yet another 4.3 help request

yet another 4.3 help request

Postby TotallyBalistic » Mon Mar 01, 2010 11:19 am

today i found a cam for a 4.3 v6 that ive had for a long time but i know nothing about the cam. i looked up the numbers and one of them (7194) is for a bb mopar and on the shaft right after the dist gear on the shaft it has k ontop of 441...it come up some random shit. maybe somebody else can come up with something different, also on the other side of the shaft from the k 441 it has the letters CWC stamped into it
Chuck Norris doesnt read books, he stares them down until he gets the information he wants.
595 
User avatar
TotallyBalistic
Good Times
Good Times
 
Posts: 259
Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 7:49 pm
Location: Grand Saline, Tx.
Engine Size: 2.0
What year vehicle do you own?: 1988

Re: yet another 4.3 help request

Postby RickDees » Wed Mar 03, 2010 6:11 pm

Russ, I did a search on the cam numbers, much like you I found hardly anything
So I did a search on the CWC, You know I will try to find out something for you guy's.
http://www.zcar.com/forums/read/1/705002


CWC cam castings Posted by: The Z Doctor
Date: January 27, 2007 10:04AM


Regarding the recent discussion on CWC cams, and my credibility......My experience with CWC has been overwhelmingly bad. I am talking in the neighborhood or 20 or more cams, all of which have failed save the ones with stock springs. Many people have called me asking why their cams failed, and my first question is " Was it a CWC stamped casting, and what springs were you using?" "ALL" CWC stamped cams I have had the pleasure of being acquainted with have failed when used with comp springs, and a couple I am aware of did OK with stock springs. This is trans-brand, trans-installer (this means more than one grinder, many more than just myself as installer).

After first trying to understand what "I" had screwed up, the evidence over the years has piled up. I installed my first cam (Racer Brown turbo, stamped JAPAN) in 1975, and last I heard (in 2002) it was still on the road, even though the original car long since rusted away. Every cam I install nowadays is an ISKY regrind with JAPAN cast into it. I have a ZERO defect rate with these cams. I have a 99% failure rate with CWC cams.

Those CWC's always fail with about half of the lobes disintegrating.......the remaining half seemingly unfazed. Does this point to CWC, or the metallurgical skills of the regrinders with their hardening processes? Since most cam company's names have passed through my place with failed CWC markings, it's hard to place the blame on the cam grinders..... or could they ALL be dumbasses?

I suggest to those Doubting Thomases to pay an engineering firm to find out the truth (if you've got enough money) and if you think the resultant information will be worth the expense. You see, as it now stands, when your CWC cam craps out, it's YOUR fault, with YOUR improper installation techniques.......and the loser in the end is YOU.

I offer empirical experience in this area and nothing more. You make your own decision after asking around a little......it's a free country.

BTW: I've got a nice L6 cam billet (CWC) I bought from Nissan Competition many years back (I figured if I bought it from Nissan Comp, it would be a Japanese casting........NOT) It's for sale.......CHEAP...........

..........................................................................................................................................................................................
CWC formally Campbell Wyant and Cannon Foundry Co. in Muskegon, MI is the largest supplier of cast iron camshaft blanks in the world. I worked there in the summer of '68. At that time they cast 85% of the camshafts in the country. It used to be the biggest grey iron foundry in the world but is now reduced to one plant that make mostly camshafts. They do not market finished cams only the blanks.
http://www.chevelles.com/forums/showthread.php?t=250997
Last edited by RickDees on Wed Mar 03, 2010 9:55 pm, edited 2 times in total.
A Fact of Life: After Monday and Tuesday even the calender says W T F.....
User avatar
RickDees
Donator
Donator
 
Posts: 17
Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2010 10:02 am
Engine Size: 4.3
What year vehicle do you own?: 1986

Re: yet another 4.3 help request

Postby TotallyBalistic » Wed Mar 03, 2010 6:30 pm

thanks for this rick...i know to throw this cam in the trash like i had planned lol...really appreciate the help
Chuck Norris doesnt read books, he stares them down until he gets the information he wants.
595 
User avatar
TotallyBalistic
Good Times
Good Times
 
Posts: 259
Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 7:49 pm
Location: Grand Saline, Tx.
Engine Size: 2.0
What year vehicle do you own?: 1988

Re: yet another 4.3 help request

Postby 77amc » Fri Mar 05, 2010 4:31 am

Sorry to jump in here but, Is there more to "this" thread? I'd like to learn more especially if it concerns the Chevy 4.3..

I just had talked up a neighbors 94 Jimmy with the Vortec 4.3 to a friend at work and she purchased it for her son, (on my recomendation..) and didn't even have it for 24 hrs and it thru a rod I believe. It only had 110K on it!

Are they prone to catastrophic failure? Now I have heard that the rod bolts stretch causing 'big bang'..

Please direct me to a site/thread of such concern.

Errol
User avatar
77amc
VIP
VIP
 
Posts: 98
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2009 11:25 am
Engine Size: 2.6
What year vehicle do you own?: 1989

Re: yet another 4.3 help request

Postby RickDees » Sat Mar 06, 2010 9:27 am

Errol,
Imagine a stupid ass trying to blow up a good engine. Better yet, let's watch a kid kill one.
This ass finally had to put a handfull of gravel to kill this 4.3
Start watching at about 1:30

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=teoER4j9H14
A Fact of Life: After Monday and Tuesday even the calender says W T F.....
User avatar
RickDees
Donator
Donator
 
Posts: 17
Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2010 10:02 am
Engine Size: 4.3
What year vehicle do you own?: 1986

Re: yet another 4.3 help request

Postby TotallyBalistic » Sat Mar 06, 2010 10:51 am

why would anybody wanna do something so stupid to a runnin motor. the 4.3 is a great motor and very durable and easy to build. the one slingin a rod at 110k was probably an abused piece of crap that wasnt taken care of like it was suposed to be. any motor that hasnt been taken care of will have a short life span
Chuck Norris doesnt read books, he stares them down until he gets the information he wants.
595 
User avatar
TotallyBalistic
Good Times
Good Times
 
Posts: 259
Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 7:49 pm
Location: Grand Saline, Tx.
Engine Size: 2.0
What year vehicle do you own?: 1988


Return to Head & Block


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron