23/08/2026
A bit of background on where this camshaft project has come from.
Back in the ’90s, with the aid of Desktop Dyno, I started developing our own camshaft profiles for the Ford E-series six-cylinder engines. There weren’t many people doing it at the time mainly ourselves and Jim Mock Motorsport.
The first experimental cam went into a good mate’s car, Rob better known as Y***o Rob. It was his manual EB/ED station wagon, which made it a good real-world test car. Back then, cracking a 14-second pass in a basically standard E-series was a big achievement, particularly in a manual wagon. From memory, Rob’s car normally ran around 15.2–15.3, although I’ll let him confirm the exact figures.
I designed the profile and had it produced as a regrind by Wade Camshafts in Victoria, unfortunately the business is no longer trading. We installed the cam, set everything up and tuned it using the factory distributor. J3 chip tuning wasn’t available to me at that stage, and Rob didn’t want to go to the expense and trouble of wiring in a standalone ECU.
From memory, the first time the car went back to the track, it ran a 14.8. That was from the camshaft change and basic tuning alone. That result started my E-series camshaft journey. From there, I went on to develop Stage 2, Stage 3 and other profiles. Later on, I also had a go at developing a camshaft for the BA/BF Turbo. That combination continued making power beyond 7,000 rpm, which was a good result at the time. I believe that cam was tested in Jason Kosij car. Eventually, time moved on and I stepped away from developing camshafts. Now I’ve decided to put some time aside and have another crack at it this time with the Gen 3 Coyote.
There are already some very good camshaft manufacturers in Australia and overseas, but I believe there may still be room for something different. Using Desktop Dyno, I’ve modelled a completely standard Gen 3 Coyote with the factory heads, intake manifold and exhaust. Based on what I’ve learned about camshaft profiles over the years, I’ve developed what I consider to be our starting point for a CMS Stage 1 cam. The lift is similar to some of the popular Stage 1 and Stage 2 cams already available. The main difference is in the valve events and how I’ve designed the intake and exhaust profiles to work together. The objective is for it to continue carrying power beyond 7,000 rpm and towards 7,500 rpm, rather than falling away through the top end. Because of that intended operating range, I believe an upgraded valve spring package would be worthwhile. It should provide better valvetrain control and reduce the risk of valve float or spring resonance during sustained high-rpm operation. From my preliminary calculations, I’m looking at approximately 85–90 lb of seat pressure. The final spring specification will still need to be matched to the finished lobe profile and confirmed with the camshaft manufacturer.
The accompanying graph compares the simulated CMS Stage 1 curve against the GSC Stage 1 on the same standard Gen 3 engine, intake, exhaust, Australian 98 fuel and individually optimised Ti-VCT basis. The simulation shows the CMS Stage 1 producing a small torque and power advantage through most of the middle and upper-middle range. The GSC catches it near the top and finishes with a slight peak-power advantage. That is consistent with what I’m trying to achieve. The goal isn’t to claim that our cam will beat every other camshaft at every engine speed. The aim is to produce a strong overall combination with good average power, usable torque and the ability to carry power through the top end. At this stage, it is still a simulation and not a proven result. The next step is to speak with a camshaft manufacturer about the profile, have a test set produced and prove it properly on the dyno and at the track. The aim is a genuine street cam that maintains a healthy idle and remains suitable for both manual and 10R80 automatic cars with the standard converter. It should improve the upper-midrange and carry power further through the top end without unnecessarily sacrificing drivability. With a good intake and free-flowing exhaust, I believe there will be more in it again but first, we need to build it, test it and let the results do the talking. Let me know what you think. Comments and questions are welcome.
thanks joe
