movin on Posted August 5, 2011 Report Share Posted August 5, 2011 I understand that these cams are not the same type, but I have a couple questions comparing the two.Such as: Would a caravan cam not die off as fast in the higher rpms compared to a quest cam?What differrences would there be in lower rpms between the two cams?I understand the roller rockers and slip rockers are different too and I was wondering if they are different in size, EX.. such as 1.4 to 1.5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shelby Posted August 6, 2011 Report Share Posted August 6, 2011 they are the same cams Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
movin on Posted August 6, 2011 Author Report Share Posted August 6, 2011 Thanks Shelby. I thought the caravan was a roller cam and the stock one isn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
holeysocks Posted August 6, 2011 Report Share Posted August 6, 2011 roller would b cool Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Indiana Posted August 6, 2011 Report Share Posted August 6, 2011 The roller cam came from a TR/TS Magna that was made in Australia in the 90s it ended in 1996. Over here it was called the Diamante but it never got the 2.6. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Indiana Posted August 6, 2011 Report Share Posted August 6, 2011 (edited) A Caravan in 1984 had mechanical rocker arms and jet valves. In 1985-87 they put in hydraulic lifters but it was still always a jet valve head. When they were blowing headgaskets from the plugged up carburetors and lead foot drivers for hauling in a truck that was only an automatic THREE speed they rev's high and burnt out valves especially the jet valves that weren't ever adjusted or cleaned nor was the balance shaft chain then came the replacement heads that were usually non jet and mechanical since that saved the owners $$$ then years later people started looking in junkyards for "caravan" heads assuming that they were non jet and mechanical and was born the "caravan" head swap which is just BS cause its all a big mistake and you won't know what one is until you pull the valve cover and find out but its likely going to be cracked and why its in the junkyard anyway but you can get the valve cover since on all those FWD versions they had "Mitsubishi" cast in raised letters so they could advertise the fact it wasn't a 2.2 dodge whimp motor that had to rev to 5000rpms to get anything to move. of course it was bare aluminum and had a big sticker on it that said "MCA JET" designating that it had jet valves that helped burn the fuel better and give better economy and emissions.http://www.b2600turbo.com/images/IM006645.JPG When they changed to the hydraulic lifters they ground the cam to have the exact same specs as the mechanical cam did. The same duration, lift, overlap and open/close valve degrees. All the 2.6 cams for all the years were the same spec. http://www.b2600turbo.com/images/lash02.jpg Edited August 6, 2011 by Indiana Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lizzord30 Posted August 6, 2011 Report Share Posted August 6, 2011 The rollers that kinda fit on the conquest from the caravan are from the 3.0 engine.... as for working and being good Ask someone else I Am not sure.I have a stock 2.6 Caravan valve cover with stickers and everything!http://www.starquestclub.com/forum/uploads/gallery/album_984/gallery_1655_984_150657.jpg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dad Posted August 6, 2011 Report Share Posted August 6, 2011 Indiana, you are saying the mechanical and hydraulic cams are the same?? Dad Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Indiana Posted August 7, 2011 Report Share Posted August 7, 2011 They have a slight difference in lift because of lash that changed in 85. You can look at any service manual for any year all the way up to the roller cams that ended in 1996 and yes they all have the same specs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dad Posted August 8, 2011 Report Share Posted August 8, 2011 So, can you safely use a mechanical camshaft in a hydraulic setup? I'm asking because the only NEW camshafts that I can get are listed as mechanical. Hydraulic and mechanical are listed with different part numbers BTW. Dad Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
holeysocks Posted August 8, 2011 Report Share Posted August 8, 2011 The numbers are the same,, what about hardness ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Indiana Posted August 8, 2011 Report Share Posted August 8, 2011 So, can you safely use a mechanical camshaft in a hydraulic setup? Do it all the time and that's the way I'd do it if I had a choice because that slight extra lift when a hydraulic lifter runs at zero lash. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Indiana Posted August 8, 2011 Report Share Posted August 8, 2011 The numbers are the same,, what about hardness ?The rocker arms, springs and valves didn't change. Why would they change how it was hardened. The cam isn't pushing on the valve, what is stuck to the end of the rocker is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts