Lit'lphant: The baby hemi from Japan

ofelas said:

Very cool thread.

 

How's that Corolla coming along, by the way?

Ty....  here is the Corolla.  I did an update in September

i CUT MY INTAKE UP WITH A SKILL SAW AND SAVED THE VALLEY COVER AND FLANGES AND REMOVED ALL UNNEEDED EXTRAS, AND FABBED UP THE CARB MOUNT AND RUNNERS. i DO THINK THAT THE STOCK MFD WOULD WORK BETTER IF EFI IS TO BE USED BUT i WANTED TO GO WITH CARB. WITH A CAM REGRIND, THIS SHOULD WORK OK AT HIGH RPM.

In reply to warrenwelder :

After watching Richard Holdener's intake dyno test I realize that this style of mfd is very poor for this engine. It only allows the easy use of a carb. Other than that it is a poor solution. I think I will make a long runner mfd next.

Dan, I am looking at a cam regrind like yours: why did you choose this grind and what springs will you use? Also I am considering cutting the seats with a 3d fast cut to 1mm over abd open the bowl to match. Do you think this will help flow at higher rpm. I am not looking for big hp but would like a6000 rpm redline and enough torque to spin the tires at will on a t-bucket street rod. I have ported many 3t engines and have a customer making 475 hp on a roller dyno with a fueltech and lots of boost. I never used a flow tester and work by eye and finger. If it feels good it is good.

I would appreciate your input on this.

Thanks, Warren

I picked up a ford roller lifter to check for possible use.

warrenwelder said:

Dan, I am looking at a cam regrind like yours: why did you choose this grind and what springs will you use? Also I am considering cutting the seats with a 3d fast cut to 1mm over abd open the bowl to match. Do you think this will help flow at higher rpm. I am not looking for big hp but would like a6000 rpm redline and enough torque to spin the tires at will on a t-bucket street rod. I have ported many 3t engines and have a customer making 475 hp on a roller dyno with a fueltech and lots of boost. I never used a flow tester and work by eye and finger. If it feels good it is good.

I would appreciate your input on this.

Thanks, Warren

I picked up a ford roller lifter to check for possible use.

Springs as of now are still undecided.  We chose the grind we did based on essentially 3 parameters: 1) I wanted to raise the power, 2) I wanted a little bit of lope, and 3) the physical limitations of grinding on the existing cam... w/o hardwelding the lobes.  Concerning #3 - it didn't hurt that the port went "dead" around .450" lift.   As far as opening the seat, done correctly it should increase low lift flow - what I'm uncertain about is will it help @ .450"?

My power goals on this engine are 300hp 300#/ft.   If you get close to that I see no reason you can't roast some times....

I'd like to hear more about your Ford roller use.....

In reply to oldeskewltoy :

When I asked Ken at Oregon cams about roller cams he said the cast iron cam I have can't be used for roller lifters. A roller cam requires a hardened iron or steel cam.

He also added a word of wisdom: It is easy to over cam a small displacement V8.

They offer 3 grinds for this cam: 218/218 & .303/.303 lobe lift

218/224 & 294/299 lobe lift

224/230 & .303/.306 lift

Can you speculate on the RPM range of peak torque and peak HP on these grinds

I do plan to build a long runner mfd: Maybe a dual plane cross ram with two 2 barrels.

warrenwelder said:

In reply to oldeskewltoy :

When I asked Ken at Oregon cams about roller cams he said the cast iron cam I have can't be used for roller lifters. A roller cam requires a hardened iron or steel cam.

He also added a word of wisdom: It is easy to over cam a small displacement V8.

They offer 3 grinds for this cam: 218/218 & .303/.303 lobe lift

218/224 & 294/299 lobe lift

224/230 & .303/.306 lift

Can you speculate on the RPM range of peak torque and peak HP on these grinds

I do plan to build a long runner mfd: Maybe a dual plane cross ram with two 2 barrels.

Shame on the roller lifters.... I wonder how much a custom roller cam would cost???

My plan is to run the 268/268 advertised, 218/218 @ .050" .303/.303 cam.    Stock the cam is 240/247 overall, 182.2/182.8 @ .050" with a lobe lift of .240".

ASSUMING the same pistons I'm using.... Speculating....  the 218/224 cam - likely little if any top end difference, maybe a little low end loss.   The 224/230 cam likely twist a few rpm higher then the cams I chose, so likely the power band shift a bit higher as well.  This cam will likely do better with a bit more compression than mine... 

Some anecdotal info...  There is a story on the internet of a supercharged "V" series engine that had an issue with liner shift @ 400hp.   That could be just boost... but it also might occur as rpm levels raise...  speculation at best... but worth considering  

oldeskewltoy said:

Shame on the roller lifters.... I wonder how much a custom roller cam would cost???

Ballpark on a custom roller cam - $700.00.  That doesn't include the roller lifters....   The lifters can likely be SBF.   Lifter spacing (for the bar to keep them in place may be an issue, but there are some roller lifters that can be fitted with custom bars.

Edit: total cost estimate for a roller cam upgrade.. $1500-$2000 all told(cam, lifters, custom bars, machine work).  

Is it worth it.....   ???  Not likely, at least not at this build level

warrenwelder said:

In reply to oldeskewltoy :

When I asked Ken at Oregon cams about roller cams he said the cast iron cam I have can't be used for roller lifters. A roller cam requires a hardened iron or steel cam.

He also added a word of wisdom: It is easy to over cam a small displacement V8.

They offer 3 grinds for this cam: 218/218 & .303/.303 lobe lift

218/224 & 294/299 lobe lift

224/230 & .303/.306 lift

Can you speculate on the RPM range of peak torque and peak HP on these grinds

I do plan to build a long runner mfd: Maybe a dual plane cross ram with two 2 barrels.

Those numbers all seem quite mild, I personally would be worried about being over cammed until the 050 duration crosses 260 or 270....but there is a flow duration relationship, lots of flow means you need less duration, lower flow and you want and can tolerate more.  218 is the OEM pollution cam spec on 2v and 4v ferrari 308 engines.....240-260 are where the hot street cams end up, my frankenferari V12 (same bore/stoke as the V8s) is 242/245 with high flow 4v heads and modest 10.7 compression.  my ole roadrace Harley was 270/270 and idled and drove fine below race rmp, I would not be scared of duration.

On lift, even when a port stops flowing at higher lift, it usually still makes sense to keep lifting the valve with the goal being get to max flow as quick as possible and stay there as long as possible.....so hit the .450 point on the steep part of the cam ramp then slow down and reverse motion once you're above 450 and it make no difference to flow what the valve is during.  On setups that are lift limited for other reasons  (ferrari engines flip out shims for example) I've seen a few attempts to make lobes that are a bit flat and dwell at max lift, but its easier to just open further when you can.

warrenwelder said:

...Ken at Oregon cams...also added a word of wisdom: It is easy to over cam a small displacement V8.

He's right, but it's worth considering the context.  More than likely his experience is typically from small domestic V8s with not a heck of a lot of compression, often strapped to automatic transmissions, tugging around bigger, heavier cars, and I'm going to speculate that a lot of them weren't regeared to let the engine spin.  We could also speculate that many of them were driven by people who measure performance in how easy it is to light the tires leaving the Dairy Queen (which I admit is bordering on mean-spirited), a scenario where a small engine with too much cam in a heavy Camarobird or pickup with an automatic and freeway gears will probably fail spectacularly.

mke said:

Those numbers all seem quite mild, I personally would be worried about being over cammed until the 050 duration crosses 260 or 270....but there is a flow duration relationship, lots of flow means you need less duration, lower flow and you want and can tolerate more.  218 is the OEM pollution cam spec on 2v and 4v ferrari 308 engines.....240-260 are where the hot street cams end up, my frankenferari V12 (same bore/stoke as the V8s) is 242/245 with high flow 4v heads and modest 10.7 compression.  my ole roadrace Harley was 270/270 and idled and drove fine below race rmp, I would not be scared of duration.

I'm not certain I'd go as big as mke would, but I agree with the direction he's heading.

By way of comparison, a typical, off-the-shelf "performer grind" for a domestic V8 is in the range of 210° at .050", and they're designed to get heavy vehicles like trucks, RVs, etc, moving right off of idle.  We're comparing a four-liter engine to a five or six-liter, so it's not a perfect comparison, but it's something.

Also by way of comparison, the Web 577 cams in your 4AGE-powered Corolla (and my 7AGE-powered MR2) are 226° @ .050".  Even in a little 1600cc four cylinder, my experience is that they're pretty mild.  They are plenty docile, and even work OK with air conditioning, although idle admittedly isn't great with the A/C engaged.  Again, not a perfect comparison, so we'll extrapolate accordingly.

Your 5V has two and a half times the displacement of a 4AGE, the vehicle you're putting it in is probably not even 50% heavier than your Corolla, and you still have a manual transmission and the ability to gear the rear end to suit.  And this is a plaything, not a daily driver.  Live a little.  If you are determined to go with Oregon Cam (anecdotally, I'm not sure I would, but you can text me about that), the 224°/230° cam is the one I'd choose.  It will probably have a noticeably choppy idle and be happy spinning to 6500 or so.

Just for further confusification, the vaunted/fabled/mighty whatever DZ302, weighing in at 254° @ .050" - a bridge too far, I think.  It makes peak power way up at 6700 on the dyno according to one Mr. Holdener:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VkJqw4Zx8M0

DarkMonohue said:

Just for further confusification, the vaunted/fabled/mighty whatever DZ302, weighing in at 254° @ .050" - a bridge too far, I think.  It makes peak power way up at 6700 on the dyno according to one Mr. Holdener:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VkJqw4Zx8M0

ONLY 6700?  What fun it that? 

Stock 308, little 3liter V8, with the later pollution cams (218/218 @.050) is about 6800 hp peak, the earlier stuff 7700.  The frankenferrari and the H-D I mentioned target closer to 9000.  But to the point I thing you're making, I like to start with where I want the power to be either RPM or hp#, calculate the flow needed to get there, see where the flow lands, then pick the cam to match everything else.  Flow is almost always lower than I'd prefer leading to cams with more duration than I'd prefer.

....but I should have mention in the last post though that doing what you can with the core you have is a very fine plan; I'm not saying anything bad about making an old engine run as well as it can without spending stupid money in the process.  So you say here's what I have, can't wait to get it together tha drive it!  Whatever you can do flow wise is gravy because you know you can use it all.

Years ago, between me and a buddy I think the same expensive set of high compression pistons ended up in 5 or 6 engine builds, the pistons started life .010" oversize and cylinders where cheap enough at swap meets to make it worth getting replacements that could be finished smaller each time to match the wearing pistons, and I had them ceramic coated once to make them fit again too....because I wasn't buying new pistons.

Edit: watched the video and it wasn't the 254 duration (factory street cam BTW...I had that exact cam in a ratty 65 vette  I had back in ...'84/85?, it drove nice),that I noticed it more flow with less duration made more hp in the boss 302....and neither combination was  poor at low rpm.  That was what I was on about matching...if you don't have the flow you need duration, if you have flow you don't need or want a lot of duration.  That is the key to a nice engine....matching parts.

Duration only gives you so much of the story, LSA can have just as much an impact on the engine.

Two cams with the same duration but with a 106 LSA vs a 114 LSA, will feel like completely different engines.

I have definitely over cammed an engine, and I've seen a bunch of guys immediately scroll to the bottom of the cam list and order the biggest one and be slower and less happy than someone with a more mild choice.

Id be inclined to pick the 218/218 or 218/224 (maybe slightly leaning to the dual pattern as in most application I have found them to be better, but I'd have to research the specific engine), but would be interested in the rest of the cam specs

Opti said:

Duration only gives you so much of the story, LSA can have just as much an impact on the engine.

 

Two cams with the same duration but with a 106 LSA vs a 114 LSA, will feel like completely different engines.

It does.  Twin (or quad) cam stuff is nice as you can change your mind about LSA later vs single cam must get it right.  Here is a comparison of simulation 104 vs 114 LSA on the frankeferrari I di way way back ...it looks like I held the intake fixed and moved the exhaust here

Then this looks like cams installed at 100-110 vs 110-110 so I guess a 105LSA vs 110LSA.  This engine has lots of duration and lots of flow so narrow LSA to boost lowend makes a better street setup.  Lower flowing/duration stuff you see at 110-115 LSA to help the topend or contain boost.

Opti said:

Duration only gives you so much of the story, LSA can have just as much an impact on the engine.

 

Two cams with the same duration but with a 106 LSA vs a 114 LSA, will feel like completely different engines.

Yep.... Intake valve closing is the most critical thing, LSA is mostly a function of how early you have to open the valve to get it to close at the right time, for a given duration, and the duration is a function of head flow.

The conversation has gotten interesting....  but some variables have not been considered.....  The higher you twist an engine the higher the load is on the all the moving parts... and there are no spares... well I don't have any.  

As it is, I'm running many of the parts that came out of it - original bearings, timing chain, and rockers** (that some of are/were damaged with the stock cam/springs).  While I'm confident the crank is capable, I'm a little less confident about the rods - I'm completely unsure of the rod bolt holes in the rods - as the bolt threads directly into the rod - no nut, and I'm unsure of the rods strength in holding a stretched bolt @ 20% more rpm.

** With the regrind, and the wear, the push rods for this engine will be replaced with an adjustable type.   They need to have moderate ramps to survive.

With no spares....  a new cam of any kind is a bit of a gamble.  

To the cam.... The intake valve will be touching the seat @ 64 degrees abdc.  Dynamic CR will be 8.35:1 manageable (not a challenge) on pump fuels.  The head flow, along with the cam specs should be close to my goal of 300hp.   

Just for comparison.... the 45 cid larger 289 Hipo was 271hp, while the Shelby 289 was 306hp

If my pockets were deeper, I could look at more cam, more valve, custom rods, and custom rocker assemblies.  I could also look at a custom timing chain, and maybe check that the oiling system is up to task to spin to 7000+......  

My goals for this engine have pretty much remained true...   300hp, 300#/ft, 6000rpm, and this combination should meet that goal

You SHOULD be able to get pushrods of basically any length you want, assuming that they are a standard-ish diameter.  They're usually available in .050" increments.

mke said:

Edit: watched the video and it wasn't the 254 duration (factory street cam BTW...I had that exact cam in a ratty 65 vette  I had back in ...'84/85?, it drove nice),that I noticed it more flow with less duration made more hp in the boss 302....and neither combination was  poor at low rpm.  That was what I was on about matching...if you don't have the flow you need duration, if you have flow you don't need or want a lot of duration.  That is the key to a nice engine....matching parts.

Didn't he run the stock 254° (Duntov) cam?  He mentions it at about 7:20, though his videos can be tough to process.  I really like the work he does, but he sometimes talks in circles before getting to the point (and his HEY GUYS, CAPS LOCK!! delivery has inspired 'er indoors to ask me not to play his videos when she's in the room).

Same cam in a '65 Corvette (if original) sounds like either a fuelie or an L76, and if ratty, I assume not a fuelie.  My dad had a '65 L76 roadster in 1968.  To say he remembers it fondly would be the very definition of understatement.

One point worth a quick mention is that most dynos don't showcase anything other than WOT power/torque output.  My little Magnum-peashooter MR2 (81.5x85.5mm, 11.2:1, 226°/226°, MS, common plenum intake manifold) will happily grunt under WOT at any speed, but the threshold for cruise or part-throttle operation is really about 2100 RPM (peak power is around 7000, incidentally).  I've been driving it daily for something like seventeen years, so for my money, that kind of temperament would be more than acceptable in an ice cream car.  But it ain't my money.

Dan (OP) certainly knows the importance of a well-matched combination.  We could preach on, but he's already singing in the choir.

DarkMonohue said:

Didn't he run the stock 254° (Duntov) cam? ....

Same cam in a '65 Corvette (if original) sounds like either a fuelie or an L76, and if ratty, I assume not a fuelie. 

Yes and not not stock in the vette, at least not in the engine I had which was  350 from a later vette. I added the cam so I remember it.  I was.//.20 maybe? and that cam was listed in book or article I saw calling god's gift to the SBC so I bought 1 instead of food that month. iirc 

oldeskewltoy said:

 

My goals for this engine have pretty much remained true...   300hp, 300#/ft, 6000rpm, and this combination should meet that goal

I have never had that kind of will power.  I'm sure it will be very nice.

mke said:

oldeskewltoy said:

 

My goals for this engine have pretty much remained true...   300hp, 300#/ft, 6000rpm, and this combination should meet that goal

I have never had that kind of will power.  I'm sure it will be very nice.

not so much will power... as budget.  I also knew going into this that I was going to be handcuffed by little or no available parts.  The car this lump is going in weighs 2500#s, 300hp means a power to weight ratio of 8.3#s per hp so yeah..... it should be "nice"

As far as push rods...  and why adjustable.  We have a reground cam, and lifters, along with some of the intake rockers needing the push rod ends being machined.  Push rod lengths will need to be adjustable to take up tolerances - this isn't an ideal solution, but one that is "acceptable".    I looked into having my rockers customized to accept adjustable ends, and they can't be done, so the next step would be custom rockers, but that is way out of the budget.   

As far as sourcing a 2nd engine as a solution, since I bought this one... the prices have risen, I paid $1400 for this one including shipping, they are now listing the 5V for about $2000 now.......so with freight more than double what I paid... and that doesn't mean the internals are better - I got super lucky finding this one with good (re-usable) internals.

I do acknoweldge there is more available, that build will have to wait for another day.

Push rods are available as kits with one end installed and the other user installed. Just cut to length and press in the end. V/W guys do it all the time.

I did the head and intake and exhaust on a 4-AGZ engine for a customer who had the largest cams from HKS and 2mm oversize superflow valves, and JE pistons. I told him it would be a 9000 rpm or higher engine with no bottom end and he said OK.After big port work and trick valve work with 3D fastcut , bore and hone snd deck and O ring , tapered runner, flared opening, large plenum Mfd and big T3 turbo mfd, He was scared to wind it over 7500. At that rpm it was better as a stock block. not only over cammed but over everything. He went back to a mild head and cam.

I have great faith in Toyota engines and all I have worked on had great cranks and rods and oiling systems. This 5V-eu engine is from a $150,000 car and I can't see Toyota cutting any corners. I payed $1500 plus $300 shipping for engine, auto trans and 2 starters. My social security check can cover that. Don't be badmouthing spinning the tires at the dairy queen, at my age that is the closest I can come to getting it up to impress the girls.

I hope you can get your engine  driving soon to prove your concept. Then I can use that knoledge to do mine. Otherwise I will go with a larger cam  and test the results. Since my car is just a showoff toy  and this island is only 26 miles long with nowhere else to go I can live with a little to much cam. I can allways port it or turbo it or machine a steel cam blank for a roller cam.It is just a toy to play with befor I kick the bucket.

warrenwelder said:

I have great faith in Toyota engines and all I have worked on had great cranks and rods and oiling systems.

I'll drink to that. My 7A-GE has stock rods (utlizing stock bolts threaded directly into the rod, like OST's 5V) and it's seen the wrong side of 7500 RPM thousands of times. This is one of those combinations that the all-knowing internet of the late 90s said was only designed for 6000 RPM and would never hold past that. But there's nothing wrong with prudence, especially when replacement parts are so few and far between.

Speaking of replacement parts, has anybody looked into aftermarket rods for this thing? Might not be an off-the-shelf item by application, but there's always a chance they're dimensionally similar to something more common.

Warren, by all means, smoke 'em if you got 'em. Something tells me you are a little better informed than the average bear.

Dan, I didn't catch whether you did any porting on your heads before flow testing. If you did , do you have before and after flow numbers? I haven't pulled my heads off yet, but I tend to be a compulsive port cleaner and have a 3-D fastcut system to do the seats and bowels.

Could you measure the length of the runner in the intake mfd or estimate the length from the opening in the plenum to the flange? I cut all that off mine and scrapped it.

I tried to order the gaskets from Cometic but they don't answer their phone.I called about 10 times over 3 days. I guess I'll call again now.

First off, DAMN this is cool! I never would have thought Toyota mad a hemi! learn something new every day or die!  I'll be watching this one closely!

mke said:

 

It was like $160 for the pair and if you send a dwx file of what you want there was no engineering charge....I think onshape (free on line cad) will export a dwx.

 

I know I'm super late to the party, but onshape will export DXF's and DWG's,  which most shops can use, I don't think they support a DWX though. I use onshape somewhat regularly, and would recommend it in a heartbeat to someone interested in digging into CAD projects.

While I typically agree that Toyota usually has these inherent qualities, the fact remains that this hemi design type has always had some issues with oiling intake rockers, kind of a known short coming.   As this engine was being used in their top of the line model, you would think they might have improved the design of the oiling for the intake rockers.

I don't expect this engine to be assembled anytime soon, there are over 100 engine builds at the shop currently in front of mine,  so I expect mid/late summer.  And that doesn't as yet account for the ignition side - broken distributor.

As far as intake runner length, I may be able to get you an internal measurement - length.   Another point on the intake, the throttle body, and throttle body flange are not likely capable of flowing the air needed for my power goals.