Better torque and freeway, I assume 235 is it?

 

All three so close but I would pick the 231 or 232 with their least overlap.
231..206/214..32* overlap
232..206/212..27* -- my choice.
235..210/218..36*
901..204/216..42*

 

Comp 232
68-232-4

Factory Rocker Arm Ratio
0.460 int.
0.476 exh.

 

232 list "great torque" on Comp Cams web site.

I posted above to help me follow along.

I know cams are subjective, hence the reason for so many. Like shocks. Some like one, while other hate it.

The 232 seems to be more for torque and nothing else. Vs, the 235 list as "good torque and excellent mid range"

Personally, I am looking for more mid range. I assume mid range is for freeway speed. The 235 looks like it adds more torque and more mid range according to Comp Cams site.

 

Ill pull the trigger shortly. But, keep coming back to the Crane Cam

753901

9.5 compression ratio advised

Factory Rocker Arm Ratio
0.456 int.
0.484 exh

204/216

 

I like the Crane and the Comp 231, 232, and 235. I think that it would take an engine dyno, not a chassis dyno, to notice the difference in the four. I think idle quality between all of them would almost be identical.

All of the comp selections were good recommendations Marty. Post #39 I think it was, is something that everyone buying a cam should read.

Crawler, your choice man. I don't know that you will notice a difference between any of them. Like I said, it would probably take an engine dyno to notice the difference in power.

 

I put the comp cams Xtreme 4x4 68-232-4 in my my Jeep while I was doing a full engine rebuild. I bought the complete kit with the chain set, and lifters. This kit was cheaper then a stock cam kit at the time. Runs great. I have nothing really to compare it to because the engine was trash when I got it. This is the only cam Comp Cams makes for the fuel injected 4.0. I am happy with it

 

Copy/Paste. I found it.

COMP 68-231-4
.465"/.485" int/exh
250*/256*int/exh
30* overlap

OK! High lift = High performance cam
Duration = mild cam
overlap = stock cam???????
IVC= 56*
So, Hi lift cam and mild every thing else
1500 rpm T=272 and HP 78( Both or more then the stock cam)
MT was 303 at 3500 rpm( more torque at a lower rpm)
M,HP was was 223( less max hp and is at 500 less or lower rpm)
IVC is 56* and created a DCR of 8.06:1 (much higher running compression(DCR)

Crane 753901
.456"/.484"
260*/ 272*
42* overlap
IVC 61*

Lift = High performance
Duration= mild to High performance
Overlap= fit in at mid mild
IVC 61* bring the DCR in at 7.80:1( Hmmmm lowers DCR then the comp cam(you can get away with more SCR) but........the stock cam has the lowest DCR
This shocked me and is what i meant above, when i said i learned something.
So, HP lift,
mid to HP Duration,
and overlap that is more close to mild.......so even thow this cam is the biggest cam showed so far, vac brakes shouldn't be affected............

1500 "T" 256 and "HP" 73(More T and HP then stock renix cam)
"MT" 4000 RPM and 301
"M,HP" 5000 and 246

 

Stock cam is 41.6* overlap, renix 46*. This just bleeds off too much compression.
It is not the IVC(albeit slightly related) but the overlap that bleds down the DCR.
Milder duration will give better idle vacuum and MAP sensor function.

What program are you plugging all these cams into? Compare the 231 and the 232.

 

Program? Everything listed on my jeep is in my signature. I can't compare those. What I posted above, I found online searching.

I would assume the 232 is less HP in less rpm based by what was posted since the valve duration is lower?

 

These red numbers, where were these found?

 

I found them on a "stroker" site. I can't remember at the moment. Sick Been up all night.

Update: Found it
http://www.jeepstrokers.com/forum/vi...php?f=34&t=145

Here is stock I think
"T"(torque) at 1500 rpm 233 and HP at 67
"MT"(Max Torque) came in at 4000 RPM and 278
M,HP (Max Horse Power) came in at 243@5000
DCR is 6.97:1

VS

231
1500 rpm T=272 and HP 78( Both or more then the stock cam)
MT was 303 at 3500 rpm( more torque at a lower rpm)
M,HP was was 223( less max hp and is at 500 less or lower rpm)
IVC is 56* and created a DCR of 8.06:1 (much higher running compression(DCR)

VS

901
1500 "T" 256 and "HP" 73(More T and HP then stock renix cam)
"MT" 4000 RPM and 301
"M,HP" 5000 and 246

 

The 232 even with slightly less duration should make more HP b/c less overlap anda slightly higher DCR.
In all, these 4 are so close except for the overlap. If you have higher compression you can use more overlap to 'bleed' down some of that compression to a lower DCR. But you will be 'blowing' some of that charge air/fuel out the exhaust. I would stick to a lower overlap at the same or very similar duration.

 

Post #57 updated. I am on the fence. 231 isn't bad when you compare it now. I can't find specs on the 232

 

That thread you quoted, he made a few assumptions and used the wrong numbers for his calculations.
Seat to seat duration is not useful, not a true look at a cam. That is why everyone looks at the 0.050" duration. The new cams have more aggressive ramps and more 'area under the curve' with respect to time and duration of valve lift.
The 'stock' cam he used 270* which looks aggressive but only has 191* duration at 0.050". And a DCR of 6.97
The 231 cam has 250*/256* seat to seat which 'looks' smaller but has 206*/214* duration at 0.050". Clearly a more aggressive cam. And a DCR of 8.06. It will have more area under the curve that the stock renix cam. He did not take that into account when he ran his numbers.

He also used a 4.6L stroker and 9.44:1 CR.