5.9 stroker build

-
RBConvert said:
I bookmarked his site and read all four of his articles. When I read these articles, it reminds me just how much I don't know about performance builds. I think I'm pretty knowledgeable and can hold my own in a conversation. Then I read those articles that Mike posted and I feel like I'm in school again.
Click to expand...
I don’t think that’s uncommon. It made me realize how much minutiae there was to learn about how the valve accelerates off the seat and where you want it to slow down, where to speed back up again, and how all of that affects stability. And why the rocker shaft placement is so important. I think I’ve read his tech articles a hundred times. It’s good stuff.
 
Yesterday I went with @Kern Dog to the machinist to drop off the cam bearings, intermediate shaft bushing, and the pistons for him to do the final hone. Greg dropped off his cam bearings and bushing and Rick will be finishing up his engine shortly. Mine's next, so I gotta get my butt in gear and finish ordering some parts.
Camshaft selection is always my most hand-wringing decision, but at the same time I enjoy the research more than any other engine component. I finally made a decision.
You Tube has dozens of 360 build videos. I subscribe to JustMoparJoe, and he did a 360 build series a few years ago. Power Nation is another site I subscribe to. They work on all makes, but they had a couple of good videos on stroking a 360 with TF heads. Their build used an off the shelf Comp grind of 236/242, 581/578 lift @1.6 on a 110° LSA. With a TF SP intake, the motor made 550 ft-lb @4,100 and 537 hp @6,000. Torque was over 450 ft-lb @2,500. I understand those are dyno numbers under perfect conditions, but it's still impressive low-rpm torque with a single plane intake. I'm running an AirGap RPM.
Here's the video:

Just the other day, FABO member James Clews added this (post #47):
James Clews said:
I run premium unleaded that is 98 but in Australia we measure our fuel in the opposite to USA ( RON or MON) and I have never hear detonation in my engine and will pull cleanly from about 1000 rpm in fifth gear without complaining and I have a custom roller cam designed by Mike at B3 236.6 / 242.6 and 610 lift on a 112 lobe sep. That cam idles sweet at about 800 rpm with a slight lope but behaves really nice and gets 23 mpg on a run and makes 425 RWHP (about 540 flywheel) and runs low eleven sec qtrs in an Australian Valiant Charger!
Click to expand...
A few weeks ago I submitted a cam questionnaire to Hughes Engines, and Dave responded with a recommendation of their SER4650ALN-9 grind, a 246/250 @0.050; .592/.603 @ 1.6; 109° LSA. I felt it was a little too aggressive for my taste so today I decided on the Hughes Engine SER3842ALN-10 grind. Duration is 238/242 @.050"; .576/.587 lift @ 1.6; 110° LSA. Ironically, this a larger cam than I have in the 440.
It feels good to clear that milestone. Still need to buy rocker arms and talk to Mike at B3 Racing.
 
Last edited:
That’s a shelf grind (I think form comp) that the power nation guys used. It’s a good all around cam, and you could definitely do a lot worse. But don’t let the decision bother you too much, people think camshafts are parked in an engine forever and that’s absolutely not true. If you don’t like it, change it. You can do it in the car in a weekend and a roller just needs a new cam, not lifters and all that junk. It’s easy and not too expensive in the grand scheme.
 
Smart move going one size smaller in my opinion. I feel like it's always better to err on one size smaller than the other way around. I went super small for my roller 408 build. I was surprised Comp was able to get it out so quick (shipped yesterday). Good to hear about your progress!
 
" Hughes Engine SER3842ALN-10 grind. Duration is 238/242 @.050"; .576/.587 lift @ 1.6; 110° LSA. Ironically, this a larger cam than I have in the 440."

01 face 14.jpg


That cam is similar in numbers to THIS one I'm considering or my 440/495 :

1740161931226.png


1740161947155.png


I have 1.6 rocker arms so the lift moves to .580/.577 with the higher ratio.
Holy crap, that ought to be a thumper.
 
TT5.9mag said:
That’s a shelf grind (I think form comp) that the power nation guys used. It’s a good all around cam, and you could definitely do a lot worse. But don’t let the decision bother you too much, people think camshafts are parked in an engine forever and that’s absolutely not true. If you don’t like it, change it. You can do it in the car in a weekend and a roller just needs a new cam, not lifters and all that junk. It’s easy and not too expensive in the grand scheme.
Click to expand...
Greg and I just had this exact conversation earlier this week. Time will tell, but I think I'm really going to like this cam.
 
Still waiting on the machinist to finish the block, in the meantime I'm digging into the cam specs on the Hughes HR cam.
Hughes requires that their spring p/n 1129 be used with these cams. Comparing these specs with the installed springs on the TF heads reveals some discrepancies.
Per the cam card, Hughes requires 145#@ 1.800" on the seat. TF's specs are 120#@ 1.900". Hughes requires 345# @ .550 lift. Conversely, TF calculates to 335#@ .550. TF's spring rate is 390 lbs/in. So, (390 x .550)+120=335.
Taking it a step further, the cam's intake lift with 1.6 rockers is .576". Hughes' spring rate is 391 lbs/in. So at max lift, Hughes' spring rate is (391 x .576)+145= 370#. TF is (390 x .576)+120= 345#. Being a novice engine builder, spring rates vs. cam profiles wasn't something I was deeply aware of. Am I looking at this correctly?
If the springs and cam profile are incompatible, then I either swap the cam or the springs. Changing out the cam would be the path of least resistance. I like the Hughes cam profiles; I have their hyd FT grind in my 440 and it runs strong. But it seems changing one cam is easier than 16 springs. And would I also have to change the locks and retainers?
 
You'd just change the springs and check the installed height. Changing springs on cylinder heads that are sitting on a bench isn't hard.
If the cam is a custom grind, the return process could be costly.
 
Kern Dog said:
You'd just change the springs and check the installed height. Changing springs on cylinder heads that are sitting on a bench isn't hard.
If the cam is a custom grind, the return process could be costly.
Click to expand...
It's an off the shelf grind so I'm pretty sure Dave will let me return it. But if I replace the TF springs with springs that are .100" shorter, won't that leave a gap between the retainer and locks?
 
I'd try the TF springs if they allow for the lift you're at. Looks at the coil bind height and allow for clearance. Those 1129 springs are the same ones he specs for his 276/280/.656" HR cam, so you're at the small end for those springs. If you want more seat pressure, you could always shim the TF springs. Just make sure you're not getting into coil bind territory at open.
 
I am just learning about Installed spring height as it has not been something that I have dealt with before. As I understand it, your valve is a fixed length so the tip sticks above the guide the same no matter what spring you have. If your replacement springs are shorter than the ones you currently have, the gap gets taken up with shims.
I'll be dealing with this when doing the roller cam swap in the red car.
 
Kern Dog said:
I am just learning about Installed spring height as it has not been something that I have dealt with before. As I understand it, your valve is a fixed length so the tip sticks above the guide the same no matter what spring you have. If your replacement springs are shorter than the ones you currently have, the gap gets taken up with shims.
I'll be dealing with this when doing the roller cam swap in the red car.
Click to expand...
I picked up this inexpensive spring mic a while back. There are some reviews that it's not calibrated, but mine was dead nuts when measured against a set of dial calipers. Worst case, buy a few until you get an accurate one and return the others.

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B08B8CSSB5?tag=fabo03-20
 
mopowers said:
I'd try the TF springs if they allow for the lift you're at. Looks at the coil bind height and allow for clearance.
Click to expand...
Max lift is .680"; .093" greater than the exhaust lobe at 1.6 ratio.
mopowers said:
Those 1129 springs are the same ones he specs for his 276/280/.656" HR cam, so you're at the small end for those springs.
Click to expand...
They do specify a large range of cams for those lifters. The cam card's open/closed pressure specs are lower than the specs for those springs, which backs up your comment about the being on the smaller side.
mopowers said:
If you want more seat pressure, you could always shim the TF springs. Just make sure you're not getting into coil bind territory at open.
Click to expand...
How does the installed height play into this? If I shim the TF springs, they'd be even taller than the 1129 springs. Would the difference be taken up in the pushrod length?
 
RBConvert said:
How does the installed height play into this? If I shim the TF springs, they'd be even taller than the 1129 springs. Would the difference be taken up in the pushrod length?
Click to expand...
Shimming the springs makes them shorter, while adding additional seat pressure. Think of the top of the spring as a fixed point (though that can be moved too with +.050" keepers, etc). When you shim the bottom of the spring, it just adds any seat pressure that's needed and shortens the installed height of the spring. The added pressure can be easily calculated based on the thickness of the shim used and the spring rate. You just have to be careful to check that the installed height of the shimmed spring still allows for enough lift and clearance needed before it reaches coil bind. I hope this makes sense.
 
mopowers said:
Shimming the springs makes them shorter, while adding additional seat pressure. Think of the top of the spring as a fixed point (though that can be moved too with +.050" keepers, etc). When you shim the bottom of the spring, it just adds any seat pressure that's needed and shortens the installed height of the spring. The added pressure can be easily calculated based on the thickness of the shim used and the spring rate. You just have to be careful to check that the installed height of the shimmed spring still allows for enough lift and clearance needed before it reaches coil bind. I hope this makes sense.
Click to expand...
Thank you, I get it now. I was thinking about carpenter's shims, which increase a gap. While shimming will increase the seat pressure, shouldn't it also increase spring pressure through the range of compression?

It's still boiling down to two choices: remove, shim, and reinstall 16 springs that were originally installed at the TF factory vs. send back the uninstalled cam and restart my cam grinder search for what will probably need to be a custom grind.
 
If you like the cam keep it. Springs are easy. And you’re going to have to set up springs for whichever cam goes it in. I certainly wouldn’t pick a cam based on the springs that are already installed on my heads. That’s a quick way to build a turd. My opinion of course.
 
RBConvert said:
I bookmarked his site and read all four of his articles. When I read these articles, it reminds me just how much I don't know about performance builds. I think I'm pretty knowledgeable and can hold my own in a conversation. Then I read those articles that Mike posted and I feel like I'm in school again.
Click to expand...


Don’t feel bad. Mike is smart enough that he makes a lot of us feel stupid.

I’m at the top of that list.

Plus he’s a really great guy.
 
RBConvert said:
Still waiting on the machinist to finish the block, in the meantime I'm digging into the cam specs on the Hughes HR cam.
Hughes requires that their spring p/n 1129 be used with these cams. Comparing these specs with the installed springs on the TF heads reveals some discrepancies.
Per the cam card, Hughes requires 145#@ 1.800" on the seat. TF's specs are 120#@ 1.900". Hughes requires 345# @ .550 lift. Conversely, TF calculates to 335#@ .550. TF's spring rate is 390 lbs/in. So, (390 x .550)+120=335.
Taking it a step further, the cam's intake lift with 1.6 rockers is .576". Hughes' spring rate is 391 lbs/in. So at max lift, Hughes' spring rate is (391 x .576)+145= 370#. TF is (390 x .576)+120= 345#. Being a novice engine builder, spring rates vs. cam profiles wasn't something I was deeply aware of. Am I looking at this correctly?
If the springs and cam profile are incompatible, then I either swap the cam or the springs. Changing out the cam would be the path of least resistance. I like the Hughes cam profiles; I have their hyd FT grind in my 440 and it runs strong. But it seems changing one cam is easier than 16 springs. And would I also have to change the locks and retainers?
Click to expand...


Shim the TF springs to 1.800 but post what coil bind is.

140 is the minimum I use for HR’s. If you are going to beat on it I’d use 160 on the seat.

Dave will squeal but he always does.
 
RBConvert said:
Yesterday I went with @Kern Dog to the machinist to drop off the cam bearings, intermediate shaft bushing, and the pistons for him to do the final hone. Greg dropped off his cam bearings and bushing and Rick will be finishing up his engine shortly. Mine's next, so I gotta get my butt in gear and finish ordering some parts.
Camshaft selection is always my most hand-wringing decision, but at the same time I enjoy the research more than any other engine component. I finally made a decision.
You Tube has dozens of 360 build videos. I subscribe to JustMoparJoe, and he did a 360 build series a few years ago. Power Nation is another site I subscribe to. They work on all makes, but they had a couple of good videos on stroking a 360 with TF heads. Their build used an off the shelf Comp grind of 236/242, 581/578 lift @1.6 on a 110° LSA. With a TF SP intake, the motor made 550 ft-lb @4,100 and 537 hp @6,000. Torque was over 450 ft-lb @2,500. I understand those are dyno numbers under perfect conditions, but it's still impressive low-rpm torque with a single plane intake. I'm running an AirGap RPM.
Here's the video:

Just the other day, FABO member James Clews added this (post #47):

A few weeks ago I submitted a cam questionnaire to Hughes Engines, and Dave responded with a recommendation of their SER4650ALN-9 grind, a 246/250 @0.050; .592/.603 @ 1.6; 109° LSA. I felt it was a little too aggressive for my taste so today I decided on the Hughes Engine SER3842ALN-10 grind. Duration is 238/242 @.050"; .576/.587 lift @ 1.6; 110° LSA. Ironically, this a larger cam than I have in the 440.
It feels good to clear that milestone. Still need to buy rocker arms and talk to Mike at B3 Racing.
Click to expand...


In my 416", I'm running 236/242 with 110 deg LSA flat tappet solid. I run 1.5 rocker and much lower lift (502/511). I wanted something a little easier on the valvetrain. I'd keep it 110 deg on the street.

I don't if this is a car you plan to put some travel miles on or just around town.
 
Last edited:
Newbomb Turk said:
Shim the TF springs to 1.800 but post what coil bind is.

140 is the minimum I use for HR’s. If you are going to beat on it I’d use 160 on the seat.

Dave will squeal but he always does.
Click to expand...
I'm not beating on it hard, the recommended 145 should be fine. I'll shim the TFs, after talking with Mike at B3.
 
Newbomb Turk said:
Don’t feel bad. Mike is smart enough that he makes a lot of us feel stupid.

I’m at the top of that list.

Plus he’s a really great guy.
Click to expand...
He and I have been playing phone tag. I'm currently it, so I need to call back.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top