| From | Message |
GraphiteDak
GenIII
 
2/15/2004
23:59:08
|
 Subject: HO cam vs. 206 cams for the 4.7
IP: Logged
Message:
OK. I went to the KRC website. So far from what I read here that IS the place to get the deal for the cams.
OK. So I was planning to ORDER the HO cams. After reading more about the 206 cams I'm curious. The 206 cams claim to give quite a few more HP and TORQUE over the HO cams with STOCK PCM and minor mods.
Does anyone have the 206 cams and have you still been able to TOW as good as before?
Right now my 4X4 QC will tow 3 quads and stay in OD most of the time and pulls the hills like a bad a$$ mo fo. I don't want to have to run out of OD too much because of the 206 cams if they become a problem. That would DRINK gas. I left mine out of OD ONE TIME and MPG dropped below 10! I just towed to the dunes this weekend leaving in OD most of the way and got over 12 MPG.
So. bottom line. Are the 206 cams still good all around cams? Goes fast(er)? Tows great?
|
GraphiteDak
GenIII
2/16/2004
22:14:07
|  RE: HO cam vs. 206 cams for the 4.7
IP: Logged
Message:
WOW. Not one response. Well that's what I get for asking on a holiday weekend I guess.
After reading more into it there wasn't enough info to prove the 206 cams a good choice for my setup so I went ahead and ordered the HO cams today.
It says it usually takes 4 hours to change them. So I expect it to take me 2 hours. It doesn't look very hard to me. I've done old school cams in 4 hours.
Can anyone who has bought these from KRC tell me how long shipping takes? I can't wait to get these :-)
|
Pittdawg
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
2/16/2004
22:31:04
| RE: HO cam vs. 206 cams for the 4.7
IP: Logged
Message:
while you are at it you better order a fastman tb, you can't realize the full potential of these cams without and upgraded tb...your stock 68mm really is more like a 65mm with the torque step, a fastman true 68mm or 69mm will really allow your cams to shine, trust me i know from experience
|
GraphiteDak
GenIII
2/16/2004
22:56:24
| RE: HO cam vs. 206 cams for the 4.7
IP: Logged
Message:
That's exactly what Marty said from KRC.
Good thing the 2003 allready has the HO intake STOCK. I'm sure I'll still notice a good difference with my BUTT-DYNO after the cam swap.
Man, I sure was itchy to try the 206 cams. But I'm afraid it would have killed my towing grunt!
When I just towed to the dunes near Yuma and back my truck stayed in OD and around 1800 RPM's the whole way with no trouble. With the 206's I'd probably have to leave the OD off. I did the trip once with the OD off. I got less than 10 MPG! This last trip there I got over 12 MPG leaving the OD on.
|
teamfast
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
2/17/2004
00:12:38
| RE: HO cam vs. 206 cams for the 4.7
IP: Logged
Message:
can you bore the stock 68 out for better performance? Just how do you explain your 68 is really a 65? Is it tapered or something?
Ive looked down it before (in the summer) but I didnt have my tape out!
|
GraphiteDak
GenIII
2/17/2004
01:32:07
| RE: HO cam vs. 206 cams for the 4.7
IP: Logged
Message:
I've heard people have successfuly ported their own. Carefuly.
I want to try my new cams with the stock TB before I mess with it.
|
CASDAK
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
2/17/2004
02:38:09
| RE: HO cam vs. 206 cams for the 4.7
IP: Logged
Message:
I e-mailed the same question to KRC, and they responded by stating that I should stick with the H.O. cams and going up to a 70MM TB.
My thinking was that the 206 cams would throw the powerband to high to be of use when towing. However, I wasn't to sure about the RPM range of the 206 cams, so I just had to ask. I love the fact that the 206s put 299-300+ ft-lbs of torque to the rear wheels, but I want to use my 02 Ram for towing the Dakota to the track, and I need as much low-end as I can get without going to far into the engine, so that it's totally useless to tow with. The 206s may be a little more benefical for me if they made a torque convertor for the 5-speed auto, but I'm stuck with the factory unit, so I'll stay with the smaller cams.
So it looks like after the tax man gets me my refund...I'm ordering the H.O.s.
Hope this was of some help.
|
b1llyw
GenII
2/17/2004
06:51:21
| RE: HO cam vs. 206 cams for the 4.7
IP: Logged
Message:
The 70mm F&B would be a nice choice for both of you guys. :)
Bill White - KRC Performance
'95 CC 4x2, SLT - 408 is done, truck isn't
'03 Ram 1500 QC 4x4 Hemi Off-Road
|
ZenDak
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
2/17/2004
07:54:56
| RE: HO cam vs. 206 cams for the 4.7
IP: Logged
Message:
I'm boring mine out pretty soon! - I would really like to 'try' out the 206's. I've done the HO's,,and am really happy w/the gains. Of course it leaves me wondering what it would be like w/the 206's in there........
I don't suppose anyone would take my HO's as a core on some oh,,I don't know,,,206's????
|
GraphiteDak
GenIII
2/17/2004
18:46:13
| RE: HO cam vs. 206 cams for the 4.7
IP: Logged
Message:
HA HA HA. That WOULD be nice wouldn't it?
If I had a reg cab or ext cab 2WD and a 5 speed. I'd be running at LEAST the 206 cams if not the 218's.
I've ran big cams before, but never in a computer controlled engine. One of my badest mothers was a Ford small block that ran in the range of 3K and 7K RPM's on the street! First I ran a auto with a high stall converter and then I went to a 5 speed stick. Boy was that engine nasty. But it sucked when you would be stuck in traffic because it wouldn't be able to idle with the clutch let out. It would lope so bad the car would jerk. No power below 2500 RPM's with the single plane high rise and nasty cam but after 3k it was like riding a two-stroke motorcycle. I would LOVE to still have that with the Ricers on the street these days. No way in fukking hell they'd stand a chance. No way!
Hey. Those of you who have ordered these HO cams from HRC, how long does it take to get shipped??? It still says "recieved" on my tracking page. I want to see that mutha say "shipped"!!!!
|
Paul
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
2/18/2004
01:47:58
| RE: HO cam vs. 206 cams for the 4.7
IP: Logged
Message:
I believe it's like 2 weeks. I just ordered the KRC 212s (*excited*). They have to send them off to get ground, get them back, package them, and then send them off to you.
|
b1llyw
GenII
2/18/2004
08:37:11
| RE: HO cam vs. 206 cams for the 4.7
IP: Logged
Message:
We usually get the 200 cams out a little quicker.
Bill White - KRC Performance
'95 CC 4x2, SLT - 408 is done, truck isn't
'03 Ram 1500 QC 4x4 Hemi Off-Road
|
ZenDak
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
2/18/2004
15:33:46
| RE: HO cam vs. 206 cams for the 4.7
IP: Logged
Message:
Hey Bill - you wouldn't accept some 'slightly used' HO cams as cores towards a new set of 206's would you?
|
b1llyw
GenII
2/18/2004
15:37:41
| RE: HO cam vs. 206 cams for the 4.7
IP: Logged
Message:
ZenDak, what's your e-mail? Or send me one.
Bill White - KRC Performance
'95 CC 4x2, SLT - 408 is done, truck isn't
'03 Ram 1500 QC 4x4 Hemi Off-Road
|
Waltherone
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
2/18/2004
17:57:13
| RE: HO cam vs. 206 cams for the 4.7
IP: Logged
Message:
Took mine about 2 weeks as well if I remember correctly.
|
GraphiteDak
GenIII
2/18/2004
19:01:15
| RE: HO cam vs. 206 cams for the 4.7
IP: Logged
Message:
OK, thanks for the responses.
I can't wait.
|
ZenDak
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
2/19/2004
10:31:24
| RE: HO cam vs. 206 cams for the 4.7
IP: Logged
Message:
you've got mail Bill!
|
KrisR05
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
5/06/2019
13:20:45
| RE: HO cam vs. 206 cams for the 4.7
IP: Logged
Message:
I have a 05 Dakota 2WD with the 5spd Trans. I
currently am searching for cams, and I'm looking at
the 206, but I tow quite a bit during the summer.
But I also want to be faster. Which cam should I
use?
|
| | P 1 |
|
Post a reply to this message:
Username Registration: Optional
All visitors are allowed to post messages
|
