Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

SVT Cams vs. 3.0L Cams: The Real Difference

Collapse
This is a sticky topic.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • SVT Cams vs. 3.0L Cams: The Real Difference

    I mentioned in my "Preparing for a 3.0L Port-matched Swap" (http://www.contour.org/ceg-vb/showthread.php?t=40721) that I was going to do some measuring and comparing of the CSVT cams and the 3.0L cams. I did the measuring with an articulated arm coordinate measuring machine. After getting a scan of a pair of lobes from each cam, I over-layed them to really show the true differences between the cams. The cams I'm comparing are 2.5L cams from a 99 CSVT and 3.0L cams from a 2004 Taurus.

    The only thing I am not 100% sure of is the timing (rotation) of the cams relative to each other. Each cam gear had a hole in it and a mark near the teeth on the front side of the gear. This hole and mark line up perfectly on each cam gear. Those features are what I used as a rotation reference when I overlayed the cams on the computer. Any comments on cam timing are based on this assumption.

    Exhaust cam gear comparison: CSVT cam profile is green, 3.0L cam profile is black. Cam rotation is clock-wise.
    SVT duration is longer
    SVT opens sooner and closes at about the same time
    Base circles are the same
    Max lift is the same










    Intake cam gear comparison: CSVT cam profile is green, 3.0L cam profile is black. Cam rotation is clock-wise.
    SVT primary duration is about the same
    SVT secondary duration is longer
    SVT primary and secondary open sooner than 3.0L
    SVT primary opens at faster rate
    Base circles are the same
    Max lift is the same








    The biggest difference to me is cam timing. The SVT's advanced (relative to the 3.0L) cam timing shows that the SVT cams will build more power higher in the rpm range. The extra duration is also good. Duration is also notably longer on the SVT's exhaust cam and one lobe of the intake cam. The intake cam also opens faster to get more air in sooner. The cam with the largest area between its base circle and the cam profile above the base circle will flow the most air as long as it is timed correctly for where you want to make the power. For someone not tuning, I think the SVT cams especially make sence because the car is fuel-mapped for the higher-revving cams.

    To sum it all up, the SVT cams are what will be going into the 3.0L swap I'm currently helping my brother with.

    Over the next week, I will try to calculate the specs of each cam for those that prefer to compare cams that way.
    Last edited by squeek; 12-10-2017, 01:15 AM.
    -Aaron
    03 SVT Focus , 01 Lightning, 86 Ranger, 98 T-red/MNB SVTC (full 3L), Mid-Engine 91 Geo Metro [3.0L Escape motor, SVTC everything else]

  • #2
    Aaron

    Thanks for this information. Its going to be really helpful. Im going to burn it into my brain. :) thumbs up!
    -99 T-RED 3L SVT TURBO
    -99 T-GREEN RHD MPV ST220 MAZDA 6 TURE DUAL 3L SVT
    -00 BLK/TAN SVT
    NEW OEM CONTOUR PARTS DEALER*
    SVTWAREHOUSE.COM COMING SOON!!

    Comment


    • #3
      Aaron:
      Thank you very much for doing this and posting the information, much appreciated.
      Any 3L I build will also have the the SVT cams.
      -J
      '99 SVT Silver
      Clean DD
      '91 LX Bimini Blue
      427"/88mm @ 16psi....yeah 4 digit power

      Comment


      • #4
        I think this shows what many of us have either know or suspected all along. The SVT cams have more potential. Getting that potential should be a matter of tuning as well as how well it is balanced with other mods.
        Jim Johnson
        98 SVT
        03 Escape Limited
        10 Fusion Sport

        Comment


        • #5
          Great post!
          06 WRX 423/400
          04 Softtail deuce

          Former owner of:
          #9 #135 #1119 #4427 3l SeVT

          Aircougar Performance

          Comment


          • #6
            sticky?
            buy me,95 conotur se
            http://contour.org/ceg-vb/showthread.php?t=36638

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Big Jim View Post
              I think this shows what many of us have either know or suspected all along. The SVT cams have more potential. Getting that potential should be a matter of tuning as well as how well it is balanced with other mods.

              This is true of 3.0L swaps in anything other than an SVT car. In an SVT car, the ECU fuel maps are already tuned for the SVT cams. Putting the 3.0L cams in an un-tuned CSVT must be sluggish in the upper rpms.


              I'm glad you guys like the info. I did it more for my own curiousity, but I couldn't help but share it since there's so much discussion about the choice.
              -Aaron
              03 SVT Focus , 01 Lightning, 86 Ranger, 98 T-red/MNB SVTC (full 3L), Mid-Engine 91 Geo Metro [3.0L Escape motor, SVTC everything else]

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by TennTechMan View Post
                This is true of 3.0L swaps in anything other than an SVT car. In an SVT car, the ECU fuel maps are already tuned for the SVT cams. Putting the 3.0L cams in an un-tuned CSVT must be sluggish in the upper rpms.


                I'm glad you guys like the info. I did it more for my own curiousity, but I couldn't help but share it since there's so much discussion about the choice.
                Are you saying put the 3.0L cams in a 2.5 engine or a 3.0L engine? I know 3.0L cams, from driving my car, they run out of power around 5.5K or so. In my old SVT it made power up until redline. BUT, even in my untuned 3.0L, the amount of power the 3.0L cams make in the lower part puts the svt cams to shame.....big time.
                2011 Fusion SE V6 & 07 Honda Pilot EX-L
                98 3.0L SVT Sold 9-11-11
                99 3.0L SVT Silver Frost #1264 Sold 1-22-10
                95 SE MTX---Sold 9/14/07 sniff
                98 E1 SVT #4892 of 6535T-Red Sold 8-29-08

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by TennTechMan View Post
                  In an SVT car, the ECU fuel maps are already tuned for the SVT cams. Putting the 3.0L cams in an un-tuned CSVT must be sluggish in the upper rpms.
                  I'm running 3L cams off an untuned SVT PCM in my hybrid, and sluggish is definitely not the word I would use to describe it's high-rpm performance. Power DOES drop off but it's not as bad as I've heard some people describe. Though, a lot of it could be dependant on setup, and mine is rather unique.

                  These graphs are sweet, BTW.
                  200hp 201tq
                  3L block w/3L cams in SE heads, untuned

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by elraido View Post
                    Are you saying put the 3.0L cams in a 2.5 engine or a 3.0L engine? I know 3.0L cams, from driving my car, they run out of power around 5.5K or so. In my old SVT it made power up until redline. BUT, even in my untuned 3.0L, the amount of power the 3.0L cams make in the lower part puts the svt cams to shame.....big time.
                    could that low end power be a result of the 3L displacement rather than the cams? are you comparing the 3L cams in the 3L to the SVT cams in an svt engine or a 3L?
                    97 M3/ 93 RX7 touring ls1/t56
                    SOLD: 98 SVT #2663,89 Mustang GT Twin Turbo, 00 SVT #985-SF,98 SVT #948 BLK/Tan E0, 99 SVT #587-T-green,98 SVT #3969 blk/MNB

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by turbo_fox View Post
                      could that low end power be a result of the 3L displacement rather than the cams? are you comparing the 3L cams in the 3L to the SVT cams in an svt engine or a 3L?
                      Most posts that I have read say the same thing with a 3.0L with SVT cams and 3.0L cams. The low end power of the 3.0L cams is there where it is lacking in the SVT cams, while the top end the SVT cams shine while the 3.0L fall off.

                      Granted there is a difference in displacement between the 3.0L engine and the 2.5L engine. But, the way the two cars drive is so different that I can't just cough it up to displacement.
                      2011 Fusion SE V6 & 07 Honda Pilot EX-L
                      98 3.0L SVT Sold 9-11-11
                      99 3.0L SVT Silver Frost #1264 Sold 1-22-10
                      95 SE MTX---Sold 9/14/07 sniff
                      98 E1 SVT #4892 of 6535T-Red Sold 8-29-08

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by elraido View Post
                        Most posts that I have read say the same thing with a 3.0L with SVT cams and 3.0L cams. The low end power of the 3.0L cams is there where it is lacking in the SVT cams, while the top end the SVT cams shine while the 3.0L fall off.

                        Granted there is a difference in displacement between the 3.0L engine and the 2.5L engine. But, the way the two cars drive is so different that I can't just cough it up to displacement.
                        i understand what you are saying, but i was asking if your statement that the 3L cams "puts the svt cams to shame" is something from your own personal experience comparing 3L cams to SVT cams in a 3L, which it isnt- your own personal experience is comparing 3L to 2.5L.

                        I asked because my 3L with SVT cams pulls a ton better at low RPM as well, which is only due to the displacement. I am not convinced that SVT cams in a 3L makes less low end than the same 3L with 3L cams. I have never seen any data to back that up, especially since most people with 3L cams have 3L intakes as well
                        97 M3/ 93 RX7 touring ls1/t56
                        SOLD: 98 SVT #2663,89 Mustang GT Twin Turbo, 00 SVT #985-SF,98 SVT #948 BLK/Tan E0, 99 SVT #587-T-green,98 SVT #3969 blk/MNB

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by turbo_fox View Post
                          i understand what you are saying, but i was asking if your statement that the 3L cams "puts the svt cams to shame" is something from your own personal experience comparing 3L cams to SVT cams in a 3L, which it isnt- your own personal experience is comparing 3L to 2.5L.

                          I asked because my 3L with SVT cams pulls a ton better at low RPM as well, which is only due to the displacement. I am not convinced that SVT cams in a 3L makes less low end than the same 3L with 3L cams. I have never seen any data to back that up, especially since most people with 3L cams have 3L intakes as well
                          There is also a reason why Pud went this way in this car after what what he did with his last 3.0L (SVT heads etc). I am not saying one is better than the other, but there is a noticable difference in the way they drive.
                          2011 Fusion SE V6 & 07 Honda Pilot EX-L
                          98 3.0L SVT Sold 9-11-11
                          99 3.0L SVT Silver Frost #1264 Sold 1-22-10
                          95 SE MTX---Sold 9/14/07 sniff
                          98 E1 SVT #4892 of 6535T-Red Sold 8-29-08

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by elraido View Post
                            There is also a reason why Pud went this way in this car after what what he did with his last 3.0L (SVT heads etc). I am not saying one is better than the other, but there is a noticable difference in the way they drive.
                            right, I get that, you still are missing my point. it was not a change in cams only, so we have no comparison (other than the one at the top of the thread) between performance of SVT vs 3L cams on a 3L.

                            For example, I highly doubt I could swap from SVT cams to 3L cams in my ported 3L and gain any low end power. That isnt to say a full 3L wont make more low end power (such as yours), but I dont think the cams alone will make a low rpm difference- the noticeable difference you refer to has more to do with the 3L intakes.
                            97 M3/ 93 RX7 touring ls1/t56
                            SOLD: 98 SVT #2663,89 Mustang GT Twin Turbo, 00 SVT #985-SF,98 SVT #948 BLK/Tan E0, 99 SVT #587-T-green,98 SVT #3969 blk/MNB

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by turbo_fox View Post
                              right, I get that, you still are missing my point. it was not a change in cams only, so we have no comparison (other than the one at the top of the thread) between performance of SVT vs 3L cams on a 3L.

                              For example, I highly doubt I could swap from SVT cams to 3L cams in my ported 3L and gain any low end power. That isnt to say a full 3L wont make more low end power (such as yours), but I dont think the cams alone will make a low rpm difference- the noticeable difference you refer to has more to do with the 3L intakes.
                              I guess I was missing your point. That helps to explain your arguement a little better.
                              2011 Fusion SE V6 & 07 Honda Pilot EX-L
                              98 3.0L SVT Sold 9-11-11
                              99 3.0L SVT Silver Frost #1264 Sold 1-22-10
                              95 SE MTX---Sold 9/14/07 sniff
                              98 E1 SVT #4892 of 6535T-Red Sold 8-29-08

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X