| Author |
Message |
58ragman
Samba Member
Joined: September 29, 2014
Posts: 404
Location: OC to ontario
|
 Posted: Mon May 16, 2016 7:27 pm Post subject: Re: anyone running a FK-10 on the street? |
 |
|
duration is 270 at .050 they always been that way but were written under duration as 266 or posibly 268 .
call down to engle they will set anyone straight.
A lot of people complain they want the advertised number 266 but 266 and 270 at .050 is nothing to balk about.
If your motor has serious power enough to handle a fk10 cam then whats another 4 degrees correct |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Pizza Eater
Samba Member
Joined: October 10, 2013
Posts: 81
Location: Chico, CA
|
| Posted: Mon May 16, 2016 6:28 pm Post subject: Re: anyone running a FK-10 on the street? |
|
|
Has anybody ran the CB FK-10 clone (2292)?
Looks like it has less lift, but longer duration than the FK10.
Adv. Duration 321°
Dur. @ .050" 270°
Lift @ cam .378"
Lift w/1.1:1 Rocker Arms .415"
Lift w/1.25:1 .472"
Lift w/1.4:1 .529"
Lift w/1.5:1 .567" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
58ragman
Samba Member
Joined: September 29, 2014
Posts: 404
Location: OC to ontario
|
| Posted: Sun May 15, 2016 3:06 pm Post subject: Re: k8 vs fk10 |
|
|
| Ken Taber wrote: |
| I am woundering if you have tried a fk10? Our dyno and street testing has proved the fk 10 is a better street cam than a k8 |
whats the true RPM the fk10 comes in on most say 4000 but i fgure 2800rpms.
Whats the dyno say |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MURZI
Samba Member
Joined: August 25, 2005
Posts: 5066
Location: Madisonville, La
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 10, 2012 5:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
Two different cams..... Both totally streetable. The FK10 is a high revver and "comes on" at 2500-2800, not that it doesn't have bottome end torque, and revs to the moon. The FK44 is more linear and has huge torque, but with my heads still revs to 7k. The power is there from the bottom to the top.....
If i had to do it over, I would use the FK10 in both engines. My buddies car ,2110, fk10, IDA's , is driven all the time, 30-50 miles at a time, and it drives great. My car sits with a broken tranny... 
The Fk44 would work BETTER with stock gears, but that is not to say the fk10 WON'T work...it will. One thing to consider with both cams, is that the lift gets in the 560ish (with CB 1.4's) range and you need to make sure your heads can handle that kind of lift.
In this video, the FK10 car is racing a 1915, 110 equipped car. My buddies 69 weighs 1940 lbs and he was running 8.50's all day long in the 100 degree heat. With some tuning and diet the car will be way faster.
Link
_________________
62 vert
2276
Tim’s welded heads
45 Dells
A1 sidewinder
Fk44 cam |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fuguboy
Samba Member
Joined: December 14, 2004
Posts: 228
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 10, 2012 12:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
| MURZI wrote: |
Ok, here is some first hand FK10 experience. Cranked up my buddies new 2110 build today and shoved it into the baja. 2110, fk10, CB rockers 1.4(1.45) actual, Tim's stage II's and 37 vent IDA's. IT FREAKING ROCKS!!!
Pulls hard even down low and keeps pulling to about 7K. I have stock 4.12 tranny with 28" tires and it had NO problems. Smooth idle..... Drives like a stock engine until you mash the pedal.
Next month I will finish my 2276 FK44 combo and will be able to update on the difference. For now......I say the FK10 is a killer cam. Smooth as silk!!!!! |
Murzi
Which combo works best with stock gears ? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MURZI
Samba Member
Joined: August 25, 2005
Posts: 5066
Location: Madisonville, La
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 10, 2012 7:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Ok, here is some first hand FK10 experience. Cranked up my buddies new 2110 build today and shoved it into the baja. 2110, fk10, CB rockers 1.4(1.45) actual, Tim's stage II's and 37 vent IDA's. IT FREAKING ROCKS!!!
Pulls hard even down low and keeps pulling to about 7K. I have stock 4.12 tranny with 28" tires and it had NO problems. Smooth idle..... Drives like a stock engine until you mash the pedal.
Next month I will finish my 2276 FK44 combo and will be able to update on the difference. For now......I say the FK10 is a killer cam. Smooth as silk!!!!!
_________________
62 vert
2276
Tim’s welded heads
45 Dells
A1 sidewinder
Fk44 cam |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ALB
Samba Member
Joined: August 05, 2008
Posts: 3499
Location: beautiful suburban Wet Coast of Canada
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 07, 2012 8:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
| KopfenJager wrote: |
| Any info on the FK42? just wondering how it compares to the other cams especialy the K8. |
The FK8 makes power to 6500 or so and has decent bottom end/mid range in a larger stroker motor(provided there is enough intake and exhaust for the motor). Where it shines, though, is above 3500 or 4000 rpm. In a vehicle that spends a lot of time putting around in the lower rpms (rough mountainous trail riding, rock crawling) this may not be the best choice. If you're talking about blasting up sand dunes, down fire roads or open desert, then in a lighter weight rail it could work well.
As you already know, the fast ramps/big lift of the FK42 provide a ton of low end/midrange power, the shortcoming being the 5500 or so rpm peak. What size motor is it in and how do you find it in your rail?
Simply swapping to the FK8 may be a disapointment; if the carburetion, intake port volume and exhaust are optimal for what you have now it may not have the ability to run the extra 1000 rpm with power. Remember, it's all in the combo.
As usual, just my 2 1/2 cents (I'm Canadian, eh). Al
_________________
On a lifelong mission to prove (much to my wife's dismay) that Immaturity is Forever!! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
KopfenJager
Samba Member
Joined: December 09, 2011
Posts: 582
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 07, 2012 2:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
| I agree, Ive been running the FK42 in my rail, almost switched it out for a K8. Just wondering what the differance looked like on a dyno sheet. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
vince1
Samba Member
Joined: December 14, 2003
Posts: 837
Location: Burgundy, France
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
KopfenJager
Samba Member
Joined: December 09, 2011
Posts: 582
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 07, 2012 1:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Any info on the FK42? just wondering how it compares to the other cams especialy the K8. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ALB
Samba Member
Joined: August 05, 2008
Posts: 3499
Location: beautiful suburban Wet Coast of Canada
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 06, 2012 10:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mark tucker wrote: |
| run a biger base circle and a smaller lobe lift and higher raito rockers. |
You've given me an idea, Mark; I have some Berg 1.54 rockers....
_________________
On a lifelong mission to prove (much to my wife's dismay) that Immaturity is Forever!! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mark tucker
Samba Member
Joined: April 08, 2009
Posts: 23950
Location: SHALIMAR ,FLORIDA
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 06, 2012 10:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
| run a biger base circle and a smaller lobe lift and higher raito rockers. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
westy richardson
Samba Member
Joined: September 22, 2010
Posts: 153
Location: Suffolk, England
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 06, 2012 10:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Glenn wrote: |
| jamestwo wrote: |
| The FK-8 is the best cam for a TRUE hot rod daily driver. |
I love my 2180 with K8. |
I'm looking forward to my 2110 now 
90.5 x 82
5.4 rods
FK8 with 1.4 rockers
40 x 35 valves
CB 044's CNC ported
Weber 40 IDF's
Merged exhaust
All lightened, balanced and blueprinted |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ALB
Samba Member
Joined: August 05, 2008
Posts: 3499
Location: beautiful suburban Wet Coast of Canada
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 06, 2012 5:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Alstrup wrote: |
What I mean is, that we cant argue that they can make good power.
If they were ground on a fatter lobe, with the timing adjusted of course, they would make the same power and torque characteristics, but would not wear parts out, and would not need so high spring pressure to avoid valve float.
T |
By fatter lobe do you mean bigger base circle? With the 86-88mm cranks that run into clearance problems, does it not? Do you have any experience with beehive springs?
_________________
On a lifelong mission to prove (much to my wife's dismay) that Immaturity is Forever!! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Alstrup
Samba Member
Joined: July 12, 2007
Posts: 7837
Location: Videbaek Denmark
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 11, 2012 8:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
What I mean is, that we cant argue that they can make good power.
If they were ground on a fatter lobe, with the timing adjusted of course, they would make the same power and torque characteristics, but would not wear parts out, and would not need so high spring pressure to avoid valve float.
T |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ALB
Samba Member
Joined: August 05, 2008
Posts: 3499
Location: beautiful suburban Wet Coast of Canada
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 11, 2012 7:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Alstrup wrote: |
| The figures/timing on the 40 series, (43-46) are actually rather good. And I do think that if they were ground on a slightly fatter lobe they would be killer cams. |
What do you mean by that last statement? Please explain...
_________________
On a lifelong mission to prove (much to my wife's dismay) that Immaturity is Forever!! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
westy richardson
Samba Member
Joined: September 22, 2010
Posts: 153
Location: Suffolk, England
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 11, 2012 6:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Glenn wrote: |
| jamestwo wrote: |
| The FK-8 is the best cam for a TRUE hot rod daily driver. |
I love my 2180 with K8. |
I'm having a 2110 built for my 1970 bus as we speak, my engine builder is using an FK8, with 1.4:1 rockers and 40x37 valves. All this with weber 40 IDF's and a 1 5/8 merged exhaust should give a good driveable bus and plenty of grunt when needed |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Alstrup
Samba Member
Joined: July 12, 2007
Posts: 7837
Location: Videbaek Denmark
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 11, 2012 6:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
I vote for the 86c too in that cam range. I have used them down to 1914´s and they run surprisingly strong. Of course the combo needs to be about perfect and not have too long gears, but still.
As Alan U stated, the CB 2289 is a much overlooked cam. It works really nice and has more midrange than the 87.
The 40 series I dont care about, apart from the fact that they make good power. They wear stuff out fast. (A few people seem to not have problems. I suspect they are suddenly in for a surprise)
The FK10 was never a popular cam. I´m not sure why. But I actually do think that a certain, now long gone, person had a lot to do with it due to the way he built and advocated street engines. It doesnt work well with 7,5-1 CR. 
The FK8 is a "forgiving" cam. It works reasonably well with 8-1 CR and is hot at 10-1 + high octane. If the ports are small it pulls ok numbers, but early. If the ports are actually too large it still makes reasonably good numbers. Going to the FK10 all that disapears and the combo has to be more "correct" to make good power.
The figures/timing on the 40 series, (43-46) are actually rather good. And I do think that if they were ground on a slightly fatter lobe they would be killer cams. Until then I stay with the 86B/C and CB 2289 
T |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mark tucker
Samba Member
Joined: April 08, 2009
Posts: 23950
Location: SHALIMAR ,FLORIDA
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 13, 2012 7:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| both sets of my 1.4 checked out at about 1.53,and with a .420 lobe they were 1.56, checking without a calculator is a must in all motors. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bilboa
Samba Member
Joined: July 23, 2008
Posts: 16
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 13, 2012 7:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mark, my fk46 lift was .630 with my berg 1.45's that measure 1.54 ?? ken has my cam card, gotta make sure on engle cams, some k10's measure 266 or 268, some fk 46s might differ from 271 . ? GREAT CAM... Might want to play with lobe centers in future as ken taber and doug berg just built a motor for johny johnson with fk46 with a 106 lobe center, GREAT results , ken , speak up ? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
