where are you revving to and what cams were in the car before, i switched @ 5.5k, 5.2 felt smooth but it started surging forward at 6k upwards, also if your mapped for stock cams, the car wont feel stronger as your moving more air into the engine so you needto match it with fuel,
0 Likes
Be the first to like this post.
people: ....."where did you get that?"
me: "I built it"
Originally Posted by jer_760 Yea, double check the timing and raise the cam switch. I could tell a very noticeable difference on the top end going from 16ve cams to n1's with no tuning.
^This should be the case.
^I know I noticed this when I put in my BC2's in over my stock cams for my DE. Top end was waaaay different. I don't see why it wouldn't be the same for a VE unless he didn't mark his timing.
0 Likes
Be the first to like this post.
1993 SE-R | 2.0L Full bolt-on setup | 2.3L VE up next | 2015 Q50-S | 3.7L The Sunday car | 2003 Kia Rio-cinco | 1.6L gas saving daily driver |
Originally Posted by SR20GTi-R NA is a thinking man's game, alot of people dont have the stomach to play NA.
That's always the answer ^ and again, from what Calum has said... the bigger the cam the more timing you should remove after peak torque... if your tune is set for stock cams you probably have too much timing after the cam switch.
"So for example we found that a stock VE cam likes 36 degrees timing up top, but a SR16VE doesn't make any more power beyond 30 degrees."
"...you advance the timing after peak torque. The trick is how much you have to advance it. This is one of the biggest misconceptions- 'more timing = more power'. Your eyes open (at least mine did) the first time you see that this is dead wrong on a dyno."
"Having your timing curve work with you cam switching is something that has to be done on the dyno, but having those two work together gets you what you see in his dyno runs- a much fatter curve."
Aka... you would benefit most if you retuned and adjusted your cams switch point.