Turbo cams on their way.

Duke · Post by **Duke** » Mar 26, 2008 2:47 PM

The true M30 turbo cam is now a reality.

Paul Burke will soon have the first lot of CNC precision ground cams specifically for turbo application. Paul is estimating that this cam will produce at least 40 HP more than any B34/B35 cams made by Schrick or OEM.

Very detailed information to follow. Price will most likely be in the $475-$525 range. It has yet to be determined.

raceaddic · Post by **raceaddic** » Mar 26, 2008 5:04 PM

Duke wrote:The true M30 turbo cam is now a reality.

Paul Burke will soon have the first lot of CNC precision ground cams specifically for turbo application. Paul is estimating that this cam will produce at least 40 HP more than any B34/B35 cams made by Schrick or OEM.

hope he keeps lob separation under 112 degrees or you will start to lose power instead.. because a company here sells a True Turbo camchaft. 284 /284 degrees. 11.2 mm lift with 113 degrees lob separation and the engine made less power and lost some rev punch. the Schrick 284/280/110 made more power and a more rev happy engine witj less lift all to thanks to M30s nice head flow balance

just something to keep in mine when promise at least 40 HP more

BadM535i · Post by **BadM535i** » Mar 26, 2008 5:07 PM

hey raceaddic are you talking about PPF?

raceaddic · Post by **raceaddic** » Mar 26, 2008 5:13 PM

BadM535i wrote:hey raceaddic are you talking about PPF?

PPF:s turbo cam is from ENEM so pick your choice. it was from the beginning made by Enem for an alpina b6 twin turbo from Sweden with wherry high back pressure due to small turbos,

BadM535i · Post by **BadM535i** » Mar 26, 2008 7:37 PM

raceaddic wrote:
BadM535i wrote:hey raceaddic are you talking about PPF?
PPF:s turbo cam is from ENEM so pick your choice. it was from the beginning made by Enem for an alpina b6 twin turbo from Sweden with wherry high back pressure due to small turbos,

Oh I thought PPF made the cam, I guess not!

Are you familiar with an alpina cam named RO275?

My cousin just finished building his motor in U.A.E and is pushing close to 640Hp with nos using this cam!

Post by **Jeremy** » Mar 27, 2008 9:11 AM

Duke wrote:Paul is estimating that this cam will produce at least 40 HP more than any B34/B35 cams made by Schrick or OEM.

That's quite a claim. I'm guessing that claim only applies to one of Paul's re-worked heads? At what boost level?

Jeremy

Duke · Post by **Duke** » Mar 27, 2008 1:45 PM

Jeremy wrote:
Duke wrote:Paul is estimating that this cam will produce at least 40 HP more than any B34/B35 cams made by Schrick or OEM.
That's quite a claim. I'm guessing that claim only applies to one of Paul's re-worked heads? At what boost level?

Jeremy

Not really, 40 HP from a chip is quite a claim.

Paul has yet to give me the details. I believe that is with a stock head. Results with Paul's head will be different. Details as soon as I get them.

Post by **Nebraska_e28** » Mar 27, 2008 2:48 PM

Duke wrote:
40 HP from a chip is quite a claim.

True!

bimmerboy · Post by **bimmerboy** » Mar 27, 2008 7:47 PM

Duke wrote: Not really, 40 HP from a chip is quite a claim.

I don't call that a claim. I call it marketing.

George · Post by **George** » Mar 27, 2008 8:07 PM

I call it someone integrating the area between the before and after (with chip) curve and getting the results of 40 total hp

Duke · Post by **Duke** » Mar 28, 2008 8:29 PM

A bit more information for ya. Paul is putting together a comprehensive and detailed info package that I will have soon.

Imagine this - you can now choose a BMW cam like you can a Chevy. Thousands of profiles to choose from. No more of this "284" cam... not knowing the profiles or the lift. The Schrick cams are 70's technology. Paul's cam's are state of the art 2008 technology.

These new chilled cast billets are turned on a Landis CNC machine. The cam profiles are computer modeled generated and cut by the Landis CNC machine one at a time. There is not any master cam that thousands of cams are cut from...(70's).

Paul will have at least four different turbo cam profiles. One for example has 278 duration intake with .440 of lift, 269 exhaust with .420 of lift. That is .030-.035 more lift that a Schrick 284.

You will also be able to order a custom cam with whatever profile you want on the intake and exhaust. Hell, you can get a cam with different profiles per cylinder if you want.

+40 HP easy.

More to come.

raceaddic · Post by **raceaddic** » Mar 29, 2008 8:09 AM

Duke wrote: Imagine this - you can now choose a BMW cam like you can a Chevy. Thousands of profiles to choose from. No more of this "284" cam... not knowing the profiles or the lift. .

im using Catcams and ther cams comes with a nice and detailed camcard with both 0.050duration and seat-to-seat, vale event timing, Lift and everything else you want to know.

Duke wrote: Paul will have at least four different turbo cam profiles. One for example has 278 duration intake with .440 of lift, 269 exhaust with .420 of lift. That is .030-.035 more lift that a Schrick 284.

You will also be able to order a custom cam with whatever profile you want on the intake and exhaust. Hell, you can get a cam with different profiles per cylinder if you want.

+40 HP easy.

so he think it will produce +40 HP easy with the same engine and boost as a Catcam 284-280-110, lift 10.9mm In and 10.6mm

Enem made my last custom cam for my M102 engine with the flow data i gave them, 296-302-112, lift 12.3 and 12.1
think it cost $550 to have a custom cam made.

Duke · Post by **Duke** » Mar 29, 2008 9:08 AM

raceaddic wrote: so he think it will produce +40 HP easy with the same engine and boost as a Catcam 284-280-110, lift 10.9mm In and 10.6mm

Enem made my last custom cam for my M102 engine with the flow data i gave them, 296-302-112, lift 12.3 and 12.1
think it cost $550 to have a custom cam made.

Yes....this is not Sweden so we do not have Enem or CatCam to make cams for us. What would shipping be to the US for your $500 custom cam? $500, that is with the current Euro to $ exchange rate?

raceaddic · Post by **raceaddic** » Mar 29, 2008 10:08 AM

Duke wrote:
Yes....this is not Sweden so we do not have Enem or CatCam to make cams for us. What would shipping be to the US for your $500 custom cam? $500, that is with the current Euro to $ exchange rate?

catcam is available here http://www.catcams.co.uk/ordering.asp they have fast Worldwide shipping as i know so has http://butiken.enem.se/katalog.asp Enem

shipment from sweden is $70 5-6days delivery.
$500 is 2900 Swedish kronor exchange rate 5.86kr to $1
we don´t have Euro in sweden 8)

Duke · Post by **Duke** » Mar 29, 2008 10:47 AM

raceaddic wrote: catcam is available here http://www.catcams.co.uk/ordering.asp they have fast Worldwide shipping as i know so has http://butiken.enem.se/katalog.asp Enem

shipment from Sweden is $70 5-6days delivery.
$500 is 2900 Swedish kronor exchange rate 5.86kr to $1
we don´t have Euro in Sweden

Well there you go then.

I personally will stick with Paul and his knowledge. He has produced a S38 that makes over 700 HP at 5400 RPM, 12 psi on pump gas.

Paul knows CatCams well. He has worked personally with Lieve Pawells and Stesson Ludo. CatCams will not easily make a custom cam, they take Euros and when your cam arrives in the states there is duty and taxes to be paid on the top of the very expensive shipping. Paul was charged over $200 shipping, duty and taxes for four cams.

raceaddic · Post by **raceaddic** » Mar 29, 2008 7:01 PM

Duke wrote:I personally will stick with Paul and his knowledge. He has produced a S38 that makes over 700 HP.

i have produced a 900hp S38

and several 650hp M30

Duke · Post by **Duke** » Mar 29, 2008 7:27 PM

raceaddic wrote:
Duke wrote:I personally will stick with Paul and his knowledge. He has produced a S38 that makes over 700 HP.
i have produced a 900hp S38

You forgot this part - at 5400 RPM, 12 psi on pump gas.

Stop stealing pictures from VS Motor in Norway.

Go away troll.

raceaddic · Post by **raceaddic** » Mar 29, 2008 7:44 PM

Duke wrote: Stop stealing pictures from VS Motor in Norway.

Go away troll.

WTF,,,, thees pictures is not stolen from VS motor its a friends car with an engine i have ported and built myself. here is some more pictures

first run video taken with phone

so hoes the troll... come back when you have produced anything fast yourself....

Skeen · Post by **Skeen** » Mar 29, 2008 11:04 PM

VW+bimmer=bliss · Post by **VW+bimmer=bliss** » Mar 30, 2008 12:38 AM

Skeen wrote:

wtf?

Duke · Post by **Duke** » Mar 30, 2008 9:51 AM

raceaddic wrote:WTF,,,, thees pictures is not stolen from VS motor its a friends car with an engine i have ported and built myself.

T_C_D · Post by **T_C_D** » Mar 30, 2008 10:05 AM

Duke wrote:
Just to clarify the S38 we are speaking of - Ken H's motor made 707 rwhp @ 5700, 725rwtq @ 4900, both @ 14.95 psi on pump gas. 707 rwhp = ~842 fwhp, assuming there's a 16% loss in the drivetrain.

Were not those numbers at elevation and had a huge software adjustment?

Actual rwhp being in the 500 range?

Duke · Post by **Duke** » Mar 30, 2008 10:07 AM

Milwaukee's Best wrote:Were not those numbers at elevation and had a huge software adjustment?

Ken will have to chime in. I don't want to miss-speak.

Ken H. · Post by **Ken H.** » Mar 30, 2008 3:06 PM

As to the numbers that were recorded on Lucifer's Hammer during the April, 2005 dyno pulls.

1. Altitude will reduce horsepower at a rate of about 3.3% for every 1000 feet of elevation above sea level. The dyno is located at about 6200 ft ASL (suburban Denver). This means a power loss for any NA motor of about 20.5% across the board. Further, additional adjustments can be made for air temperature and relative humidity, but the adjustment factors are quite small. IIRC, these get discussed in Bell's "Forced Induction Performance Tuning," pp 62-65.
2. On a properly configured dyno, the software asks for the input of altitude, air temp, RH before the runs commence.
3. The actual power delivered to the rollers is adjusted by the afore-mentioned factors, which are multiplicative in nature, BTW.

Since the afore-mentioned factors tend to reduce delivered power, the compensation is to divide the delivered power by the appropriate compensation factors to arrive at a value available under so-called "standard" conditions.

Example:
Sea level altitude = 100.0%. Less the altitude factor of .205
= .795. (6.2 x 3.3 = 20.46. 100.0-.205 = .795)
Air temp is usually taken at a standard 68 deg F. With air temp ~70 deg F, the adjustment factor is about .15%. Relative humidity is about in the same range.
So we have .795 x .9985 x .9985 = .7926.

Divide actual HP at the rollers by .7926 and the result is an altitude-compensated value.

In my case, the horsepower at the eddy current armature within the Mustang dyno was around 567 and the altitude-compensated power was 707.25. Which is about what I would see on a dyno pull done in Connecticut.
What this process does is allow runs taken under different conditions or locations to be compared on an apples-to-apples basis.
Lets assume for the moment a box-stock NA M30. The car gets taken to three different locations and gets put through the paces. A pull done on a 100 degree day in Phoenix can be accurately compared to one done on a 30-degree day in Denver to a 90-degree 100% humidity day in central Ohio. The actual readings off the rollers in these different locations will be different, chiefly due to altitude, but the mathematics permit doing the comparisons on a level playing field.

The issue of power loss at altitude gets a lot of people very exicted. Jay Kimball, who runs Mile High Performance where the runs were done on his Mustang dyno, does a lot of tuning work for serious drag iron which is being run at Bandimere Speedway--Mile High Nationals stuff. Bandimere is at about 6500 ft. Big Dogs come up from the LA area and panic when they find their motor suddenly lost 20-25% of its power. WTF?? The power loss has nothing to do with the engine . . . the air density is less, and so less power. The altitude is one reason the NHRA has a set of compensation tables to correct ETs for runs done here vs. those done at sea level.

A sidebar worth noting. Mile High performance is one of only a couple of shops in the Front Range certified by AirCare Colorado (our environazis) to perform dyno analyses on cars which fail Colorado's emissions tests. In these situations, the dyno is set up to run the car through the IM-240 tailpipe emissions profile. The exhaust is run through a 5-gas spectroscopic analysis. The results are then used to tune or repair the car to where it passes the emissions standards. This means that there is far too much at stake to play games with providing bogus dyno outputs. . . like criminal penalties.

For what it is worth, it is not unheard of for an unscrupulous dyno operator to alter the software settings or the resistance in the eddy current coils to yield incorrect power outputs.This isn't rare where a client has paid mucho $$ to the shop for a series of modifications and the shop can "prove" that a stated power output has been reached. But in Mile High's case, they have built a business on doing the job properly and the dyno is accurate.

When we were doing the tuning on LH, we had the car on the dyno for something in excess of 40 hours of actual dyno time over a period of several weeks. I lost count at somewhere over 300 pulls. These weren't necessarily short bursts. A lot of this was extended runs at a given set of values for timing, boost/vacuum, Ve, fuel delivery and so on. The purpose was to optimize the settings for use over as wide an operating range as I was likely to see, not just dial-it-in for-max-hp. Given that we were on and off the rollers (see comments re. emissions tuning above), there was a lot of care taken to be sure we had setups done correctly.

So the figures which I provided in the LH series and where I outlined to TCD and Russ C in a thread how the numbers came about are accurate. In other words, if you have a FI M30 in Lousiana which is indicating 300 hp at the rear wheels, bring it to Denver and it will show somewhere around 240, give or take.

To be noted here, these are rear wheel numbers. To adjust for power losses through the drivetrain, divide the rwhp by .84 for a manual transmission and about .8 to .78 for an automatic. This translates ito a 16% to 22% power loss between the flywheel and the ground. This will apply across the board to nearly all cars, not just BMW.

A few comments regarding Duke's statements about boost levels.
I discussed this at some length in my "Lucifer's Hammer" series, but here goes.
I achieved max hp at ~5700 rpm, and max torque at 4900. Both at 14.95 psi boost. This was done with a Turbonetics T66/T4 turbo. The T66 will push around 82-84# per min. air mass. When wound up closer to my 6300rpm redline, boost dropped off to around 12.5 psi, with a corresponding drop in hp.
The dropoff is due to the airmass going into "choke;" effectively going into a stall condition within the compressor. If you look at a compressor map, this is where the flow point has moved way to the right, away from the efficiency island. This is an indication that the compressor cannot meet the flow demand from the engine.
Further analysis on my motor indicated that ideally I need a GT-42 or GT-45 capable of moving airmass in the 104-108# per min range to fully utilize the engine's capabilities.
The reason(s) that we didn't use the larger compressors were first, that doing so has major downsides in terms of lag and potentially running into "surge" at low engine speeds and loads. Second, the purpose with this motor is power and flexibility over a wide rpm range, NOT max power for quarter-mile applications. Thirdly, the physical size of a GT-4X series compressor has some limitations, given where the snail is located.

Looked at another way, we were trying to maximize the area under both the hp and torque curves, not reach some arbitrary maximum hp or tq value. The fact that the power levels are reached at relatively low RPM has given the engine a huge load of day-to-day driveability and made it a lot less temperamental, as might be the case if everything is seen in the upper 5-10% of the rpm range.

Yeah, I'm still experiencing some tuning issues. When I come off idle the transitions could be a good deal smoother, and clutch engagement is hair-trigger. But nobody ever said this was a fix-it-and-forget-it deal.

bimmerboy · Post by **bimmerboy** » Mar 30, 2008 10:27 PM

Duke wrote:
raceaddic wrote:WTF,,,, thees pictures is not stolen from VS motor its a friends car with an engine i have ported and built myself.
Just to clarify the S38 we are speaking of - Ken H's motor made 707 rwhp @ 5700, 725rwtq @ 4900, both @ 14.95 psi on pump gas. 707 rwhp = ~842 fwhp, assuming there's a 16% loss in the drivetrain. You can get all the detail of this engine and what Paul Burke did from the Lucifer's Hammer series below.

http://www.mye28.com/viewtopic.php?p=18 ... ht=#189596
http://www.mye28.com/viewtopic.php?p=19 ... ht=#190339
http://www.mye28.com/viewtopic.php?p=19 ... ht=#192379
http://www.mye28.com/viewtopic.php?p=19 ... ht=#193753
http://www.mye28.com/viewtopic.php?p=19 ... ht=#194707
http://www.mye28.com/viewtopic.php?p=19 ... ht=#195526
http://www.mye28.com/viewtopic.php?p=19 ... ht=#196932
http://www.mye28.com/viewtopic.php?p=19 ... ht=#198406
http://www.mye28.com/viewtopic.php?p=19 ... ht=#199417
http://www.mye28.com/viewtopic.php?p=20 ... ht=#200489

So raceaddic go ahead and post your flowbench and dyno printouts for comparison. Also indicate the type of fuel and boost . If you did indeed build such an engine.

BS walks my friend, BS walks.

Duke, why don't you post your flowbench and dyno printouts. You're far too defensive. Last time I checked you paid for your engine build, just because Raceaddic does it himself doesn't mean they're going to be some cobbled mess. And fwhp means front wheel horsepower. You would be talking about BHP.

red535t · Post by **red535t** » Mar 31, 2008 2:54 AM

is this what its coming down to;
standing around measuring ourselfs and shouting the results?!

for what it worth Duke,

good on Paul,Duke whoever for trying/doing something new.

HP claims I cant comment on but any improvement on head flow/valve lift etc is going to be a good thing

peace

///ARINUTS... · Post by **///ARINUTS...** » Mar 31, 2008 10:42 AM

Always love the Drama Here.

Funny thing is Turbo Specific cam(s) won't really make much difference when compared to a similar NA cam, When used on a well designed turbo system.

Over lap is usually the issue. and when there is too much of it , on a system with too much exhaust back pressure ( Pre Turbo ) you have something called exhaust gas reversion.

Once again, another reason why you go Big or Go Home.

Running Big NA Cams is perfectly fine with a big enough turbine housing and proper manifold.

altus22 · Post by **altus22** » Mar 31, 2008 11:17 AM

With large overlap on boost, you push intake air and fuel into the intake and right out the exhaust before the exhaust valve closes.

turbodan · Post by **turbodan** » Mar 31, 2008 12:20 PM

I dont think turbo cam timing is just as simple as applying general observations. You have to consider the intake/exhaust manifold pressure ratio before you can determine how overlap will affect cylinder filling on any particular motor. That also changes with different boost levels and at different engine speeds. A cam that lets some boost blow through between 3500 and 4500 RPM might make some serious top end once enough pressure exists in the exhaust manifold to allow proper scavenging without losing fresh fuel and air out the exhaust. It could be like the port blocking effect used on two stroke racing engines.

Shadow · Post by **Shadow** » Apr 04, 2012 11:17 PM

Since it's +40hp over a cat or schriek more importantly
how much power over a stock b34/b35 cam?

I think I hit a wall and it's either more boost or bigger cam.
Miller sells these cams at $1,000,000 so just trying to be sure on this.

MyE28.com DEV

MyE28.com DEV

Turbo cams on their way.

Turbo cams on their way.

Re: Turbo cams on their way.

Re: Turbo cams on their way.

Re: Turbo cams on their way.

Re: Turbo cams on their way.

Re: Turbo cams on their way.