Newmans Cam Fail!
22-05-2010, 11:12 AM
#1
Newmans Cam Fail!
Well much like the rest of the CVH cam market these days it seems that the Newmans cams can also fall apart!
less than 1000miles......
From RST_Rob who came to APT yesterday with me, he was down on power by about 50bhp and this is why!
less than 1000miles......
From RST_Rob who came to APT yesterday with me, he was down on power by about 50bhp and this is why!
22-05-2010, 11:20 AM
#4
Regular Contributor
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Suffolk
Posts: 251
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I should of left my trusty kent cam in Lol! will have to see what mr newman say's monday when i ring him, Bought it on the 25th of march and done less than 1000miles!! Very gutted put it that way
Trending Topics
22-05-2010, 02:00 PM
#8
Truth is that while this Newman cam has failed and they do fail, they are still the best of whats available.
IMO, the fitting and adjustment needs to be methodical and clinical to give it a chance. If you don't, this is what will happen.
22-05-2010, 03:14 PM
#9
Regular Contributor
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Suffolk
Posts: 251
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think i had a bad egg this time round though as know i set the lifter cap correctly and fitted the cam in a clean contamination free inviroment. I know kent are spose to be shit but ive had no trouble with mine and only changed it due to the hype and so called benifits from having a newmans cam and gay solid lifter's. But will see what dave say's monday but either way round cant see me putting a newmans cam back in.
22-05-2010, 07:00 PM
#11
Too many posts.. I need a life!!
Hi Karlos,
Do you know what valvespring set up was used with the Newman camshaft?
Also what boost pressures and rpm were being run?
Very important "details" that many ignore. Lifters bouncing on the camshaft lobe
from insufficient spring pressure can kill a camshaft faster than you can read this reply.
High boost requires more spring pressure - open and closed.
I think that some shops (and cam companies) have started recomending low spring pressures to add life to possibly low quality camshaft cores and lifter bodies. Much of this can be corrected with increased oiling to the camshaft/lifter interface.
Reducing spring pressure on a low rpm use engine is probably not that big a deal.
However when 5000+ rpm and 15+ psi boost is used - Failure results.
Schrick cams in Germany has a CVH profile with extra oiling holes in the cam lobes themselves. (indicates oiling is a problem to me)
The CVH engines in Canada have a very large (0.25" diameter) hole for the cam lobe oiling.
The UK heads have that threaded insert with a small hole ( Some of you will know what I am talking about.) I personally would drill this restriction out, allowing more oiling to the cam lobes.
Spring pressure, for the CVH with the heavy valves, lifters and rocker arms, I would never use less spring pressure than the factory Ford spring.
In canada the factory spring is rated at 94 lbs closed and 200 open. This is with no
boost pressure, and on a very mild cam profile. A faster ramp cam profile, and boost pressure will surely require more pressure to keep the lifter on the lobe. Losing lifter control kills cams and lifters very quickly. I have seen Kent cams recommending a spring with only 70 lbs of seat (closed) pressure - recipie for lifter bounce.
Great to hear what others have set their spring pressures to. ( Hopefully most everyone measures this )
Just my opinion
Do you know what valvespring set up was used with the Newman camshaft?
Also what boost pressures and rpm were being run?
Very important "details" that many ignore. Lifters bouncing on the camshaft lobe
from insufficient spring pressure can kill a camshaft faster than you can read this reply.
High boost requires more spring pressure - open and closed.
I think that some shops (and cam companies) have started recomending low spring pressures to add life to possibly low quality camshaft cores and lifter bodies. Much of this can be corrected with increased oiling to the camshaft/lifter interface.
Reducing spring pressure on a low rpm use engine is probably not that big a deal.
However when 5000+ rpm and 15+ psi boost is used - Failure results.
Schrick cams in Germany has a CVH profile with extra oiling holes in the cam lobes themselves. (indicates oiling is a problem to me)
The CVH engines in Canada have a very large (0.25" diameter) hole for the cam lobe oiling.
The UK heads have that threaded insert with a small hole ( Some of you will know what I am talking about.) I personally would drill this restriction out, allowing more oiling to the cam lobes.
Spring pressure, for the CVH with the heavy valves, lifters and rocker arms, I would never use less spring pressure than the factory Ford spring.
In canada the factory spring is rated at 94 lbs closed and 200 open. This is with no
boost pressure, and on a very mild cam profile. A faster ramp cam profile, and boost pressure will surely require more pressure to keep the lifter on the lobe. Losing lifter control kills cams and lifters very quickly. I have seen Kent cams recommending a spring with only 70 lbs of seat (closed) pressure - recipie for lifter bounce.
Great to hear what others have set their spring pressures to. ( Hopefully most everyone measures this )
Just my opinion
22-05-2010, 07:09 PM
#12
Spoke to a guy at newmans the other day and he said they were the best..... but don't expect any more than 10,000 miles roller rockers are the way forwards i believe, canada1 above is the expert 
another option is to speak to a proper company about having some decent heat treatment/surface hardening.
Rob,
roller rockers are the way forwards i believe, canada1 above is the expert another option is to speak to a proper company about having some decent heat treatment/surface hardening.
Rob,
22-05-2010, 11:25 PM
#13
Too many posts.. I need a life!!
Hi Rob,
Not an expert by any means, just a Ford guy building and modifying all types of race engines since I was 15. Dad had an auto shop, and I got my Physics degree.
Details are very important to understand failures. Lowering valve spring pressures
to rediculous low values is not a fix for (allegedly)poor cam quality or poor cam lobe lubrication.
I have suspected for a long time that CVH cam problems are a direct result of inadequate
oiling to the lobe.
Other engines have had similar issues. One being the early Porsche 911 2.0 six. Early versions had oiling through hollow cams to holes in each lobe. Latter versions had oiling spray bars in the cam housings.
Pinto race engines (and Datsun L20B's if you are old enough to remember that one) use oiling spray bars to enhance camshaft lifetimes.
Solve the camshaft oiling issue, and you will solve your camshaft wear issue.
I know I am not one of the CVH "Gods" on this forum, so many will probably dismiss
what I put forth.
Not an expert by any means, just a Ford guy building and modifying all types of race engines since I was 15. Dad had an auto shop, and I got my Physics degree.
Details are very important to understand failures. Lowering valve spring pressures
to rediculous low values is not a fix for (allegedly)poor cam quality or poor cam lobe lubrication.
I have suspected for a long time that CVH cam problems are a direct result of inadequate
oiling to the lobe.
Other engines have had similar issues. One being the early Porsche 911 2.0 six. Early versions had oiling through hollow cams to holes in each lobe. Latter versions had oiling spray bars in the cam housings.
Pinto race engines (and Datsun L20B's if you are old enough to remember that one
) use oiling spray bars to enhance camshaft lifetimes.Solve the camshaft oiling issue, and you will solve your camshaft wear issue.
I know I am not one of the CVH "Gods" on this forum, so many will probably dismiss
what I put forth.
23-05-2010, 09:45 AM
#16
Professional Waffler
Nothing wrong with Kent cams providing you get one that doesn't eat itself inside of 5 minutes. My CVH35 Kent has done me proud over the years and is still good as gold, also ran one in my FRST again with no issues and my brother is currently using one in his FRST and that's made consistant power with 100% relaibility. Only reason it's now being binned off is he want's to take the car and engine to the next level so something a bit more trick is required
23-05-2010, 10:54 AM
#18
Hi Karlos,
Do you know what valvespring set up was used with the Newman camshaft?
Also what boost pressures and rpm were being run?
Very important "details" that many ignore. Lifters bouncing on the camshaft lobe
from insufficient spring pressure can kill a camshaft faster than you can read this reply.
High boost requires more spring pressure - open and closed.
I think that some shops (and cam companies) have started recomending low spring pressures to add life to possibly low quality camshaft cores and lifter bodies. Much of this can be corrected with increased oiling to the camshaft/lifter interface.
Reducing spring pressure on a low rpm use engine is probably not that big a deal.
However when 5000+ rpm and 15+ psi boost is used - Failure results.
Schrick cams in Germany has a CVH profile with extra oiling holes in the cam lobes themselves. (indicates oiling is a problem to me)
The CVH engines in Canada have a very large (0.25" diameter) hole for the cam lobe oiling.
The UK heads have that threaded insert with a small hole ( Some of you will know what I am talking about.) I personally would drill this restriction out, allowing more oiling to the cam lobes.
Spring pressure, for the CVH with the heavy valves, lifters and rocker arms, I would never use less spring pressure than the factory Ford spring.
In canada the factory spring is rated at 94 lbs closed and 200 open. This is with no
boost pressure, and on a very mild cam profile. A faster ramp cam profile, and boost pressure will surely require more pressure to keep the lifter on the lobe. Losing lifter control kills cams and lifters very quickly. I have seen Kent cams recommending a spring with only 70 lbs of seat (closed) pressure - recipie for lifter bounce.
Great to hear what others have set their spring pressures to. ( Hopefully most everyone measures this )
Just my opinion
Do you know what valvespring set up was used with the Newman camshaft?
Also what boost pressures and rpm were being run?
Very important "details" that many ignore. Lifters bouncing on the camshaft lobe
from insufficient spring pressure can kill a camshaft faster than you can read this reply.
High boost requires more spring pressure - open and closed.
I think that some shops (and cam companies) have started recomending low spring pressures to add life to possibly low quality camshaft cores and lifter bodies. Much of this can be corrected with increased oiling to the camshaft/lifter interface.
Reducing spring pressure on a low rpm use engine is probably not that big a deal.
However when 5000+ rpm and 15+ psi boost is used - Failure results.
Schrick cams in Germany has a CVH profile with extra oiling holes in the cam lobes themselves. (indicates oiling is a problem to me)
The CVH engines in Canada have a very large (0.25" diameter) hole for the cam lobe oiling.
The UK heads have that threaded insert with a small hole ( Some of you will know what I am talking about.) I personally would drill this restriction out, allowing more oiling to the cam lobes.
Spring pressure, for the CVH with the heavy valves, lifters and rocker arms, I would never use less spring pressure than the factory Ford spring.
In canada the factory spring is rated at 94 lbs closed and 200 open. This is with no
boost pressure, and on a very mild cam profile. A faster ramp cam profile, and boost pressure will surely require more pressure to keep the lifter on the lobe. Losing lifter control kills cams and lifters very quickly. I have seen Kent cams recommending a spring with only 70 lbs of seat (closed) pressure - recipie for lifter bounce.
Great to hear what others have set their spring pressures to. ( Hopefully most everyone measures this )
Just my opinion
Spoke to a guy at newmans the other day and he said they were the best..... but don't expect any more than 10,000 miles roller rockers are the way forwards i believe, canada1 above is the expert
another option is to speak to a proper company about having some decent heat treatment/surface hardening.
Rob,
roller rockers are the way forwards i believe, canada1 above is the expert another option is to speak to a proper company about having some decent heat treatment/surface hardening.
Rob,
23-05-2010, 03:02 PM
#20
Too many posts.. I need a life!!
Crazy cage,
There is something challenging and wonderful whan an old CVH is made to perform well.
Not everyone has the ability to do it right. 200 HP is relatively straight forward.
250 HP requires more attention to details. 300+ HP requires a knowledgeable builder - and these there are very few.
Why build a zetec? Crap when you compare it to a new Duratec.
This thread is about CVH cam wear, not what engine is "better".
There is something challenging and wonderful whan an old CVH is made to perform well.
Not everyone has the ability to do it right. 200 HP is relatively straight forward.
250 HP requires more attention to details. 300+ HP requires a knowledgeable builder - and these there are very few.
Why build a zetec? Crap when you compare it to a new Duratec.
This thread is about CVH cam wear, not what engine is "better".
23-05-2010, 04:14 PM
#21
Too many posts.. I need a life!!
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: United Kingdom southend on sea
Posts: 992
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
3 Posts
I agree with Canada1 on this.Going Zetec would not cause less cam wear and plus the fact you would have to change two cams.Double the price if all goes down hill.
23-05-2010, 06:01 PM
#23
PassionFord Post Whore!!
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Maldon, Essex!
Posts: 4,186
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hey could be worse, you could be my engine that has a piper 285 t2 cam in it, and the engine hasnt been properly run in about 4years now so god knows what thats going to do the first time i boot it when i use it again in estimate of say 4months time.
23-05-2010, 09:39 PM
#24
Too many posts.. I need a life!!
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: worcester
Posts: 934
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It does come down to the point that are the cams getting enough oil? I bet most of us on here can hold our hands up and say we have had a worn cam. Now surely kent, piper and newmans can get it wrong. My way of thinking is are the oil pumps up to the job? How old are they? Are they worn? The other thing that goes through my mind is can the oil ports be opened up in the head to have better flow?
24-05-2010, 07:02 AM
#26
Regular Contributor
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Suffolk
Posts: 251
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oil pump is a genuine ford one with a high pressure burton power spring fitted. Also a oil pressure gauge is fitted so know my pressure is good. Hoping to speak to newmans today to see whats happening.
24-05-2010, 08:48 AM
#27
Canada1 Has got the right idea. All my heads on my cars have had extra oil ways drilled and also the casting on the head near the rockers has been filled down to allow more oil around them. I also have roller rockers in one of my heads and never had a single issue with any cam shafts that have been fitted over the years from CVH35 to Newman whats init now.
You might be able to spot some differences if you look closely.
You might be able to spot some differences if you look closely.
24-05-2010, 09:23 AM
#28
I've found that life I needed.. It's HERE!!
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: hertfordshire
Posts: 1,291
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Canada1 Has got the right idea. All my heads on my cars have had extra oil ways drilled and also the casting on the head near the rockers has been filled down to allow more oil around them. I also have roller rockers in one of my heads and never had a single issue with any cam shafts that have been fitted over the years from CVH35 to Newman whats init now.
You might be able to spot some differences if you look closely.
You might be able to spot some differences if you look closely.
24-05-2010, 09:44 AM
#29
from my experience looks like a cam failure from lack of oil, the first oil journel i open up to 2mm then chamfer the rest, at high rpms simply not enough oil in the head a common problem in other sohc engines too oil spray bar gets blocked very quickly or when hot the journels restrict oil flow. The cam aggressive ramp angles creates wear more than just lift or duration or valve springs tbh sadly pot luck the only cam i trust these days is catcams you can request specific case hardended and heat treated cam for extra life.
25-05-2010, 01:49 PM
#30
Too many posts.. I need a life!!
I certainly agree with Jano (Versus)?
Oiling to the cam lobe and lifter are critical for longevity.
Maybe this oiling modification is a trade "secret"?
I think everyone assembling a CVH should do the cam oiling mods.
Notice factory oiling holes - very large openings - do not get plugged. These holes could be radiused to allow a better oil drain path as well.
North American roller rocker arms. I think these cost about 250 Pounds.
Who made those UK roller rocker arms?
Cheers
Oiling to the cam lobe and lifter are critical for longevity.
Maybe this oiling modification is a trade "secret"?
I think everyone assembling a CVH should do the cam oiling mods.
Notice factory oiling holes - very large openings - do not get plugged. These holes could be radiused to allow a better oil drain path as well.
North American roller rocker arms. I think these cost about 250 Pounds.
Who made those UK roller rocker arms?
Cheers
25-05-2010, 04:31 PM
#32
Canada1 i have seen similar ones pictured by you above snaped in half on youtube. Down to the material they are made of i think? Are they made in the US or import from China.
The ones i use are what burtonpower sold many years ago. These were around 400-500gbp back in 1985 which is why they are so hard to find as noone bought them
The ones i use are what burtonpower sold many years ago. These were around 400-500gbp back in 1985 which is why they are so hard to find as noone bought them
25-05-2010, 04:36 PM
#33
haha just noticed the question mark..
I was told i had to change my username from OddKidd Creations because im not a trader on here...
so i did to Jano OddKidd.
but i wasnt allowed to keep that either??
so i had to settle for Versus (Which is my DJ name).
Whatever makes them happy i spose.
I was told i had to change my username from OddKidd Creations because im not a trader on here...
so i did to Jano OddKidd.
but i wasnt allowed to keep that either??
so i had to settle for Versus (Which is my DJ name).
Whatever makes them happy i spose.
25-05-2010, 06:18 PM
#35
20K+ Super Poster.
I think i had a bad egg this time round though as know i set the lifter cap correctly and fitted the cam in a clean contamination free inviroment. I know kent are spose to be shit but ive had no trouble with mine and only changed it due to the hype and so called benifits from having a newmans cam and gay solid lifter's. But will see what dave say's monday but either way round cant see me putting a newmans cam back in.
tabetha
25-05-2010, 06:47 PM
#37
Jano do your lifters have a roller tip too?
Another problem is where the oil comes from, lots of engine (these too i believe) pic up the oil feed for the head from the centre main, a better design is to take the oil feed for the head just after the oil filter....
Even then oil filters only filter to 10 microns (ish), this is more than okay for bearings as the 'gap' between a bearing and journal is large enough to avoid any damage.... problem with cam lobes is that there is obviously no gap and massive wear can occur even with metallic particles smaller than 10 microns as we have seen. I have seen some heads with magnetic pic ups after the oil galleries (mostly agricultural) as most of the damaging particulate in the oil is ferrous.
Another massive problem with kent/piper etc is that their surface treatments are near to nill, especially compared to an oem camshaft of good quality.
Canada1 have you done any flow testing of inlet manifolds btw?
Rob,
Another problem is where the oil comes from, lots of engine (these too i believe) pic up the oil feed for the head from the centre main, a better design is to take the oil feed for the head just after the oil filter....
Even then oil filters only filter to 10 microns (ish), this is more than okay for bearings as the 'gap' between a bearing and journal is large enough to avoid any damage.... problem with cam lobes is that there is obviously no gap and massive wear can occur even with metallic particles smaller than 10 microns as we have seen. I have seen some heads with magnetic pic ups after the oil galleries (mostly agricultural) as most of the damaging particulate in the oil is ferrous.
Another massive problem with kent/piper etc is that their surface treatments are near to nill, especially compared to an oem camshaft of good quality.
Canada1 have you done any flow testing of inlet manifolds btw?
Rob,
Last edited by Rob_DOHC; 25-05-2010 at 06:49 PM.
