Hadn't heard that about the cam. Could explain why I don't get a punch
until late in second gear, then third and fouth. Since I am not worried
about off the line performance, I won't worry about it until an engine
rebuild way in the future (I hope!). Any idea if it hurts the
acceleration in higher gears/RPMs?
Joe Burlein
On Thu, 18 Nov 1999 09:30:54 -0600 Erik Quackenbush
<erik@midwestfilter.com> writes:
> I'm not an expert by any means, but everything I've read suggests
> that if
> you're going with forced induction you're better off with a stock
> camshaft
> instead of a high performance cam. As I understand it, with the
> supercharger forcing the charge into the engine you don't need the
> extra
> duration or valve lift to feed it, so you're basically giving up low
> end
> smoothness and torque for no reason. I suppose a cam grind with
> stock
> intake lobes and performance exhaust (the supercharger doesn't pull
> exhaust
> gas OUT of the cylinders) lobes would be an improvement, but I've
> never
> heard of anyone doing that.
>
> -Erik (who's been toying with the idea of supercharging his
> winter-driver
> station wagon)
>
> At 11:20 PM 11/17/99 -0500, Joseph J Burlein wrote:
> >
> >A lot of people have asked about my engine etc.
> >
> >The engine was rebuilt about three years and three thousand miles
> ago.
> >(It was a weekend driver up until about three weeks ago, but, that
> is
> >another story) The only mod I know of is a Crane Cam that is
> between
> >stock and race. I know, a huge gap, but, that is best I can do.
> If
> >anyone is really interest, I can dig out the spec sheet and tell
> you the
> >regrind number and intake/exhaust clearences (18 and 20 I think).
> The
> >rest is a fully spec engine. I've been told that you want as stock
> a
> >head as possibly with (I hope I get this right) low compression
> (ie:
> >don't shave the head). The blower need volume to work with, so the
> >bigger the better. (As for the rest of the car, Falcon SS sport
> exhaust,
> >ss headers from Rimmer. The header sounds great but may be dinging
> >performance. Don't know yet).
> >
> >The blower is an M-62 (for 2.5 to 4.0 liter cars) Eaton from
> Magnuson.
> >
> >The kit (minus carb) came from Peter Boucher of Vintage Induction
> >Systems. He had one already made up, so it came quick. I don't
> know if
> >he has anymore left or not.
> >
> >The car is a 1972 (build date, Oct 71) TR-6 with somewhere around
> 50K (if
> >you believe DMV) on the clock. Overdrive included.
> >
> >Keep the questions coming. Pics to go out the CFTR website after
> >Thanksgiving to give everyone an idea of what the kit looks like in
> >production versus the one in British Car Magazine.
> >
> >Joe
> >
> >On Wed, 17 Nov 1999 21:28:41 -0800 "Jack Clark" <molars@home.com>
> writes:
> >> Hey Joe,
> >> I am green with envy!! What year is your six?
> >> Did you rebuild the engine, or do anything nonstock to the engine
>
> >> prior to
> >> installing the blower?
> >> i.e porting the head, using headers, ...
> >> Also, have you tried the faster pulley? I have been debating
> doing
> >> this for
> >> some time now, but
> >> have not heard any feedback from anyone who has done it. Also,
> how
> >> long did
> >> it take to get the kit from Pete, and the blower from Magnuson?
> >> Sorry for
> >> all the questions, but I want know as much about it as possible
> >> before I
> >> sink the 2k!
> >>
> >> Thanks in advance,
> >> Jack 74 TR6
> >>
> >>
> >
> >Joe Burlein
> >72 TR-6
> >Melbourne, FL
> >
> >Real cars are designed to carry only two people, anything else is
> just a
> >bus.
> >
>
> --
> Erik Quackenbush, V.P. Operations, Midwest Filter Corporation
> 1-847-680-0566 fax: 1-847-680-0832 http://www.midwestfilter.com
>
>
Joe Burlein
72 TR-6
Melbourne, FL
Real cars are designed to carry only two people, anything else is just a
bus.
|