heavy cam phase limiters or lockouts on coyote engine

twistedneck

Active Member
Established Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2011
Messages
1,143
Location
Dearborn, MI
The cam sprocket layout on our TiVCT motor seems huge and i assume very heavy and adds rotating mass.

Do the lockout kits actaully replace the system or just lock out the existing heavy sprocket with yet another heavy piece, what about the phase locker?

seems like alot of drag and extra mass for the motor to deal with if we do not have / need TiVCT. I hope there is a lightweight single sprocket type like the pre TiVCT days - especially if i want to have a pure N.A. motor and need rpm.

thoughts?
 
Last edited:

Torch10th

I make hits
Established Member
Joined
Mar 16, 2004
Messages
7,408
Location
Evans, Colorado
If the phaser lockouts for the coyote are like that of the 4.6 cars, it's an added piece of mass.

One thing to consider though, is that while the mechanisms may be large and seemingly massive, this is still a valvetrain that has been tested by Ford reliably to at least 7500 rpm. FR500C cars are reportedly spinning the factory boss mill past 8000 without issue.

There's obviously some differences with the standard coyote mill as far as the valves and some running gear goes. The mechanisms as far as I know are primarily the same however.

Bottom line, unless you're building a high RPM road car, this is probably something that isn't even going to enter in to your equations. If you're spinning the car to 7000 or just beyond as you would with a standard intake car, it's really not going to matter much I don't think.

And anyway it wouldn't be more taxing than bolting a big blower that's run off the crank to the engine.
 

twistedneck

Active Member
Established Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2011
Messages
1,143
Location
Dearborn, MI
I would hope that after 2yrs someone would have machined up a set of sprockets to replace the huge engine slowing power gobbling phaser assemblies of the end of each cam.

If not, then it seems foolish to remove them because of the rotating mass penalty we still have to pay even when they are fully locked out.

Is there any truth to the thought that you can't run ti-vct with a radical camshaft? something about the cams not keeping up with the motor? We would simply have to make sure that even at worst case timing max out the valves still have clearance to piston.
 

BlackMamba3

New Member
Established Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2011
Messages
747
Location
Ft. Wainwright, AK
^^I know some of the drag guys who have built motors are running custom ground cams and I'm sure they're some what radical. Also, the Boss that's making over 1,000rwhp is running custom ground cams.
 

Torch10th

I make hits
Established Member
Joined
Mar 16, 2004
Messages
7,408
Location
Evans, Colorado
I would hope that after 2yrs someone would have machined up a set of sprockets to replace the huge engine slowing power gobbling phaser assemblies of the end of each cam.

If not, then it seems foolish to remove them because of the rotating mass penalty we still have to pay even when they are fully locked out.

Is there any truth to the thought that you can't run ti-vct with a radical camshaft? something about the cams not keeping up with the motor? We would simply have to make sure that even at worst case timing max out the valves still have clearance to piston.

That's kind of the purpose of having the TiVCT. It allows the use of more aggressive camshafts while maintaining more manners at the same time.

I think we're assuming here that these pieces are in fact so heavy as to induce noticeable power loss due to rotational inertia.

Keeping in mind that rotational mass grows almost exponentially as you move the weight away from center, it doesn't make nearly enough sense to focus on the cam sprockets as it does to focus on the wheels/tires, clutch plate, flywheel etc.

There' no shortage of documented 800+rwhp cars running around. Some with stock, or near stock engines.

If you're building an all out drag strip brawler and every 10th counts, this is definitely an area that could be looked at. However most racing classes where you'd be in that situation may actually prohibit that type of modification. Especially if it's any type of stock class.

it's a time/cost vs. benefit analysis. Spend time + money developing a lighter cam sprocket system that will be expensive and free up small amounts of power, or develop a lightweight flywheel that will be much cheaper and free up more power.

I don't think you're wrong, but I don't think it would be time or money well spent.
 
Last edited:

Users who are viewing this thread



Top