Djmouz63

I understand the complexities and work surrounding building/modifying our crankshafts, however i wish there was a more affordable solution than the practically $8k MHP crank. Just my opinion but would like to hear others.

Here is the link to the current offering...

http://www.modernhorsepower.com/cgi-...MC63MHPM156CBC

P.S. Dont get me wrong i love mhp and am looking forward to receiving their headers today and their customer service has been A+ just would like a more affordable cam

mr747

It's a pretty big investment for just cams

Couple more grand and you can buy a stage 2 supercharger kit

Weistec have head packages for the same power output with standard cams

ecampbell

Who is doing the tune for you? As FYI I am making over 1,000 HP with the stock cams.

Wobble64

for this to make sense, the heads need to be reworked also, so it will not end up with $8K.


That probably only makes sense if you want to race the car and blowers are not allowed. For most, a blower will be better value.

Merc63

Didn't know we have crankshafts?? You mean cam shafts ha ha.


I never seen the logic behind upgrading the cams on these cars. The engine/ecm is able to change over lap and timing. The only thing that is stable is the lift and duration. I doubt they are touching the lift, so probably and increase in duration for more top end at the sacrifice of bottom end.

I could see doing cams if we could increase intake lift, but I highly doubt that is possible with the stock clearances v to v and p to v.

Like mr747 says for the price get a blower and enjoy more torque through the whole rpm.

KillaC63

There is no chance anyone is making the same power with head porting alone as with upgraded camshafts. There just isnt enough meat left on the bone cylinder head wise to make those kinds of gains. I made reference to this in a post a week or so ago about head porting. When I did heads and cams on my Boss 302 we gained about 8-10HP from the head porting portion, the rest of the gains were pure cams. Thats because even though the Ford heads aren't as good as the MB ones from a design aspect, they are still amazing castings and there just isnt much left on the table out the factory door. My porter said on a typical modern four valve cylinder head he will see 25-30% gains from the valvejob part of the port, with my Boss heads he said based on the amount of overall work needed and performed 70% or more of the gains came from the valvejob alone. Now factor in the M156 heads being a better design to start and you can begin to see that porting heads is a waste of money no matter which direction you go with these cars.

roadtalontsi

the stock cams are already pretty badass. Putting some bigger ones in there are going to ruin the driveability of the car and make it miserable to drive. You may actually need a higher stall converter to make the car go not just because you want to launch harder. Not to mention the hours of tuning the factory engineers went through calibrating the stock cams, trust me no tuner has that kind of budget. Lets also mention the stock buckets already dont have the best track record, so putting even more stress on them is not a good idea.

KillaC63

A properly cammed engine will not lose power or torque anywhere across rpm band. Its when you overcam all the bad stuff happens. My boss didn't lose power or torque idle to redline with heads, cams, LTs, filter. From what I've read on the M156 cam problems its due to improper heat treating of the stock cams not the buckets. As long as the aftermarket cams are harder it should help not hurt the issue.

ecampbell

You can't really compare a ford to the merc. The CNC ported heads were making upwards of 70HP on with the SC on my car.

Merc63

Properly cammed for what? The street?

Unless you have variable cam abilities, a cam will always be a sacrifice of low end for top end torque, it's a matter of physics.

jrcart

Lol, is this thread about cams or cranks??? I made1200whp with a stock crank, I just recently modded my crank. You are wasting your money unless you plan in pushing your motor further than ecampbell and I.

PS, be careful with MHP.

jrcart

Spot on! Unless OP is looking for a dedicated race car both the stock cams and crank are fine for anything he will most likely throw at it.

KillaC63

M156s have VCT. The biggest problem most people have when camming a four valve engine is going too large. Just as with a two valve engine that kills area under the curve.

KillaC63

Please explain why you can't compare a ford four valve head to a MB four valve head?

How did you come to realize this 70HP gain, did you dyno or track test before and after installing them vs the stock heads?

Also if you're making 1000HP+ with a large supercharger, its not really the same thing as making 50HP without one. Two different worlds.

Thx!

KillaC63

Badass collection of cars! Are you selling your SLS Black Series? Either that or there's a clone of it on ebay lol.

KillaC63

Take it fwiw I emailed MHP asking about their cams and they sent me a dyno graph from a 2012 C63 Black series with their headers and x pipe with cats, and cams. This car does not have CF airboxes I posted that incorrectly before. Before with just headers x and tune and after (with cams) dynos attached. I don't see any losses under the curve and even they agreed head porting gains nothing close to what cams do for these engines. Super fast response time too. Last dyno is from a S4 car with ported heads headers x with no cats (Dads C63) plus cams, CF airboxes.

edit: Couldn't get last dyno to load so I had to copy and paste it, sorry!

ecampbell

Where has the OP gone?

Killa, jrcart and I saw these gains when we used Weistec heads several years ago. Weistec has the dyno graphs.

Everyone enjoy their xmas, I'm off to play as my boat is calling!

KillaC63

I would very much like to see them. I'll try emailing them, thank you!

Please enjoy your day, you must be somewhere warm!

Wobble64

According to these curves, cams bring no max torque increase, but less torque drop off at high rpm, leading to +20 whp. For 8 grand plus installation.


Interesting, but expensive horse powers.......

Djmouz63

sorry long holiday weekend.... and yea i meant cams not crank, i guess i shouldnt be drinking and posting haha

roadtalontsi

The difference in comparing ford mustang cams and amg cams.... Amg production is substantially lower than any v8 motor. Considering a new long block motor is about 1/5th the price you have to understand some short cuts on quality and materials are being made. Ford builds these motors with a compromise in power/emissions/fuel economy. They know if people arent happy they will modify them. Amg builds things with the intention that people will leave them alone since they are already so close to optimized. increasing lift alone is the only way to keep the same drivability and loose no power anywhere. The problem is with increase of lift you have to increase duration or the ramp rates are too quick. Increased ramp rates wear parts out. With increased lift you may also need different valve springs to avoid coil bind or valve float. Im sure they changed the durations aswell which will result in torque losses. We've all spoken our piece. it's your choice.

spend 13k$ on cams, headers, tune + install and get a car with poor streetability, loss in low end torque, questionable reliability and 520whp on a dynojet... or spend 15k$ on a stage 1 blower kit and make 500whp on a mustang dyno which is more like 550whp on a dynojet. gain massive low end torque and maintain streetability.

KillaC63

I fully understand the cost and demand part of the argument. No qualms there. My question to ecampbell was why can't you compare a Boss 302 four valve cylinder head (which is as I said not as good of a casting vs a M156 63 AMG) to a M156 head. When I say not as good that means theres more meat left on the bone to gain with porting. The better a cylinder head is to start the less gains are available from porting. Make sense?

You don't need huge lift to make power with a four valve cylinder head. With my Boss cams (450HP from 5.0L stock is on par with a 507HP 6.3 C63 tune from the factory from 6.2L) didn't add much if any lift, but a good bit of duration and thanks to the VCT which the M156 also has, I didn't lose any low end. The graphs I posted above prove there's no loss in low end with the M156 cams available. The aftermarket cams from MHP are also made from billet 9310 rod, which would eliminate any potential camshaft issues, I've read about a few motors with these problems. Also remember when you install a supercharger you do add stress to the snout of the crankshaft. Not saying thats an issue for anyone here but it is a fact.

Its nice to have options, and on the open track even though I was down 100rwhp or more to Boss's with superchargers after one lap or two, depending on outside temps, they could not pass me or leave me on a straightaway. Now at the dragstrip sure, I'm sure I'd get killed but that's not my bag.

It looks like you're making the same power with supercharger as Dads C63 did without one his 538rwhp was also done on a Dyno Jet as you can see. All things equal I'd take the setup without supercharger for more consistent performance. And you don't make supercharger torque and put extra stress on the driveline. Then there's the option of running both lol.

edit: Are dealers not voiding warranties with cars with superchargers? Cams you can't see. But are they really that cool about running a supercharger on the C63s?

Thx!

roadtalontsi

what warranties? These engines dont blow up when done right. aftermarket parts dont void an entire warranty just that component. Like if my radio breaks and saw my supercharger they would still fix the radio. However if a rod is sticking out the side of the block and they see a blower sure they'd be like heres a 50k$ bill to replace your engine. The cams arent the problem its the buckets. It's simple physics with cams you cant have your cake and eat it too. It changes the volumetric efficiency not selective parts. I dont care what their dyno sheets show. That company has a very shady reputation too. My numbers are on a mustang dyno not dynojet. You were passing people with blowers on their car's because they suck at driving and you didnt, Most people are too cheap to set their cars up correctly anyways. Most kits arent intended for road course use right out of the box. My old stage 2 sti approx 300whp/300wtq was killing it on the road course, hanging with 911 turbos, ferrari 430s, modded z06's etc... Not because im a god at driving, they all just sucked that bad. Didnt dad's use nitrous at some point too?

KillaC63

mustang dynos can read as high or higher than dyno jets, not like the traditional mustand dynos of yore.
The buckets are not the problem, the cams are made of the same material as the cams 9310 so there is no cam galling. Even if the buckets don't spin as they should. As far as physics, anything that allows more air into the motor will make it more powerful, this is true in the case of both your supercharger and cams in general. I'm thinking you don't have much experience with four valve cams, with a two valve head you need big lift and duration changes to make power up top. With a four valve properly designed camshaft(s) you simply increase area under the curve and length of powerband.
Correct some of my fellow racers can't drive as well as me, others literally kill my driving skills (if you can call them that lol).
So far my interaction with MHP has been very positive and I'm thinking of working with them with my CLA. Apparently they did the work on my C63 (purchased pre-owned a few weeks ago not knowing who had done what, just that it was fast and loud lol) and I'm quite pleased with it. Honestly when googling weistec I came up with some pretty unsavory information about one of the employees there. Not sure I'd want to be part of that fwiw.

Thx!

roadtalontsi

oh i didnt know you've replaced camshafts in the m156 engine and have direct experience with them. Im guessing you really believe that upgraded cams for a 4v and 2v head are really that different. The reason camshafts dont work like a supercharger is Intake port velocity. When you force air in it doesnt have a choice. When you suck air in you can only suck so much. Another piece of food for though... boost is actually measurement of restriction.

good luck with the cla45, amg didnt leave much on the table, already seeing turbo failures too.

alright im done trying to educate. take it or leave it. no more pissing match.