Date:         Thu, 28 Mar 2002 21:45:36 -0600
Reply-To:     "Smola, Tony" <TSmola@TRIBUNE.COM>
Sender:       Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From:         "Smola, Tony" <TSmola@TRIBUNE.COM>
Subject:      Performance Cams.....to cam or to ratio rocker....that is the que
              stion
Comments: cc: Robert Donalds <bostneng@fcl-us.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

Robert and all other gearheads, ....first of all thanks to Robert Donalds on
all his work with performance upgrades....I know I'm a pain in his
side.....but.

Here is my question:

Let's say one wants to get the benefits of ratio rockers without putting
ratio rockers in and suffering excessive   sideload on the valve guides.

The stock 1.9L cam grind is different than the 2.1L......But what is the
lift and duration differences of each cam?
Does the 2.1L cam profile work with digijet well?

Can ojne duplicate the lift and duration of ratio rockers if one maps out
the lift on a motor with ratio rockers
and puts those numbers onto a cam.....therefore eliminating the need of
ratio rockers?

With ratio rockers, what is the lift and duration profile?
Can a cam be ground to those specs........to duplicate the retainer movement
without actually having ratio rockers?

Is there a euro grind for the Vanagon?.....

Does the Syncro or Syncro 16 have a different cam profile than the rest of
us commoners?

Has anyone done a cam profile chart showing lift, duration, dwell etc for
each cam for the vanagon?

Malibu Tony------85' Westy    building a 2.2L   waterboxer....just working
out the details first....thx Bob