|
| G.EB |
|
||
|
What wade cam should i go with for my EB, i'm goin all out on basic mods such as:
Cam Exhaust Intake Thermos Throttle Body and possibly ECU and T5 Cheers, Grant |
||
| Top | |
||
| Shortshift |
|
|||
|
Another newbie......Welcome to Fordmods.
The popular Wade cams are 1636, 1673 & 977b. With an auto, Wade recommend the 1636 with a factory ECU. If you have a hi-stall converter you can use one of the other two. With a manual, you can use a 1673 or 977b. (all this is a mentioned on their website) A vernier gear is recommended if you want to dial the cam in, plus a J3 chip & dynotune to get the air/fuel ratio correct through the rev range. Some cars have idle problems with the 977b, but with a J3 chip that can be sorted out. You can also go further and fit an aftermarket ECU but it can be expensive. If you go to Wade's forum on Fordmods, read through the feedback for these cams (Grechie is one of the guys who's done a bit of testing with all 3 cams).
_________________ AU2 XR8 with Raptor VL, ported Yella Terra GT40P heads, Scorpion 1.6 RRs, XE264HR-14 Comp Cam, ceramic coated Hurricane Headers, 60lb injectors, Walbro 255, 200cfi cats, 3" exhaust & Snow Performance water methanol injection |
|||
| Top | |
|||
| krisisdog |
|
|||
|
1673 minimum IMHO
|
|||
| Top | |
|||
| EF Wagon |
|
|||
Posts: 69 Joined: 27th Dec 2006 Ride: EF Wagon Location: Canberra - not as bad as you think |
I might depend on how you'll drive the car most of the time. You might not appreciate a big cam for long if you're just commuting and driving around under 2000rpm most of the time.
If you've got an auto, I'd go with the 1636. You'll need to reset the 'base idle' to 650 rpm to stop it hunting and stalling. I've just put one in my EF and I'm very happy with it. I'm still running it in so I can't comment on the top end just yet. More power from 1200 rpm onwards than a stock cam. The car has become effortless to drive. It idles a little faster than stock and the exhaust note is a bit louder. If you've got a manual, then I'd go for the 1636 or 1673 for everyday use.
_________________ 96 EF Wagon, PRINS VSI LPG, Wade 1636, 4480's, Redback zorst, Metalcat, 3 angle valve job, .5mm overbore, hypertec pistons, shaved head (because the head was banana shaped when I brought it), Tickford 16" alloys, KYB shocks, 30mm sway bar, 1 1/2 degrees negative camber, tow bar, roof racks. |
|||
| Top | |
|||
| Shortshift |
|
|||
|
When I had the 1636, it used to hunt a bit too. After it was dynotuned, the mechanic pointed out that it idled better with an increase in fuel pressure. The engine seemed to falter a bit when cruising at 100km/h with the standard fuel regulator. Probably running a bit lean.
I'd recommend installing an 300KPa XR6 fuel pressure reg & J3 chip (with an XR6 tune) as well.
_________________ AU2 XR8 with Raptor VL, ported Yella Terra GT40P heads, Scorpion 1.6 RRs, XE264HR-14 Comp Cam, ceramic coated Hurricane Headers, 60lb injectors, Walbro 255, 200cfi cats, 3" exhaust & Snow Performance water methanol injection |
|||
| Top | |
|||
| krisisdog |
|
|||
|
I'll admit I have never used or been in a car with a 1636, but I do have he 1673, and its not a large cam at all, theres not a lot of room for a cam between stock and 1673 if you get what I mean.
|
|||
| Top | |
|||
| FordFairmont |
|
||
Posts: 6113 Joined: 8th May 2007 |
big cams make more power, but at higher revs, which in turn can make the car feel slower in normal driving conditions, unless its full throttle 3000rpm clutch dumps
smaller cams like the 1636 make power lower in the revs and can actually feel stronger than a big cam through the mid range revs |
||
| Top | |
||
| G.EB |
|
||
|
thanks heaps for the feedback aye! this car will be my "toy car" wont be driving everyday, jus have it out for fun and cruises.
Where bouts is this Wade forum? Cheers |
||
| Top | |
||
| misk_one |
|
|||
|
i have a 1673 with 114LSA (as apposed to 113LSA) and it actually has more power and torque down low than the standard cam!
it doesnt surge (ie no power then lots of power). i cant comment on the hunting as i have a gas research t/b, but i doubt it would hunt on a normal falcon. this would be the minimum you should get, i would almost go the 977b with 114LSA if you wanted it to rev out. i dont even have a J3 chip or extractors either...
_________________ XG Panelvan |
|||
| Top | |
|||
| G.EB |
|
||
|
whats the 114LSA?
|
||
| Top | |
||
| FordFairmont |
|
||
Posts: 6113 Joined: 8th May 2007 |
|||
| Top | |
||
| misk_one |
|
|||
|
LSA is lob seperation.
going a higher number helps spread kind of spread the power curve out slightly. it makes the lower revs a bit friendlier. it was only 1 degree, but its enough to help make a difference. i havent been in a car with a standard 1673 but in mine it hasnt lost any power at all down low, it def picked up a bit. with a proper tune it would pick up heaps with more timing in the lower revs i dont really get the max revs out of it as im running a standard exhaust manifold (going turbo soon), so i cant comment on the top end, but id imagine it would be quite good. once the turbo is on i will look into getting a 977b at 114lsa cause you could def get away with it in an auto i rekn
_________________ XG Panelvan |
|||
| Top | |
|||
| Who is online |
|---|
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], Google Adsense [Bot] and 92 guests |
