SuzukiSavage.com
http://suzukisavage.com/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl
General Category >> Rubber Side Down! >> Lancer's performance cam
http://suzukisavage.com/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl?num=1241324937

Message started by Yonuh Adisi on 05/02/09 at 21:28:57

Title: Lancer's performance cam
Post by Yonuh Adisi on 05/02/09 at 21:28:57

After being asked a few times now about my opinions on the performance cam that Lancer provides, I have decided to create this thread to address those questions.

Ease of install: (Seems to be the most popular question asked of me)
Installation of the performance camshaft is a straight forward swap. Just use the instructions in the Clymers or Suzuki Shop Manual for camshaft replacement.

Performance (Second most popular question asked)
I do not have any hard data except that even with my heavy a$$ girder frontend and a full six gallon Road King tank I can, at a fifteen mile per hour roll in second gear just roll the throttle back hard and lift the front wheel off of the ground about an inch.

I do highly recommend this camshaft and Lancer is great with shipping and tech support.

Title: Re: Lancer's performance cam
Post by seviersavage on 05/03/09 at 13:02:59

Yonuh,
Wanted to bump this thread, maybe Lancer will respond.
I'm wanting one of Lancer's cams. But I already have a vm carb with the ufo and dial a jet. My question is will my clutch handle it?
Or will I need to upgrade to a heavy duty clutch with these mods?
I do like to twist the throttle and don't want to ask too much of the clutch.
What say ye?
Seviersavage

Title: Re: Lancer's performance cam
Post by Max_Morley on 05/03/09 at 14:20:22

I've got one in my 96 with stock carb/intake and a HD/FXD muffler and no clutch concerns noted running full fairing and hard bags with trunk. I've run about 30K miles with that setup.  

Sidecar rig is supposed to have an aftermarket clutch setup (?Barnett?), the cam, and had a AMAL carb and straight pipe. I went back the to OE carb jetted up a little and aluminum body Supertrapp made for an Honda XT250/500 which has a bigger inlet than the Savage long taper supertrapp. No clutch concerns in almost 1000 miles running with the sidecar and wife and shopping items. If it were me I'd do the cam as I really like the low end improvement and not abuse the clutch and it will last long enough. Max

Title: Re: Lancer's performance cam
Post by Wolf on 05/03/09 at 14:57:47

Any oil concerns?  The performance cam calls for racing oil.  Is this needed, or can I use a basic approved oil?  

Thanks!

Wolf  :D

Title: Re: Lancer's performance cam
Post by Yonuh Adisi on 05/03/09 at 14:58:52

I missed the part about it calling for racing oil, because I just use what I have always used Quakerstate 10w40 and have had no problems with it.

Title: Re: Lancer's performance cam
Post by marshall13 on 05/03/09 at 16:38:48

lancer's street grind cam may add a little torque, but mostly what it does is "flatten the curve", it adjusts the torque curve to bring more useful oomph in earlier, and maintains it longer... moderate lift, fairly long duration, minimal overlap... his more aggressive grind has a bit more lift, longer duration, and a bit more overlap, thus making the torque curve peak later... look at the specs for a 90-93 dr650 cam... a little less lift, but more overlap than the second lancer cam, which is why they didnt like running below 3000 revs... too peaky... a cam really doesnt increase torque(which is a function of cylinder pressure, area of the piston crown, and length of stroke)... it changes the amount of torque available at any particular rev range... peak torque is what determines a clutches suitability... one has to increase either of the cylinder measurements, or increase cylinder pressure to increase the peak torque.... length of exhaust has a similar effect as the cam, as does intake dimensions.... if your clutch didnt slip with a stocker, a lancer cam isnt going to make it slip either.... ;)

Title: Re: Lancer's performance cam
Post by PTRider on 05/03/09 at 16:52:57

If the profile of the cam causes more pressure against the cam and parts of the valve train, I'd be leery of any general automotive oil.  I'd use a 15W-40 or 5W-40 dual rated diesel/gasoline engine oil, or an automotive racing oil, or a motorcycle oil.  

The most recent automotive service category, API SL and ILSAC GF-4, lowered the allowable level of phosphorus to reduce phosphorus poisioning of the catalytic converter.  The zinc phosphorus compound in the oil is a very effective, very cheap anti wear agent.  Each new oil formulation is extensively tested on production engines to be more robust than the previous oils, but these don't have after-market cams with higher contact pressures.  There is plenty of the zinc dialkyldithiophosphate (or related compound) in the oil for stock engines.  Other antiwear agents are very effective but cost more, so aren't used much in the usual automotive oils.  Diesel engine oils, racing oils, and motorcycle-labeled oils usually are more robust than the ordinary automotive oils.

Also, I don't think Quaker State is Shell's best oil.  I've heard a Shell rep rank Shell's products as (1) Pennzoil, (2) Formula Shell, (3) Quaker State (all are brand names owned by Royal Dutch/Shell).

Title: Re: Lancer's performance cam
Post by PTRider on 05/03/09 at 16:55:11


666A7978636A67673A380B0 wrote:
lancer's street grind cam may add a little torque, but mostly what it does is "flatten the curve", it adjusts the torque curve to bring more useful oomph in earlier, and maintains it longer... moderate lift, fairly long duration, minimal overlap...

What does this cam do for miles per tank, given the same driving habits?  Fuel consumption, actually how far I can ride on one tank, is a concern.

Title: Re: Lancer's performance cam
Post by Yonuh Adisi on 05/03/09 at 17:02:07


5B5C43100 wrote:
[quote author=666A7978636A67673A380B0 link=1241324937/0#5 date=1241393928]What does this cam do for miles per tank, given the same driving habits?  Fuel consumption, actually how far I can ride on one tank, is a concern.


With my re-jet and the performance cam, my mileage has only dropped about 5mpg. I don't have any hard data to prove this, but that I believe is a rather accurate guesstimate.

Title: Re: Lancer's performance cam
Post by Max_Morley on 05/03/09 at 17:03:54

Mileage is such a variable between riders, my solo 96 did better than it has ever done in AZ when we had it down there for the end of winter. 60+MPG on a couple tanks. Probably was a function of slower road speeds more than anything else, but was nice to push it out to 120 miles between going on reserve and finding fuel. Savage tug with Cozy sidecar ran between 40 and 45 MPG there with a passenger most of the time. I don't think the mild cam changes the mileage enough to count. Max

Title: Re: Lancer's performance cam
Post by marshall13 on 05/03/09 at 17:10:07

it passes air more efficiently for the engine, thus using a little more... so, rejetting, and possibly a MINOR loss in mileage... i doubt the difference will make any change in your fueling habits, unless you have a "run from full to reserve" daily 1 way commute.... now, throw the second grind one in, add an open pipe exhaust, and say an edelbrock 38mm, with an efficient air filter(or a velocity stack), and your mileage will drop noticably... anything that makes the engine breath more air, will require you to burn more fuel per gulp.... though one can mitigate that to an extent with final drive gearing(more torque available at cruise speed, you can lower the drive ratio, thus lowering revs, and air/fuel usage)... it's a package deal, aint no free rides...lol

Title: Re: Lancer's performance cam
Post by LANCER on 05/04/09 at 04:10:56

My stock milage was 52 mpg; after cam/carb/bore/exhaust changes it dropped to 48 mpg.  I have a heavy throttle hand normally, but when  just cruising easy on the highway for extended periods I could get back up to 50+.

Title: Re: Lancer's performance cam
Post by Wolf on 05/04/09 at 11:14:25

Lancer (other upgraded cam owners),

Have you noticed any cam chain issues, like earlier wearout.  Is there a performance difference between the stock cam chain and the nitrided cam chain you offer (wears longer/better)?  

Thanks

Wolf  :D

Title: Re: Lancer's performance cam
Post by srinath on 05/04/09 at 12:15:43

Is the cam more duration only and not much more lift ... if so, it wont place any additional load on the cam chain. However if it has more lift or is a comma cam opening ramp is much steeper than the closing ramp. Like most kawi's of the 80's that will definetly send many more forces into the chain.
Cool.
Srinath.

Title: Re: Lancer's performance cam
Post by marshall13 on 05/04/09 at 15:13:25

the pics of lancer's cam on ebay show straight lobes, no commas... these cams are both basically analogs of v-8 "torquer/towing" performance cams... as the savage's bore/stroke dimensions and rev range are close to those of the big detroit iron, it's by far the proper choice.... the second grind cam is bordering on the "performance" cam lift/duration, which is why he says it's only for modified engines... the 90-93 dr650 cam has duration like a v-8 "high-performance" cam, just less lift.... lancer's cams arent so much "hot-rod" bump-sticks, they're more efficient breathers.... the loads on the various parts of the timing, intake, exhaust systems should be very close to stock... by what ive seen here, lancer's cam, diamond jim's kamikaze intake, and a low restriction exhaust (something resembling a baffled harley big twin drag pipe) is a near ideal combo for these machines.... though i think the stock headpipe is too large in diameter... a 1 1/2 inch pipe would be better....think  pushrod v-8 when you think about mods to these beasties, and you'll find what you want....

Title: Re: Lancer's performance cam
Post by Yonuh Adisi on 05/04/09 at 18:26:36

I need to clarify since I did not know about Lancer's second generation performance cam. I have his first gen. performance cam.

Title: Re: Lancer's performance cam
Post by LANCER on 05/04/09 at 18:34:02


6F6370716A636E6E3331020 wrote:
the pics of lancer's cam on ebay show straight lobes, no commas... these cams are both basically analogs of v-8 "torquer/towing" performance cams... as the savage's bore/stroke dimensions and rev range are close to those of the big detroit iron, it's by far the proper choice.... the second grind cam is bordering on the "performance" cam lift/duration, which is why he says it's only for modified engines... the 90-93 dr650 cam has duration like a v-8 "high-performance" cam, just less lift.... lancer's cams arent so much "hot-rod" bump-sticks, they're more efficient breathers.... the loads on the various parts of the timing, intake, exhaust systems should be very close to stock... by what ive seen here, lancer's cam, diamond jim's kamikaze intake, and a low restriction exhaust (something resembling a baffled harley big twin drag pipe) is a near ideal combo for these machines.... though i think the stock headpipe is too large in diameter... a 1 1/2 inch pipe would be better....think  pushrod v-8 when you think about mods to these beasties, and you'll find what you want....


Well said; the primary purpose at the core of the project with Webcam was to create a cam profile which maximizes EFFICIENCY.  Good usable power and torque to enabe the engine to work well without over extending it capabilities.  It is a joy to ride.

Title: Re: Lancer's performance cam
Post by Wolf on 05/05/09 at 06:42:03

.... Thats nice to hear...   lol  ;)    

so what oil do you use LANCER    :-?  :-?   lol  

I can't wait... my soon Savage make over... engine first!

Wolf

1999 Raask 60mm dragpipe, LANCER cam, versalvy, jetset in hand,(what ones???)   more to come... a 660 in the offering...  :-X

SuzukiSavage.com » Powered by YaBB 2.2!
YaBB © 2000-2007. All Rights Reserved.