[oldman]

I will mention this also, the Viper cam in a cam design can bring another 5 to 10 % more torque, fuel economy, and HP to the OHV engine, so while DOHC engines have lots of money spent on them, there is technology that can bring even more competitiveness to the OHV, that being variable valve overlap. So the demise of the OHV maybe longer than people think. Me, I'm comfortable either way.

[whiteboyblues2001]

Originally Posted by oldman

I will mention this also, the Viper cam in a cam design can bring another 5 to 10 % more torque, fuel economy, and HP to the OHV engine, so while DOHC engines have lots of money spent on them, there is technology that can bring even more competitiveness to the OHV, that being variable valve overlap. So the demise of the OHV maybe longer than people think. Me, I'm comfortable either way.

I would love to see this technolgy more widespread on pusrod engines (DOHC already has independant cams as I'm sure you are aware).

But, I would love to see things go camless. They are researching using solonoid acuators for the valves instead of a cam. Once they do this it will unlock a bunch more torque and efficiency to the ICE, as you aren't tied to one specific camshaft profile. The computer can open/close the valves in any manner as needed on the fly...

[ILBMF]

I'm with you on going camless. I'd like to see this technology in development.

[oldman]

I think we should protect the endangered cams. Protect the cam... stop the camless, hedonist all. You can pry my cam out of my cold dead hands.
http://chryslercorporationllc.blogsp...am-in-cam.html

Of course, this almost 90 HP gain has some supporting mods... but clearly it kicks &ss.

[Spartan268]

Originally Posted by oldman

I think we should protect the endangered cams. Protect the cam... stop the camless, hedonist all. You can pry my cam out of my cold dead hands.
http://chryslercorporationllc.blogsp...am-in-cam.html

Of course, this almost 90 HP gain has some supporting mods... but clearly it kicks &ss.

Is cam in cam a thing now? The article is dated 2007. I would expected cars to be using it by now unless it's just being saved as a next gen thing for who knows how long.

[oldman]

Originally Posted by Spartan268

Is cam in cam a thing now? The article is dated 2007. I would expected cars to be using it by now unless it's just being saved as a next gen thing for who knows how long.

The only usage that I know of was the Viper for 90 horse gain. This is not expensive tech, and the gm phaser probably could be used out of the box, I'm pointing out that GM could use this for leap forward that OHC currently can't match.... obviously talking about cheap power gain, as we all know OHC already feature VVT overlap

[whiteboyblues2001]

Originally Posted by oldman

The only usage that I know of was the Viper for 90 horse gain. This is not expensive tech, and the gm phaser probably could be used out of the box, I'm pointing out that GM could use this for leap forward that OHC currently can't match.... obviously talking about cheap power gain, as we all know OHC already feature VVT overlap

I am really surprised that this hasn't trickled down into other OHC engines, especially ones from FCA like the HEMI's. There must be some reason I can't think of, because it isn't terribly complicated.

But camless will significanly better. VVT with or without cam-in-cam design only lets you vary the timing between the crankshaft and camshaft. So you can delay the valve operation or advance the valve operation. But the valves still move to the same height and open and close in the same manner. With solonoid driven valves, they are run by a computer. The computer can chose to open early and close late, or open late and close early (something a VVT can't do). It can also vary the amount the valve opens, and they can do so separatly for each piston for each combustion. This will also simplify cylider deactivation, since you don't need additional mechanical devices to in the valve train to shut down a cylinder. The computer can just choose to not open the valves. Which again, makes dynamie skip-fire even more efficient as well.

And think of this... If you want a bigger cam in a traditional engine, you have to tear the engine down and replace the cam. With camless, you just apply a new tune that makes the computer open the valves as though you had a more agressive cam. AND, I can envision where you can have a mild cam-like settins for daily driving, but flip a switch and BOOM, you now have a big lopy like cam (virtually of course). It would be like have an infinate number of cam shafts available at any time, and the computer can switch every millisecond if need be...

[oldman]

Originally Posted by whiteboyblues2001

I am really surprised that this hasn't trickled down into other OHC engines, especially ones from FCA like the HEMI's. There must be some reason I can't think of, because it isn't terribly complicated.

But camless will significanly better. VVT with or without cam-in-cam design only lets you vary the timing between the crankshaft and camshaft. So you can delay the valve operation or advance the valve operation. But the valves still move to the same height and open and close in the same manner. With solonoid driven valves, they are run by a computer. The computer can chose to open early and close late, or open late and close early (something a VVT can't do). It can also vary the amount the valve opens, and they can do so separatly for each piston for each combustion. This will also simplify cylider deactivation, since you don't need additional mechanical devices to in the valve train to shut down a cylinder. The computer can just choose to not open the valves. Which again, makes dynamie skip-fire even more efficient as well.

And think of this... If you want a bigger cam in a traditional engine, you have to tear the engine down and replace the cam. With camless, you just apply a new tune that makes the computer open the valves as though you had a more agressive cam. AND, I can envision where you can have a mild cam-like settins for daily driving, but flip a switch and BOOM, you now have a big lopy like cam (virtually of course). It would be like have an infinate number of cam shafts available at any time, and the computer can switch every millisecond if need be...

VANOS, can vary lift and duration from nil to huge, needing no TB.




I not only race a Type R with VTEC, the wife / kids race a Mini with BMW's 2.0 VANOS / Valvetronic can go from idle to huge lifts and duration with no TB, the engine is phenomenal, and fuel economy is also VERY good.

As an aside, in the LS1 days, gm was looking at two cams in the block one for the intake and one for the exhaust....

[Rayvan]

Originally Posted by shaffe

While cool

1. I doubt it ever finds its way into anything else other than trucks,

2. I don't get it, If I am getting a heavy duty truck and springing for an optional engine I am getting the diesel

In California, we're forced to use "low sulfur diesel" that's hell on diesel injector$ and pump$ (You should see the prices on those). and good luck even finding a place that can work on them when (not if) they need replacement.
No way in hell I'd get anything diesel, if I had to drive it in this God-forsaken state.

[lightsOUT]

Originally Posted by Rayvan

In California, we're forced to use "low sulfur diesel" that's hell on diesel injector$ and pump$ (You should see the prices on those). and good luck even finding a place that can work on them when (not if) they need replacement.
No way in hell I'd get anything diesel, if I had to drive it in this God-forsaken state.

All diesel fuel in the US is ULSD and has been since 2010.

[hotlap]

Originally Posted by lightsOUT

All diesel fuel in the US is ULSD and has been since 2010.

ULtra low sulfur diesel has been in the US since late 2006 when the particulate filters came for MY 2007. The addition of DEF (diesel emission fluid) for the SCR system that reduces NOx came in 2010.

California has it bad because all the older diesel engines are forced to be updated to 2010 emissions or they must leave the state

[oldman]

NOx is needed to fertilizer plants and any give strorm produces far more NOx in the same region vs engines, which is an integral part of the rain / plant / growth system. Just saying.

[lightsOUT]

Originally Posted by hotlap

ULtra low sulfur diesel has been in the US since late 2006 when the particulate filters came for MY 2007. The addition of DEF (diesel emission fluid) for the SCR system that reduces NOx came in 2010.

California has it bad because all the older diesel engines are forced to be updated to 2010 emissions or they must leave the state

You’re right for on-highway use. Between 2007 and 2010 it was still legal to use LSD for off-highway applications.

[cmitchell17]

Originally Posted by whiteboyblues2001

I am really surprised that this hasn't trickled down into other OHC engines, especially ones from FCA like the HEMI's. There must be some reason I can't think of, because it isn't terribly complicated.

But camless will significanly better. VVT with or without cam-in-cam design only lets you vary the timing between the crankshaft and camshaft. So you can delay the valve operation or advance the valve operation. But the valves still move to the same height and open and close in the same manner. With solonoid driven valves, they are run by a computer. The computer can chose to open early and close late, or open late and close early (something a VVT can't do). It can also vary the amount the valve opens, and they can do so separatly for each piston for each combustion. This will also simplify cylider deactivation, since you don't need additional mechanical devices to in the valve train to shut down a cylinder. The computer can just choose to not open the valves. Which again, makes dynamie skip-fire even more efficient as well.

And think of this... If you want a bigger cam in a traditional engine, you have to tear the engine down and replace the cam. With camless, you just apply a new tune that makes the computer open the valves as though you had a more agressive cam. AND, I can envision where you can have a mild cam-like settins for daily driving, but flip a switch and BOOM, you now have a big lopy like cam (virtually of course). It would be like have an infinate number of cam shafts available at any time, and the computer can switch every millisecond if need be...

Probably will be that the PCM/ECM will be completely locked and not tunable the way things are headed.