2.3 cams on a 2.0 - The Saab Link Forums

Go Back   The Saab Link Forums > Saab NG900 '94-'98 and 9-3 '99-'02 Forum > Performance Modifications for the NG900 / Old 9-3

Performance Modifications for the NG900 / Old 9-3 This forum contains PERFORMANCE related Q&A's for the NG900 and 9-3. This may also include suspension.

SaabLink.net is the premier Saab Forum on the internet. Registered Users do not see the above ads.
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 07-27-2004, 08:49 PM   #1
Elder
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 2,170
2.3 cams on a 2.0

Hey tweek, you said that your shop was running tests on the cams. I have a feeling that for Stage 6 on maptuns site for the NG900, this is what they use for upgraded cams.

Let me know how the results come out. I have been talking to cedric about this, and some other people. I'm pretty sure that they use the cams from a 9-5 Aero. I could be wrong, but keep me posted.

Thanks
snow4_1man is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 07-28-2004, 12:08 AM   #2
SAAB Road Master
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 361
The cams from the 9-5 Aero are the same as the Viggen.

Cam specs for B235R are in bold (and 2.3 naturally aspirated in italics) are as follows:

.327" .341" of lift

Intake Duration: 231 246

Exhaust Duration: 231 246

Even the stock cams for the 2.0 are more agressive than the ones on the Viggen/Aero. So unless MapTun was de-engineering the camshafts?

The stock 2.0 turbo (B204L) has .341" lift, and 240 degrees duration intake and exhaust.

The Saabs with really un-aggressive cams are the B205R, and B235E.

Adrian~
SaabTuner is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 07-28-2004, 05:44 AM   #3
Moderator
Elder
 
Tweek's Turbos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Northern VA
Posts: 10,303
Send a message via AIM to Tweek's Turbos
I have yet to get my specs back, but Saabtuner has answered.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Delorean
- pretend you are watering delicate plants...
Quote:
Originally Posted by SAABseanSCANIA
can be prone to failure due to increased localized stresses in the hole penetrations
Tweek's Turbos is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-28-2004, 05:47 AM   #4
Elder
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 2,170
Thanks Adrian for your input. I wonder why Saab would use less aggressive cams on their so called high-performance cars, such as the Aero and the Viggen.

Also do you have a site that you reference to, or some kind of book? I would like to read about some more info on the engines and all the specs.


Thanks,
Dan
snow4_1man is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 07-28-2004, 07:01 AM   #5
Nick Taliaferro
Elder
 
GenuineSaab's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Springfield, MO USA
Posts: 3,232
Send a message via MSN to GenuineSaab Send a message via Skype™ to GenuineSaab
I posted the specs when I tried them in my Viggen. (t7 afm)

Saab "less aggressive" profiles = Higher torque with the compromise being top end power.

Since we have not tried this on t5, I would recommend after changing cams having a wideband o2 connected to monitor fueling. I do not know how the change in Volumetric Efficiency will affect the fuel system.

http://trolltuner.com/projects/cams.htm
__________________
Nicholas Taliaferro

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
|
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
|
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

2.0 GOOSE 500whp + 8500rpm = 11.06 @125 E85
Viggen 439whp / 447tq 12.43 @114 on Gt2871.64, (Now 511whp Gt3076)
Nordic E85 9-3 SS Aero 320hp / 350ftlbs
GenuineSaab is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 07-28-2004, 07:10 AM   #6
SAAB Road Master
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 361
You may find that the specs have changed if the cams are worn. But these are the specs Saab listed. Also I believe the Saab specs are seat to seat, some people may list the specs as .050 - .050 lift ... which is slightly different. In order to compare to the Saab specs I think they'd have to be seat to seat.

There is a page here with all of the Saab cams specs and the combustion spaces of some of the earlier Saab cyllinder heads. None of the new heads, but has some of the newer cams.

http://www.sacsaabs.org/faq.htm#Cam%20Profiles

The reason for putting "less aggressive" cams on the newer Saabs is that the Trionic 7 cyllinder head flows better than it's previous counterpart used on T5. I believe this is mainly due to smaller valves which have smaller stems and allow the air to flow more easily into the cyllinder.

Because the head itself flowed better, the cams didn't need to be as aggressive to get the desired power output. It also improves spool up to have a fairly non-aggressive exhaust cam because reducing the duration and lift increases exhaust gas velocity.

Never hurts to get a head port and polished, if you're looking to have this done see if you can get them to recess the valve guides. (See attached photo courtesy of ylee coyote of SaabScene and his monester Aero.)

Anyhow, using desktop dyno and entering the Saab specs as best I could (which should be pretty accurate as I now have exact valve sizes) I was able to acertain that it should be good for about 15 hp on older T5 cars (it depends on knock sensitivity) and would be good for 30 hp on T7 cars except that T7 will just pull back boost if the head flows better (same airmass) so you only see an increase in power from the reduction in pumping losses created by lower intake and exhaust pressure. Probably a bit less. Also note that the cams will change the powerband towards the high end slightly.

The DeskTop dyno is a wonderful program. It can be run on nearly any computer, and it's been designed from the ground up by some SAE engineers who got together with some software writers. It actually calculates frictional losses and has programmed engines of a number of different kinds. You can input valve diameter, ported or stock head, bore, stroke, compression ratio, exhaust design.

The cams should pretty obviously increase the power some as they have an extra 6 degrees of intake and exhaust duration. Unless you want a 7K+ redline and almost no low end they're about as aggressive as you can go. IMHO

Adrian~
SaabTuner is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 07-28-2004, 07:10 AM   #7
SAAB Road Master
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 361
ty Nick! Always good to have you around.

To be pedantic the most aggressive factory Saab cams are on C900T's. The only reason those cars don't get moster power in stock form is due to the poorly flowing cyllinder heads the 2.0's had.

I'm unsure if those longblock cams are compatible with the shortblock heads though. I know the heads and blocks have to have significant machining done to match.

Adrian~
SaabTuner is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 07-28-2004, 07:47 AM   #8
Elder
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 2,170
Hey thanks Nick and Adrian for you help. I'm understanding about it better now. I'm still going to be reading about it.

Just ordered a JT3" from you nick, i'm the one that kept calling about it being stainless. Cant wait to get it thanks.

Quote:
I would recommend after changing cams having a wideband o2 connected to monitor fueling. I do not know how the change in Volumetric Efficiency will affect the fuel system.
What do you mean by wideband o2? Also what would you suggest switching my cams with. I would rather have more torque then high end power.
snow4_1man is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 07-28-2004, 09:09 AM   #9
Elder
 
BurnsSide42's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: South Eastern PA
Posts: 10,049
ok - so for a 1986 Turbo block having a 2.1 head put onto it - what would be my ideal cam shaft combo? I have a set of each 2.0 2.1 and 2.3 - Which one goes where (intake/exhaust) ? Anyone know which would be best for performance and sound? Thanks!
__________________
Original TSL Founding Member - ADMIN
Check out
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
for your repair needs
BurnsSide42 is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 07-28-2004, 09:25 AM   #10
 
mike saunders's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 6,468
How difficult is a cam switch? (I have a 2.0 B204 head that will be taking up space soon...would the cams swap out into a B205R?...and would it even be worth the effort?)
mike saunders is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 09-11-2004, 09:28 PM   #11
Flirting With TSL Addiction
 
swdmus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Central New York
Posts: 410
Send a message via AIM to swdmus
So your saying that you will get a longer lift with 2.3L cam on a 2.0L? and intern about a 15 hp increase on a T5 turbo? Am I getting this or is there less of a lift on a 2.3L? Just to clarify this for me.

Thanks A lot
__________________
PRC Installations
1994 900SE 2.0L Turbo
1991 900S 2.1L
1998 Jeep XJ


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
swdmus is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 09-11-2004, 09:32 PM   #12
Elder
 
BurnsSide42's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: South Eastern PA
Posts: 10,049
well I am going with 1985 Turbo Cams from a 2.0L for my 1989 SPG Project - Apparently these are the best cams for MY purpose - HOWEVER - a N/A 2.3 is the next best if it's like a 92/93 9000 they are coming from. - as for you newer folks - not 100% sure there.
__________________
Original TSL Founding Member - ADMIN
Check out
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
for your repair needs
BurnsSide42 is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 09-12-2004, 03:33 PM   #13
HNNLIC
Elder
 
Blaque's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Washington, D.C. / Kansas City
Posts: 4,209
Send a message via ICQ to Blaque Send a message via AIM to Blaque Send a message via MSN to Blaque Send a message via Yahoo to Blaque
I definately need to figure out whats up with this as well, because recently i found a problem.

Unfortunately, I had an exhaust manifold bolt break of inside the head, and its causin an exhaust leak. Since I have to remove my head to fix this problem... Im planning to replace my head with a 2.3L, and get my manifold coated.

So please clarify what needs to be done if i'm to do this as well as the gains if any.
__________________
Virtualization FTW. IT 4 Life.

“Brothers and sisters… and friends…and I see some enemies. In fact, I think we’d be fooling ourselves if we had an audience this large, and didn’t realize that there were.. some enemies present.” –Malcolm X


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Blaque is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 09-12-2004, 08:47 PM   #14
Flirting With TSL Addiction
 
swdmus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Central New York
Posts: 410
Send a message via AIM to swdmus
Ok I thought that there was no difference in the two heads except for cam size but I’m not even sure about that? Can someone clarify this? What is the difference between the two heads? The cam size? And is there a difference between the exhaust cam and the intake cam? Because I’m in the middle of rebuilding a head for my car and the head that I got had bent valves from a timing chain failure and I noticed that the only valves that where bent where the exhaust valves. So that leads me to believe that there is a higher lift on the exhaust side than the intake side is this true? Overall do you guys know would be better to go with 2.3L cams or 2.0L cams on a turbocharged application?

Help Please
Thanks
__________________
PRC Installations
1994 900SE 2.0L Turbo
1991 900S 2.1L
1998 Jeep XJ


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
swdmus is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the The Saab Link Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:
Vehicle Info.
Enter your vehicle information (year, model, mods)
Insurance
Please select your insurance company (Optional)

Log-in


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:36 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.5.2
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
All content is copyright © The Saab Link and it's original authors.


 

Garage Plus vBulletin Plugins by Drive Thru Online, Inc.