Camshafts

  • Thread starter Thread starter Sureboss
  • 72 comments
  • 2,232 views
Thanks, so I have a pushrod V6, blessedly awesome engine with kick-butt power and torque curves.

The Buick 3.8L V6? Its the same one we have in our Grand Prix, and I love it. A very flat power-curve, a great all around engine.

Is geting better pushrods a performance option? I also just realised, pushrod engines that get really bad power drop off, is that because of pushrods flexing at the higher RPM?

They certainly are a performance option and on most high-performance applications they are swapped out with a new cam immediately. Same with the roller-rockers, and usually the valve springs as well.

As for it being the cause for the drop-off in power, I'm not sure.
 
Go and read some books by David Vizard. Try the Comp Cams and Crane Cams website for some good pushrod engine info.

Pushrods are not that important if you're trying to figure out where to spend a bit of money on an existing engine for a hop-up. The majority of the mass in an OHV system is in the valve and the valve side of the rocker arm. The bigger the rocker ratio (to get more valve lift from a certain lifter displacement) the worse the problem. However, yes, you want the lightest and stiffest pushrods you can find. I aced a deal on some carbon fibre pushrods for my 327 Corvette engine, but I only fancy testing them on a back-to-back basis with the middle-quality TrickFlow steel items I have.

And light lifters are important... but if you're going mental with a cam lobe to get lift and duration, then you're probably using a roller lifter, which is heavier than a straight 'solid' (heh - actually hollow!) non-hydraulic lifter. (A hydraulic lifter contains oil which varies in quantity, squirting out through orifices in the lifter. The idea is that it removes lash from the system and is quieter. The drawback is that to be quiet, the orifices need to be quite small, and the higher the revs, the oil gets trapped and can't get out, which causes 'lifter pump-up' and makes the valvetrain too tall, holding the valve off the seat when it's off the cam lobe, losing compression - and thus power.)

If you're going above 7000rpm then it may be worth looking into a 'rev kit' which is a set of reaction springs that hold your lifters as gently as possible against the cam, thus reducing the load they transfer back to the spring holding the valve closed and the stresses on the pushrod. The logic follows that a well selected valvetrain for use without a rev kit will be nowhere near optimised for use with a rev kit.

Most important of all in a performance OHV valvetrain (assuming you've got your valvetrain as light as you can) is spring selection. Springs themselves have a weight, and the valvetrain's weight and dynamics will be affected by that weight. Actually, this goes for OHC engines too, but in an OHV engine it's arguably more important because of the increased number of components.

For a given big cam, you might need a high spring rate of X. So, you select a spring of rate X which is a double spring set weighing 120grams. Now, if you choose a slightly lower rate, but is a single spring which weighs, say, 80grams, it might actually allow valve control which is just as good up to 6,500rpm, and then actually more torque above that because the spring is controlling the lower mass of the whole train better - no valve bounce from all that extra spring mass.

It's a heck of a game, cam selection. It's not a black art, but the level of understanding and experience necessary to optimise an engine is huge. Even the cam suppliers will be a little bit conservative when you ask them what cam their experts recommend. If you're going for the last tenth then you have to learn some of the fundamentals yourself and figure out where you're going to take the risks. :)

You may be interested to know that the camshaft may be finally on its way out. Manufacturers have been experimenting with solenoid operated valves for a while now - infinitely variable timing. However, the solenoids are bulky and current materials technology and heat issues mean that valve control is only good up to around 5,000rpm. However, the engine up to that point makes very impressive amounts of torque relative to current state-of-the-art engines. When materials and solenoid technology improves, the capability of these engines will improve. When they're up to 7,000rpm limits at good endurance, expect to see them in the market, linked up with turbochargers on smaller 'eco' style engines. Ironically, these devices are better packaged inverted and driving rockers in pushrod style V-engines rather than OHC engines, because of their size. You add mechanical complexity, but the engine remains the same overall size. The OHC applications are quite bulky and make an engine topheavy.
 
I'd love to articulate how a pushrod engine works with the camshafts, but the problem is, I don't know how to put it into words (much less, use the correct ones). Its the same idea (for the most part), however, there are more moving parts going about despite the overall simple design.

The main difference is that there is only one camshaft at the center of the engine, the pushrods moving up and down as the cam turns which in turn move the roller-rocker arms that lift or close the valves on each cylinder. Thats the most basic way I can describe it.


Yea you really need to have a picture or have seen the inside of an engine to be able to visualize it. I know I had to, I just could picture without seeing it first.

And also you forgot to mention the cam is at the bottom of the motor in a pushrod engine. Or atleast it is not on top of the cylinders.
 
DOHC.. top heavy? rrriiight.. so is pushrod V8.. when compared to boxer engine. comparing apples to oranges, as usual.
 
My comment was specifically referencing the solenoid valve engine.

However, in general, a pushrod V8 of a given capacity has better package density (and is lighter) than a QOHC V-engine, even though it (almost always) is down on specific power output because it (almost always) has only 2 valves per cylinder. The relatively narrow, short and light LS-series gives the Corvette its low hood/bonnetline. Put it another way, you can fit an LS or Ford 302 into a Mazda Miata, but none of the Ford V8 OHC engines fit without a heck of a lot of carving.

As for inlines, OHCs are taller and more topheavy, but the packaging is a relocation, so the benefits are worth the effort. Some manufacturers (notably, Saab and Peugeot) have laid their engines over to try to reduce the height (2.0 'Slant 4' and TU-series respectively.)

The boxer engine is a good solution for low centre-of-gravity. However, the intake manifolding becomes tricky to package and the overall width of a bigger engine (especially if it QOHC) can cause some issues. If you do something silly like Ferrari did with the 365GT4BB and try to put the engine on top of the gearbox, you instantly kill the 'low centre-of-gravity' ideal. It made the early Berlinetta Boxers tricky beasts, and the TestaRossa they sired not much more fun on the limit. I can't wait to drive the 512BB in GT5 to see what it's like. :)
 
I also just realised, pushrod engines that get really bad power drop off,
I'll just throw this in there.

From Sport Compact Car magazine:

The LS1's vintage two-valve pushrod arrangement limits breathing ability at high revs and makes presice valve control difficult at high speeds. The layout is well suited to mid-range output, so everything else in the engine is largely optimized for the middle of the tach

I'm guessing that's part a pretty large part of it.
 
HOWSTUFFWORKS.COM

Not to be an ass or anything, but this is the first place you should go if you want to know the fundamentals.

The basics on camshafts.
http://auto.howstuffworks.com/camshaft1.htm

And if you scroll down, the differences in sports and normal cam shafts are shown.
http://auto.howstuffworks.com/camshaft.htm

I know, but that gets in the way of a good discussion ;)

I tried to invoke/provoke/something an interesting topic and it's been one, I've learnt more about it for sure (rather than reading a 40 year old manual).

One question.

On the howstuffworks moving pictures, it shows a yellow fluid at the bottom of the piston rod. Is that just the engine oil? Fuel comes in with air intake? *awaits a slapping*
 
Well, a touch of bias in such a magazine is to be expected. :sly:

The LS1's vintage

Mmmmm... valid, but the OHC is just as old, it is just better suited to modern engines... there's pretty much nothing new about anything in IC engines.


two-valve pushrod arrangement limits breathing ability at high revs

Fixed, partially, for road engines. Having two valves does limit flow compared to a four-valve head. Pushrods are nothing to do with breathing ability...

and makes presice valve control difficult at high speeds.

Difficult, yes, I'd go with that - for low cost. But when the LS7 redlines at 7k, how far do you want to go? Don't get me wrong, I love my FTO, and it redlines at 8 on solid tappet cams (that, to Mitsubishi's credit, have never gone out of adjustment for lash in 160,000+ miles.)

The layout is well suited to mid-range output, so everything else in the engine is largely optimized for the middle of the tach.

Yes, true.

If Honda decided to make a 6 litre petrol engine, it would be fantastic. Current best practice for flame propagation and the RPMs Honda might make it develop would suggest less than a 100mm bore - so that means not a V8, more like a V12. Working for Aston Martin as I do, I'd welcome that. We could do with a new engine, Dr. Bez doesn't like pressure charging, so getting Honda to make it would be wonderful - you know it's going to produce a minimum of 600hp - probably 700hp, and if the S2000 engine is anything to go by, more than that. If it were modular, a 4 litre V8 version would pop out 480hp as a pair of S2000 engines might. Yummy.

But what the cost? Those four VTEC cams are going to cost Joe Public at least $50,000 in a crated engine (considering the current AM04 V12 variants cost $48,000 from the dealer and is based on Ford V6 bits.) That the single cam OHV LS7 engine (albeit at 7 litres) outstrips the current V12 in all performance departments (economy included, I believe) for the princely sum of around $15,000 says something about how hard GM have worked to refine the OHV V8 concept over the past 53 years, and for this, I salute them.

In terms of VFM, you can't beat the LS-series, and ultimately for torque generation at any engine speed, there is no replacement for displacement. :D

Now, what was the question?
 
On the howstuffworks moving pictures, it shows a yellow fluid at the bottom of the piston rod. Is that just the engine oil? Fuel comes in with air intake? *awaits a slapping*
Yeah the yellow fluid is the oil sump I believe.

And yes, the fuel comes already mixed with the air.
 
I know I'm not the TC, but thanks everyone so far for helping me understand engines better. I don't understand every little things said but I understand the basics far better now. :dopey:

YSSMAN, yes it is the Buick 3.8L V6, and when combined with relatively light (my Ute weighs 1360kg) early model Commodores they can be very deadly even to V8s with a small bit of work. (Maybe not LS series V8s :sly: )

Leo, I laugh every time you try to put down pushrod engines, not at you, it's just funny with your persistence. ;)
 
YSSMAN, yes it is the Buick 3.8L V6, and when combined with relatively light (my Ute weighs 1360kg) early model Commodores they can be very deadly even to V8s with a small bit of work. (Maybe not LS series V8s :sly: )

We've got a 128KW version of the 3800 in our Pontiac Grand Prix, and it still has the gusto to outrun quite a few cars. Sure, it doesn't hold a candle to the later versions (147 and 191KW respectively), but it was a strong powerplant at the time...
 
We've got a 128KW version of the 3800 in our Pontiac Grand Prix, and it still has the gusto to outrun quite a few cars. Sure, it doesn't hold a candle to the later versions (147 and 191KW respectively), but it was a strong powerplant at the time...

My Ute has a 130kw/300Nm engine, and the next model after that was an updated engine, the Ecotec. I think they call it 3800 Series II in the US? Anyway, I haven't raced anything in it yet because I haven't been to the drags, but it's supposed to get around a 16sec flat 1/4 mile. I would like a Gem (Gold Star?) bottom end, that sounds sweet.
 
Another camshaft related question.

How do side valves work? Just been talking with Dad, again, and he mentioned them, couldn't find anything on a google and I tried using the term Flathead as they are also known that.

...
 
My Ute isn't the ultimate handler, that's for sure, simply because it is a Ute, but some good driving and winning on every straight can even things out ;)

Camshaft question: When you guys say more lift, does that mean larger lobes that press the valve down further?
 
Might be a stupid question, but on that diagram I see no exhaust valve for the L-Head.

Edit: I just had a scour round that website and have learnt how Diesel engines work and Gas Turbines (far simpler than I thought), 2-cylinder engines also.

It really is a fantastic website.
 
My Ute isn't the ultimate handler, that's for sure, simply because it is a Ute, but some good driving and winning on every straight can even things out ;)

Camshaft question: When you guys say more lift, does that mean larger lobes that press the valve down further?
But how do you expect to win on the straights with a 16 sec 1/4 mile?

And yes, more lift = pressing the valve further.

Yes would have worked as well ;) What does FTW mean?
For the win.
 
Back