Vizard vs Foxwell

[shoedoos]

for some reason I can't post this link in the David Vizard section......so here ya go, the yokels over at yellowbullet are fueling the fire over there.... https://www.yellowbullet.com/threads/i- ... t.2619992/

[bob460]

Foxwell does not pick his own cams, his got his BOSS Mr Straub to do that............so really it should be VIZARD vs STRAUB!!

[SchmidtMotorWorks]

Two cams with the same lift and duration can vary considerably.
Do any of these people actually design cams?

Specking lift and duration is like like saying "the place you want to go is about 2 miles north of here"
Designing an acceleration curve is actually cam design. More like giving precise directions to the address.

[THORNY]

Foxwell does not pick his own cams, his got his BOSS Mr Straub to do that............so really it should be VIZARD vs STRAUB!!

I wish Joe (BigJoe) was still here to take on Vizard and Straub.

[digger]

Two cams with the same lift and duration can vary considerably.
Do any of these people actually design cams?

Specking lift and duration is like like saying "the place you want to go is about 2 miles north of here"
Designing an acceleration curve is actually cam design. More like giving precise directions to the address.

even if the cams are identical its what happens at the valve that matters and there is a lot that can change that.

it seems like Mike is the only one that cares about the actual valve motion, most everyone else seems to car about what the tappet is doing and assumes the rest works itself out......in truth there is a couple threads where people have compared theoretical cam lift with theory rocker ratio vs actual valve motion but little. then there are threads about rocker sweep with little discussion on what the valve actually does more about just theory about what happens.

and people talk about designing the events yet no one can tell you no actual method to do so.its like people thing they are uncoupled from each other

[hoffman900]

Two cams with the same lift and duration can vary considerably.
Do any of these people actually design cams?

Specking lift and duration is like like saying "the place you want to go is about 2 miles north of here"
Designing an acceleration curve is actually cam design. More like giving precise directions to the address.

Odds are they are both spec'ing lobes Billy Godbold designed...

The man drama is just too much sometimes...

[Stan Weiss]

If my memory is off, I am sure David will correct this. I believe David went to Harvey Cranes cam school and has / had Harvey's cam lobe design software.

Stan

[406shark]

I really miss Harold...





Jeff

[paulzig]

Well at least guys fighting over cam specs is a welcome change over people fighting over toilet paper in the stores....

[GARY C]

Foxwell does not pick his own cams, his got his BOSS Mr Straub to do that............so really it should be VIZARD vs STRAUB!!

From what I have seen those would be almost identical except DV prefers more lift than Chris.

[GARY C]

If my memory is off, I am sure David will correct this. I believe David went to Harvey Cranes cam school and has / had Harvey's cam lobe design software.

Stan

Isn't Harvey who David did the vast cam test program with?

[bob460]

Well at least guys fighting over cam specs is a welcome change over people fighting over toilet paper in the stores....

All the meat, rice and pasta all gone aswell...........................the VEGANS must be loving this, it's the only shit left on the shelves......

[SchmidtMotorWorks]

9

If my memory is off, I am sure David will correct this. I believe David went to Harvey Cranes cam school and has / had Harvey's cam lobe design software.

Stan

That wasn't really a complete cam design software.
It had no functionality for valve-train dynamics.
The process was so slow and tedious, it would prevent anyone from doing any significant optimization.
Sort of like pushing something with a string.

I suspect the original coding was probably done by Richard Moser, but he never talked about it much.
He had just previously written the cam design software used by Chrysler to design cams for the 1960's B engines (Wedge and Hemi), he also designed the race Hemi heads etc.
He gave me a copy of the code (in FORTRAN) altogether it was less than 1,000 lines.

A competent software today, would be 10,000 lines at least.
Could go 10x long that if it had good simulation.

[hoffman900]

If my memory is off, I am sure David will correct this. I believe David went to Harvey Cranes cam school and has / had Harvey's cam lobe design software.

Stan

Isn't Harvey who David did the vast cam test program with?

It would have been interesting to hear Harvey’s take on that testing. Good or bad.

My guess on comments Harold has made in the past, that he would have a field day commenting on this whole thing.

If my memory is off, I am sure David will correct this. I believe David went to Harvey Cranes cam school and has / had Harvey's cam lobe design software.

Stan

Doesn’t mean you can design (or should) design a lobe. David used Crane cams early on, as well as other companies. I know he has said he has had Mike Jones as well as others grind cams for him. I am not aware of a single “David Vizard lobe design” and not sure why he would venture down that path.

Anyway, so to get the full story out there; Scott Foxwell, Jay Wiles, and Chris Uratchko disagreed with David on FB and David now thrown down a challenge and posted it everywhere?

1) and people call millennials social media drama queens. The man drama has never been lacking in motorsports.
2) Jay obviously works in the NASCAR R&D world and Chris’s stuff is very competitive in the heads up world, so both obviously know their stuff. So David is trying to legitimize his position by saying NASCAR builders attend his seminar, but it’s a top NASCAR builder who disagreed with him? Okay.
3) the posting everywhere reeks of promotion. For what?
4) I’d still like to see this challenge happen, because why not? It’s a distraction, like any bad reality show.

[CamKing]

9

I believe David went to Harvey Cranes cam school and has / had Harvey's cam lobe design software.

That wasn't really a complete cam design software.
It had no functionality for valve-train dynamics.
The process was so slow and tedious, it would prevent anyone from doing any significant optimization.
Sort of like pushing something with a string.

Exactly.
Harvey came to our shop in the 80's in his motorhome, trying to sell/Lease us his software.
I think he had it on a 286 with a math co-processor.
I sat there while ho showed me how it worked.
He started with a basic lifter motion curve, then said, if you want to make it bigger at .200", you do this. If you want to make it smaller at .020", you do this. If you want to lower the max velocity, you do this.
Being the 20 year old that I was, I said, what do you do, to make it the correct curve for the application?
The look on his face changed instantly.
I then told him, using the parameters of the engine, we design the optimum valve lift curve for each application.
He angrily told me, you can't do that. He then drove off, and never talked to me again.
I've been "Can't doing that" for 35 years since.