Why don't more owners run cams?

[Alan23NSX]

My lady #Rossana has TODA cams with pulleys.
I have decided to do this mod because my engine was already open for a rebuild with BC 3.5L stroker in order to have the higher HP and torque for a C30a NA engine.
Max Power: 415 hp @ 8000 rpm
Max Torque: 40 kg*m @ 6750 rpm

Alan23NSX

---

https://www.instagram.com/alansimoni/
https://www.facebook.com/SimoniRacingNSXProject/

 

[Razen]

My lady #Rossana has TODA cams with pulleys.
I have decided to do this mod because my engine was already open for a rebuild with 3.5L stroker in order to have the higher HP and torque for a C30a NA engine.
Max Power: 415 hp @ 8000 rpm
Max Torque: 40 kg*m @ 6750 rpm

Alan23NSX

---

https://www.instagram.com/alansimoni/
https://www.facebook.com/SimoniRacingNSXProject/

That’s amazing 415hp. It looks like I have my work cut out for me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[greenberet]

...Andreas has been running the same cams on his MT maps just fine for 20 years...

Just as a note, immediately after Comptech camshafts were installed in my engine, I very gently drove to Autothority in the Washington, DC area to have them custom program a chip with my car on their dyno. I don't know how good a job they did but my car did burn the ceramic coating off the headers in places. After SR5guy made his definition of the PGM-FI freely available for public use here on NSX Prime, I had new maps programmed on a dyno and those are richer.

 

[Honcho]

Just as a note, immediately after Comptech camshafts were installed in my engine, I very gently drove to Autothority in the Washington, DC area to have them custom program a chip with my car on their dyno. I don't know how good a job they did but my car did burn the ceramic coating off the headers in places. After SR5guy made his definition of the PGM-FI freely available for public use here on NSX Prime, I had new maps programmed on a dyno and those are richer.

Thanks- that's helpful to know! All the better I think to just drive my car on the AT cams and do the Comptechs when the 6-speed goes in.

 

[Honcho]

Just a quick update. I have acquired the staffs of Ra. More to follow.

 

[Honcho]

Since I have these CT heads and cams and want to run the auto trans for a while for budget reasons, I wonder if a quick and dirty way to tune the car for safety is to snip the R4 resistor on my ECU, which should default the ECU to the manual cams map. I could use the Ostrich to set the rev limit back to 7,500 to protect the transmission. Since the CT cams have the same base profile as the OEM manual cams, I should be safe. [MENTION=26435]Old Guy[/MENTION] thoughts?

 

[Old Guy]

Since I have these CT heads and cams and want to run the auto trans for a while for budget reasons, I wonder if a quick and dirty way to tune the car for safety is to snip the R4 resistor on my ECU, which should default the ECU to the manual cams map. I could use the Ostrich to set the rev limit back to 7,500 to protect the transmission. Since the CT cams have the same base profile as the OEM manual cams, I should be safe. @Old Guy thoughts?

"Same base profile". I am presuming that you are referring to the lift and duration on the primary and secondary lobes (non VTEC) and not the 'base lobe' of the cam? If the lift and duration of the CT and OEM manual cams is the same for the non VTEC lobes, it would seem logical that the CT cams would be fine in an OEM head running the OEM manual fuel map. If you plan to run the CT head instead of an OEM head, the CT head presumably has some porting valve work that improves the volumetric efficiency. If the Ve improvement is across the RPM range, the higher Ve value could result in the engine running leaner than normal when the ECU is running open loop.

Because you are making reference to the non VTEC cam profiles, I am presuming that as an interim step you are talking about putting this together and planning to operate only on the non VTEC profiles (no max engine load conditions / not wide open throttle). If that is the case, then with the exception of warm up the engine should always be operating in closed loop. So, even if the CT head does alter the Ve some, the fuel trim in closed loop should be able to bring the AFR to 14.7. In closed loop with an OEM ECU you run at 14.7 and only 14.7 in steady state. I have lost track of your details. Your ECU is na1 and presumably pre OBDII since you are doing the Ostrich thing? If so fuel trims are not easily available. Are you planning on adding wide band O2 sensors? If so, you could log those to confirm that your AFRs are not rising above 14.7 during steady state operation. The other option might be if you can find the location of the front and back fuel trims in memory and monitor those values. If the trims start running really high that might tell you that the presumption that:

CT non VTEC profile = OEM non VTEC profile = safe operation

is not a valid equation when mixed with a CT head.

 

[Honcho]

"Same base profile". I am presuming that you are referring to the lift and duration on the primary and secondary lobes (non VTEC) and not the 'base lobe' of the cam? If the lift and duration of the CT and OEM manual cams is the same for the non VTEC lobes, it would seem logical that the CT cams would be fine in an OEM head running the OEM manual fuel map. If you plan to run the CT head instead of an OEM head, the CT head presumably has some porting valve work that improves the volumetric efficiency. If the Ve improvement is across the RPM range, the higher Ve value could result in the engine running leaner than normal when the ECU is running open loop.

Because you are making reference to the non VTEC cam profiles, I am presuming that as an interim step you are talking about putting this together and planning to operate only on the non VTEC profiles (no max engine load conditions / not wide open throttle). If that is the case, then with the exception of warm up the engine should always be operating in closed loop. So, even if the CT head does alter the Ve some, the fuel trim in closed loop should be able to bring the AFR to 14.7. In closed loop with an OEM ECU you run at 14.7 and only 14.7 in steady state. I have lost track of your details. Your ECU is na1 and presumably pre OBDII since you are doing the Ostrich thing? If so fuel trims are not easily available. Are you planning on adding wide band O2 sensors? If so, you could log those to confirm that your AFRs are not rising above 14.7 during steady state operation. The other option might be if you can find the location of the front and back fuel trims in memory and monitor those values. If the trims start running really high that might tell you that the presumption that:

CT non VTEC profile = OEM non VTEC profile = safe operation

is not a valid equation when mixed with a CT head.

Sorry- at work and trying to do two things at once. Yes, by "base profile" I meant the primary and secondary lobes of the camshaft. The Comptech profile on these lobes is identical to the OEM manual cams. The VTEC lobe is different, obviously. From my research, the IEM package included a slight milling of the head to bump compression and a light port and polish job. Considering Comptech designed the IEM head package to work on all NA1 NSXs without any ECU tuning required, I doubt any of these parameters are enough to put the AFR into a dangerous range. Furthermore, as long as I am running a 137k mile auto transmission in the car, it will be driven gently. My thought is that if I have the engine out already, then it's not much more work to swap the heads. The head gaskets probably need freshening anyway. If I don't swap the heads, I will have to remove the engine again later. I'd really rather not do that on a freshly painted car, if at all possible. If I can run the CT hardware safely on the auto trans, I think it makes sense to do it now. It would basically be an OEM manual tune state with a 7,500 rpm limit. Considering I will be retaining the OEM boat anchors and exhaust, tuning the car probably wouldn't bump the power much anyway (with the 6-speed will come headers and exhaust too).

As for the wideband O2's, that's a great idea! Assuming the NSX ECU can run on widebands, I think it makes a lot of sense to use them- even in the automatic. With Tunerpro and the Ostrich, I can check the AFRs and make any needed tweaks to keep them in the safe zone. My guess is that the car will run lean in open loop (but apparently not so lean that CT would advise tuning?) Maybe in the 15's? I will need the community's help on the hardware side though. My soldering skills are not that great and I need to make sure the ZIF socket and associated Ostrich hardware are installed correctly on the ECU. I was thinking about running a cable from the ECU to a USB port inside the armrest for data logging. Anyone here a good solderer?

I'm a bit confused regarding the fuel trims. IIRC, [MENTION=16606]sr5guy[/MENTION] released the entire ECU definition for the OBD-I NSX. I have those files. Assuming I connect the Ostrich, run TunerPRO, and load the definition into the emulator, wouldn't the OEM fuel trims be displayed in the TunerPRO interface?

Engine Details
1992 C30A
OBD-I
Automatic Trans ECU

 

[tonykreepy]

Just Finish installing on my 93 webcam cams, ported & Polish Heads, SOS Springs, Titanium retainers, Supertech bronze guides & seals, Exedy Clutch and a AEM infiniti6 EMS. Waiting for 1050X injectors to do final.tuning. Final Dyno Results Coming Soon

Sent from my LM-V405 using Tapatalk

 

[Old Guy]

Sorry- at work and trying to do two things at once. Yes, by "base profile" I meant the primary and secondary lobes of the camshaft. The Comptech profile on these lobes is identical to the OEM manual cams. The VTEC lobe is different, obviously. From my research, the IEM package included a slight milling of the head to bump compression and a light port and polish job. Considering Comptech designed the IEM head package to work on all NA1 NSXs without any ECU tuning required, I doubt any of these parameters are enough to put the AFR into a dangerous range. Furthermore, as long as I am running a 137k mile auto transmission in the car, it will be driven gently. My thought is that if I have the engine out already, then it's not much more work to swap the heads. The head gaskets probably need freshening anyway. If I don't swap the heads, I will have to remove the engine again later. I'd really rather not do that on a freshly painted car, if at all possible. If I can run the CT hardware safely on the auto trans, I think it makes sense to do it now. It would basically be an OEM manual tune state with a 7,500 rpm limit. Considering I will be retaining the OEM boat anchors and exhaust, tuning the car probably wouldn't bump the power much anyway (with the 6-speed will come headers and exhaust too).

As for the wideband O2's, that's a great idea! Assuming the NSX ECU can run on widebands, I think it makes a lot of sense to use them- even in the automatic. With Tunerpro and the Ostrich, I can check the AFRs and make any needed tweaks to keep them in the safe zone. My guess is that the car will run lean in open loop (but apparently not so lean that CT would advise tuning?) Maybe in the 15's? I will need the community's help on the hardware side though. My soldering skills are not that great and I need to make sure the ZIF socket and associated Ostrich hardware are installed correctly on the ECU. I was thinking about running a cable from the ECU to a USB port inside the armrest for data logging. Anyone here a good solderer?

I'm a bit confused regarding the fuel trims. IIRC, @sr5guy released the entire ECU definition for the OBD-I NSX. I have those files. Assuming I connect the Ostrich, run TunerPRO, and load the definition into the emulator, wouldn't the OEM fuel trims be displayed in the TunerPRO interface?

Engine Details
1992 C30A
OBD-I
Automatic Trans ECU

I am not really familiar with the CT stuff. I had assumed that IEM refers to Intake, Exhaust, Muffler - bolt on stuff which usually has a minimal effect of volumetric efficiency. If CT limited their head modifications and camshaft such that it would operate acceptably with the OEM ECU, then you are probably OK to do the resistor snip on your auto ECU and run on the manual fuel maps. Peak horsepower at wide open throttle usually occurs when the fuel map is set to give an AFR around 13 (or a nudge less) at the RPM & MAP corresponding to peak power. At wide open throttle the OEM ECU is in open loop and probably runs the engine significantly below an AFR of 14. If the CT package raises the VE and you leave the fuel map as is, the resultant AFR must go up. However, perhaps CT limited the VE improvement in the cam / head / IEH package such that the AFR would not become risky (higher than 14.7). All they did was eat into some of the margin that Honda provided in the fuel map. It means that they likely left some horsepower on the table; but, were able to market the package to a larger range of customers (because aftermarket ECUs were not so common in the early '90s). The up-side for you is that simple tuning of the fuel map may yield additional horsepower.

Wideband O2 sensors- yes & no. I was thinking of adding WB sensors in the manifold in addition to the OEM NB sensors by welding in extra bungs. The WB would just be for monitoring AFRs. The ECU would continue to run off the OEM NB sensors. You cannot plug a WB sensor into the OEM ECU for a lot of reasons. The OEM ECU lacks the controller required to operate a WB sensor, the output slope is inverted and .... on and on. What some / most aftermarket wideband controllers allow you to do is emulate a NB sensor. The controller will have two outputs. A WB output to drive an AFR gauge and a simulated NB output that you can connect to your ECU. In theory this allows you to replace your existing OEM NB sensor with a WB sensor and get two outputs. Problem is the theory does not always seem to work so well. You may want to ask around to see if anybody has done this successfully. One of the obvious problems to me is that when you ditch your heated narrow band and just provide a voltage signal to the ECU, the heater monitoring circuit in the ECU is connected to nothing and will throw a code unless you can fake the heater circuit some how.

Check out Sparkfun and Adafruit. One of them had some good tutorials for replacing high pin count devices - usually SMDs.

Fuel trim is probably not a term you would find on TunerPro. It would probably be described as fuel correction or exhaust gas O2 sensor correction and may or may not be displayed. Trim, or fuel correction or EGO correction would typically be displayed as the % correction to the fuel map value required to bring the actual AFR to its target value - which on an OEM ECU will be 14.7. This begs the question, when you rewrite the fuel maps on the OEM ECU, are you only rewriting the fuel maps in the portion of the maps that correspond to open loop control? If you are in closed loop control with the narrow band sensors you only have one option and that is to run at an AFR of 14.7.

 

[Honcho]

I am not really familiar with the CT stuff. I had assumed that IEM refers to Intake, Exhaust, Muffler - bolt on stuff which usually has a minimal effect of volumetric efficiency. If CT limited their head modifications and camshaft such that it would operate acceptably with the OEM ECU, then you are probably OK to do the resistor snip on your auto ECU and run on the manual fuel maps. Peak horsepower at wide open throttle usually occurs when the fuel map is set to give an AFR around 13 (or a nudge less) at the RPM & MAP corresponding to peak power. At wide open throttle the OEM ECU is in open loop and probably runs the engine significantly below an AFR of 14. If the CT package raises the VE and you leave the fuel map as is, the resultant AFR must go up. However, perhaps CT limited the VE improvement in the cam / head / IEH package such that the AFR would not become risky (higher than 14.7). All they did was eat into some of the margin that Honda provided in the fuel map. It means that they likely left some horsepower on the table; but, were able to market the package to a larger range of customers (because aftermarket ECUs were not so common in the early '90s). The up-side for you is that simple tuning of the fuel map may yield additional horsepower.

Wideband O2 sensors- yes & no. I was thinking of adding WB sensors in the manifold in addition to the OEM NB sensors by welding in extra bungs. The WB would just be for monitoring AFRs. The ECU would continue to run off the OEM NB sensors. You cannot plug a WB sensor into the OEM ECU for a lot of reasons. The OEM ECU lacks the controller required to operate a WB sensor, the output slope is inverted and .... on and on. What some / most aftermarket wideband controllers allow you to do is emulate a NB sensor. The controller will have two outputs. A WB output to drive an AFR gauge and a simulated NB output that you can connect to your ECU. In theory this allows you to replace your existing OEM NB sensor with a WB sensor and get two outputs. Problem is the theory does not always seem to work so well. You may want to ask around to see if anybody has done this successfully. One of the obvious problems to me is that when you ditch your heated narrow band and just provide a voltage signal to the ECU, the heater monitoring circuit in the ECU is connected to nothing and will throw a code unless you can fake the heater circuit some how.

Check out Sparkfun and Adafruit. One of them had some good tutorials for replacing high pin count devices - usually SMDs.

Fuel trim is probably not a term you would find on TunerPro. It would probably be described as fuel correction or exhaust gas O2 sensor correction and may or may not be displayed. Trim, or fuel correction or EGO correction would typically be displayed as the % correction to the fuel map value required to bring the actual AFR to its target value - which on an OEM ECU will be 14.7. This begs the question, when you rewrite the fuel maps on the OEM ECU, are you only rewriting the fuel maps in the portion of the maps that correspond to open loop control? If you are in closed loop control with the narrow band sensors you only have one option and that is to run at an AFR of 14.7.

I'm starting a new thread in this forum regarding tuning, which has strayed from the present thread topic of the CT cams. I will update this thread with the cam lobe measurements once I disassemble the heads for the repair.

 

[BBVNSX]

Hi [MENTION=18194]Honcho[/MENTION] !

Are you still committed to use OEM valve springs? have you ever considered the Toda ones? Any data about long term use on those?

 

[Honcho]

Hi [MENTION=18194]Honcho[/MENTION] !

Are you still committed to use OEM valve springs? have you ever considered the Toda ones? Any data about long term use on those?

I'm going with the Supertech springs sold by SoS. The Todas are too stiff for the CT cam, which is fairly mild compared to the Toda. I plan on either using new OEM retainers or seeing if I can find a set of tool steel retainers (much lighter and indestructible) that will fit the Supertech springs.

https://www.scienceofspeed.com/index.php/nsx/enpp/internal-engine-components/scienceofspeed-valve-springs-retainers-bases.html

I'm also going with the Supertech intake valves from SoS.

 

[BBVNSX]

Thanks Honcho!

Some good information on Toda cams and comparision with AT/MT/TODA here:

http://www.speedhunters.com/2019/07/project-nsx-dreams-power-part-one/

I'm going with the Supertech springs sold by SoS. The Todas are too stiff for the CT cam, which is fairly mild compared to the Toda. I plan on either using new OEM retainers or seeing if I can find a set of tool steel retainers (much lighter and indestructible) that will fit the Supertech springs.

https://www.scienceofspeed.com/index.php/nsx/enpp/internal-engine-components/scienceofspeed-valve-springs-retainers-bases.html

I'm also going with the Supertech intake valves from SoS.

 

[RYU]

Just Finish installing on my 93 webcam cams, ported & Polish Heads, SOS Springs, Titanium retainers, Supertech bronze guides & seals, Exedy Clutch and a AEM infiniti6 EMS. Waiting for 1050X injectors to do final.tuning. Final Dyno Results Coming Soon

Sent from my LM-V405 using Tapatalk

Would love to see your results! Please share [MENTION=33421]tonykreepy[/MENTION]

 

[Gthong]

I can't believe "the juice would be worth the squeeze".. meaning more trouble and expense than it could possibly be worth....

I you want a faster car... simply buy one... they are everywhere

my .02

 

[Honcho]

I can't believe "the juice would be worth the squeeze".. meaning more trouble and expense than it could possibly be worth....

I you want a faster car... simply buy one... they are everywhere

my .02

I think that depends on what your goal is. There are a lot of ways to make your NSX faster that don't involve buying another car. If your goal is to gain the most power at the lowest cost, then the supercharger is a no-brainer. It's effectively bolt-on and completely transforms the car. Comptech basically abandoned their IEM cammed engine package in favor of this solution, which makes a lot of business sense. If you want the max possible performance, than turbo is the way to go, but it requires a lot of work and is quite expensive for a good, reliable system. Cams are definitely on the bottom end of the power-per-dollar value curve, but in my opinion there is some merit to using them. In my opinion, cams are truer to the spirit of the NSX, which is supposed to be a high-revving, lightweight sports car with exceptional balance and driver engagement. With proper tuning and supporting mods, power output of 340 PS or more is possible. That's a 60 hp increase from stock, which is close to what the supercharger can do, but it delivers the power differently and, in my opinion, closer to the spirit of the car (high-rpm operation). The NSX heads flow exceptionally well and the 8,000 rpm limit favors more aggressive cams. I think cams got a bad rap back in the 90's when people just plugged them into the car and ran them on the stock ECU. Power gains were small and people basically concluded it wasn't worth it and moved to the supercharger. But today, with modern engine management, you can feed the cams the fuel they need and tune them properly. In Japan, as a matter of fact, cams with engine management are the most popular way to improve power on the NSX. Honda themselves chose to go with cams (and ITBs) on their GT2 Le Mans car, which won its class (the turbo GT1 car broke). That setup was pushing 400 hp, but it was a full race engine. And finally, the best part about using cams is you get to feel VTEC kick in, yo.

 

[docjohn]

Ha I was waiting for you to respond to that last post...:biggrin:

 

[BBVNSX]

Couldn't say it better Honcho. And modding a car is not all about numbers, is about sensations and being part of the equation... is like fishing.... you can buy the fish... you can even buy bigger fish... but fishing is not all about the fish... :wink:

I think that depends on what your goal is. There are a lot of ways to make your NSX faster that don't involve buying another car. If your goal is to gain the most power at the lowest cost, then the supercharger is a no-brainer. It's effectively bolt-on and completely transforms the car. Comptech basically abandoned their IEM cammed engine package in favor of this solution, which makes a lot of business sense. If you want the max possible performance, than turbo is the way to go, but it requires a lot of work and is quite expensive for a good, reliable system. Cams are definitely on the bottom end of the power-per-dollar value curve, but in my opinion there is some merit to using them. In my opinion, cams are truer to the spirit of the NSX, which is supposed to be a high-revving, lightweight sports car with exceptional balance and driver engagement. With proper tuning and supporting mods, power output of 340 PS or more is possible. That's a 60 hp increase from stock, which is close to what the supercharger can do, but it delivers the power differently and, in my opinion, closer to the spirit of the car (high-rpm operation). The NSX heads flow exceptionally well and the 8,000 rpm limit favors more aggressive cams. I think cams got a bad rap back in the 90's when people just plugged them into the car and ran them on the stock ECU. Power gains were small and people basically concluded it wasn't worth it and moved to the supercharger. But today, with modern engine management, you can feed the cams the fuel they need and tune them properly. In Japan, as a matter of fact, cams with engine management are the most popular way to improve power on the NSX. Honda themselves chose to go with cams (and ITBs) on their GT2 Le Mans car, which won its class (the turbo GT1 car broke). That setup was pushing 400 hp, but it was a full race engine. And finally, the best part about using cams is you get to feel VTEC kick in, yo.

 

[stuntman]

Cams + Turbo = BEST

 

[JohnWayne]

Cams + Turbo = BEST

What brand turbo cams do you prefer?

 

[stuntman]

What brand turbo cams do you prefer?

There's not a ton of data out there on them, but CT and Toda (type A) have a pretty good record for making a bit more power at less boost. I'm going with Type A, which Driving Ambition ran for seasons with success and reliability. The FXMD car ran stock cams.

 

[DPG]

Just got back from Vienna where an S2K with C30A was dynoed. Mods: TODA C, CT cam gears, headers, Wisecos 11.5:1, SoS ITBs, ported heads with stock valves. not fine tuned but 385hp to the engine. Nice numbers: 128,33 hp/litre. Runs like stock on idle.

View attachment 100866

I’m interested in knowing more about this setup. What do they do with the car? Race only? Do they drive it on the street much? Do they have a factory crank? I will be running a similar setup and this is the only one I’ve found that is close. How is the driveability of the toda c? Do you feel the adjustable cam gears were necessary 100%?

 

[RYU]

I’m interested in knowing more about this setup. What do they do with the car? Race only? Do they drive it on the street much? Do they have a factory crank? I will be running a similar setup and this is the only one I’ve found that is close. How is the driveability of the toda c? Do you feel the adjustable cam gears were necessary 100%?

not sure if this matters in your pursuit but i'm working with a local shop who is procuring a custom set of cams. We're still working on the specs so it's pointless to go over them here now. We are aiming for a January install date. I believe there is a new company willing to put forth the investment in new cams for the NSX. Me and a couple others might be the guinea pigs... for better or for worse lol

 

[Speedmaster]

It would make more sense, but without quoting the person with whom you are referring, it makes my assumption obvious. Thank you for adding some clarity though.

- - - Updated - - -





You are right about most tuners. They get a few experiences with these potato "chips" off the internet and they think they can tune anything. They mostly consider doing their "research" using google all of the time without knowing the fundamentals of tuning to begin with. The customers who have these hiccups with their tunes have fallen victim to what I call fast food tuning. Most shops are pressured by the customer to get the tune done as quickly as possible. The ones who know what they are doing put the right amount of time into the tune rather than getting it done as quickly as possible. People often forget that OEM car companies put a lot more time into building the VE than just a software basemap calculator and an hour on the dyno. Ask Devin Pearce from AEM how his NSX runs with an EMS. He wouldn't settle for less than OEM startup and driveability which is why it works so well. You can build a near perfect tune for all conditions/most fuels if the right amount of time and effort is put into the work. Fundamentals of building an engine? Forget it. I've had to fix so many f### ups because they had their buddy do it who is the Honda "master".

As far as cams go for the C30/C32 engine? Getting the best of both worlds (power/ reliability) isn't impossible. The problem with some camshaft manufacturers is that their approach to designing cams for the Honda heads follows a very basic pattern; especially turbo cams and therefore do not give the results we should see from a good cam. We have it easy running three lobes per two valves and various profiles. You can have a very mild mannered profile for the primaries which will give you all of the driveability you desire, idle quality, good emissions, etc. and then you can make for a very aggressive high lift profile that will give you all the power up top and RPM the bottom end can handle. How to get a decent torque curve out of these two different profiles requires more than just good fuel tuning. That's why there are things like variable intake runners to help get maximum port velocity at low engine speeds. Ferrari have been able to get this to work without VTEC for so long with their small displacement V8s while getting insane top end. The high compression on the C engine is already there. The displacement is so-so. The stroke allows for tons of high rev opportunities while keeping piston speeds under control to further increase the torque curve. The options out there now for cams? The best ones I've seen in the profile department are the Todas and they aren't that big of a cam. The only thing close to the high lift specs that will work well are the spec C's; but the cam still isn't big enough. The problem with those cams is that they were deisgned for the ITBs which is clearly evident by profiles. Good for those who already have the ITB's as they will work pretty damn well with that setup. The spec A's just don't produce enough results but are streetable cams nonetheless. The low cam profile of the spec C's don't promote swirl (bad economy/emissions) and people will complain about idle as well. But then again these cams were not deisnged for such things other than to get business done.

What these motors lack from my experiences with dyno testing custom parts is the damn engine cannot breathe well enough. The exhaust, intake, and header combos I have made and others I have tested attest to this notion. I have done custom intake and exhaust combos (only parts added from stock)that maxxed out the stock fuel injectors on the 3.0 engines (went to a 15:1 AFR on WOT). It gives the impression that in just these two small areas alone the engine can breathe significantly better. Imagine what can be done with the right intake manifold/cam package.

This is what I am currently working on. I look at what is available and there are a lot of areas on the engine that people aren't playing with that can make a great deal of difference in regards to power/torque. I am sure many companies didn't touch making these parts simply because of the lack of customers and therefore lack of money. I am currently planning on testing two different camshaft designs and an intake manifold design that I'm absolutely positive will give ridiculous power gains to this engine both naturally aspirated and FI, while still giving everyone the basic essentials required for a daily driver. It will be good for both on and off of the track, and economy won't suffer too much. The cost will be sweeter too. That is just to start. In light of all my rambling, and to comment on your post, don't lose hope..yet

P.S There is a way to get more flow out of the cylinder heads as well. Stay tuned.

How are we doing here? Any movement on the product design?