Installshield's NA Build

^^i know man, i was waiting for him to start it haha...

its pretty awesome stuff...they were talking about air injection with it too...as having the actuators actually deliver some pressurized metered air into the chambers, as well as control the valve events...an entirely new form of forced induction, mixed with normal engine vacuum intake...would be pretty crazy...

and not just a new car...imagine if companies started making kits to convert a standard head to this?...our heads have nice deep tappet reliefs, and the right size actuator could drop right in there...and be held in place with the cam strap threads...i've thought about this for years, it was just finding actuators that would be the right diameter...and...a computer to control it haha; that would be the hard part...but some actuators designs i've seen are completely sealed...so they wouldn't need engine oil feeds...they could be just stand alone units that you bolt in, and after you push the valve into the actuator...its sealed and finished...
 
I saw that video the other day and was going to put it up here but you beat me to it haha.

I think this will be the next progression in the auto industry. I mean the saab was using 33% less fuel but still making 33% more torque and HP. And the fact that they have ran it for 60,000k and not have any problems is just awesome. Put a head like that on a diesel engine that already gets 45mpg and now you have near 60mpg! Id buy one in a heart beat. I hope this kills some hybrids out there...
 
^^exactly...this hybrid stuff is all fine and great, it just always annoyed me that they keep using a very traditional small engine with an electric motor...there are VERY clear ways to start pushing internal combustion engines forward, and its not even that complicated... pneumatic valves and especially...air injection...are two EXTREMELY simple concepts...they are more damn simple than the systems they're replacing...that for whatever reason have been held back in automotive development...but at least this video illustrates its no longer just concept or one off racing r&d, its actually being pushed towards production aggressively...

I'm sure this has a lot more internal research going on than we are aware of...but...s***...its 2013...In college i thought this stuff would be on road cars before i graduated...

In the mean time i'm stuck pouring over numbers about high revs after realizing...i'm stuck with a relatively small amount of lift...again...because of camhafts haha...
 
Last edited:
^I mean there is so much more then just hybrid stuff out there that hasn't been tapped into. And lets be honest, hybrids are not that efficient. First the materials for the batteries has to be mined (that burns diesel), then its shipped to be made into batteries(more diesel), then shipped to the car manufacturer(diesel), put into the car and then the car shipped to customers(do I need to say it again... yes, DIESEL). An old gas sucker car from 50 years ago burns less fuel then one of these hybrids before the engine turns over! And plus your mining for the batteries which turns the land scape into the surface of the moon. Oh and you have to replace said battery every 5 odd year and it like 3 grand?... No thanks. Ill take a cheap and clean burning diesel engine any day of the week.

But I digress. For how long has F1 engines had no cam?... 5 race sessions off the top of my head if not much more and please tell me if Im wrong. Id love to hear if they have had it for longer. Some one need to find out the miles that just the winners of F1 races have done with no cams in the engine and that will tell you that it is a viable system.
 
To further digress;recycling plastics into clothing has come back to pollute the waters, when consumers wash those garments and the loose particles manage to wash into the waterways on a large scale. For every action there is a reaction. Not to mention all the taxpayer money Obama has wasted subsidizing the "Green Energy" programs, through crony capitalism!
 
door.gif
 
I'm thinking we may never see camless cars on the road for the simple reason that it's not good for the economy. Every new technology needs to consume the earth in order to be viable. That keeps everybody working. Hybrids do this wonderfully,.. they are over complicated with many ways to fail (like the braking regeneration system that recharges the batteries,... the real brakes are almost never being used and are seizing up,... keeps mechanics busy and the economy turning). The energy and resources consumed in producing and maintaining a hybrid car will never pay for itself in gas savings. The hybrid is perfectly disguised as saving the environment.
The camless car would save the consumer and manufacturer money. It's cheaper to produce and operate and that doesn't help the economy. It's the super rich, powerful and hidden oil barons that are at the top of the economy that are controlling everything including world leaders and they need to keep selling their oil.
It was the same type of monopoly that kept the steam engines and coal producers in control for so long, well after they were out dated.
I think it would take some kind of huge social uprising to bring this technology to the mass market especially in the automotive industry.
 
sparkstyl said:
But I digress. For how long has F1 engines had no cam?... 5 race sessions off the top of my head if not much more and please tell me if Im wrong. Id love to hear if they have had it for longer. Some one need to find out the miles that just the winners of F1 races have done with no cams in the engine and that will tell you that it is a viable system.
Click to expand...

I think F1 engines still have cams...Renault originally developed the actuator thing for an F1 engine in the late 80's...and it performed well enough in testing that the FIA re-wrote a whole section of the engine restrictions...one of which was that all engines had to have at least a single physical camshaft...

The don't have to use metal valve springs (they do use compressed air from that i think), but i'm pretty sure they still have cams...but not sure about the upcoming 1.6L engines...
 
I finally had time to watch the video, thanks for sharing. I'm more than suprised that hasn't been taken to a production phase yet. Seems like an incredible idea. By the way, I've been meaning to ask you where you went to school at? I'm switching my major from electronics engineering to Mechanical Engineering and then pursuing a masters in Aerospace. Wanted some advice from some one that's already done it, it seems you enjoy it so thought I would ask.
 
^ I went to Penn State for a BS in ME and a minor in MIS...worked for a construction company out of school, who put me into law school for 'contract handling'...but i then moved to a company back in State College doing cloud processing, and I'm currently finishing up the law degree in software licensing instead...

So the car is really the only 'engineering' thing i get to do haha...as my job isn't really engineering all that much, at least not mechanical.

If you're already into engineering, you'll be fine...All i've found over the years is that most people either LOVE engineering, or want nothing to do with it...not many people seem to fall in the middle, at least from what i've seen.
 
I have noticed that all the engineers that I've worked with over the years have gotten away from the mechanical/hardware aspect and now focus on the software side. It seems like companies expect more than just being able to design and build systems they also want them to be able to design operating systems for it too. I work on various Radar and Communication systems as a technician but am attempting to get into an enginneering program but it's hard since I'm active duty military. Can't seem to stay in one place long enough to finish their specific program.
 
Thanks for serving our Country!

JaLMP5 said:
I have noticed that all the engineers that I've worked with over the years have gotten away from the mechanical/hardware aspect and now focus on the software side. It seems like companies expect more than just being able to design and build systems they also want them to be able to design operating systems for it too. I work on various Radar and Communication systems as a technician but am attempting to get into an enginneering program but it's hard since I'm active duty military. Can't seem to stay in one place long enough to finish their specific program.
Click to expand...
 
^yeah awesome JaLMP5, good luck with everything and thanks!

So i got my generic elm 327 bluetooth OBD-II device, and downloaded torque pro on my android...pretty cool app, with a whole lot of capabilities...and so far so good with the sensors i'd prefer to have read...all for under $30 including shipping of the reader and the app cost.

I hadn't posted it yet, but i've had 2 p0300 codes since the cam swap...both times of which i simply reset the ecu...the p0300 seems to pop up commonly at partial warm up...if i idle from a cold start up until around water temp hits 100 degrees or so, after i've driven 200 miles or so since a reset...it'll trip the light...I'm fairly sure this is nothing to worry about, as the rpm's for cold start bounce around a lot...i've read that obd-II computers, generally, look at the tps and triggering sensors...as well as control the IAC...to monitor for random misfires...if the rpms bounce between a certain threshold, it assumes its a misfire as it thinks the rpm should stay stable if the throttle plate isn't moved...

exactly where the twiggy's hurt this at low rpm...with the torque pro, i'm seeing revs bounce about 150 rpm at 0% tps position...exactly what 'lope' is...and i'm guessing this is the only cause of the occasional p0300...the app can immediately clear the code, turn off the light, and can even remove the pending codes that are 'maturing'...so that in itself is pretty useful...

I also had a pending p0147 code...from the 2nd O2 sensor...which i'm positive is related to my incorrect non-fouler set up...I drilled both non-foulers by accident, letting a little too much exhaust gas in it...and just never got around to fixing it yet...will take $2.50 when i finally do haha.

i'll keep you guys updated...all in all i'm pretty impressed for the cost...at least more than anything it makes trips to autozone for a free read less of an issue...
 
tweety2300 said:
My head hurts from the last couple pages
Click to expand...

i hear you tweety; looks like factory cam specs were just as confusing as the gearboxes...

Orion pretty much cracked it...Mazda set their advertised duration at .003" cam lift PLUS ~.014" lash, so all numbers are universally posted at .017" valve lift...thats not uncommon or ridiculous or anything...its just either Mazda never mentioned it in the tech releases, or those who posted it just skipped that part...

on the other hand, Andrew and some others were posting overlap numbers at unknown lift intervals as well...but was setting seat duration the same as Mazda...so comparisons were extremely misleading at first, as we all thought overlap numbers were at the same lift...far from it, he was talking about overlap at something like .050" lift, a significant jump from .017"...it looks now like NA twiggy's have something like 35 degrees of overlap at the Mazda specified valve lift...where as the most aggressive factory cams made for the engine, had 17 or so...and nearly NO ONE has ever run the exhaust cam that makes that anywhere other than japan.

after Orion lined up a bunch of figures on a table with the factory cams, he was able to figure out what amount of valve lift they were posting the numbers at...and did the same for the twiggys...so thanks to him for that, he dug up cam specs i've never come across before...

so anyway, all that is over now haha...
 
Its also worth mentioning...i'm having a bit of a change in design for all this...

There is a limiting problem i've since become aware of for huge revs...which is the physical limit to lift we have with these heads...even the most aggressive aftermarket cams only introduce a marginal increase to lift...and i'm starting to see why; we get about .41xx" max before the valve springs are pretty much fully compressed...and combined with the deck height of the block + quench volume of the head (very small)...its not very easy to fix this and run more lift...it basically involves a highly modified head with addressing that problem from both directions (a bigger bowl, but with longer valves and a cam that sits higher in the head altogether)...which is, at least at this point, well beyond something i can have done any time soon...this option may become available eventually, as i've been talking to some members with shop access recently...but cost is going to be very high, i'm sure...

So, with all that, i'm going to do this a little differently...first, the 1.8L design: i'll simply park that at a more realistic 8,000 rpm, or a little more...as far as head work, i can do bigger valves which will somewhat cure the lift problem (it'll just let more air in per given lift)...which is a lot easier than adding lift...but with that also, i'm pretty limited on how big you can go...still though, 8,000 rpm with high compression can give some pretty good numbers...even with the twiggys...and the cam settings for 8,000 rpm will be A LOT more liveable down low than 9,000 would be...

the other change...i'm first going to rebuild my current engine, hopefully soon...I'm getting the standalone anyway, and wanted to wire it and get used to how to handle it well before dropping in the 1.8L crank...and i've also lined up some K1 rods and 11.1:1 wisecos...after i get that running, i'll tear down my old built NA engine thats just been sitting around...and see what i come up with...in the end, i'll have a 1.8L and 2.0L in pretty good shape...1 for 7,000 rpm with a lot more torque, and one for higher revs with higher peak HP...

so for now the focus is shifting a little towards a 2.0L build, and learning how to build this stuff myself...considering how well this engine runs currently even at high miles, i'd hate to just get rid of it entirely...or have no car for a month while i'm sourcing parts, machining, etc...
 
^^ yeah...if anything we need a 'destroker' crank...but since the 1.8L crank is already forged, and a great drop in stroke to begin with...there probably isn't much of a market for an aftermarket destroked crank...

honestly...i don't know how they'd fit a stroker crank...the FS is basically a stroker to begin with...and the FS crank with FS block already uses up most of its deck height...adding stroke any further would need even shorter rods...making some incredible low-end torque...but it would probably come apart above 5,000 rpm...

I just wish K1 made rods specifically for a 1.8L crank and 2.0L block...then you have a bunch of extra deck height for longer rods, and with the right pistons and high compression...they can be even longer than just the difference in stroke...

even with the FP crank...the engine is still undersquare by 2mm...a lot better than the FS, but if i had it my way and was building a ~2.0L 4 cylinder from scratch...i'd have under 80mm of stroke with like 90mm bore...and nice long rods...
 
Last edited:
Please log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

D
Mazda Protege FSDE "is this rod knock?" thread (2024 edition)
Replies
7
Views
293
Diamond_Dave
D
Demanius
    • Like
Demanius' ADM sp20 Manual
Replies
8
Views
2K
BenjiHoggi
BenjiHoggi
M
To part-out or not to part-out?
Replies
2
Views
964
katapaltes
K

Latest posts

Back