Camshaft for 273

-
Narek H said:
Thanks fir this. I suppose the only upgrade then is the heads ( commando heads) if compression needs to be higher?
Click to expand...
273 heads are all the same. The compression is in the pistons. Domed with valve reliefs vs. flat tops with valve reliefs.
 
Narek H said:
So what did the commando have additional or different for 10.5 compression?
Click to expand...
For the compression, just the pistons. The HP cam was different and of course the 4 barrel, intake, and dual point. Valve covers and air cleaner for appearance items.
 
Narek H said:
So what did the commando have additional or different for 10.5 compression?
Click to expand...
The difference is in the head gaskets that are available now. Unless you want someone like Cometic to make some, what's available, while will work, is really not correct. The gasket bores are way too big for the 273 small bore, so it adds some volume to the cylinders and lowers the compression.
 
I "just bet" you can find some NOS 273 specific head gaskets here: AMS Obsolete Home Page
But they ain't gonna be cheap. I would make damn SURE they are for a 273 only before you pull the trigger, if you decide to go that route. They should be able to give you the gasket bore dimensions.
 
RustyRatRod said:
I "just bet" you can find some NOS 273 specific head gaskets here: AMS Obsolete Home Page
But they ain't gonna be cheap. I would make damn SURE they are for a 273 only before you pull the trigger, if you decide to go that route. They should be able to give you the gasket bore dimensions.
Click to expand...
Already been covered. I made it a sticky in the small block forums. 273 Head Gaskets
 
Narek H said:
Yeap I guess I miss understood the RPM range meaning. My intention is to add a bit power (My engine is 273 NON commando, but I am adding EGGE pistons) but I do not want to turn the car into a drag/racing engine where I can event enjoy slow speeds/cruises....
Click to expand...
I built my car with the same sentiment in mind.
 
Just a heads up.
You said that you have a manual trans.
Probably this trans has a 3.09 low.
But it's a 2bbl engine which could have a rear gear of 3.55 or probably less.
Let's say it is in fact a 3.55..
Your starter gear is thus 3.09 x 3.55= 10.97
If your engine will idle like stock 2bbl cam, say 550rpm in gear, then your slowest roadspeed is 3.66 mph. with 24.5" tires.
But if you have say 2.94 gears, and a later 2.66 low-gear trans, then 550 will be 5.13mph
But if your engine will not idle smoothly below 700 in gear, then 6.53 mph.
The point is this;
Do you need to drive this car slowly?
If the answer is yes, then, you need to know;
what rear gear is in it, and
what low-gear is in the trans, and
what your tire roll-out is,
and then, you need to know how slowly your engine is willing to idle at. This will depend an awful lot on the cam, the compression ratio, and the ignition timing. If you have to retard the ignition timing like I do, to 5*, then the entire bottom end will be weak.
That's quite a lot to have to think about.

BTW-1
for your application, I find no fault with your factory 273 2bbl cam, assuming that it is serviceable.
However, your engine can easily be converted to run a hydraulic lifter, and then you can run a stock 318 cam, or even, a stock 360 2bbl cam.
When it comes to bottom-end power, pumping up the pressure is already gonna give you more power. ANY cam with a later-closing intake event, is automatically gonna drop some pressure, which will drop the low-rpm power, and likely need to idle faster. and if it idles faster, it will drive faster at idle.
BTW-2
Somebody has got to say this, and if I'm the bad guy then so be it.
If you are looking for more low-rpm power, with a 273, then your best bet is more rear gear. Going to a 3.55 from a 2.94 is a 21% increase in torque-multiplication, which will make each gear feel that much more powerful. The downside, of course , is the higher cruising rpm.
Alternatively, a 318 is plus 16.5% a bigger engine, and will do the same thing without the higher cruise rpm. And the deal with that is, all things being equal, even a stock smog 318 will out torque your hopped-up 273. Put a 4bbl on the 318, with your closed chamber heads, with a free-flow exhaust, and your 64 will be a whole new animal, with only a modest loss of fuel economy, which you can easily get back with less rear gear.
There, I said it
 
I don't know about all of that, but I can assure you from having several 273 4 speed early Barracudas that the Mopar engineers hit a home run with the drivability performance of a commando camshaft. They basically already did for a 273 2bbl what you are wanting to do now. No need to reinvent the wheel. Best of luck with your upgrade.
 
AJ/FormS said:
Just a heads up.
You said that you have a manual trans.
Probably this trans has a 3.09 low.
But it's a 2bbl engine which could have a rear gear of 3.55 or probably less.
Let's say it is in fact a 3.55..
Your starter gear is thus 3.09 x 3.55= 10.97
If your engine will idle like stock 2bbl cam, say 550rpm in gear, then your slowest roadspeed is 3.66 mph. with 24.5" tires.
But if you have say 2.94 gears, and a later 2.66 low-gear trans, then 550 will be 5.13mph
But if your engine will not idle smoothly below 700 in gear, then 6.53 mph.
The point is this;
Do you need to drive this car slowly?
If the answer is yes, then, you need to know;
what rear gear is in it, and
what low-gear is in the trans, and
what your tire roll-out is,
and then, you need to know how slowly your engine is willing to idle at. This will depend an awful lot on the cam, the compression ratio, and the ignition timing. If you have to retard the ignition timing like I do, to 5*, then the entire bottom end will be weak.
That's quite a lot to have to think about.

BTW-1
for your application, I find no fault with your factory 273 2bbl cam, assuming that it is serviceable.
However, your engine can easily be converted to run a hydraulic lifter, and then you can run a stock 318 cam, or even, a stock 360 2bbl cam.
When it comes to bottom-end power, pumping up the pressure is already gonna give you more power. ANY cam with a later-closing intake event, is automatically gonna drop some pressure, which will drop the low-rpm power, and likely need to idle faster. and if it idles faster, it will drive faster at idle.
BTW-2
Somebody has got to say this, and if I'm the bad guy then so be it.
If you are looking for more low-rpm power, with a 273, then your best bet is more rear gear. Going to a 3.55 from a 2.94 is a 21% increase in torque-multiplication, which will make each gear feel that much more powerful. The downside, of course , is the higher cruising rpm.
Alternatively, a 318 is plus 16.5% a bigger engine, and will do the same thing without the higher cruise rpm. And the deal with that is, all things being equal, even a stock smog 318 will out torque your hopped-up 273. Put a 4bbl on the 318, with your closed chamber heads, with a free-flow exhaust, and your 64 will be a whole new animal, with only a modest loss of fuel economy, which you can easily get back with less rear gear.
There, I said it
Click to expand...
Smaller engines definitely can use more gear, even very mild ones.
 
I’m building a 273 atm. ‘60 over L222’s Crane Z268-2 (268/276-459/480),comp 901’s, super locks, 318 4V intake,1406 carb, cometic 4.04 bore’40 gaskets and a few other goodies, should be a nice putt putt engine. Gives my W2/410 12+ comp rocket a rest, and something for the wife to drive.
 
A 273 with any cam at the 340 Resto level or lower will be very responsive from just off idle to 5600 RPM.

With the 4 speed stick, you will never be traveling at 850 RPM anytime in normal driving or you will pound the rod bearings out lugging it. Maybe 850 RPM with an Auto and 1800 RPM Stall converter.

The above cam Rusty said will give a good power ratio in a light A body from 1,200 and up.

A split 268/270 cam or below will NOT turn a 273 into a RACECAR.

My 1965 Dart GT had the 273 Commando package but we pocket ported the heads, 340 Resto cam, Carter 625 AFB, ran 340 A body Iron log exhaust logs, Dual 2 inch out to dump in front of the rear wheels. It had a A-904 with a shift kit and 3.23:1 Suregrip. Ran P205/78 14's in back. Got between 17 and 25 MPG.

This would be a good engine to put an Eldy 318 SP2P intake on.
 
The Commando cam works very well. We measured an original 67 Commando cam with 50,000 miles on it at Racer Brown's Cam Doctor's Analysis.

Intake:
110.4* center ATDC
202.8* duration at .050 Crank degrees
.405" net valve lift

Exhaust:
110.4* center BTDC
202* duration at .050 Crank degrees
.414" net valve lift

He can custom grind some nice smaller solid cams that have worked out nice. He has a 200* duration that works for either a 2 or 4 barrel carb and a 210* duration cam for a 4 barrel carb. The cost is not that high either.
 
66fs said:
The Commando cam works very well. We measured an original 67 Commando cam with 50,000 miles on it at Racer Brown's Cam Doctor's Analysis.

Intake:
110.4* center ATDC
202.8* duration at .050 Crank degrees
.405" net valve lift

Exhaust:
110.4* center BTDC
202* duration at .050 Crank degrees
.414" net valve lift

He can custom grind some nice smaller solid cams that have worked out nice. He has a 200* duration that works for either a 2 or 4 barrel carb and a 210* duration cam for a 4 barrel carb. The cost is not that high either.
Click to expand...
I look at those cam specs and chuckle at how anemic it looks.
 
C130 Chief said:
There's also the Schneider T-132-F LA Small Block Solid Lifter Camshaft I'm most likely going to use this in my 65 Dart.

Solid lifter cost might be something you want to consider.
Click to expand...
I was looking at that cam pretty hard but went with the E4 instead. I would like to hear from some that have used that Schneider cam.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top