crap in back. Before the work I would consistently get anywhere between 21-22.5 MPG, and that didn't change this trip.
However, over the summer I did a trip to Reno going up HWY 50 (55-65 max) completely empty, and pulled a shade over 24 (old head). Like Ted says, head/cam shouldn't affect MPG. The things that will affect it are things like if you grow lead feet (lower MPG) or you are able to use less throttle because the engine is slightly more efficient now (more MPG).
However, over the summer I did a trip to Reno going up HWY 50 (55-65 max) completely empty, and pulled a shade over 24 (old head). Like Ted says, head/cam shouldn't affect MPG. The things that will affect it are things like if you grow lead feet (lower MPG) or you are able to use less throttle because the engine is slightly more efficient now (more MPG).
09-22-2006, 09:24 PM
#6
Registered User
When I ordered my parts from Ted I went with the 268 cam which of course goes great with the block being bored .030 I do not do much hwy driving and when on the trails at the Superlift park it seems to work great, power is where I need it. Only thing I need now is some Aussie lockers..
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
LittleUgly
86-95 Trucks & 4Runners (Build-Up Section)
15
01-02-2020 01:30 PM
