Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Photobucket
Welcome to Mercedes-190.co.uk

We are the Mercedes 190 owners forum, the place to be for all owners and fans of the Mercedes 190E, 190 and 190D cars. Including Cosworth (2.3 16v and 2.5 16v), EVO 1 and EVO 2 models. Modified and concourse, track cars and daily drivers, all are welcome.

This free UK based forum was started back in November 2005 to serve the Mercedes 190 W201 community and now has over 9000 members from all around the world and 600,000 + posts.

The members welcome you and encourage you to stay a while and have a look around.
We offer you friendly chat and access to some very useful information as well as tutorials with photos and videos for many common repair and maintenance jobs.
Whatever your needs there is a good chance you will be able to find what your looking for. Such as our Mercedes 190 buyers guide

Sign up to gain access to all areas including for sale / classified areas and country wide meetings and events. Many forum features and sections are only available once you sign up.

Join our forum at mercedes-190.co.uk!

If you're already a member please log in to your account:

**New members signing up**
please check your junk mail for the email authorization email
otherwise we cannot verify your new account.
I have noticed a lot of unauthorized accounts in the system.
Regards
Admin

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Cam Follower Travel
Topic Started: Mon Aug 10, 2009 1:48 pm (1,027 Views)
The Gorilla
Part of things
[ *  * ]
Hi,

Does anybody know the distance travelled
by the cam follower in the head, from
the valve fully open to full closed
please ?

I do not have a spare head here at the moment
they are both at the machine shop for work.

I was looking to see if some weight can be
removed out of the reciprocating mass of the
valve Train by having the Cam follower skirts
cut down, as well as already looking into lighter valve
retainers, with of course lighter dual springs.

Out of interest, has anybody ever weighed a
2.3 or 2.5 16v Exhaust Manifold [Header] !!!

No wonder they are always cracking, its the
bloody weight of themselves trying to rip the
head studs out that must cause the cracking.

No wonder the Evo's are quicker, their not hauling
all that steel plate about.

I have drilled numerous holes, thinned down the
mounting lugs, and am going to have the
main face plate skimmed down a few mill
which should help the poor old exhaust studs a
little, if nothing else.

Regards,

The Gorilla.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
feoffle
Member Avatar
Part of things
[ *  * ]
If you're going for lightweight valvespring retainers, a word of warning regarding titanium ones.

The quality can vary a great deal, and dependant upon the manufacturing and material quality, can cause big trouble.

I have specially coated ones, but many being naked titanium, wear quite quickly against the steel valvesprings, which eventually lead to the retainer breaking, dropping a valve and then catastrophic engine failure.

You may be aware already, but many people aren't, and are then amazed at 15,000miles into using them, having a destroyed motor.

Sorry for going off-topic.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
matsalleh76
Matsalleh76. RIP. Gone But Never Forgotten.
[ *  * ]

Gor,

Unless something has changed, follower travel is determined by and can not exceed cam shaft valve lift. Most cam manufacturer's published specs indicate lift at a certain lash, so maximum follower travel would be published lift plus that lash.......although running that way is not to be recommended.

Photos of your lightened exhaust manifold, please.

Cheers,
bobf.
Edited by matsalleh76, Mon Aug 10, 2009 2:16 pm.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
The Gorilla
Part of things
[ *  * ]
Hi,

Feoffle- Thanks for that. I was looking into hard anodized
alloy ones which I am told are a little better ?

Matsalleh76- I was hoping that there was a +/- no matter what
cam lift, if that makes sense, so that I could have the
skirts cut down by 'X' and be able to swap cams without
issues.

5.5mm of lift would be about max I guess.

The Header is at the same shop as the heads, for
its skimming of the steel face plate, and when back will
post a pic.

I was also looking into how best to ditch the
heavy steel rings that locate the primaries to
the plate. They are like boat anchors.

Even the 'under' and 'over' supports onto the
tubes from the face plate are 10mm steel !!!

Regards,

The Gorilla.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
RobertE
Member Avatar
Serial victim...
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Yes, I've just weighed my spare 2.3 manifold (albeit rather crudely) - 14 lbs - and that is after having the wretched thing skimmed. So, point taken!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
matsalleh76
Matsalleh76. RIP. Gone But Never Forgotten.
[ *  * ]
Gor,

How did you get the 5.5mm max lift number?

Lift on the 2.3-16 and 2.5-16/EVO-1 are 9mm and 10mm respectively. The EVO-2 is 11mm (int) and 10mm (exh).

CATCAMS produces 16V camshafts with up to 13.5mm lift and recommends using Merc followers and their own special valve springs & retainers with same. If you need springs and retainers I would go to them as a proven source-Vs-going to a un-proven although well meaning alternate solution.

No disrespect to anyone's effort or ability intended but I would shy away from becoming part of the "trial" of a component as critical as valve retainers.

bobf.
Edited by matsalleh76, Tue Aug 11, 2009 1:55 am.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
alogaparaloga
Member Avatar
crazy mind
[ *  *  * ]
The Gorilla
Mon Aug 10, 2009 1:48 pm
Hi,

Does anybody know the distance travelled
by the cam follower in the head, from
the valve fully open to full closed
please ?

I do not have a spare head here at the moment
they are both at the machine shop for work.

I was looking to see if some weight can be
removed out of the reciprocating mass of the
valve Train by having the Cam follower skirts
cut down, as well as already looking into lighter valve
retainers, with of course lighter dual springs.
Hi Gorilla,

I would advice you not to cut down the cam follower skirt at all.
If you cut the skirt you are going to increase the wear in the bore, due to the misalignment that will be present during compression.
Think about piston and cylinder wear. Piston with long skirt has more friction but shows less wear on the cylinder walls while short skirted pistons have less frictions but wear the cylinders quite fast.
You could drill the follower skirt to remove material. this will reduce mass and friction. but to finish the job properly it is required to deburr the holes and polish the external surface of the skirt.

Are you using roller cam assemblies, is this allowed for your car (maybe race regulations)
If possible I would look for roller assembly modification. that save a respectable amount of friction.

Good luck with it.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
The Gorilla
Part of things
[ *  * ]
Hi,

Matsalleh76- The Dbilas 316 duration cams have
5.3 of lift at TDC, the only thing I do not like is that
it makes the engine very peaky and Cammy.

Great on the Track, absolute pig on the road in Traffic.

Still investigating, although on the Valve retainers,
Hard Alloy with Hard Anodizing has been used to
great success.

Alogaparaloga- Your point is well made, but I was never
intending to have them machined off in a straight line,
more like a piston skirt.

Roller cam is like re-inventing the wheel for this engine,
its std component make up is very good but I am trying to
make small gains on the parts retained.

Regards,

The Gorilla.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
JM Motorsport
Member Avatar
More than part of things
[ *  *  * ]
Just a correction 990 and 991 engines both have 10mm, only the 992 (EVO 2) has 11mm (Intake).

As for the manifolds, im not really with you, but both 990, 991 and 992 share the same exhaust manifolds, but perhaps i misinterpreted you?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
RobertE
Member Avatar
Serial victim...
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Just weighed the LHD exhaust manifold (2,3-16) and it was 10 lbs on the same measure. Q. a big difference!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
alogaparaloga
Member Avatar
crazy mind
[ *  *  * ]
The Gorilla
Mon Aug 10, 2009 4:28 pm

Alogaparaloga- Your point is well made, but I was never
intending to have them machined off in a straight line,
more like a piston skirt.
Consider that the followers are allowed to rotate in the bore in order to reduce wear, and to make wear more uniform.
So you have to think about the skirt shape. Probably a design divided into 4 or more sections (legs) so some force balance is maintained.

Additionally, I believe that this material is hardened through its depth so special tools will be required to give you the proper finish.
It's a big job that needs to be well planed as you need repeatability of the process so as all the followers are identical.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
The Gorilla
Part of things
[ *  * ]
Hi,

JM Motorsport - you LHD guys do not suffer the
RHD Exhaust Manifold and all its additional
steel bracing and the weight.

The weight of them is quite astounding
for what is supposed to be a tubular S/S
Manifold.

Anybody have a Pic and the weight of the Evo
Header please ?

While on the subject of the Evo, does anybody
know the differences between the 2.5 Head and
the the Evo Head please ?

Is it just the porting or is there more ?

Regards,

The Gorilla.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
matsalleh76
Matsalleh76. RIP. Gone But Never Forgotten.
[ *  * ]
Gor,

Don't take this wrong, no offense intended, but you can answer many of your own questions by researching EPC, WIS, and known internet sources/vendors.

Try it, get knowledgeable, then post the questions that are not answered, we will suck our brains to answer them for you.

Better still, get knowledgeable and post info that may not be known.

Cheers,
bobf.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
The Gorilla
Part of things
[ *  * ]
Hi,

Matsalleh76- Us Primates have much thicker skin
than that. No offense meant or taken.

I can understand how it might appear,
but there is so much mis-information out there.

You are much better asking people who know via
their own experince and endavor than some so
called 'facts' that are third hand prior to print.

And for sure it get irritating when a ''newbie''
appears and starts asking lots of questions
that some of you guys take for granted.

The truth is that most of the best kept secerets
are just that.

With regards searching hours for information that
some have at their fingertips is part of the reason
for Forums such as this one is it not ?

You yourself only the other day learnt of the Evo
11 reverting to a single chain due to discussion
on aspects of other modification.

You have to keep kicking the boundaries otherwise
some of this stuff is so taken for granted it just
dissappears.

Regards,

The Gorilla.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
JM Motorsport
Member Avatar
More than part of things
[ *  *  * ]
My 2.5 header is lying in the garage i can weigh it and get some pics for you. As for the Evo head, there are differences even between the 1 and 2 heads, im at work now but i can scan a few pictures from the Service manuals for the EVO 1 and 2 when i get back home.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Chris Martens
Member Avatar
Part of things
[ *  * ]
As bob wrote, maximum travel of the buckets is equal maximum lift of the cam (minus the lash).
That is 9mm / 10mm / 11mm with Mercedes cams.

The buckets are designed to rotate during operation...
Bucket weight is small compared to the weight of the respective S14 parts:

bucket (S14 / M102) 53g / 42g
shim (S14 / M102) 25g / 4g

EVO header is the same as for the standard header from 2.5-16 RHD LHD, EVO II header has the same design but is ported.
Race headers are totally different.

Concerning the thickness of different primate's skin - I too would love to see results from your work. :P

regards,
Christian

Edited by Chris Martens, Tue Aug 11, 2009 12:06 pm.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
The Gorilla
Part of things
[ *  * ]
Hi,

JM Motorsport- thank you that would be really helpful.

I was just trying to see if any other gains to the head
could be made, simply, or if the Evo Head had any
master elements to it.

Chris Martens- my reason for looking to reduce a little
weight from the buckets was that I was going to use
lash caps which add more weight on.

Its a primate thing, but you must first take weight
away before you can add it.

I am starting to think that 4 or 6 offset holes in the
buckets might be the easiest solution. So as they rotate in
situ, there is no common wear path that evolves.

I have pictures, specs, etc of DTM Inconnel Header
which Dennis kindly plotted out the stud diemensions.

I have also reserved a DTM Inconnel Header but am thinking
that opening up and matching the ports on the
2.5 16 v RHD Header might be an easier route,
for the car being RHD. Will see.

I do not think that a RHD 2.5 16v header will be the
same as the Evo Header ?, as its RHD v LHD, and thus
the flow pattern of the LHD Manifold in being superior
to that of RHD car would surely not have been used ?

I was of the belief that the RHD headers swept up and
the LHD swept down, reason being the steering box ?

The Guy who use to work at Longman Engineering,
back in the good old days of Patrick Motorsport and
Mini 1275 Gts winning the BTCC ala Richard Longman, and do
a lot of their Head work, has undertaking porting on
the Head mainly the exhaust ports, where he has opened up
the ports and removed as much of the 'ridge' in the
exhaust port tunnel for improved exhaust gas flow out,
and he also wants to polish again the bottoms of the
intake ports and leave the tops course,
so as assist with the intake vortex.

I will not be using Merc Cams, either Dbilas or Cat,
and the Dbilas Rally spec cams look interesting,
as I would guess more lower down Torque as well
as lowering the engine power band which is
good for a car that does see road use.

Thanks for the S14 comparission weights.

When I get a little further on then I will post up some
pics.

Regards,

The Gorilla.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
feoffle
Member Avatar
Part of things
[ *  * ]
Someone please correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought rocker-arm valve train had a multiplication factor for valve lift.

i.e. Cam lift * 1.xx = Valve lift.

where 1.xx is the factor that the rocker arm applies on the valve
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Chris Martens
Member Avatar
Part of things
[ *  * ]
Danny,

>Chris Martens- my reason for looking to reduce a little
>weight from the buckets was that I was going to use
>lash caps which add more weight on.

why would I do that?

>I do not think that a RHD 2.5 16v header will be the
>same as the Evo Header ?

Sorry, my fault, the EVO header is the same as of the 2.5-16 LHD (continental version ;) )
I have corrected my above posting.

Dbilas is not known for his long lasting high quality cams in Germany... :'(
Stick with the Cat.

regards,
Christian
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Chris Martens
Member Avatar
Part of things
[ *  * ]
feoffle
Tue Aug 11, 2009 11:30 am
Someone please correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought rocker-arm valve train had a multiplication factor for valve lift.
there are no rocker arms in these Cosworth heads, just the cam lobe and the bucket.

Therefore lobe hight is equal bucket travel.

regards,
Christian
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
JM Motorsport
Member Avatar
More than part of things
[ *  *  * ]
Hello Christian are the Dbilas cams really that bad? I have always thought it was the other way around?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
feoffle
Member Avatar
Part of things
[ *  * ]
Chris Martens
Tue Aug 11, 2009 12:12 pm
feoffle
Tue Aug 11, 2009 11:30 am
Someone please correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought rocker-arm valve train had a multiplication factor for valve lift.
there are no rocker arms in these Cosworth heads, just the cam lobe and the bucket.

Therefore lobe hight is equal bucket travel.

regards,
Christian
Werd.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
The Gorilla
Part of things
[ *  * ]
Hi,

Guys this was my very point earlier on
about kicking down the boundaries.

I was always lead to believe by 'others'
and what had been written on the Net etc,
that the Dbilas cams were harder than Cat ?

I know Cat have changed their material specs etc.

I have no personal experince of either, but it
would be nice to know what the general
concensus is and why ?

Chris Martens- the higher up the rev band
you go for prolonged periods you increase the chance of
the valve stems 'mushrooming'' hence lash
caps will help assist with this.

I am no Race Engineer but I have listened
to what some Race Engineers say, its the
attention to the small details that are often
overlooked that results in the main components
suffering increased fatigue and failure.

If you can drill a few holes or shave some
weight of something, broadly speaking, which does not effect
its performance and reduces weight and stress,
then why not ?

For sure, my efforts may well not make any significant
gains, but if I do not try I am never going to know.
Primates thrive by being outside the box, not in it.

Regards,

The Gorilla.




Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
RobertE
Member Avatar
Serial victim...
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
I understood that the materials used by both CatCams and Dbilas was a similar grade of chilled iron but I read a winge on another forum that the latter were not all they were cracked up to be due to excessive wear. This was on a diesel forum, I should say, so we're probably looking at a different grade of metal altogether; I imagine a carbon steel.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
jeremy
Member Avatar
Too Far Gone To Help
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
I wish I could enjoy this thread ,
It is so way above my head,
Which ever way its read,
My brain hurts, I'm off to bed .

Jeremy. 56 1/2 years old.


Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Neil
Newbie
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Roffle at Jezza, I feel the same

:ehh: :ehh: :ehh:
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Chris Martens
Member Avatar
Part of things
[ *  * ]
I don't have personal experience neither with Dbilas nor CatCam.
But as the Gorilla said, others have told me...
Just ask Atec Motoren or Thorsten Stadler what they recommend or use.

cams... the whole topic is a lot more than max. lift and a hardend surface.
Jesper "Racing" wrote a lot on this, just dig in the old threads.

Danny,

I thought lash buckets are the same as hydraulic lifters? Seems to be wrong.
ok.
Do you really need some kind of protection glove at the valve stem?
I've never heard of this.
Is this often used in the bimmer world?

You're absolutely right with this 'attention to small details' but on the other hand, you do have a budget I suppose? :)
To reduce weight AND stress by 'drilling a few holes' should be discussed with that named race engineer.

regards,
Christian
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
The Gorilla
Part of things
[ *  * ]
Hi,

RobertE- I think the problem with the Cam shafts
is that people have preffered preferences and everything
else is 'no good' or 'not up to it' no matter what.

Trying to obtain an impartial view on something now days
is almost impossible.

Chris Martens- Budget, ha ha, more like financial stress.

I have done a lot of digging on the Cams hence the
questions and probing about them,

'Racing' implied on more than a couple of occassions that Dbilas was good,
hard German Metal, after somebody had suggested that
Cat were on the soft side, and then I guy I know, just a little, has
run the Cat Cams in his Honda S2000 Track Car, and swears by them ?

It was also suggested to me that within Cat Cams there is
a Racing Camshaft department offering differing lifts
profiles and duration etc.

All I will say is, metal hardness aside, the duration on
some of the Cat Cams is interesting.

Regards,

The Gorilla.





Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
feoffle
Member Avatar
Part of things
[ *  * ]
Who are "Cat cams" exactly?

I've never before heard of people changing out cams in an S2000, even from the top tuning houses in Japan, as it's mostly considered a waste of time. I'd be interested to hear more on the subject.

But one thing people fail to realise with cams, they're not a mod where you can just throw them in and expect to make power. They're very dependant on supporting mods, and very much work as a a part of a 'system'.

Some people will make crap power with the exact same set of cams another person made 15whp+ more with.

"One mans junk is another mans treasure."

Compression ratio, cam timing/duration/lift/valve overlap, exhaust manifold design, exhaust diameter, throttle body diameter. ALL of these have to be taken into account as one.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
The Gorilla
Part of things
[ *  * ]
Hi,

Feoffle- www.catcams.be

The Guy with the S2000 said that the Cat Cams
gave more mid grunt but no more real power.

I think some of the Escort Mk 1/2 Rally Guys
who were running S2000 Engines also had
some better mid band power from the Cat
Cams.

Rule Changes for 2010 means no more S2000
in Ford Escorts.

Regards,

The Gorilla.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
feoffle
Member Avatar
Part of things
[ *  * ]
Ah ok.

I'm sure the Primary and Secondary lobes were made more aggressive to improve mid-range, possibly leaving the Mid alone.

On a road car this isn't really feasible, as it has penalties with fuel economy under normal driving conditions and a poor idle. Not an issue on race-only engines.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Free Forums. Reliable service with over 8 years of experience.
« Previous Topic · Engine · Next Topic »
Add Reply


Email me if anyone replys