Custom cam, or waste of time?

[joemohio]

Has anyone bought a cam from these people?
http://www.camcraftcams.com/index2.html
I was thinking about getting one for my 93 3.0 4x4 hoping to get some more power below 3000 rpm. Do I have to do anything to the computer?

 

[Wicked_Sludge]

a custom ground cam would be THE way to lower the 3.0's power band.

any particular reason 3,000 rpm hurts your motor?

 

[joemohio]

I dont think it hurts it, It just would be nice to get some power below that. If I rev it up to 3,000 or more and dump the clutch its awsome,lays some rubber down. If your doing anything but that then it sucks to drive. I just dont know what ford was thinking when they put the 3.0 in the trucks. It has to be the biggest turd off the line. I was hoping to get a little more out of it at lower rpm with a cam swap, hopefully helping on hills at 55-65 mph which would be around 2,000 or so.

 

[Wicked_Sludge]

downshift.

having your peak torque above 3500 rpm only hurts you between 0 and 15 miles an hour or so. after that, use your gearing to keep the rpms where they need to be and it will perform the same as it would if you had a much lower powerband. highway driving is actually where an engine like the 3.0 shines (think about it, its a sedan engine...and where do sedans spend all their time?)...you just need to not be afraid to downshift and kick the rpms up for hills, passing, merging, ect.

on top of that, bringing the powerband down will likely lower your peak power output...meaning the engine will ultimately be slower than it is now. the 3.0 already puts out a very good power curve for what it is....it makes almost 85% of the engines peak torque at 2,000 rpm....you probably wont be able to increase that number much.

im not trying to talk you out of a new cam...i just want to make sure you understand that i dont think it will give you the result your looking for.

 

[almostclueless]

I believe a lot of people would prefer their truck not have to be revved.....and not have to slip the clutch more taking off or use more gears.



I've never seen anything else wrong with the 3.0 other than the higher torque peak. I don't see why cam timings aimed at a lower rpm peak torque wouldnt work.


The max torque and HP numbers frequently don't mean jack compared to preferred rpm range.

 

[Ranger44]

I think I see what wicked is getting at.

A manual transmission (so you can downshift) would help you alot more or even a slightly lower gear(numerically higher), or even both for that matter.

As for the 3.0 being a rever....it's the nature of the beast. If you don't like it, get rid of it...

It's just that the factory made the engine a way for a reason, to run it's best, drivability, to be efficient, etc. But it's your call.

 

[joemohio]

Yeah I see what your getting at, just run it harder. I can do that just dont know how much longer she's going to hold together, getting a little tired. Im going to start lookin for a stock replacement before Im walkin.

 

[Wicked_Sludge]

The max torque and HP numbers frequently don't mean jack compared to preferred rpm range.

very true....when your talking about the 7,500 rpm dyno queen hondas. 3500 rpm isnt a very high peak torque in the grand scheme of things. many of todays motors dont make decent power until that range...the new 3v 5.4 peaks at 3,700rpm, the 4.6 used in mustangs, crown vics, ect is 4k, the new duratec 3.5 peaks at 4,500 (and let me tell you, those motors are no slouches at 249ft-lbs).

it may feel "bad" for the motor, but running the rpm up to 3 or 4 grand isnt going to cause any significant increase in wear.

 

[Mutant Pony]

The motor in the Frog has had a little bottom end noise for years. I still rap it up to 6K everytime i drive it. At the dunes it sits at 6k for extended periods of time(The factory rev limiter is at 6k). Bumping to 4k is not gonna make your truck blow.
Aftermarket cams generally increase the Rpm that the engine works at.