Slant Six Forum :: Turbo cam spec's

: I would like to get some ideas from everyone on
: what type of cam specs would work well on a
: slant 6 engine with a turbo. The engine
: would be a street driven car with a mildly
: modified 170 engine. The engine would run
: 20-25 lbs. of intercooled boost with
: electronic fuel injection. I have seen the
: 2.2 turbo Chryslers put out 500+ horsepower
: somewhat reliably with 30psi boost, so I
: feel that the 170 can take almost as much
: boost without damage.(Controlling detonation
: of course!) The compression ratio would be
: in the 8.0:1 range. Doc, do you have any
: experience in this area? Any idea how the
: 2.2L heads flow compared to slant 6 heads?
: The newest issue of High Performance Mopar
: has some flow numbers for reference. The
: spec's I'm looking for is lobe separation
: and lobe centerline and valve overlap
: especially. Thanks

: As you suspect, you do not want a bunch of
: overlap with a turbo, especially if you set
: it up to provide lots of boost at lower
: rpms.
:
: The other consideration is the "zero
: deck" of the 170, are you planning to
: notch the pistons or make some kind of dish
: or trench??
:
: The only 170 turbo I have done used a stock
: engine and a "blow through" 2.2
: turbo on a 2 bbl BBD.
: Spooled-up quick and woud rev to 6000 before
: going "flat" (not enough fuel or
: cfm?? or both?)
:
: Back to the cam, 45-55Âº overlap is about all
: you need and a wide lobe spacing,
: (110-112Âº)should work pretty good but
: realize this is just "ballpark"
: guesstamate stuff, valve clearance needs to
: be worked-out.
: DD

: Doug, I wasn't aware that 170's were zero deck,
: but if that is the case then I would have a
: custom built J&E piston to correct it then.
: I think it would be cheap insurance to
: invest in a set of these when I'm looking at
: a possible 2.5hp per Cubic inch. Back to the
: cam though, I since this will probobly be a
: custom grind, is there a duration and lift
: spec you could recommend? I am suspecting a
: duration of about 225 degrees @.050 lobe
: lift and about .520" net lift. I don't
: know if it is possible to get that much lobe
: lift with that little duration, but I can
: always check with a cam grinder to see.

: Boy, a roller cam would sure help here, much
: faster ramp rates.
: The zero deck 170 is a big issue, it has always
: kept the lifts low on the performance
: Hyper-Pak cams. (the factory Hyper-Pak cam
: was only .440 lift)
: I would say we need to mock this up and take
: some actual measurments, using what ever we
: have around, that would give us a base line
: to work from. Do you have a "big
: lift" cam and a 170 around?
: DD

Author:	Joel Harris [ Wed Aug 15, 2001 9:10 am ]
Post subject:	Turbo cam spec's
I would like to get some ideas from everyone on what type of cam specs would work well on a slant 6 engine with a turbo. The engine would be a street driven car with a mildly modified 170 engine. The engine would run 20-25 lbs. of intercooled boost with electronic fuel injection. I have seen the 2.2 turbo Chryslers put out 500+ horsepower somewhat reliably with 30psi boost, so I feel that the 170 can take almost as much boost without damage.(Controlling detonation of course!) The compression ratio would be in the 8.0:1 range. Doc, do you have any experience in this area? Any idea how the 2.2L heads flow compared to slant 6 heads? The newest issue of High Performance Mopar has some flow numbers for reference. The spec's I'm looking for is lobe separation and lobe centerline and valve overlap especially. Thanks jharri2@fmo.com

Author:	Doctor Dodge (Doug Dutra) [ Wed Aug 15, 2001 8:40 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Turbo cam spec's
Quote: : I would like to get some ideas from everyone on : what type of cam specs would work well on a : slant 6 engine with a turbo. The engine : would be a street driven car with a mildly : modified 170 engine. The engine would run : 20-25 lbs. of intercooled boost with : electronic fuel injection. I have seen the : 2.2 turbo Chryslers put out 500+ horsepower : somewhat reliably with 30psi boost, so I : feel that the 170 can take almost as much : boost without damage.(Controlling detonation : of course!) The compression ratio would be : in the 8.0:1 range. Doc, do you have any : experience in this area? Any idea how the : 2.2L heads flow compared to slant 6 heads? : The newest issue of High Performance Mopar : has some flow numbers for reference. The : spec's I'm looking for is lobe separation : and lobe centerline and valve overlap : especially. Thanks As you suspect, you do not want a bunch of overlap with a turbo, especially if you set it up to provide lots of boost at lower rpms. The other consideration is the "zero deck" of the 170, are you planning to notch the pistons or make some kind of dish or trench?? The only 170 turbo I have done used a stock engine and a "blow through" 2.2 turbo on a 2 bbl BBD. Spooled-up quick and woud rev to 6000 before going "flat" (not enough fuel or cfm?? or both?) Back to the cam, 45-55Âº overlap is about all you need and a wide lobe spacing, (110-112Âº)should work pretty good but realize this is just "ballpark" guesstamate stuff, valve clearance needs to be worked-out. DD

Author:	Joel Harris [ Thu Aug 16, 2001 7:32 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Turbo cam spec's
Quote: : As you suspect, you do not want a bunch of : overlap with a turbo, especially if you set : it up to provide lots of boost at lower : rpms. : : The other consideration is the "zero : deck" of the 170, are you planning to : notch the pistons or make some kind of dish : or trench?? : : The only 170 turbo I have done used a stock : engine and a "blow through" 2.2 : turbo on a 2 bbl BBD. : Spooled-up quick and woud rev to 6000 before : going "flat" (not enough fuel or : cfm?? or both?) : : Back to the cam, 45-55Âº overlap is about all : you need and a wide lobe spacing, : (110-112Âº)should work pretty good but : realize this is just "ballpark" : guesstamate stuff, valve clearance needs to : be worked-out. : DD Doug, I wasn't aware that 170's were zero deck, but if that is the case then I would have a custom built J&E piston to correct it then. I think it would be cheap insurance to invest in a set of these when I'm looking at a possible 2.5hp per Cubic inch. Back to the cam though, I since this will probobly be a custom grind, is there a duration and lift spec you could recommend? I am suspecting a duration of about 225 degrees @.050 lobe lift and about .520" net lift. I don't know if it is possible to get that much lobe lift with that little duration, but I can always check with a cam grinder to see. joelharris@fmo.com

Author:	Doc [ Thu Aug 16, 2001 11:41 am ]
Post subject:	Re: 170 Turbo, cam spec's
Quote: : Doug, I wasn't aware that 170's were zero deck, : but if that is the case then I would have a : custom built J&E piston to correct it then. : I think it would be cheap insurance to : invest in a set of these when I'm looking at : a possible 2.5hp per Cubic inch. Back to the : cam though, I since this will probobly be a : custom grind, is there a duration and lift : spec you could recommend? I am suspecting a : duration of about 225 degrees @.050 lobe : lift and about .520" net lift. I don't : know if it is possible to get that much lobe : lift with that little duration, but I can : always check with a cam grinder to see. Boy, a roller cam would sure help here, much faster ramp rates. The zero deck 170 is a big issue, it has always kept the lifts low on the performance Hyper-Pak cams. (the factory Hyper-Pak cam was only .440 lift) I would say we need to mock this up and take some actual measurments, using what ever we have around, that would give us a base line to work from. Do you have a "big lift" cam and a 170 around? DD

Author:	Smith [ Thu Aug 16, 2001 12:25 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Turbo cam spec's
What are the specs for the 2.2 turbo motor cam? Based on the close size of the cylinder bore and stroke of the 2.2's and the 170/198 motors, the cams for a turbo slant could work using the 2.2 specs. Mopar Performance had all the hardware for a 300 hp 2.2, so is a 450 hp slant 3.3 litre (200 cid) motor possible? Seems unlikely. The ports in a head on the 2.2 must be better than the slant 6 for flow rates, as the 2.2 was designed in the late '70s early '80s for fairly good performance, low fuel use and low smog. Any way, the 2.2 turbo cams may be a good starting point. By the way the fastest day to day car I ever had was a 1985 Omni GLH turbo with the "off-road" computer. Went 175,000 miles on the original head and turbo but eat 3 transmissions and 3 head gaskets. It was great for blowing off Firebirds and early 5.0 Mustangs. sgw041454@aol.com

Slant Six Forum https://slantsix.org/forum/

Turbo cam spec's https://slantsix.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2561	Page 1 of 1

Author:	Joel Harris [ Fri Aug 17, 2001 8:46 am ]
Post subject:	Re: 170 Turbo, cam spec's
Quote: : Boy, a roller cam would sure help here, much : faster ramp rates. : The zero deck 170 is a big issue, it has always : kept the lifts low on the performance : Hyper-Pak cams. (the factory Hyper-Pak cam : was only .440 lift) : I would say we need to mock this up and take : some actual measurments, using what ever we : have around, that would give us a base line : to work from. Do you have a "big : lift" cam and a 170 around? : DD I don't have either at the moment. I like to build these things on paper first before I start buying any parts. I don't really thin I will have to worry too much about piston to valve clearance. You can correct me on this if I a wrong but I could just have valve releifs cut in a J&E piston so I wouldn't have to worry about a near zero deck piston in this. The only valve clearance issue I could see is valve to cylinder bore clearance, and if I keep the valve size to 1.75" max on the intake in a .100" overbore I don't think it will be an issue. In the last issue of High Performance Mopar, there is a flow bench test on 2.2L mopar heads. Do you know how far off these spec's are compared to the slant six heads at the same lifts? I have never seen any flow numbers on a slant head before. I appreciate your previous responses.

Page 1 of 1	All times are UTC-07:00
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited https://www.phpbb.com/