Go Back   EcoModder Forum > EcoModding > EcoModding Central
Register Now
 Register Now
 

Reply  Post New Thread
 
Submit Tools LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 12-07-2008, 04:44 PM   #1 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Oregon Eugene
Posts: 47
Thanks: 8
Thanked 10 Times in 7 Posts
Shorter duration cam on Chrysler 2.2 engine

I have an 85 Dodge Daytona with the 2.2 turbo engine. Currently it has the stock 85 slider cam with 240-240 Duration. I have been wondering what kind of fuel economy benefits I would see if I were to swap in a 1989 model year cam that has 228-228 Duration. The 1989 cam is a roller cam.

If I could get a cam for free I would just try it out but it would probably be expensive to get one at the wrecking yard so I must figure out if it would be worth any fuel economy benefit.

Perhaps this sort of cam swap will be comparable to a geo metro cam vs a metro XFI cam.

  Reply With Quote
Alt Today
Popular topics

Other popular topics in this forum...

   
Old 12-08-2008, 07:22 AM   #2 (permalink)
38 time NHRA/IHRA Champ
 
ATaylorRacing's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Fishers, IN
Posts: 305
Thanks: 1
Thanked 10 Times in 8 Posts
I drag race a 2.5 motor that was switched from efi to the carb set up. This ia a 87 tall block that uses the roller cam. When you switch out cams you will also need to change the entire valve train too. The roller followers will be needed in addition to the different valves and springs. Since you have a turbo motor you need to make sure you have the turbo exhaust valves to prevent valve damage due to excessive heat.

If you have the slider cam head on a bench you can't hardley turn the cam gear, but the newer roller cam head you can. I think the rollers are also only a 410 lift while the others are a 460. If you shift at anything above a lowly 4600 rpm you are beating a dead horse, while the slider cam lets you rev the heck out of it.

On my car I went from a 2.2 with a Lambros racing 500 lift hydralic (495 actual) to the 410 lift roller and a 2.5 ltr. My 0-60' times improved, my 0-330' times improved, and my 1/8th mile times improved....but at that point the mph was even...the 1000' time was slower as was the 1/4 mile time and speed. I shift into high right at the 1/8th mile mark. The 2.2 efi cars and 2.5s were rated at the same hp but the bigger motor had quite a bit more torque. The extra cubes did not gain more hp due to the smaller lift cam.

Since you have one of our cars you can join the Shelby/Dodge auto club. There are several clubs around and forums too. For links to hot rod shops, forums, and clubs go to: Shelby Dodge Auto Club you do not need to have a Shelby. In the forums you can also find good info on all sorts of things even how to convert to E85. My user name there is Matchbox
__________________
42 time NHRA/IHRA drag race champ

05 SRT4-12.17@117 mph on DOTs-31.0 mpg-SOLD
96 Geo Metro-3 banger-60.1 mpg-SOLD
95 BMW M3-13.41 @ 106 mph-31mpg-SOLD
77 Chevy Monza with 350/350-FOR SALE
84 Horizon-1880 lbs-29 mpg
95 Neon-43 mpg
99 Z28-10.80 @ 127 mph-27.1mpg
2011 Prius-62.1 wife's
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2008, 10:29 AM   #3 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
bhazard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Toledo, OH
Posts: 500

2012 Golf TDI - '12 Volkswagen Golf TDI
TEAM VW AUDI Group
90 day: 45.51 mpg (US)
Thanks: 6
Thanked 34 Times in 27 Posts
Yea if youre looking for FE I would think the 2.5 would be better with its more low end grunt. I know the shadow is a real stump puller. The combination of the 2.5 and the lil mitsu turbo really get it going below 2500 rpms. It had no problem towing my dads ranger home 20 miles.
__________________
'05 Outback XT, 19 mpg

BP-turbo 93 Festiva (long gone)
1/4 mile - 12.50@111.5
Best MPG - 36.8
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-09-2008, 09:26 PM   #4 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Oregon Eugene
Posts: 47
Thanks: 8
Thanked 10 Times in 7 Posts
I had both the 2.2 and the 2.5 and observed the same fuel economy for both engines even though the 2.5 has more displacement. I actually prefer the 2.5 but I will keep my 2.2 since it is in perfect condition and has the pre swirl head pistons and head.

I am not concerned with a loss of high RPM power with a shorter duration cam. My car already has a custom programmable logic module, water injection, and an intercooler. A small loss of power will not be an issue. I am simply trying to figure out what kind of fuel consumption will be observed by going to a shorter duration cam. I found a wrecking yard in my area that is willing to sell a roller cam and followers for $25 but it sure would take a long time time to amount to $25 in fuel savings.

  Reply With Quote
Reply  Post New Thread


Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
1992 Metro sedan needs a new engine - What/Where/How - advice appreciated greatly! Crono EcoModding Central 26 11-18-2008 01:42 AM
New 2-stroke Diesel engine, cool link to Engineering TV metromizer General Efficiency Discussion 14 11-17-2008 08:05 PM
Coasting experiment: engine on VS engine off on a fixed route = 12.9% gain MetroMPG Hypermiling / EcoDriver's Ed 6 02-22-2008 08:38 AM
Basic EcoDriving Techniques and Instrumentation SVOboy Instrumentation 2 11-17-2007 11:38 AM



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.5.2
All content copyright EcoModder.com