Modifying Your 348/355 – Thoughts-Benefits-Risks-Options-Costs

Ha ha, fair enough. Just got my back up when just after I post about wanting a carbon interior someone else posts it’s “boy racer” and the describes how he is trying to make his car a challenge car for the street. We both want the same thing. I started with a challenge car that has things added to make it more streetable and he started with a street car and added things to make it more trackable.

 

I think to me (most of) the interior parts aren't structural so don't actually get any weight savings from the carbon - so it's more an aesthetic choice than anything to do with performance. If you like it, you do you, my opinion is fairly worthless. I just had some buddies in college that watched too much fast and furious and then added a bunch of faux carbon to their civics, so when I see a bunch of blatantly not structural carbon it screams "boy racer" to me. Carbon seats that drop some actual weight or exposed structural carbon, sure, but the center console/sill plates/gauge surrounds aren't fooling anyone and look tacky to me. Again, my opinion, but that's what we're here for.

 

I mean, I legit cooked the factory brakes and went off track at VIR, so they're decidedly not for looks. I tried better pads but they didn't help too much. Sorry if I offended you, but I wouldn't spec a new ferrari with carbon interior bits that didn't actually reduce weight, either. They look tacky to me, but that's me, i prefer form following function for stuff like that. If you like it it's your car, go for it and enjoy. "Boy racer" was harsh and not directed at you. I know the Japanese car you're talking about and it was a bit (just a bit) over the top for my tastes but screamed racer, without the boy. I think starting from a real challenge car you don't have to worry about looking like a poser, but maybe I do, hence my aversion.

2:20 in this video trying to slow down from 150mph if you want to see why I'm upgrading the brakes.

 

Are they any good? I have family in Belgium I visit periodically, could make a trip there next time I'm out there. I haven't seen anyone run them, or the Toda cams for that matter, probably only a handful of cars running them but I haven't seen any reports of how they work.

 

Gains above 7k rpm and losses below. So, they are good for a car that will be raced, ideally with aftermarket engine management and the ability to stomach 9500+ shift points. Here is what info I have from them-


"Hello,

It seems that i have been to fast in my answer.
We only have dyno data if our customers give them to us.
But our engineer let me know that we received them for the F355

So i am trying to give you enough info to work with.
In attachment you find 2 pictures of dyno result from a customer that fitted our 1701102.
This are the pics that is comparing the stock cams of that engine with our catcams.
The data of the 1701102 are attached.

Another guy that fitted our 1701101 give some feed back.
- solid follower conversion
- lash cap thickness +/- 4.5mm. The caps he received from another supplier had a 3mm centering edge around the valve which he needed to modify for clearance to the valve locks, but ours are 2.5mm so they will most probably fit perfectly.
- he used original valve springs, however based on the datasheet of another customer that could be that yours can be only 0.2mm from coil block (intake only). I suggest to have a look at the intake spring seat and grind off 0.5mm or (if possible). Maybe he did as well and forgot to tell me.
- he used new pistons because the bore was increased from 85mm to 88mm (3.8L)
- final result was 495hp at 9000rpm (full race trim)

Basically, the only problem they had when fitting the cams was the fact they needed to machine the cylinder head to clearance the larger cam. Apparently, you get really close to the spark plug seal, which they removed and used loctite instead.
Therefor we created the 1701102 witch have a reduced lift that eliminates the need to modify the retainers and (excessive) clearancing of the head around the cam lobes.


If you want to go for the higher lift you need to make adjustments. you can do this by modifies the lower retainer or replace the upper retainer by a retainer that gives you 0.5 mm extra.
You always have to check the clearance between the valve seal and the bottom of the spring retainer, clearance should preferably be 0.5mm at maximum valve lift. This could also be a reason to go for the lower lift version.

Please take your time to consider en check all the remarks.
Also keep in mind that this is feed back from customers and nothing we measured ourselves.
So you always have to see what is possible in your engine and check if everything has enough clearance to work correct.

For the mechanical conversion you can use our CC018 followers together wit our lash caps TS101 We have them in different thickness but they are not always all in stock.
So for that is is nice for us to know if you are able to grind them yourself to the correct thickness so we can give you in case we run out of stock a bigger one then you are asking for.

Beside that we also have part number 1701103 that is for hydro followers.
That is having the same specs as the mechanical 1701102 but for Hydro followers.
Normally this is plug and play like we say.
But same like the other you have to check clearance the moment you are assemble the engine

If you have further questions you can contact me.
Kind regards
Raf Liekens"

Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

So that's the 1701102, it looks like there are no losses in the meat of the torque curve 5000-7000 and then gains over 7000. It'd be softer in around town driving but as fast or faster in any kind of performance driving.

Those are pretty huge top end gains if that's a stock motor.... I'd imagine the hydraulic version would be similar but maybe have a little less top end and better low end as the valve opening will be less aggressive.

 

^ Yes, agreed on all. Only downside I see is ideal shift point with the new cams would probably be 9500+ and it's been said that timing belt life is drastically shortened up there.

 

Even if that's ideal, if you keep to the factory 8750 fuel cutoff (which I'm assuming is where that graph ends), that's a 40hp gain on the top end. Maybe getting the toda belts and upping the limit to 9500 would be worth the investment? Would the hydraulic followers still hold up at that rpm? That might be a step too far...

 

I don't see any reason the hydraulic setup wouldn't still work. (And Catcams said they wouldn't expect much power difference between hydro and solid)