Cam Choice

-
mullinax95 said:
fishy68

If I was going to go with a Comp Cam I might pick up the hydraulic lifters some where else and avoid the Comp lifters all together.

I once used a set of sealed power lifters on a comp cam and had no problem. Adam says theirs only 2 places making lifters. Don't know about that but if it's true the Comp lifters must not be sealed power made.
Click to expand...

If you read the top posts by me I was amazed by the solid cams that Comp offers over my hydraulic Mopar cam. The Comp Cam XS268S would gain me 7 more HP and 21lbs of TQ!
Click to expand...

A solid will allmost everytime make more power over a hyd. That's possibly where yoru seeing the gain. Then again it could be that the 268s just works better with your heads. That's what it's all about. Matching the cam to the air flow potential of the induction system.
 
fishy68 said:
A solid will allmost everytime make more power over a hyd. That's possibly where yoru seeing the gain. Then again it could be that the 268s just works better with your heads. That's what it's all about. Matching the cam to the air flow potential of the induction system.
Click to expand...

I also noticed that on Cam Quest that the gains mentioned above come in 500 less RPM on HP and TQ with the solid cam. To me that means that would be better or would it? I mean it's only 500 RPM difference.
 
mullinax95 said:
I also noticed that on Cam Quest that the gains mentioned above come in 500 less RPM on HP and TQ with the solid cam. To me that means that would be better or would it? I mean it's only 500 RPM difference.
Click to expand...

That's quite a difference in peak rpm.

Was the lobe seperation angle and installed centerline the same between the 2 cams the same? Those factors can shift the power up or down in the rpm range.
 
fishy68 said:
That's quite a difference in peak rpm.

Was the lobe seperation angle and installed centerline the same between the 2 cams the same? Those factors can shift the power up or down in the rpm range.
Click to expand...




All it shows both at lobe centerline 110 and intake centerline is 106.

Purple shaft .474/.474 (mine)
Peak HP 374.8 @ 5500
Peak TQ 412.8 @ 4000


XS268S .488/.501 (the solid cam)

Peak HP 381.9 @ 5000
Peak TQ 441.8 @ 3500
 
I dont put anby faith in the engine dyno simulators. WAY too much is assumed. As far as the whys, the hydraulic cam ramp is much more gentle, because if it was too fast, the hydraulic lifter will collapse under the strain and not lift the valve. Remember they were designed for quiet and no maintenance, not performance. They have been re-designed several ways to help the problems they inherantly have. But a solid lifter can do a better job of quickly and smoothly opening and closing the valves. What you see is the trend of more torque at lower rpms. That's what a solid does over a flat tappet. A roller does the same thing, but mnore so than even the solid flat tappet.
 
moper said:
I dont put anby faith in the engine dyno simulators. WAY too much is assumed. As far as the whys, the hydraulic cam ramp is much more gentle, because if it was too fast, the hydraulic lifter will collapse under the strain and not lift the valve. Remember they were designed for quiet and no maintenance, not performance. They have been re-designed several ways to help the problems they inherantly have. But a solid lifter can do a better job of quickly and smoothly opening and closing the valves. What you see is the trend of more torque at lower rpms. That's what a solid does over a flat tappet. A roller does the same thing, but mnore so than even the solid flat tappet.
Click to expand...

Yeah I know what you mean. Putting it on a dyno would be best.

I have never ran a solid cam so it would be a different to me. I just was amazed at the HP TQ the cams make at lower RPM. Especially the TQ jump. I guess that they are more a race cam than a street cam because of the noise and adjustment. I surely wouldn't want to stay under the valve covers all of the time.
 
You shouldnt have to adjust them that often. Lots of hi-po cars cam with solids from the factory. 302 Chevys, LT1 350s, LS6 454s, Hemi and 235hp 273s.
 
AdamR said:
You shouldnt have to adjust them that often. Lots of hi-po cars cam with solids from the factory. 302 Chevys, LT1 350s, LS6 454s, Hemi and 235hp 273s.
Click to expand...

Yeah like I said I've never ran a solid before so I wouldn't know how often I would have to adjust the rockers. I have roller rockers so I'm wondering would that help silence the noise compared to non-roller rockers?

When I built my motor I threw the .474/.474 in it because I already had it laying around. The Comp Cam isn't a whole lot bigger far as lift compared to mine. The duration is 230 intake and 236 exhaust, mine is 233 on both.
 
The older wide lash cams did beat things up more and require more maint. but the new tight lash cams are very low maint. Most people I have talked to say they only adjust them once a year and even then they might only be .001-.002" off. Different types of rocker arm setups make a diff. too. Chevies ball and stud rocker wears more because most of the hammering from lash occurs at the fulcrom and unless you change the factory adjusting screw to positive locks you have to adjust them more often because the factory adjuster nut even though self locking wasn't tight enough to keep vibrations from causing them to back off. Same goes for the original 273 rocker adjuster screw that's why changing them to a screw with a locknut design helps them hold the lash adjustment longer.

What Moper said about trusting dyno programs is true to a point. They can give you a good idea of what your engine can produce but there's still allot left on the table that can affect things even if you know your flow numbers and put them in and it's a program that considers rod ratio. For instance I have the newest version of Desktop Dyno and have mocked up my 408 I'm building but it has nowhere to input piston and rod weight. I have assembled an extremely lightweight but strong rotation assy. The pistons are Wiseco forged that weight 452 grams each. The pins weigh a few grams less than stock. Same for the rods. Their SCAT rods and I don't remember the exact weight but I know their quite a bit lighter than stock. I figured up the weights and my complete rotating assy. weight within a few grams of what a Magnum V6 rotating assy. weighs. In other words it's 2 whole piston/rod assy's lighter than a stock 360 magnum assy. That has to have quite a bearing on power production. None of the programs take tht into consideration. Also the intakes you get to choose from are kinda generic. For instance do you consider the very popular Edel Air-Gap a High flow or a Max flow intake? Model both on the dyno program and you'll see a huge difference.

What Moper said about the agressiveness of the solid is true and helps power output. I see the Comp solid is also a higher lift and split duration/lift cam which may be a better match to your heads also contributing to the higher power output.
 
what ever cam you use ,hyd,or solid make sure you add their cam lube additive, todays motor oil doesnt have the zinc additive,maybe shell rotela still has it in it. im not sure, thats the reason i heard for the recent camshaft/lifter failures. i use rotelaand aquart of lucas additive. whats your guys thought??
 
I have 3 hughes cams in use....all three cars in my sig listed below...

have no problems with them....
two solid lifters.... 256/265 .626/.642 with 1.6 rockers
260/264 .626/.633 with 1.6 rockers

hydraulic 230/237 .515/.535 with 1.5 rockers..
 
35regal said:
what ever cam you use ,hyd,or solid make sure you add their cam lube additive, todays motor oil doesnt have the zinc additive,maybe shell rotela still has it in it. im not sure, thats the reason i heard for the recent camshaft/lifter failures. i use rotelaand aquart of lucas additive. whats your guys thought??
Click to expand...


http://www.napaonline.com/NOLPPSE/(S(t1qojnngtagu4gbgotwojz45))/Detail.aspx?R=VAR851_0006411555

Must have "not street legal" wrote on it. There are different weights but this is packed with zinc. No additive needed. Don't get the Valvoline racing oil that does not state "not street legal"
 
mullinax95 said:
http://www.napaonline.com/NOLPPSE/(S(t1qojnngtagu4gbgotwojz45))/Detail.aspx?R=VAR851_0006411555

Must have "not street legal" wrote on it. There are different weights but this is packed with zinc. No additive needed. Don't get the Valvoline racing oil that does not state "not street legal"
Click to expand...

I'm curious what you found here since you said it has zink but the link don't work. What is it?

VR1 Valvoline is the good stuff. Has a good ammount of zinc. I've bought it quite a few times but never noticed it saying "not street legal". I'll have to look next time.
 
If you make the change to a solid cam, you have to change the pushrods also!!! There are 3 different pushrods for the small block...
hyd/hyd hyd /adjustable rockers and solid/adj....

Bob
 
fishy68 said:
I'm curious what you found here since you said it has zink but the link don't work. What is it?

VR1 Valvoline is the good stuff. Has a good ammount of zinc. I've bought it quite a few times but never noticed it saying "not street legal". I'll have to look next time.
Click to expand...


Yeah it says the part search has run out. Ok try NAPA part number VAL 851 for the 20w-50. We discussed this not to ago and I'm going use this oil next time instead of the regular VR-1. Its got to have "not street legal" on the bottle to be the really good stuff. You'll see the difference.
 
SoulSurvivor said:
Hello guys. I was hoping you could give me a little guidance on what cam I should install in my '69 340. This is my first rebuild. Its a blast.

The 340 has been hot tanked and magnafluxed and has passed inspection. machinist says I can get away with .020 over bore. The crank survived and just need a polishing. The rods and caps are all Ok but the cap bolts should be replaced. The engine was in really good shape upon disassembly.
The J heads (2.02/1.60) have also been hot tanked and magnafluxed. I had them fitted with a set of Manley severe duty stainless valves and comp cams valve springs rated up to .530 lift(just in case). I will be using the stock type rocker arm assembly.
I am thinking of a set of 10.5:1 forged pistons(correct me if you think something else will work better) and was given a new M1 dual plane manifold.
The engine will go in my 69 Dart Custom(my sig picture).
The trans will be my 904 with a Trans-go kit and 2400 stall(suggestion please)
I also have a just rebuilt 8-3/4 with 3:91 Sure Grip(742 case).
Headers will be mandatory. The car already has a 2-1/2 in system and Flowmaster Super 40s.

So...what cam should i use. I'm old school and remember Racer Brown, Isky, Direct Connection and Crane were the big cam manufactures back in the day. I would like to use the most aggressive without it overheating or having to machine anything. And i don't want to use a roller assembly. But I want my car to snarl and haul ***. If I can get it to run 12 1/2 seconds every couple of months at the drag strip that would be a plus.
I truly am looking for your guidance and tell me if I am on the right track with my combination. I have not bought any parts except the head assembly stuff.

Thanks in advance. I know you will have good suggestions.

Doug
Click to expand...
Have you looked at a custom ground fast rate cam? They are the current rage these days!......:eek:
 
RustyRatRod said:
Dangit. Thread back from the DEAD.
Click to expand...
Who doesn’t like a “what cam?” thread??!! Long live the Dead Thread!! :rofl: Always interesting (at least for me!) to read the thinking and logic of the times, especially from past members that disappeared, as well as from some of our senior members, when they were still wet behind the ears!:lol:
 
12many said:
Who doesn’t like a “what cam?” thread??!! Long live the Dead Thread!! :rofl: Always interesting (at least for me!) to read the thinking and logic of the times, especially from past members that disappeared, as well as from some of our senior members, when they were still wet behind the ears!:lol:
Click to expand...

Oh I like the dead threads too. I just like pokin fun. lol
 
Mopar Tech said:
Like wide lash cams are terrible and fast rate cams make more. It's a joke from someone who's worked in the business. Others(most) just wing it.
Click to expand...
I'm not trying to bust anyones balls but most are out in space hoping for a magic lobe when that wont happen.
 
Mopar Tech said:
Like wide lash cams are terrible and fast rate cams make more. It's a joke from someone who's worked in the business. Others(most) just wing it.
Click to expand...

I don't go by any of that mess because I've made good power with pretty much all kinds. It just all depends on the combination.
 
Mopar Tech said:
I'm not trying to bust anyones balls but most are out in space hoping for a magic lobe when that wont happen.
Click to expand...

Exactly, that's why it makes little sense putting a camshaft choice under a microscope, UNLESS it's a drag only car racing for points and money. Even then "I" would not put a "WHOLE LOT" of thought in it, because it's supposed to be FUN.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top