I think the the biggest problem with all of the stock manifold testing is that they are done out of the chassis. Stick a head pipe from an A-body manifold and test it that way.
340 max camshaft with exhaust manifolds
- Thread starter Illahe
- Start date
-
I’m not questioning the stock 340 cams have a following. That’s why I requested responses of members running Solid Lift Cams with manifolds.
For instance Lunati lists an aggressive “factory performance” in there catalog, 30201011lun. I'm hypothesizing, they intended using it with manifolds as the duration is fairly mild. Looking for a sub .500" lift combo.
Last edited:
Inertia
Well-Known Member
I am being reminded of a thread from someone swearing he got more h/p from manifolds and an x/h pipe than full tuned headers, went on and on.
interesting,
Gentlemen,
you realize our competition: Chevrolet, offered 2x4 bbl and stock rear dump exhaust manifolds on a 302 ci with a smog pump! Was this a fluke?
I'm confident Mother Mopar wasn't far behind. The six pack was rated at 1000 cfm. Ma mopar used manifolds on the TA. Seems logical that one could exceed the 340 cam's potential with manifolds...
you realize our competition: Chevrolet, offered 2x4 bbl and stock rear dump exhaust manifolds on a 302 ci with a smog pump! Was this a fluke?
I'm confident Mother Mopar wasn't far behind. The six pack was rated at 1000 cfm. Ma mopar used manifolds on the TA. Seems logical that one could exceed the 340 cam's potential with manifolds...
that could happen if the person cant tune a car
i saw more then a few clueless clowns at the strip with built abodys in the 15s lol
cant tune/cant drive= 15s
okay...
the 302 290hp 2x4 was a dog as well as the boss 302 unless on a road racing course
I do believe they cam with headers in the trunk
slows as piss in the 1/4 mile stock
Exactly! I prefer dusk till dawn and stoplights...Stock appearing is always a plus!
i woudnt run a stock 340 cam if you paid me its outdated by alot
could still run 12s
I cant say, yet I would bet carefully on a four speed 69 302..
slow as piss 14.7 dz302 4spd
yes, about as exciting as stepping on a hot marshmallow...
interesting. Appreciate the responses. Camshaft selection always gets everyone jacked up...Not sure why people take it so personal. Didn't come to bench race, just looking for those with experience with a similar combination. Cheers.
Last edited:
Good point. Currently run headers in my 69 4 speed with a 238/238 .558 solid. Looking for a slightly smaller combination, sub .500" lift with exhaust manifolds for my Sons 72.
Last edited:
You pretty much run any cam you want just make less power than with headers, high amount of Overlap generally doesn't like restrictive exhaust and needs collectors to function properly and a restrictive generally likes more exhaust duration. Your not gonna find too many large cam and manifold combos to copy, What ballpark cams you thinking about?
Not sure why you are specifically asking about sol lifter cams. In production, they were used in the Poly & 273 engines.
If you are asking because you are trying to relate the performance of the more common hyd cams to a sol lifter, then you might find this helpful as a means of comparison. This applies to the 050 numbers: the difference between them varies between 8 -15*. A tight lash sol lifter cam [ 0.012" lash ] of 240 @ 050 will perform similarly to a hyd cam of 232 @ 050.
A large lash [ 0.030-32"] sol cam of 240 @ 050 will perform similarly to a 225 @ 050 hyd cam.
If you are asking because you are trying to relate the performance of the more common hyd cams to a sol lifter, then you might find this helpful as a means of comparison. This applies to the 050 numbers: the difference between them varies between 8 -15*. A tight lash sol lifter cam [ 0.012" lash ] of 240 @ 050 will perform similarly to a hyd cam of 232 @ 050.
A large lash [ 0.030-32"] sol cam of 240 @ 050 will perform similarly to a 225 @ 050 hyd cam.
junkyardhero
Well-Known Member
you're jumping all over the place. first bringing up the E4 cam, conflating a number of different ideas, and making odd comparisons. all without explicitly stating what the intended use or idea is for the car, just vague generalities.
anyway, it seems like you've got this well enough in hand so i'm going to excuse myself from any further involvement and just follow along.
anyway, it seems like you've got this well enough in hand so i'm going to excuse myself from any further involvement and just follow along.
Thank you for your response Sir.
We started running solids years ago and prefer them. The vacuum is poor with large hydraulic cams and the lifters aren't much better. Solid lash adjustments can be manipulated when tuning for weather, and staring line conditions. I have several grinds and long blocks that I'm going to use over time.
Cheers
Last edited:
-
