Extreme Terrain
4x4Wire Trail Talk Forums: Jeep, Toyota, Mitsubishi, Pajero, Isuzu, Kia, 4WD, 4x4, SUV, Off-Road and OutdoorWire Forums


Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate Thread
Page 3 of 5 1 2 3 4 5
Re: Engnbldr 261 Cam + 22re = Problems [Re: engnbldr] #796076 03/12/07 07:18 PM
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 3,935
bkg Offline
Roll Me Over
Quote

>>>*The gentleman's email came in first with the same heading. I doubt he means anything by it.

It doesn't bother me any, I can't keep cams in my building anyway. I have 200 on back order right now and had to quit listing until I get restock.

The simple fact IS that any cam change combined with other additions certainly CAN equal problems, we have no choice but to design from a bone stock application, of course.

So I want a solution, just trying to help, figure out what is going on. I am way behind a lot of you folks on tuning problems, thus I suggested the gentleman post his concerns here so my peers can offer help.

Since the vast majority of users report nice results, I need to know what is different here.

That is why I personally bumped this thread, I could have just let it go off into cyberland and forgot it.

I think that what is going on is a combination of additions, these engines are sensitive to changes. The 261C is so close to the Comp Cams 260 that some mistake it, not noticing the nose design for quieter operation and the fatter ramps. The profile is simple and will normally have zero detrimental effect on the way the engine runs, simply adding air flow potential for some power gains.

Yet some report a chattery idle, some report smooth as silk, some report a need to bump up the idle speed by around 50-100 or so, and rarely...something wrong!

Of course if another problem exists, adding intake airflow can aggravate it. I just want to know.


I certainly didn't mean to step on toes, Ted. I highly respect you and know your components are used by thousands w/o problem. I've made the mistake in the past of narrowing the potential cause to one item and forgetting that 15 other things have changed or are not adjusted, and that typically ends up in a bad scenerio (for me). A holistic view of the problem is necessary.


Brian K. Gallus
I have nothing important to say.
Re: Engnbldr 261 Cam + 22re = Problems [Re: bkg] #796077 03/12/07 10:20 PM
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 3,576
engnbldr Offline
Roll Me Over
*****


I certainly didn't mean to step on toes, Ted. I highly respect you and know your components are used by thousands w/o problem. I've made the mistake in the past of narrowing the potential cause to one item and forgetting that 15 other things have changed or are not adjusted, and that typically ends up in a bad scenerio (for me). A holistic view of the problem is necessary.

_________________________________________________________

>>>*Not a prob. I have dealt with drivability issues for over 45 years, everything from Flathead Fords to the types of engines we deal with in today's world.

No way can I ever get a handle on all the possibles I guess, especially when the job is hundreds or even thousands of miles away.

For this gentleman's situation, that "set at 5? without the computer jumped and it runs OK." Just keeps tugging at my mind.

This of course suggests the cam it timed straight up instead of at 11:30 position like it is supposed to be. Most engines do set up exactly opposite, of course the 22RE does not.

I suppose there could be a couple of bent valves from torquing the head down with the cam out of time a bit, but a leakdown test catches that easily.

So if not the obvious, then one needs to start at the basics. If the engine won't run properly timed, but does run improperly timed, then of course something else is out of time..No amount of tuning or adjustment will correct that until the foundation is correct....I would be curious to see a pic of the top cam gear with the engine on TDC at this point....*EB


*Beats the he** outa me!....*LOL**...
Re: Engnbldr 261 Cam + 22re = Problems [Re: engnbldr] #796078 03/12/07 11:32 PM
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 11
S
StevenC Offline OP
Need a Spot
I do not have the truck in my hands at the moment. Its about 40 miles away from me.

I am confident that the cam is installed correctly. If it was off as much as you mentioned, there would be obvious issues in how it was runnning.

It does not misfire.

It revs freely.


This weekend I will have an opportunity to take another look at it. I did have my friend remove the TPS for me and picked up a new one at NAPA. The new one seems to have quite a bit more resistance than the old one. Figure it cannot hurt to swap it out.

Quote

I suppose there could be a couple of bent valves from torquing the head down with the cam out of time a bit, but a leakdown test catches that easily.


The head did not have rocker installed until the cam was correctly timed with the chain.

We used your timing chain setup on another 22re with a stock configuration and set the cam the same way as I did on this one and has had no problems to date with 15k miles on it.

Re: Engnbldr 261 Cam + 22re = Problems [Re: engnbldr] #796079 03/12/07 11:44 PM
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 11
S
StevenC Offline OP
Need a Spot
Quote
Quote
Just for the sake of clarity, the title of this thread should be changed. I don't like seeing a title imply blame on a specific part and then seeing that many additional parts were added at the same time and numerous components not adjusted properly. The title itself might be enough to turn a person off of a product that isn't related to the issue at all.


>>>*The gentleman's email came in first with the same heading. I doubt he means anything by it.

It doesn't bother me any, I can't keep cams in my building anyway. I have 200 on back order right now and had to quit listing until I get restock.

The simple fact IS that any cam change combined with other additions certainly CAN equal problems, we have no choice but to design from a bone stock application, of course.

So I want a solution, just trying to help, figure out what is going on. I am way behind a lot of you folks on tuning problems, thus I suggested the gentleman post his concerns here so my peers can offer help.

Since the vast majority of users report nice results, I need to know what is different here.

That is why I personally bumped this thread, I could have just let it go off into cyberland and forgot it.

I think that what is going on is a combination of additions, these engines are sensitive to changes. The 261C is so close to the Comp Cams 260 that some mistake it, not noticing the nose design for quieter operation and the fatter ramps. The profile is simple and will normally have zero detrimental effect on the way the engine runs, simply adding air flow potential for some power gains.

Yet some report a chattery idle, some report smooth as silk, some report a need to bump up the idle speed by around 50-100 or so, and rarely...something wrong!

Of course if another problem exists, adding intake airflow can aggravate it. I just want to know.

*But I do have one suggestion for a possible test. If the current lash setting is our suggested minimum of .007" intake and .009" exhaust, then open up the valve lash to stock .008" intake and .012" exhaust. This effectively shortens the exhaust duration by a surprisng amount and makes it tougher for the exhaust to overscavenge which the very free flowing LCE header can do. The design runs noisier there but that is harmless.......*EB




Also one more question.

You mention that the cam is very close to the Compcamps 260. The compcams has a lift of .440 while yours has a lift of .410


However my question is, if you are willing to reveal it, is what is your lobe separation angle? This can affect a camshaft greatly on EFI.

Re: Engnbldr 261 Cam + 22re = Problems [Re: StevenC] #796080 03/13/07 12:56 AM
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 3,576
engnbldr Offline
Roll Me Over
*****


However my question is, if you are willing to reveal it, is what is your lobe separation angle? This can affect a camshaft greatly on EFI.
______________________________________________________

>>>*It's no secret, it is 110?....*EB


*Beats the he** outa me!....*LOL**...
Re: Engnbldr 261 Cam + 22re = Problems [Re: engnbldr] #796081 03/13/07 01:38 AM
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 3,935
bkg Offline
Roll Me Over
Quote


However my question is, if you are willing to reveal it, is what is your lobe separation angle? This can affect a camshaft greatly on EFI.


Ted's cam isn't going to cause EFI problems. That's just the bottom line, like it or not.

So let's actually start looking for the root cause here...
What all have you done to the engine during the rebuild? List every spec before and after and I'm sure we'll be able to help find the true cause...


Brian K. Gallus
I have nothing important to say.
Re: Engnbldr 261 Cam + 22re = Problems [Re: bkg] #796082 03/13/07 03:06 AM
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 215
subliminaltrips Offline
Wheeler
i could not agree more.... ive been using teds 261 cam on a carb application none the less but i have seen an efi truck run like that with a stock cam. how is your afm? i also think yu may have cam timing issues or are a tooth off on the dizzy.

Re: Engnbldr 261 Cam + 22re = Problems [Re: bkg] #796083 03/13/07 03:31 AM
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 16
8
84_rust_bucket Offline
Need a Spot
I know how it feels to do all that work and you just cant get it to run right,you know that most of the time its something simple you just overlooked. Thank God for this forum!I'm running the same cam as you , the only difference is that my 22r is carb'ed.Once you get your TPS adjusted I would bring it up to NO.1 and pull the valve cover and check your timing mark and dist. dowel in the cam should at twelve,timing dot to the left and the rotor should be at 11:00.I know with chevy's if the cam timing is'nt right YOU WILL KNOW right off but with these 22r's it may have a lack of power or piston to valve contact.This may not help but I can sure feel your pain.Good luck!!!

Re: Engnbldr 261 Cam + 22re = Problems [Re: 84_rust_bucket] #796084 03/13/07 07:49 PM
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 361
ToyotaT Offline
Mudrunner
I've been using this cam for about 2 years and love the combo of gas mileage and low end torque. Here is what I have found after a couple years of tinkering..

It does not want to be at 750 rpm. Sometimes I go as high as 1000, but can get by with 900. Depends on how hard I run my alternator as to how I adjust my idle. This is with a brand new head from EB and a low end at 30 over as in my title.

I do find myself tinkering with the idle from season to season honestly, but I'm sold on the torque. For in town and interstate driving at about 3K it is perfect IMO. I've managed to pull almost 25 mpg on some trips where I've been between 55 and 60.


85 Toy Pickup
89 block 30 over and EB RV head/261 cam
Re: Engnbldr 261 Cam + 22re = Problems [Re: ToyotaT] #796085 03/13/07 09:39 PM
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 11
S
StevenC Offline OP
Need a Spot
Quote
I've been using this cam for about 2 years and love the combo of gas mileage and low end torque. Here is what I have found after a couple years of tinkering..

It does not want to be at 750 rpm. Sometimes I go as high as 1000, but can get by with 900. Depends on how hard I run my alternator as to how I adjust my idle. This is with a brand new head from EB and a low end at 30 over as in my title.

I do find myself tinkering with the idle from season to season honestly, but I'm sold on the torque. For in town and interstate driving at about 3K it is perfect IMO. I've managed to pull almost 25 mpg on some trips where I've been between 55 and 60.


Thank you for posting, and proving im not the only crazy one here that cannot get it to idle nicely.

Page 3 of 5 1 2 3 4 5

Moderated by  4Crawler, 4x4Wire, kewlynx 







4x4Wire Social:

| 4x4Wire on FaceBook |


OutdoorWire, 4x4Wire, JeepWire, TrailTalk, MUIRNet-News, and 4x4Voice are all trademarks and publications of OutdoorWire, Inc. and MUIRNet Consulting.
Copyright (c) 1999-2019 OutdoorWire, Inc and MUIRNet Consulting - All Rights Reserved, no part of this publication may be reproduced in any form without express written permission
You may link freely to this site, but no further use is allowed without the express written permission of the owner of this material.
All corporate trademarks are the property of their respective owners.

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.3
(Release build 20190728)
PHP: 7.4.33 Page Time: 0.008s Queries: 16 (0.005s) Memory: 0.6530 MB (Peak: 0.7809 MB) Data Comp: Off Server Time: 2026-05-29 18:58:38 UTC
Valid HTML 5 and Valid CSS