Fuel Economy, Hypermiling, EcoModding News and Forum - EcoModder.com - View Single Post

s2man · 01-30-2008, 04:26 PM

I'll have to disagree too, malibuguy. While that blanket statement may be true when searching for maximum HP, the FE goal is to increase torque at lower rpm's. The link you supplied to hotrocker.com (nice link BTW) shows they got max torque up to 2000rpm using only a 1.1:1 rocker ratio. That would drop a stock lift of 0.414 to a mere 0.304.

And all the economy SBC cams which I can find specs for, have reduced lift and duration. So 'undervavleing' seems to be the way to go for FE.

plym49 - another trip back to j-body.org, for spec's on my rockers, shows that not only does my 2.2L have a SBC profile cam, it uses the SBC rockers too! Sweet. If your experiment works out, perhaps you'll sell me four of your unused rockers

oldschool - any clacking at low rpm with your anti pump up lifters?

01-30-2008, 04:26 PM	#25 (permalink)
s2man I"m not lurking! Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Kansas City, MO Posts: 128 Porthos - '96 Chevrolet Cavalier 90 day: 31.3 mpg (US) Thanks: 0 Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post	I'll have to disagree too, malibuguy. While that blanket statement may be true when searching for maximum HP, the FE goal is to increase torque at lower rpm's. The link you supplied to hotrocker.com (nice link BTW) shows they got max torque up to 2000rpm using only a 1.1:1 rocker ratio. That would drop a stock lift of 0.414 to a mere 0.304. And all the economy SBC cams which I can find specs for, have reduced lift and duration. So 'undervavleing' seems to be the way to go for FE. plym49 - another trip back to j-body.org, for spec's on my rockers, shows that not only does my 2.2L have a SBC profile cam, it uses the SBC rockers too! Sweet. If your experiment works out, perhaps you'll sell me four of your unused rockers oldschool - any clacking at low rpm with your anti pump up lifters? __________________ Roll on, Stew Last edited by s2man; 01-30-2008 at 05:31 PM..