• Hello Guest, welcome to the initial stages of our new platform!
    You can find some additional information about where we are in the process of migrating the board and setting up our new software here

    Thank you for being a part of our community!

L-cam in a high comp b23...what to expect?

2

240240

Guest
Just picked up a Lame cam from an 82 in the junkyard this morning...I plan on pitting it in a low mile stock 10.3-1 b23 with a 160 head. N/a powah. Keeping kjet.. My concern is too high static compression at low rpm. Or should I expect a high mpg high torque car?,its the wife's car which rarely sees over 4krpm. Keeping the auto transmission.
 
It'll be a big fat torque monster..!

Just kidding, I don't know.:oops:

Take a look at the specs of the L cam though, they are as near as makes no difference exactly the same as the T cam, so I imagine it will behave like a B230F with a T cam - like a few people have done on here.

cams1.jpg
 
gonna be a PING MONSTER. low lift low duration cam with high compression means more combustion pressure and temperature at low rpm. K-jet will guarantee it pings. How do you think the stock k-jet is going to know how much fuel to inject in this motor (hint it wont) the k-jet is calibrated for exactly the motor it came on from volvo. the B23 is EFI.

how bout swaping the whole b23 in with its ecu?
 
gonna be a Pong mNSTER. low lift low duration cam with high compression means more combustion pressure and temperature at low rpm. K-jet will guarantee it pings. How do you think the stock k-jet is going to know how much fuel to inject in this motor (hint it wont) the k-jet is calibrated for exactly the motor it came on from volvo. the B23 is EFI.

how bout swaping the whole b23 in with its ecu?

Kjet does fine with cam swaps that aren't drastic. But I want to know if anyone has gone in my direction. kjet is adaptable to a degree...I don't think its drastic what I'm trying to achieve. Kjet does fine with t cams. I plan on keeping the kjet in the 79. It has never failed me on this car.

Do you have experience with the lcam in a kjet car?
 
gonna be a PING MONSTER. low lift low duration cam with high compression means more combustion pressure and temperature at low rpm. K-jet will guarantee it pings. How do you think the stock k-jet is going to know how much fuel to inject in this motor (hint it wont) the k-jet is calibrated for exactly the motor it came on from volvo. the B23 is EFI.

how bout swaping the whole b23 in with its ecu?

Your ass has a mouth?

I guess K-Jet can't compensate for anything according to this guy but LH knows the compression ratio and cam specs to make it run right? You may need to adjust the timing a little but fueling won't be a problem.
 
Your ass has a mouth?

I guess K-Jet can't compensate for anything according to this guy but LH knows the compression ratio and cam specs to make it run right? You may need to adjust the timing a little but fueling won't be a problem.

My thought was just that....91+ octane,and set timing somewhere 10-12*....iirc isn't 2.0lh around 10* per book anyways.
 
I run an A cam in an 83 B23 with the stock LH2. I cut the head (mostly to clean it up) and am running a Elring HG. I figure I'm running 10.3 - 10.5 or so. It also has a small tube Stahl header and a full 2.5" exhaust with a single super 50 Flowmaster muffler.

The car pings pretty good with 87 octane. It did this with the stock M cam as well. I just ended up running 91 octane all the time (they don't have 89 octane at Costco). It doesn't ping on mid grade either.

The A cam is much better than the old M cam. It will pull very well to fuel cut (which is a lame 5500 RPM with LH2). More power, same or better mileage.

I expect that the L cam will be about the same as the M. No overlap, s****y lift.

If you want the car to be fun, get an A, B, V, VX or other such. You need more lift, more duration and some overlap to allow the engine to breath as it winds up.
 
Kjet does fine with cam swaps that aren't drastic. But I want to know if anyone has gone in my direction. kjet is adaptable to a degree...I don't think its drastic what I'm trying to achieve. Kjet does fine with t cams. I plan on keeping the kjet in the 79. It has never failed me on this car.

Do you have experience with the lcam in a kjet car?

uh cam swap wtf are you talking about? the k-jet is from a 2.1 liter motor and the b23 is a 2.3 liter motor so its not a cam swap its a frankenstein motor swap that at best will start and run like dog poo.

its not hard to do a complete motor swap with its own fuel system.
 
What cam is currently in the motor you plan to use this with? M? What difference does it make?

At ~25hp per cylinder it shouldn't matter if it's 100% programmed by Volvo to work for that exact hardware configuration. All these things have approximately the same torque curve and power output. I'm sure it will run fine, you may have to pull the initial timing back if you get any mid-low pinging.
 
uh cam swap wtf are you talking about? the k-jet is from a 2.1 liter motor and the b23 is a 2.3 liter motor so its not a cam swap its a frankenstein motor swap that at best will start and run like dog poo.

its not hard to do a complete motor swap with its own fuel system.

It's also really easy to do what the OP wants. I Just did this a few weeks ago.
K cam, OS valves, and head decked 0.085in on a b230 block running k-jet.

Mounting the k-jet dizzy will require some work, unless you remove the b230 breather box. We kept the breather box and just made some simple mounts to hold the dizzy under the intake. Another, better, option would be to run the B21FT turbo fuel dizzy and filter. This will supply a bit more fuel, but it will make mounting everything SO MUCH EASIER.

Also, we turned the k-jet mixture screw out a half turn to get it in the ballpark. Still needs some tuning with a wideband though.
 
It's also really easy to do what the OP wants. I Just did this a few weeks ago.
K cam, OS valves, and head decked 0.085in on a b230 block running k-jet.

Mounting the k-jet dizzy will require some work, unless you remove the b230 breather box. We kept the breather box and just made some simple mounts to hold the dizzy under the intake. Another, better, option would be to run the B21FT turbo fuel dizzy and filter. This will supply a bit more fuel, but it will make mounting everything SO MUCH EASIER.

Also, we turned the k-jet mixture screw out a half turn to get it in the ballpark. Still needs some tuning with a wideband though.

Yes I plan on putting the kjet turbo dizzy lines on the battery side like the car on the Dave Barton website via vw hoses style I hate the dizzy under the intake I can never see what's going on in there. Everyone is forgetting the mixture screen that's on all the distributors. With the wideband I know its tunable.currently I'm assuming a m can is in the motor... I want the torque down low. My wife drives this car and she drives like a grandma. In the streets the car won't even go to 3k rpm. I want to take advantage of mpg and low end torque..the mpg cars b21f-9 cars have no problem hitting hicar.20s mpg.I have plenty of cams for my other turbo build. I'car. I'm familiar with kjet fine tuning. I've just never done it in a car with compression this high. Most kjet cars like Porsches and Benzes have lower 9+- compression that I've dealt with. This is for the wife's car. I don't want a can that pulls over 3 k when the car almost never sees those revs. Currently its a b21f with t cam retarded 4* bw55 and it likes revving at 3-3500 rpm freeway with the cam retard...just don't know if by the time I tune it and retard the timing to 10* or less I'm going to lose that torque.
 
The engine I put together is over 10.8:1. Cranking pressure is 175lbs, for reference. Running stock timing and premium fuel there is no sign of knocking.

You should be safe. It might be a good idea to rebuild the head though. Sometimes the valves can wear down and get hot spots on the edges, which can lead to detonation. A fresh head is always a good start.
 
The engine I put together is over 10.8:1. Cranking pressure is 175lbs, for reference. Running stock timing and premium fuel there is no sign of knocking.

You should be safe. It might be a good idea to rebuild the head though. Sometimes the valves can wear down and get hot spots on the edges, which can lead to detonation. A fresh head is always a good start.

The engine only has 53k original documented miles. I put money down the head is in decent shape.
 
My B23E is happy with an "A" cam (wasn't happy with an RSI NA and I sold the "K"...oops) - it's fine on KJet with a Stahl header, much head work (405) and I normally don't run premium and it doesn't ping. So I agree, you'll be fine.
 
You'll be 100% fine... Any issue and you will be able to "fix it" by decreasing valve clearance, adjusting the ignition advance, or changing fuel octane rating.

I'm surprised at how close the L cam specs mimic the T cam, I hadn't noticed it was that close before. I bet there isn't a noticeable difference between the two, but the T does have less rated duration which could/should help increase dynamic compression even more, creating a more efficient setup from the get go. Minimal differences at best, either way.

Are you putting a thinner headgasket on it as well, or leaving it as is, without the head being shaved any, either?
uh cam swap wtf are you talking about? the k-jet is from a 2.1 liter motor and the b23 is a 2.3 liter motor so its not a cam swap its a frankenstein motor swap that at best will start and run like dog poo.

its not hard to do a complete motor swap with its own fuel system.
It doesn't care nearly as much as you think it does...

The engine I put together is over 10.8:1. Cranking pressure is 175lbs, for reference. Running stock timing and premium fuel there is no sign of knocking.
What valve clearance, out of curiousity?
 
You'll be 100% fine... Any issue and you will be able to "fix it" by decreasing valve clearance, adjusting the ignition advance, or changing fuel octane rating.

I'm surprised at how close the L cam specs mimic the T cam, I hadn't noticed it was that close before. I bet there isn't a noticeable difference between the two, but the T does have less rated duration which could/should help increase dynamic compression even more, creating a more efficient setup from the get go. Minimal differences at best, either way.

Are you putting a thinner headgasket on it as well, or leaving it as is, without the head being shaved any, either?It doesn't care nearly as much as you think it does...

What valve clearance, out of curiousity?

Leaving the engine as is for now. Stock head gasket, although a thin gasket would probably help ping. I've always been familiar that t & l are close.....wonder if anyone has dumped an L in a turbo just to see what happens.
 
Leaving the engine as is for now. Stock head gasket, although a thin gasket would probably help ping. I've always been familiar that t & l are close.....wonder if anyone has dumped an L in a turbo just to see what happens.
A thin one would help prevent detonation and improve efficiency, if your head is off, you're making a bad decision not to use one, in my opinion! Regarding using the L in a T situation, it's not enough of a difference to be worth it. Now, swapping in an M cam into a T car, that is something that could be worth doing. :)
 
A thin one would help prevent detonation and improve efficiency, if your head is off, you're making a bad decision not to use one, in my opinion! Regarding using the L in a T situation, it's not enough of a difference to be worth it. Now, swapping in an M cam into a T car, that is something that could be worth doing. :)

head is not off, the engine as far as I know has never come apart or been into. the engine is just on a dolly in the garage right as of now, so putting a head gasket in should be no problem, what thickness should I be aming for in the hg for proper squish? or in decking the head?
 
Back
Top