Camshaft Computer Controlled Compatible...what does this mean?

fiveoho

15 Year Member
Apr 28, 2005
1,958
16
69
TN
please explain to me what this means when selecting a cam.

for instance: the trickflow 2001 cam is not Computer Controlled Compatible.

the comp cams XE274HR is Computer Controlled Compatible.


both of these cams will work in a roller 5.0....whats the difference, pros and cons. please explain

thanks
 
This is just a guess, but since no one has replied, I'll post it...

The computer controlled cam has a magnet in it so that a camshaft sensor has something to pickup.

We do this in FSAE stuff b/c we use a 600ZXR motor that was originally carbed and convert it over to a Motec fuel injected unit. In the process, we have to machine the crank and cam to press in magnets.
 
GT_Rich said:
This is just a guess, but since no one has replied, I'll post it...

The computer controlled cam has a magnet in it so that a camshaft sensor has something to pickup.

We do this in FSAE stuff b/c we use a 600ZXR motor that was originally carbed and convert it over to a Motec fuel injected unit. In the process, we have to machine the crank and cam to press in magnets.


i appreciate the stab u took at it. i have no clue, so i'll research what u said and look into it more.

i sorta felt dumb asking but i guess other ppl arent totally sure either...makes me feel better lol
 
ok what it means is that a computer controlled car or a maps sensor car cannot take extreme cam's. that is because the maps sensor is a manifold absolute pressure sensor. since extreme cams play with the vacuum a engine makes bigger cams through off the sensor which basically tells the computer how much gas to supply. a non computer controlled car is a mass air flow car. this is because the computer is not relying on a vacuum measure ment to calculate how much air is going into the car. there is actually an air flow measurement and it doesn't really matter if the engine isn't making vacuum. i hope that makes sence. basically that cam won't work with non mass air flow engines.
 
86bluecobra said:
ok what it means is that a computer controlled car or a maps sensor car cannot take extreme cam's. that is because the maps sensor is a manifold absolute pressure sensor. since extreme cams play with the vacuum a engine makes bigger cams through off the sensor which basically tells the computer how much gas to supply. a non computer controlled car is a mass air flow car. this is because the computer is not relying on a vacuum measure ment to calculate how much air is going into the car. there is actually an air flow measurement and it doesn't really matter if the engine isn't making vacuum. i hope that makes sence. basically that cam won't work with non mass air flow engines.

im still grasping all that...let me ask you this:

will i have problems with a tfs 2001 (stage 2) cam in my 95 mustang gt? i think that cam is not computer controlled. will i have issues with that cam and my setup?

thanks again
 
From what 86bluecobra stated, it depends on whether your car is mass air controlled. I converted mine to MAF from speed density and I'm almost positive that the 5.0's from 88 to 93 are MAF. I'm not sure if 94 and 95 5.0's are the same because I have no experience with them. I guess you could try asking how they are controlled in the 94-95 tech section. To answer your other question, my cam is a stage 1 and I am running it with 1.7 rockers.
 
i knew about MA and SD years....i guess im just concerned about how my driveability will be. hopefully that camshaft will have good street manners


so- is this the bottom line? : i can run a computer controlled or non computer controlled cam in my 95 ( mass air ) car?

if the answer is yes....does it make a difference?
 
you have to be very careful about the cam that you run in the 94-95 cars. The computer used is a lot more finicky. I know steeda makes a cam or two that will work with the sn95 computer, but not 100% sure on what others would work
 
JBeezy53 said:
I've have heard of people with 94-95 cars switching to 88-93 computers when running larger cams.


im curious about that myself. ive heard the same. but then some guys say how much more advanced the 94/95 computer is rather than the fox body comp.

but if the A9L computers are more stable than what i have...why not go that way?

please shed some light on this
 
fiveoho said:
im curious about that myself. ive heard the same. but then some guys say how much more advanced the 94/95 computer is rather than the fox body comp.

but if the A9L computers are more stable than what i have...why not go that way?

please shed some light on this

I would probably search the 94-95 forum if I were you, theres probably plenty of ino there.
 
fiveoho said:
im curious about that myself. ive heard the same. but then some guys say how much more advanced the 94/95 computer is rather than the fox body comp.

but if the A9L computers are more stable than what i have...why not go that way?

please shed some light on this
Because the 94/95 PCM is a faster processor over all, it's just more picky with cams. Also in order to run the fox computer you pretty much have to run an aftermarket ingnition system, they tend to miss/break up in the higher rpms (about 3500+rpms). The money you end up dumping into the fox swap is about the same price for a self tuner like the PMS or twEECer. Thats why nobodys does it anymore, back in 96 this was the mod to do but we're not in 96. Do a search in the 94/95 forums we have cover this subject quite a bit.
105searchgif.gif
 

Attachments

  • 105searchgif.gif
    105searchgif.gif
    14.2 KB · Views: 328