Engle W125 camshaft and 1.35:1 ratio rockers ?

[SMO]

Hi !
Do you think Engle W125 works with 1.35:1 ratio rockers ? I thougt my rockers where 1.25:1 but my dial indicator tells me 14.20mm (0.559") lift @ valve. My rockers have a ratio at that moment 1.35:1,  The cam shaft has 0.418" lift att cam (10.61mm )The valve/piston clearance are ok atleast at my first test.

Do you think this cam will work with this ratio ?

Hope you can help me.

The engine is a 2332cc with 044 CNC wedge port heads and IDF 48 carbs.

//Magnus

[Rasser]

It will make lots of power, but be very hard on the valvetrain.

I had a w130 in my old engine with scat 1.25:1 rockers (which measured out to 1.33:1). It had lots of power, but I had problems with springs breaking (Berg, scat). Eventually I bought JPM springs, and problem seemed to disappear. I had perfect rocker geomtry, enough clearance before coil bind, and enough piston to valve clearance too.

I wouldn´t do it again, it is simply to hard on the springs/valvetrain.

The W cams are only meant for 1.1:1 rockers.

[SMO]

It will make lots of power, but be very hard on the valvetrain.

I had a w130 in my old engine with scat 1.25:1 rockers (which measured out to 1.33:1). It had lots of power, but I had problems with springs breaking (Berg, scat). Eventually I bought JPM springs, and problem seemed to disappear. I had perfect rocker geomtry, enough clearance before coil bind, and enough piston to valve clearance too.

I wouldn´t do it again, it is simply to hard on the springs/valvetrain.

The W cams are only meant for 1.1:1 rockers.

Hi !
Thanx for your advice, I think it´s little bit strange that (in your case Scat 1.25:1 rockers) and in my case Empi 1.25:1 rockers both measured out 1.33:1 ? Think there are alot of people who has same problem without know about it ? how can they build rockers like that ..

Wounder if w125 is so much harder than a FK89 cam ? also 0.416" lift @ cam ? but i don´t know that open/close time and degree FK89 has.
Maybee some one can calc on that ?
i have used this setup for one season now but i notice this when i bought new wedge port heads.....

[Bruce]

... I had problems with springs breaking (Berg, scat)....

The cause of this is over revving.

.... (in your case Scat 1.25:1 rockers) and in my case Empi 1.25:1 rockers both measured out 1.33:1 ? Think there are alot of people who has same problem without know about it ? how can they build rockers like that .....

It isn't a design flaw of the rockers.

If you change the length of your pushrods in your engine, you will get a different ratio.  If you put shims under the rocker blocks, you will get a different ratio.  If you put a different cam in your engine and measure your existing rockers, you will get a significantly different ratio. 

As you give a rocker more cam lift, the ratio increases.  That's because the contact point of the rocker tip to the valve moves further away from the rocker's pivot point as you increase the cam lift.
So what cam should they use when measuring the ratio for advertising purposes?  What cam is the standard? 
That cam is the STOCK cam.  If you measure your rockers with a stock cam, they will come out to exactly 1.25:1

Wounder if w125 is so much harder than a FK89 cam ? .....

I had a W-125 cam in one of my engines for 100,000 km.

[SMO]

... I had problems with springs breaking (Berg, scat)....

The cause of this is over revving.

.... (in your case Scat 1.25:1 rockers) and in my case Empi 1.25:1 rockers both measured out 1.33:1 ? Think there are alot of people who has same problem without know about it ? how can they build rockers like that .....

It isn't a design flaw of the rockers.

If you change the length of your pushrods in your engine, you will get a different ratio.  If you put shims under the rocker blocks, you will get a different ratio.  If you put a different cam in your engine and measure your existing rockers, you will get a significantly different ratio. 

As you give a rocker more cam lift, the ratio increases.  That's because the contact point of the rocker tip to the valve moves further away from the rocker's pivot point as you increase the cam lift.
So what cam should they use when measuring the ratio for advertising purposes?  What cam is the standard? 
That cam is the STOCK cam.  If you measure your rockers with a stock cam, they will come out to exactly 1.25:1

Wounder if w125 is so much harder than a FK89 cam ? .....

I had a W-125 cam in one of my engines for 100,000 km.

Hi Bruce !
Ok i´ll understand now, i thought that i should have the right ratio on my rockers if i had the best rocker geometry ?
se my picture at http://www.ausbrechervwmange.blogspot.com , it tells i have a stright line on the adjustment screw and push rod @ 0.50 lift at cam and the angel between valve and rocker is about 90 degree.
at maximum lift i have over 1mm clearance on the springs.
http://www.ausbrechervwmange.blogspot.com/

[Sarge]

Still my favorite cam .  Leave the higher lift rockers alone; they're hard on equipment as others have posted.

[Bruce]

What's this notch for?

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_DQFlAjUcz4o/R6sK7OgLiwI/AAAAAAAAAWk/48jnQJEiRbM/s400/DSC00644.JPG

[SMO]

What's this notch for?

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_DQFlAjUcz4o/R6sK7OgLiwI/AAAAAAAAAWk/48jnQJEiRbM/s400/DSC00644.JPG

There was a small pice missing on the lifter, see this picture, i had to do something. And it works well.
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_DQFlAjUcz4o/R6cK1OgLisI/AAAAAAAAAWE/ECVxYvFT__Q/s1600-h/DSC00637.JPG

[SMO]

Still my favorite cam .  Leave the higher lift rockers alone; they're hard on equipment as others have posted.

Yes i like it much too, Works very well with big engines. I drive the car to work and use it on track. I hope for more power this summer with new heads.
My Street Eliminator 2000 heads had to small intake ports, and i had a buyer on them so it was easy to buy new cnc heads.

Question is if i use this setup with length of push rods and geometry. Is this setup harder on valvetrain than a FK89 ? or cams like that.
otherwise i have to change the geometry so i have 1.25:1..

[SMO]

I had a W-125 cam in one of my engines for 100,000 km.

What kind of rockers did you have ?

[Bruce]

Still my favorite cam .  Leave the higher lift rockers alone; they're hard on equipment as others have posted.

...otherwise i have to change the geometry so i have 1.25:1..

Changing the geometry will not make your rockers into 1.25:1  You need to change your rockers.  If you use the rockers you have, your valve train will not live long.

I had a W-125 cam in one of my engines for 100,000 km.

What kind of rockers did you have ?

Stock.

[Zach Gomulka]

Installing ratio rockers also changes the effective duration of the cam, or something to that effect, correct? For arguments sake, what happens to the duration of a stock cam when 1.4 rockers are installed?

[SMO]

Changing the geometry will not make your rockers into 1.25:1  You need to change your rockers.  If you use the rockers you have, your valve train will not live long.

Okey, maybe i missunderstod you, but you said "If you change the length of your pushrods in your engine, you will get a different ratio.  If you put shims under the rocker blocks, you will get a different ratio."

Is this right ? 1,25:1 ratio rockers has only this ratio on STD cam ? What kind of rockers should i have for my W125 ? the specification are STD or 1,25:1 rockers for the cam

We need to clear this out 

[Jim Ratto]

The W125 will work best with stock VW 1.1:1 13-1600 rockers. By "best" I mean in terms of the valvetrain living.
If you add rocker ratio indiscriminately to a cam lobe, there's a good chance you are going to over accelerate every valvetrain part past the lobe. yeah this can make more power, but at what cost? If you theoretically can make "x" more power @ 5700-6400rpm, but the valve springs go into violent harmonics @ 6000+ you've gained nothing really, but sped up parts failure.
Even cams with lobes designed for 1.4's, when run with 1.4's can start breaking things.
It's not just "lift" that kills guides, springs, keeper grooves...etc. It's also (very much so) valve train acceleration rates. I ran the 86C with 1.4's for a few years in a semi daily driver, boy did I go through springs fast. Guides too.
personally, as much as I like the 125, I think it is a bit tame for that big of an engine (2332). The 130 would be a better "hot street" cam,

[SMO]

Ok in terms of valvetrain living, we compare w125 with 1,25:1 rockers and for ex. FK89 with 1,4:1 rockers.
who are the best for the valvetrain ?

I am very satisfied with this combo, good power at lower rpm and good torque Max hp @ 6000rpm.

[Jim Ratto]

Ok in terms of valvetrain living, we compare w125 with 1,25:1 rockers and for ex. FK89 with 1,4:1 rockers.
who are the best for the valvetrain ?

I am very satisfied with this combo, good power at lower rpm and good torque Max hp @ 6000rpm.

Not so sure you can compare the 125 and the FK89... about the only thing in common between the two is they're both VW cams. The FK89 is a race only cam really. If you consider the shorter time the cam is on the "heel", I would think the FK89 is going to wear parts out much faster than the 125. You only have so much ramp on a lobe. The sooner you need to get the cam to (higher) full lift, the shorter the ramps have to be. Those short ramps and the steep "flanks" to get to that long, high lift means parts have to move faster. There is a way to measure lift per degree per degree, which will give you acceleration rate... what that rate "should be" I have no idea but you could compare cams that way. 

[besserwisser]

The W-100-140 series of cams are very overlooked when building hi-po motors. Personally I find them very easy to work with especially when building "street motors" with a lot of bottom end. Depending on valve size there is rarely any need for other than stock rockers on new shafts schimed tight. If you find that the flow doesnt increase much at max with standard rockers why go with ratio ones. A 2332 with a W130 is a killer street motor even with stock rockers and is quite easy to handl around town at low rpm. My experience is that W120-W130 works extremly well with small ports and intakevalves 39-42mm. Port velocity is out of this world wich gives very nice bottom end. I have two motors in the pipe right now, 2275 with 044-s with next to standard port with 42 intake. The other one is a 1600 with 311 heads 39 intake. Both motors are with W130 and stock rockers. I will keep you posted on the results.

[SMO]

Hi !
In my case i found a higher lift important, wedge flows around 185cfm at .450 lift and 195cfm at .550 lift. This is around 10hp
Thay say that a cylinderhead who flows 200cfm @ 25" can deliver around 200hp.

Bruce ....i still wonder over some things .. it is the rocker who change the ratio ,doesnt matter what lift you have @ the cam ? always the same ratio on the pushrod side 1:1 as long as you have right geometry, in my case stright line through push rod and adjustment screw @ half of the lift on cam.

[SMO]

I have two motors in the pipe right now, 2275 with 044-s with next to standard port with 42 intake. The other one is a 1600 with 311 heads 39 intake. Both motors are with W130 and stock rockers. I will keep you posted on the results.

Hi !
Interestingplease let me know !
//Magnus

[besserwisser]

Flow is not what gets you to the finishline first, Tourqe and acceleration is more important. Lets say you dyno a motor at 220hp at 8200rpm.But with those big ports you have to keep reving to get there and it takes time. Ive seen motors with flowfigures around 175 to 180 do a lot better because of better portvelocity during acceleration. Personally I believe thats why seemingly small motors on old dragracers did do so well. Its been said before and it needs to be looked at when you design a motor, bigger isnt always better. To me its more getting to the rihgt level of flow without sacrifising port velocity. Big cams with a lot of overlap just moves your hp register up in the rpms. I also think that there is to much monkey see monkey do in the vw-scene. Just try something crazy and maybe you find something that nobody ever thought about. Lets face it ,how many 2332 fk89 do we need to build to realize what it can do? Copying will not make things move forward. New ideas will.

[Jim Ratto]

Flow is not what gets you to the finishline first, Tourqe and acceleration is more important. Lets say you dyno a motor at 220hp at 8200rpm.But with those big ports you have to keep reving to get there and it takes time. Ive seen motors with flowfigures around 175 to 180 do a lot better because of better portvelocity during acceleration. Personally I believe thats why seemingly small motors on old dragracers did do so well. Its been said before and it needs to be looked at when you design a motor, bigger isnt always better. To me its more getting to the rihgt level of flow without sacrifising port velocity. Big cams with a lot of overlap just moves your hp register up in the rpms. I also think that there is to much monkey see monkey do in the vw-scene. Just try something crazy and maybe you find something that nobody ever thought about. Lets face it ,how many 2332 fk89 do we need to build to realize what it can do? Copying will not make things move forward. New ideas will.

well said!

[58vw]

engle 140 my fav.....

[Bruce]

... it is the rocker who change the ratio ,doesnt matter what lift you have @ the cam ? .

It's the lift that changes the ratio the most.  You will never get your rockers that measure 1.35 down to 1.25 by messing with the geometry, they aren't that effective.

[SMO]

Flow is not what gets you to the finishline first, Tourqe and acceleration is more important. Lets say you dyno a motor at 220hp at 8200rpm.But with those big ports you have to keep reving to get there and it takes time. Ive seen motors with flowfigures around 175 to 180 do a lot better because of better portvelocity during acceleration. Personally I believe thats why seemingly small motors on old dragracers did do so well. Its been said before and it needs to be looked at when you design a motor, bigger isnt always better. To me its more getting to the rihgt level of flow without sacrifising port velocity. Big cams with a lot of overlap just moves your hp register up in the rpms. I also think that there is to much monkey see monkey do in the vw-scene. Just try something crazy and maybe you find something that nobody ever thought about. Lets face it ,how many 2332 fk89 do we need to build to realize what it can do? Copying will not make things move forward. New ideas will.

Hi !
I Agree, my first combo in this motor was Street Eliminator 2000 heads, flows around 160-170, yes small ports give high air and fuel speed and alot of torque that was my goal. My opinion was that they were to small for this engine but i get alot of torque. So this year i will try the wedge heads. Yes i will raise the hp in the rpm range with this heads and hopefully more hp.
Yes there is alot of 2332cc with fk89 cams and IDA carbs. there are less more 2332cc with w125 and 48idf carbs.

A interesting thing is that it´s ok to use a fk89 cam with 1,4:1 rockers who is more agressive to valvetrain than w125 and 1,25:1 rockers.

[besserwisser]

At dynoday a few years back we flowed a pair of street eliminators ported by A J Simms. They were a disaster. They stalled at 3/4 lift and never got past 180. The 044 heads are a much better choice and I prefer to start with the smaller versions and gradually go up in flow. The heads for my 2275 are stock 044 and they are ported so the original gasket still fits with minor adjustment. Its more towards the valve that I open it similar to the wedge port heads. Main reason is to keep airspeed upp. High airspeed together with the W130 and large displacement makes for a wonderful streetcar with lots of tourqe.

[Roman]

High airspeed together with the W130 and large displacement makes for a wonderful streetcar with lots of tourqe.

That is the combo Hermansson has in his looker (engine built by you). He runs low 12's on pump gas in a full weight car with old ARPM superflows, more or less unported.
By the way I was in his garage yesterday and it will be ready for the season in couple of days. I also helped another guy in the same garage with some work on the Maroon Baboon gasser that is in the same garage. It should be ready to bug run.

[SMO]

High airspeed together with the W130 and large displacement makes for a wonderful streetcar with lots of tourqe.

That is the combo Hermansson has in his looker (engine built by you). He runs low 12's on pump gas in a full weight car with old ARPM superflows, more or less unported.
By the way I was in his garage yesterday and it will be ready for the season in couple of days. I also helped another guy in the same garage with some work on the Maroon Baboon gasser that is in the same garage. It should be ready to bug run.

Hi Anders !
What kind of rockers does Herman use ?

//Magnus

[Jim Ratto]

my personal preference is keep ports shaped to keep air speed up (smallish) and use duration to get the rpm. Compare the way that runs to a motor with big lazy ports and short duration.... the worst setup in my opinion.
I ran a set of conservative sideways D ports (like Lonnie Reed wedgeports) with cam in between FK87 and 89....and 11:1, it was unreal how fast it was.
Big set of lazy port 044's I ran about 5 years ago and 256 @ .050"....a total slug top and bottom end.