When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
I have a 2006 NHBP Acura TL 6MT complete stock w/ just breather mods. J pipe, 3rd cat delete , quad Cat back system and CAI. I was looking for more aggressive cams that will be able to pass smog in California. I was actually about to pull the trigger until some one had told me RL cams would be no good for my motor and they won't be p&p. I don't see why? do I need j37 timing belt? belt tensioner? thanks for the help on advance!
Last edited by filthiestkid91; 04-20-2015 at 12:35 PM.
While I'm no expert, I've asked the same question and several experienced J-series builders on here all chimed in and said that the RL cams from the 05-08 RL should be P&P, just like the TLS cams - Both came from a J35A8, but the RL cams are suspected to be the better of the two with a more aggressive profile. MDX cams could also be a good option, I believe Robert (yungone) on here suggested those cams if the RL cams are too pricey.
As mentioned, the RL/TLS cams are thought to be different in regards to the profile but this has never been technically confirmed. They share the same part numbers and so they could be the same. I myself have seen each cam in the same engine (at different times of course) and felt like the TLS cams produced more top end power but I'm no dyno. The MDX cams are ALSO thought to be of similarity due to having the exact same lift numbers as the RL/TLS cams but I believe they have a much more docile profile that focuses more on torque and midrange power. The MDX motor may only make an additional 10hp not from the cams but from the added displacement and free flowing exhaust/intake so don't base a decision on power output alone.
With your small displacement motor (j32a3), I personally would feel better about putting in TLS cams since the other two cams may focus more on torque production. The TLS cams could help the engine make more power up top as a result of the assumed high rev profile they possess.
I've SERIOUSLY considered doing my own cam specs on a lot of these cams (and many others) but would have to rely on a degree wheel rather than electronics to obtain data which may alter the accuracy a bit. Have an engine set up right now with everything to do it just need to slide the cams in one at a time and take notes.
Depends on the setup but I'd stick with the torque cams (MDX/RL) to broaden the power out and make the boost columns easier to tune. Boost has a tendency to come on fast making tuning difficult at higher engine speeds. Not only in that perspective but having a wider power band is more controllable and easier to drive on the street. Assuming by FI you mean turbo of course...
Depends on the setup but I'd stick with the torque cams (MDX/RL) to broaden the power out and make the boost columns easier to tune. Boost has a tendency to come on fast making tuning difficult at higher engine speeds. Not only in that perspective but having a wider power band is more controllable and easier to drive on the street. Assuming by FI you mean turbo of course...
Indeed I do mean turbo - I've always thought that getting a little more low end torque with the TL would be awesome, so the RL/MDX cams, and the J36 build in general is on my radar right now.
As far as turbo goes, unfortunately I've got a relatively limited information base to go off since I'm 5AT, and the only 5AT turbo on here was libert I believe. I have a good idea of what I want to do with the engine to allow me to reliably push about 400 hp (forged pistons and rods, lower the CR), but relatively little idea as of now on how to make the 5AT reliable with that much horsepower going through it, short of going with a full rebuild
As mentioned, the RL/TLS cams are thought to be different in regards to the profile but this has never been technically confirmed. They share the same part numbers and so they could be the same. I myself have seen each cam in the same engine (at different times of course) and felt like the TLS cams produced more top end power but I'm no dyno. The MDX cams are ALSO thought to be of similarity due to having the exact same lift numbers as the RL/TLS cams but I believe they have a much more docile profile that focuses more on torque and midrange power. The MDX motor may only make an additional 10hp not from the cams but from the added displacement and free flowing exhaust/intake so don't base a decision on power output alone.
With your small displacement motor (j32a3), I personally would feel better about putting in TLS cams since the other two cams may focus more on torque production. The TLS cams could help the engine make more power up top as a result of the assumed high rev profile they possess.
I've SERIOUSLY considered doing my own cam specs on a lot of these cams (and many others) but would have to rely on a degree wheel rather than electronics to obtain data which may alter the accuracy a bit. Have an engine set up right now with everything to do it just need to slide the cams in one at a time and take notes.
Hmm after reading this i would prefer the MDX cams... Hp can easily be gained but tq for these cars seems impossible. I would attack the weak point.. 10wtq i think would show more or be more noticeable over 10whp IMO... Just my opinion though
Hmm after reading this i would prefer the MDX cams... Hp can easily be gained but tq for these cars seems impossible. I would attack the weak point.. 10wtq i think would show more or be more noticeable over 10whp IMO... Just my opinion though
These were never designed to be torque based engines, they are intended to be high RPM hp engines. I don't see it as a weak point, it's how Honda designed them, hp >>> tq.
And because of that, doing mods or installing parts that focus on improving torque is not worth the cost or time IMO. That is unless you're focusing strictly on street drivability and not a performance oriented engine. The torque gain will be minimal in comparison to HP mods. This is all relative of course so take that with a grain of salt. The small stroke of the j32 NEEDS airflow to make any respectable amount of power.
Although fun to drive it's probably a handful and the torque steer would be a pain. Probably could have skipped the FD.
There's a mod for torque... 6spd trans.. good old fashion gears, lilbert eventually swapped to a 6spd. NA power isn't cheap and neither is FI, go with custom cams if you are looking to make more power unless you are looking for OEM reliability which in turn won't be as exciting as custom cams. Even with FI I would stick with stock cams
Buy i_love_cars old TL-S (6spd) that car made power and was built by King Motorsports (whose no joke when it comes to Honda's)
Although fun to drive it's probably a handful and the torque steer would be a pain. Probably could have skipped the FD.
There's a mod for torque... 6spd trans.. good old fashion gears, lilbert eventually swapped to a 6spd. NA power isn't cheap and neither is FI, go with custom cams if you are looking to make more power unless you are looking for OEM reliability which in turn won't be as exciting as custom cams. Even with FI I would stick with stock cams
Buy i_love_cars old TL-S (6spd) that car made power and was built by King Motorsports (whose no joke when it comes to Honda's)
yeap. fd was stupid. did not think that one out. looking for a stock transmission to swap it out before I start returning the car to stock
These were never designed to be torque based engines, they are intended to be high RPM hp engines. I don't see it as a weak point, it's how Honda designed them, hp >>> tq.
Doesnt matter what they were made for.. Thats my personal opinion, hp def sells cars.. Imo tq wins races.. Cars werent made to be modded but we mod them right?.
yeap. fd was stupid. did not think that one out. looking for a stock transmission to swap it out before I start returning the car to stock
I wouldn't say it was stupid, it was unknown territory really... you didn't know till you got there.
Originally Posted by Grand_hustle17
Doesnt matter what they were made for.. Thats my personal opinion, hp def sells cars.. Imo tq wins races.. Cars werent made to be modded but we mod them right?.
It does lol you can make a dump truck fast and handle but you are better off buying a RWD or AWD platform to be competitive in whatever event you are part taking in. FWD cars should be compared to FWD cars and that's how they are classed. Getting the win over other cars RWD and AWD is gratifying but that's more driver skill.
Getting all the HP & Torque to the ground is what wins races.
Hmm after reading this i would prefer the MDX cams... Hp can easily be gained but tq for these cars seems impossible. I would attack the weak point.. 10wtq i think would show more or be more noticeable over 10whp IMO... Just my opinion though
I would think that those of us with the 5AT would benefit more from a torque enhanced cam profile vs one for higher rpm power.
No, not always. Too much torque for the curb weight and street size tires means you'll just sit there in a cloud of smoke or slow take off, while the guy in the low curb weight, low tq, high hp Honda Civic will be waiting for you at the finish line.
Originally Posted by 6spd-GERCO
Getting all the HP & Torque to the ground is what wins races.
everyone talks about camshaft, but no one knows the profile in layman term not honda measurement. So I am going to push this again. For all you know your stock camshaft might be better. Just saying
Torque doesn't win races, horsepower does. All these years after Shelby made that silly statement, people still believe it, simply because Carroll Shelby said it. Torque makes your car feel faster than it really is and it's also great for not having to downshift all the time, but all things being equal, horsepower still rules in an all out race.
My favorite example is the BMW 335i vs 335d. The 300hp/300ft lb 335i is easily a half second and 3-4 mph faster than the 265hp/425ft lb 335d. Granted, the 335i is probably underrated by 20/20 and the diesel is probably closer to true numbers, but the torque monster still gets whipped here. Guess those 425 ft lbs aint all that.
so when are those Camshaft specs coming in? lol I am going to push this
Originally Posted by thisaznboi88
everyone talks about camshaft, but no one knows the profile in layman term not honda measurement. So I am going to push this again. For all you know your stock camshaft might be better. Just saying
so when are those Camshaft specs coming in?
Originally Posted by thisaznboi88
It's almost like he's...............trying to SAY something.
The two posts above had me crackin' up for real! Lmao, good shit!
One of my techs and I are always slangin' some Arnold impersonations.
just having fun in here. Since everyone talking about Camshaft and no one actually have them besides. You with with the RL camshafts? Me with the MDX camshaft, and simione RL? and a few other people, but they haven't chimed in yet.
just having fun in here. Since everyone talking about Camshaft and no one actually have them besides. You with with the RL camshafts? Me with the MDX camshaft, and simione RL? and a few other people, but they haven't chimed in yet.
TL-S people don't count.
Actually, that's what we need are those three (RL, MDX and TLS) since they are the most common in performance builds using factory cams. I've got a few there to throw in there including some Stage II Webs that are sold and being installed in a build for buddy. I have some j32a3's, some 8g Accord cams, TLS cams, j32a2's...but if some others would like to ship me the MDX and RL cams I'll then be committed to the request.
Torque doesn't win races, horsepower does. All these years after Shelby made that silly statement, people still believe it, simply because Carroll Shelby said it. Torque makes your car feel faster than it really is and it's also great for not having to downshift all the time, but all things being equal, horsepower still rules in an all out race.
Swapping in a 455 in place of a 350 in my Cutlass got me at least a 100 lb-ft torque gain but maybe 50-60 more horsepower so I know a boat load of torque not only makes your car feel faster but it is faster, a full second and a half quicker to 60 and guarantee the torque had more to do with it than the horsepower gains.
And cams can really make a difference and too big a cam that is focused on just high end horsepower can make a car really suck to drive unless you have enough gearing and stall speed or willingness to dump the clutch at 6000 rpms if you have a manual.
You have to strike a balance between the two. And as a general rule, torque helps street cars more than high end horsepower. And since most people here drive their cars regularly on the street, you obviously can't focus on just big horsepower numbers on the top end.
My favorite example is the BMW 335i vs 335d. The 300hp/300ft lb 335i is easily a half second and 3-4 mph faster than the 265hp/425ft lb 335d. Granted, the 335i is probably underrated by 20/20 and the diesel is probably closer to true numbers, but the torque monster still gets whipped here. Guess those 425 ft lbs aint all that.
Apples to dump truck comparison. The 335i also has a much wider rpm range in which to make power. Most diesel engines are done by 5000 rpms and gearing reflects the more narrow power range.
Here is an interesting illustration of Torque vs Power. Red is the higher Power motor. Orange is the Higher Torque motor. All else is equal (and no wheel spin or clutch slip). According to this ultimate bench racing tool, the higher hp motor only beats the high torque setup at the top of 1st, the top of 2nd, and WAYYYY out there at the top of 5th. In a quarter mile, the Torque motor would have beaten the Horsepower motor since the quarter would have ended around the 100mph mark.
The main reason the HP motor didn't win in 1/4mile in this case is due to the gearing. If the HP setup had shorter gearing, you would see the red graph would have been boosted upward and left to almost exactly match the TQ setup. When adding horsepower only (think All Motor), it is absolutely necessary to shorten your gearing, which effectively boosts the torque AT THE WHEELS. Torque is what accelerates you quicker in the low speed area (like quarter mile). Horsepower is what increases your high speed area (like top speed runs). This also helps explain why the Honda/Acura Integra Type-R had a shorter final drive vs the standard Integra SiR-G (GSR in the US). The increase in RPM allowed them to use shorter gearing and boost the torque at the wheels without sacrificing top speed in each gear.
So the point of all this is show how horsepower & torque are really the same thing just applied in different ways. If you are stuck with a certain gear ratio, adding torque alone will always make the car quicker in the quarter mile. If you are going the horsepower-only route (all motor), expect to spend a ton of money to optimizing every aspect of the drivetrain to get the most out of it.
Oh, and I also wanted to add that putting a 3.5L or 3.7L cam into a 3.2L engine will NOT boost it's low-end torque like some have said. Due to the reduced displacement of the 3.2, the smaller engine will only see the benefits of the larger cam in the top end area. It will still be a 3.2L torque curve, only shifted over to the right. A 3.2L with Type-S cams (if tuned properly) should have a higher rpm power band than a stock Type-S. It will also be necessary to upgrade the intake manifold, throttle body (maybe), and the exhaust system to optimize the higher rpm flow. And since you are only boosting horsepower and not torque or gearing, expect only similar gains to those shown on the graph (top of 1st, 2nd & 5th). Though it will still be a lot more fun/challenging to drive.
Obviously none of this info I posted applies to turbo setups. Turbos boost torque AND horsepower. That's a whole different game.
Tq has to increase somewhere along the line for this equation to be true. Also the way camshaft works is they shift power from one spectrum to the other. In order for you to gain tq you lose hp. For you to get Hp you lose tq some where.
Last edited by thisaznboi88; 04-23-2015 at 10:22 AM.
TWO variables make up the horsepower figure. You increase either one, and you increase horsepower. This is why large cams make more horsepower on the same size engine. They shift the same torque to a higher rpm. Same torque times more rpm = more horsepower.
When you say "loose torque" to gain hp, it is too broad of a statement to be a solid true. If your engine setup is good, you shouldn't loose any........you should only shift it. If you shift it up the rev range, you gain horsepower (as explained above). If you shift it down the rev range you loose horsepower. In this example I would say you are not really loosing torque. If the engine is setup properly for the new cams, the peak torque value should definitely NOT be lower than before (just at a different rpm).
Now if you quantify the statement by saying "The torque-shift to a higher rpm causes you to have less torque in the low rpm".... yes that statement would be a pretty SOLID true.
Now considering a mass production passenger-car engine is a massive series of compromises (induction, exhaust, timing, emissions, consumption, fuel, compression, driveability, gearing, nvh, etc etc....), it's pretty easy to imagine optimizing many of those variables into a VERY specific powerband to create even greater torque number at an even higher rpm (for the same displacement). It's also easy to imagine sacrificing some of those compromises to maintain the same low-end torque while still increasing the top-end torque (especially with VTEC). This is what all-motor development is all about.
I meant to say lose it on the low end because it shift to the top end. And vice versa. Hence the word spectrum. Lets say that a N/A car used to make max tq at 200ft/lb @ 2500 rpm and max hp at 270whp @6800rpm. Then they drop in a set of high lift/duration camshaft the tq now shift up and you make that same 200ft/lb at 3500 rpm and the max HP is now 290whp @ 7500rpm.
Even with the perfect setup you will have to give up power somewhere in order to make up the difference somewhere else. That is unless you are boosted. Then all you have to do is turned it up or spool the turbo faster.
Last edited by thisaznboi88; 04-23-2015 at 11:06 AM.
Ah, but your forgetting that VTEC allows you have two sets of cam profiles. This is what makes it so great for a street motor. It's not until you start optimizing all the other variables for top-end that you REALLY begin to loose out on bottom end (which for racing and even sportscars is fine).
That is true, but remember we only have vtec on the intake side with no way to adjust overlap. The exhaust profile/overlap is a constant *well at least for the non-j37x#*, and the valves are tiny (I should have gotten +1mm on the exhaust side when I had my head PnP with a valve job). K series have Vtec on both the intake and exhaust and VTC to change the overlapping profiles.
You don't always have to give up power or torque on the low end to gain on the top end. That is a misconception, and could be true if you already have a camshaft that is 'optimized' for the combination, which stock cams rarely are.
For example, in my vette, I swapped the stock LS6 cam for a BIG BIG cam - i mean real big ~ 24x/25x duration .63x lift (stock LS6 is 204/218 and .551 lift).
My peak power went from 360rwhp to 420 rwhp. Peak torque was the same at 350, but it made more torque across the range.
I didn't lose any power or torque, even down to 2500 rpms. Could it have lost some below there - I guess it's possible but that is cruise rpms, I shift above that even driving in traffic.
Just pointing out that you won't ALWAYS lose down low to gain up high...
remember this build? I copy and pasted his dyno test. So as you can see there tq drop some at 2250-3000. still worth it to do considering how much power he made verse power drop, just wish he didn't' get jacked up center line camshaft.
04-20-2015, 12:33 PM
