|
09-11-2017, 04:31 PM
|
#26 | |
|
motor exploder
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 2,346
|
Re: Cam vs mpg
Quote:
You might be able to tell that it has a mild cam, but definitely not the fender shaking crackle/thump/lope that you might be hearing in your head. Just leave it like it is and enjoy a reliable daily driver with the good mpg you're getting now.
__________________
Adam 1969 Chevy CST/10 stepside, DART Big M/TREMEC Magnum Extreme/3.73's w/Detroit Truetrac 1965 Chevy Bel Air Wagon (daily driver), 327/TH350,10 bolt w/3.08's 1961 Chevy Bel Air Sport Coupe, ZZ454/M21/9" rear w/3.50's & Detroit Truetrac 2005 GMC 1500 ccsb 2wd, 6.0L/4L65e/3.73 G80 2006 GMC 2500HD ccsb 4x4, DMax LBZ/Allison 6spd/4.56's w/Detroit TrueTrac   Use the SEARCH function on this forum - it is your friend!! Last edited by BossHogg69; 09-11-2017 at 10:49 PM. |
|
|
|
|
09-11-2017, 04:57 PM
|
#27 | |
|
Registered User
 Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: 2nd left past the stump on a dirt road.
Posts: 2,629
|
Re: Cam vs mpg
Quote:
I would hope that engineering's first priority would be HP/Torque at WOT then mileage on light throttle similar to a VVT tuned engine would be. I know some are ground this way yet there is a ton to understand to get there. |
|
|
|
|
|
09-11-2017, 06:38 PM
|
#28 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Victoria, B.C
Posts: 3,794
|
Re: Cam vs mpg
Put a couple of interupter wires into one or two of the spark plug leads.
When you pull up to a light or idle through a parking lot, just hit a switch and ground off one of the spark plugs....that'll give you a rough idle for appearance/sound sake. Then when you leave the parking lot, click back onto 8 cylinders. Way cheaper...probably $25 worth of parts....same sound....same roughness.  All Good Coley
__________________
....for some men, there is experience, skill and effort....for the others...there is visa and UPS LOL 1966 Chevy 1/2 ton (Florida- Red/white) 1972 Chevy 1/2 ton (California- Blue/white) 2005 Chevy Silverado HD2500/Duramax 2000 Dodge Ram 1500 |
|
|
|
|
09-11-2017, 08:06 PM
|
#29 |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Moraga, CA
Posts: 801
|
Re: Cam vs mpg
Except for the getting shocked part when you touch the switch. ;-)
__________________
(Very) Slow-Going Build Thread: Stock 1970 Short Step with Stock 1970 LT-1 http://67-72chevytrucks.com/vboard/s...d.php?t=567340 |
|
|
|
|
09-11-2017, 10:07 PM
|
#30 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Henderson NC
Posts: 975
|
Re: Cam vs mpg
I can't believe the guys on here suggesting you should screw up the tuning on a perfectly good running motor to imitate a big cam. Why not just get a set of old heads with some burnt valves, that would really make a rough idle.
|
|
|
|
|
09-15-2017, 03:58 PM
|
#31 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Denton, Tx
Posts: 7
|
Re: Cam vs mpg
I have a 454 with a big Loby Cam in my 86 Silveraydo is not a fun cruising truck.
|
|
|
|
|
09-16-2017, 10:15 PM
|
#32 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Edinburg, Texas.
Posts: 194
|
Re: Cam vs mpg
Unfortunately lopey idle and good mpg don't exist together. Maybe if you were willing to raise the compression a bunch with the cam swap it might not hurt mpg as bad. Just a theory there, others may say that's bologna.
|
|
|
|
|
09-17-2017, 08:44 PM
|
#33 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: Central illinois
Posts: 143
|
Re: Cam vs mpg
Thank you for all the replies, I have a itch to scratch. I ordered a comp xe256. Going to swap out this weekend. I want to see how much differance these faster m0ving valves make.
|
|
|
|
 |
| Bookmarks |
|
|
Linear Mode
