Subscribe now to make sure you don't miss any future videos! / @briantooleyracing3554 BTR ON SOCIALS: Facebook - / briantooleyracing Instagram - / briantooleyracing Website - www.BrianTooley...
Anyone who is using a Spin Tron is showing people that they are invested in developing their camshaft packages based on concrete data. Great work Brian Tooley Racing.
As long as it actually fits your needs. Your best bet is to give your engine info and your goals to BTR. Maybe they have something even better? One size never fits all.
Just bought the Red Hot Cam, .660 platinum springs, and the BTR shaft rocker system. I already know this cam is going to have better drivability and make more power than my old setup.
Brian, Great video, one thing I notice and it is the one thing I have done for over 20 years. Fix the saddles on the rocker stands. I have re-machined Jessel, TD, Comp rocker stands so the shaft would sit slightly below the shaft C/L so you take the load off of the hold down bolts. You are the first I have seen do this, great job.
Thanks man! I really appreciate your desire to learn and improve everybody’s race program! You’re correct about spring pressure one best junkyard motors I ever had was small sbf .600lift solid roller 190 intake runner Only 100lbs on seat! It ran deep in 5.70s to 1/8th
We can certainly do that, we have hundreds of back to back tests. I would rank the components in terms of importance to reduce bounce by: Lobe design Spring pressure and design Valve weight Rocker mounting Although once a LS intake valve gets in the 120 gram range, it becomes very difficult to control past 7000 RPM. Generally a spring with less moving mass (conical or beehive) works better on very heavy valves. Hydraulic roller valve trains are very sensitive to weight of the components, much more so than solid roller applications.
@@briantooleyracing3554 thank you so much for sharing this knowledge. Do you guys offer this testing on a cam customers send in? This is REALLY cool information.
I had a solid roller that had what looked like bounce marks on the closing side of the lobes. I at the time figured the lifter must have had loft of the lobe. Still don't know for sure.
Cool stuff, I just did a AFM delete on my 2015 6.2 and used a stock Grind BTR cam. I am beyond pleased, this engine has never run so strong and smooth. If and when I build a LT platform, it will be BTR all the way. Do you guys design cams for Pontiac V8s, 1972 455 HO is my next project. Your R and D is very impressive. 👍👍🏁🏁
I know nothing is perfect, but I've always wondered how accurate Spintron tests are considering the significant lack of gas/chamber pressure dynamics which cannot be recreated. I'm not saying it's not a significant increase in knowledge vs. guessing, but I'd be nervous to put too much stock in it. I'm assuming its results have been compared to operating engines, so I'm probably overthinking it.
In an operating engine the exhaust side of the valve train should see even more deflection than on the Spintron due to the residual pressure left in the cylinder when the exhaust valve attempts to open. An engine with a power adder will have more cylinder pressure and therefore more opening deflection. The intake side operates almost the same.
Thank you Brian for the technical video. I believe there would be performance advantages if the spring pressure was distributed evenly through the valvetrain. Instead of at the end, at the valve. Can small springs be added at the push rod end of the lifters? My engineering mind never stops finding alternative solutions 🧐
That exact product used to be sold under the name of "Rev kits", not sure if they still exist. The entire valve train is sensitive to weight, even on the pushrod end. We've seen heavier 3 piece pushrods not perform as well as one piece due to the weight difference.
But the deflection would not occur on an overhead cam engine where the cam lobe itself is regulating the valve. The only pressure point would be the valve guide so as long as the guides are good then the cam would keep the valve from deflecting.
Now there's an interesting question,.. Would be how much force the spring applies, plus the force of the air pushing on the valve head, vs the inertia of the bounce's opening, and maybe affected by the push of air from the manifold and the pressurized air inside the cylinder forcing it's way past the opening, and those last ones would be different for NA vs Boost.
Yes it will because as long as you have bounce, you don't have compression that could force the valve shut. However, more often than not, it will actually increase the bounce as it might try to escape over the valve, thus forcing it to bounce even more. The idea that compression or boost will help close valves, is not the case. If it was, you'd never have to run more valve spring in boosted and super high compression applications.
Valve springs make a lot of heat, so the engine actually runs hotter than ambient. We've gotten the engine hot enough at times to fill the Spintron room with smoke!
Would like to hear you go more in depth on deflection and how it all affects the loft. Cause my assumption is that the amount of deflection creates stored energy in the components which gets released at the top of the lobe creating the loft. But idk. And I want to know
Exactly, and I believe that is what I said or tries to say in the video, any opening deflection is stored energy that is released during the deceleration phase, as the lifter is approaching the nose of the cam.
So many old Smokey theories' been placed on the trash pile due to the advances in SPIN TRON. The engines I buy for my customers have orders of magnitude better feel than any other because of the spin testing done. They are smoother and more powerful than the OEM stuff by far. I've read that some others have done piston travel laser mapping as well and I sure would like to finally lay the rod ratio argument to rest. Albeit I already know the answer because like everything else in life there is no such thing as the perfect one size fits all for every purpose. Like asking a 22Lr to take down and Elk or 45-70 to leave any trace of meat when hunting squirrel.
Wish more of this information was in hotrod magazines and other methods of media. I enjoy seeing custom builds but learning something new is as lucky as finding gold.
It will never happen. Comp Cams is the biggest cam manufacturing sponsor of those sources. Can you imagine what it would do to the sale of their off the shelf high energy cams so many buy? People would see it for the garbage it is. Comp cams are bouncing valves all over the place, yet nobody seems to care because they oddly enough think that good ol'e Billy did a great job and that Comp is the dogs danglies. I would not be surprised if the horrid data of the cam he showed, was one of the newer Comp lobe designs.
@@tomstiel7576 It's not over their heads. But they are in bed with Comp and have been for years. There's a reason why 95% of publicised engine tests of some kind feature a Comp cam. Just look at David Freiburger. He's so far up Billy Godbold's ass that he wouldn't know a good modern lobe if Kip from Cam Motion hit him over the head with it.
@@tomstiel7576 Oh his smart enough. However, he knows where the money is. Besides, when he needs his own cam, he gets Steve Brulé to call Billy Godbold, so he never gets the off-the-shelf stuff the peasants get.
How does a spin Tron or vice a versa your development team account for the atmospheric pressure is on each side of the valve with an open chamber? And I guess how much does that affect the valve and its movement?
Brian, how does your shaft system compare to Jesel? And is it a useful modification for high-RPM capable hydraulic roller cams that are going into a stroker Gen V LT like 468 or 480 (or even 500+)?
Wow, who would have thought fasteners would have a difference in that application. I would imagine with the compression of ignition and forced induction that also must have an effect.
It's certainly much harder to open an exhaust valve against cylinder pressure than what it is on the Spintron! Especially if the engine has a power adder!
The largest difference between the Spintron and a running engine is the exhaust valve opening against cylinder pressure. We use the engine dyno to test some aspects of the exhaust side of the valve train combination.
I have an LS7 crate engine with 227/242 .591/.590 lift 116 LSA cam which comes installed. I plan to rework the heads. Would a .660 spring kit be too much spring paired to that cam? What spring would be optimal?
Is there any data on how the different ramp angles (from the different cam follower diameter) in GM, Ford and MoPar engines from the '60's and '70's affects any loft occurring? Would the faster ramp of the MoPar cams lead to more loft then the GM cams? (GM > Ford > MoPar for ramp angle steepness)
We do! Cam kits: briantooleyracing.com/camshafts-lifters-pushrods/camshaft-kits.html Spring kits: briantooleyracing.com/valves-spring-kits-components/valve-spring-kits.html
Mr Brian Tooley, we are building a 92/103 turbo sbe 6.0 ls, rectangle port heads with heavy truck valves, stock rocker arms, really just stock junk. Can you grind us a cam to keep all the heavy parts stable at 8-8500 rpm, so we can just let the turbo make the HP?
This is a racecar. Driveability does not matter at all. We are just looking for super stable lobes for high rpm with heavy components, and let the turbo get the job done
That sounds like a really odd combo. But hey, if that's really what you do, I think BTR would consider your inquiry a lot more serious if you gave them a call.
@@AB-80X Thanks Man, I'm sure you are right. Just got caught up in the moment seeing Mr Tooley address valvetrain control at high rpm. It makes me jump for joy. Back in my Honda dyno days, one stupid aggressive comp grind would float the valves at 7600, while a very lazy crane cam would go 9200 on the same springs. No gains over the comp cam, but another thousand plus rpm plateau of usable power
It would be very difficult to get the 110 gram L92 intake valves to be happy at 8500. Your best bet is to change to LS3 intake valves. But we can certainly grind a cam for you!
@@AB-80X too bad not every aftermarket company have it or uses it properly. I mean it is a cool tool at the end and it's way more useful if people like Btr guys and other few in the aftermarket are learning and sharing results with us
@@GearheadOutlaw The aftermarket guys cannot share that info, that's their bread and butter. You cannot expect them to do that. It's not like sharing regular info on Yellowbullet for the greater good. Here BTR shares next to nothing. What he does is to tell you what to be aware of, but there are no useful data points. I don't know of any reputable cam manufacture or engine builder who does not have a Spintron or two and know how to use it. Are you thinking about someone specific?
@@AB-80X well.... a guy from Katech did and he was very insightful on some forums with great info on several camshafts with different specs and valve and springs etc. Then again it is what I was hoping for to continue as a trend for the aftermarket guys and us as customer to make a good decision on what products to go for with information to back it up. They are not OEM with billions in R&D most are moms and pops shops who are climbing up the ranks with innovation
@@AB-80X on some who know and don't remarks. Take comp Cams as an example.... How many years did they stay in the stone ages with their spintron and lobe design and ramp rates? Now compared to Btr, TSP, Cammotion, EPS, Pat G and so who took the market to another level. In any case some people know how to innovate with the data they have some do not that's all
I saw Smokey Yunkick speak at the PRI Show in Columbus, OH back in 1994 and he was using (he may have invented it) a Spintron machine to observe the valve train and oil flow characteristics. This was in 1994 fellas…..
When we tested the individual trunnions the ARP studs were the best. However we were surprised to see the BTR bolts perform better than stock. We never back to back tested the fasteners on the shaft kits.
Great question, when I think about intake or exhaust closing events I think about the differential pressure across the valve at that point. It's my belief that in supercharged applications closing intake valve bounce has about the same effect as in NA applications. However in turbocharged applications where turbine pressure can be twice as much as boost pressure, and therefore a lot of differential pressure during the exhaust valve closing event, I believe that the exhaust valve bounce would allow exhaust gas contamination of the intake charge and hurt power.
@@briantooleyracing3554 agree 100%. Volume diameter, surface area the valve all those play into factors of valve control. Got to do a video about valve spring harmonics as well if you haven't already
Most important is the intake valve close, the overlap events are next and the exhaust open is the least important, knowing what we know now. A few years ago I would have put EVO second most important and overlap events least important.
He can’t give a part # lol stop also anyone can throw a cam on a cam reader now days and get every bit of information many engine build shops have one to make sure cams are right
Boggles me on the spintron the missing factor of cylinder pressure and piston speed and the closing effects it has on the combustion side of the valves due to surface area of the valve remembering the valves in a combustion chamber make up about 40% of the average combustion chamber surface area and this is the basics of it.
