The lift element of what you wrote was what interested me. No one really makes higher lift early cams ... do they? Do they work significantly by pumping more air in quicker?



turn the clock back - flat head fords with a re ground cam, They called them 3/4 race or full race - the old timers would install the cam and not having any special tooling but having a clear understanding static compression as it relates to lobe seperation angles

they would put a battery charger on the car and crank the motor, carb open no plugs - and remachine the cam gear so off set bushing could be installed - now they kept moving the cam timing till the compression was at it highest, that giving the motor the best off the line dig -- hhahhahahhahaa watched the oldtimers actually doing this it was a 30s ford roadster with 4 deuces, la Salle 3 speed

rocker ratio change gives you increased speed at the valve @ under .100 lift and getting that dead on with take complete advantage of the exhausts negative wave and that will increase the chambers fill speed and total volume

 

Injector pirate system for the earlier M&M, havn't never used it but had some members come thru here saying it works.

M&M isn't smart enough to make adjustments by cams, exhaust and air filter, it needs some help with fuel being added. Your engine may live with just a EV23 install and no fuel but gains can be made with a basic exhaust/air cleaner change to compliment the cam

http://www.cobrausa.com/site_media/u...8571542bf3.pdf

 

Dobeck do an alternative, I have one on my Buell. Provides a degree of adjustment in a simple to understand way.

 

First of all John, in order to give a timeline like this paragraph you have to be farting dust right now.

Have been around some of the old timer gearheads that back in the day who would use the same effort as putting a wet noodle in a wildcats a$$ too gain 1 horsepower by unexplored ways - gotta love the competition factor in these guys.

Back to cams, some modern day designers use the offset to gain in areas. Dave Mackie put a adjustable gear on his darkhorse Evo 580 cam calling it a 581, put one in my buddies 80" and embarrasses alot of bigger engines. Woods/Andrews offer adjustments to cam timing to get more out of the lower rpms in Twinkies so the early pioneers as John mentioned was ahead of the game.

Steep lobes for quicker opening valves is the direction for high numbers Evo's. The pioneer EV27 used steeper lobes over it competition and had the by product of more noise but the design made it the most popular cam of all time.
Woods went further with steeper lobes that are almost square, clearly the most HP/TQ producing cams in a Evo but noise, valve train strain can be a factor but rewarding, have a Woods in the 89" and solid as a rock.
The Mackie 580 uses a unique design that goes against the norm with higher duration, higher lifts but drops the intake closing back to 42 that keeps cylinder pressure up before the Woods W6H came out, the Mackie uses ramps that are not as steep as the Woods and I like the Mackie designs although it isn't commercialized like others
Been mentioned about V thunders work with less stress on the valve train, great designs and remind me alot of the Mackie design cams as just plain out get the job done.
Big boys world of Redshifts, designer Woods 9's, large lift S&S becomes all in for street applications, bar hoppers start to become a badge when hitting this range but you can get there quick.

The cam choice world is overwhelming and going to say a large percentage of engine builders made a bad cam choice along the way learning the gig. Cam threads come out every winter and always ends up with everyone having a opinion and can be confusing as hell. Some want to stay conservative and the power guys think why waste your money, horsepower guys want to get away from 60-60 stock garbage and conservative guys only want 4500 rpm and 70 mph, power opinions are out of bounds. Put all of the numbers, opinions, costs of complimenting parts and the Evo brothers trying to learn become ready for a shot of bourbon

 

it was 1962 and i was 14 and in a garage every day after school changing tires in the gas station on a hand machine with tube tires plym and dodge were the worst, for 25 cents each fixing flats patching tubes / hot patching tires hahahhaahhahaah

we have at times re ground the cams asymmetrically to slow the lift speed as you know the rod stroke ratio issue, as it over runs the cam at 1.87 as the stock rod stroke ratio - soo slowing it just a bit lets the negative loss happening because of the piston speed / than in intake track try to let the speed its all going at catch up to the piston location, so my fill loss is reduced and A/F mixture does not show up as a cant fix it / because it moves both ways to far at a change -- you have seen that happen

 

My father owned a service station so I know what hot patch is and a hand machine. Now I have a Coats tire machine and impacts but the hot patch is gone.

In being honest on your engine statement, I understand numbers, combustion chambers shape, compression ratio's, exhaust designs, flow rates, AFR tuning but tweaking cylinder fill is best described for race team research and not a weekend bonzzi rider like myself. Understand cylinder fill but havn't never broken it down in ratio like your walk thru performance has led you over the years.