After getting everything assembled and cranking it up, with absolutely no problems, the exhaust note sounded off. The engine still sounded strong.

The tech noticed as he tightened down the rockers that the valves were ever slightly open. Two cylinders had 60 PSI while the other 4 had zero. The owner said he was amazed it sounded like it did with such horrible comp. in the cylinders.

After researching on my part into the cam I found out I got the 1987-1997 Purple Mopar Cam vs. '98-2007. I was doing the math for the one that had the more low end torque/cylinder compression not thinking about which one was designed for my model year. Oops.

They couldn't get enough shim'age to correct the offset so I ordered new pushrods. 9.500" and 9.560". I got both so they have the flexibility to test which one is best. The stock ones on there were 9.640. It should be cranked and running today.

 

IDK-
something doesn't sound right.

What year block did you use?

IDK that the Mopar 'purple' cam was available for the '99-'06 cam retainer plate engines. Do you have the part numbers for the two different cams?

If they decked the block to 0.000" and then used the stock length pushrods, what did they expect?
And a new different cam with ? different base circle, best to measure for correct fit of the pushrods.

 

It's a block for a 2001 built by golen. It was the camshaft. Adding shims at the rockers improved compression, but they had too use a lot and the numbers still weren't right. That's why I ordered new push rods.
I can only guess that the lobes for the pre-1998 models were longer.

The engine ran fine before with the block already decked to 0.00. It was the cam. The pushrods will fix that.

 

Leak-down compression testing has resulted in 60 PSI across the board in the cylinders with the shorter of the two push-rods.

Now they're going to cylinder 1 and are going to start adding shims I provided (.020 up to .040 for all 12 rockers) and see where that lands us. 0 to 60 PSI is an improvement but I sense that I will be ordering longer pushrods, and I'll probably get larger shims while I'm at it.

I'm waiting until they get back to me on how many shims they had to use down the line so I can get the exact length necessary.

 

wow still no results? seems like a lot of work and even more money for 325whp.

 

I was wrong. It was being tuned on the dyno last night when I called. I was thoroughly surprised.

I should have it tonight with my dyno sheets of before and after. Brace for impact bishes.

 

You have a '01 block with the cam retainer plate, Why go backward and use a old style cam that uses the pin-spring or rod method to control cam walk? You had a thrust bearing failure due to cam walk. Mike Jones Cams makes a '99+ cam for the cam retainer cam. The 29 cam is sooo little increase vs stock. You would be better off using a stock cam or get a Jones cam.
They are $250+shipping. These are his recommendations.
'Stroker Cam' 260/264 204/208@0.050" 1.6:1-0.472"/0.478"
'Boosted Cam' 260/272 204/216@0.050" 1.6:1-0.472"/0.488" LSA 113 Overlap 40
I have a 'boosted cam' sitting here next to me.

As far as pushrods, your shop needs to measure correctly the needed length of pushrod without any shims. The shims will throw off your valve train geometry.

 

Well it's too late now. This post has been up for 5 months. I was not aware of the differences. I also thought I ordered the correct one. I wasn't aware I had the older style.

Thrust bearing failure is highly likely due to the transmission. The bearings were all worn out due to cam-gear failure which I suspect is due to 12 quarts of oil in the engine thanks to my dad who said it was empty. It was already broken in by golen so I drove it for about 30 minutes total before it started making any noise. by the time I got where I was going and turned around 30 minutes later the noise increased drastically. After swapping out the oil and finding out I had 12 quarts in there, and more investigation, I deduced too much oil was reducing the oil flow. I also doubt my dad put any break in lube on the cam-synchronizer before he put it in. It probably went in bare-metal.

I'm trying to stay away from high lift cams. I wanted maximum cylinder pressure for bottom end torque and the mopar cam gave the best results according to all the options listed on the Jeepstrokers web-site. I've already had 2 past cam failure with aftermarket cams so I'm staying away from anything I don't trust. Another reason I went with the mopar. I don't want any more engine rebuilds.

 

I'm determined to blast the competition out of the water for CoTM.

 

Wait, you have a supercharger and only looking at 325hp?

 

Shots fired! Shots fired!

 

On 4-5 PSI with a torque oriented cam, yes. 325 is a conservative guess. The numbers I calculated were at 350. I could make more with a different style cam, but that's not the cam I want. It's not a highway race-rocket. I'd buy a motorcycle if I wanted that.

 

I understand not wanting a rocket, I got 285hp with my 4.9L and 315tq. A SC produces Tq and Hp at low RPMs so figured your numbers should be closer to your original math. My cam was custom designed and ground, which you could do to shift your powerband lower. The key is to play with the durations. Lift just opens the valve, but if the duration is still "stock" it's going to close just as fast as a stock lift cam. Duration will hold that valve open just a little longer for that maximum flow and full potential of the SC.
IMO, this should help you in getting the engine in it's intended powerband for your usage.

 

Lol. It's a military thing....:sniper:

 

You guys keep throwing out 285 and 325-350 HP, Are those crank HP numbers or rear wheel HP/tq numbers?