Factory Camshafts ~ 1968 340 '4-Speed' vs. Chevy '151'

[one mile]

69 Cuda 440 can you plott a parallel from the S.B.C. to the S.B.M. ? Just thought I would ask. you seem to be up to speed in both "Camps" as far as Camshafts. Just for general info and future reference for us..... or me and my ignorant self..... ha ha , Thanks, Tim

 

[69 Cuda 440]

Numbers

The Chevrolet '151' Hydraulic Camshaft had a Power Curve of {2800 to 5800 RPM's}
with a 'RED LINE' of 6000 RPM's.

Valve Springs....... #90 lbs. Valve-Closed ~ #200 lbs. Valve-Open

Available In 4-Speed 'Only' Transmissions......Production Numbers
* 1965 Corvette - 327/350 HP ------------------ 4716
* 1966 Corvette - 327/350 HP ------------------ 7591
* 1967 Corvette - 327/350 HP ------------------ 6375
* 1968 Corvette - 327/350 HP ------------------ 9440

* 1965 Chevelle - 327/350 HP ------------------ 6021
* 1966 Chevelle - 'Not Available' ---------------- n/a
* 1967 Chevelle - 327/325 HP ------------------ 4048
* 1968 Chevelle - 327/325 HP ------------------ 4082

* 1965 Nova SS - 'Not Available' ---------------- n/a
* 1966 Nova SS - 327/350 HP ------------------ 5481
* 1967 Nova SS - 327/325 HP -------------------- 6
* 1968 Nova SS - 327/325 HP ------------------ 1274

------------------------------------------------------------------

* 1968 Over-the-Counter Price for Camshaft.......$39.95

 

[69 Cuda 440]

J-D,

The 'Old Book' Specifications say,

The 1968 340 '4-Speed' Camshaft, good for 6000 RPM's.

340/275 HP = 275 HP @ 5000 RPM's ~ 340 Ft/Lbs. of Torque @ 3200 RPM's
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Chevrolet '151' Camshaft, good for 6200 RPM's

372/350 HP = 350 HP @ 5800 RPM's ~ 360 Ft/Lbs. of Torque @ 3600 RPM's

 

[VOETOM]

28899205. I have one in my 69 and it is good for about a tenth and a mph with the stock setup. Plus it sounds rougher, as it is is, and idles worse. Not good for an automatic with a stock converter. Chrysler was right in not installing it in automatics. Would have been rough to drive with a 3.23 gear and stock convertor.
Tom

 

[69 Cuda 440]

28899205. I have one in my 69 and it is good for about a tenth and a mph with the stock setup. Plus it sounds rougher, as it is is, and idles worse. Not good for an automatic with a stock converter. Chrysler was right in not installing it in automatics. Would have been rough to drive with a 3.23 gear and stock convertor.
Tom

Not 100%,

But the 1968 4-Speed 'Bumpstick' had a 60" Overlap, compared to
the Automatic 'Bumpstick' which was rated at 52* Overlap.

Correct, you needed at least 2500 RPM Stall Converter to make it functional for normal driving.

 

[MTmopars]

Did mopar ever build a motor with 300* duration? I love reading these head to head threads and see the mopar almost always out cammed but still winning or giving a run for the money.

 

[PocketAces]

You Guys Got it ...."We" old timers called the solid lift cam the "30-30" which in fact (as far as I know it, I had one) was the Valve lash setting and real Gear Heads would understand (at least the chevy guys). :thumleft:

I think the 30-30 cam was also known as the Duntov cam. Back in the early 90's I restored a 65 Corvette with factory fuel injection. We used a TRW cam with similar specs, although I can't remember what that cam was called.

This was pre-internet and I didn't know anything about dynamic compression ratio. We used flat top pistons in that motor and I have no idea what my static CR was. Quite possibly, I did not have enough compression for that cam, but it was still fun to drive. It was really obnoxious, especially with the factory side exhaust, basically 2.5" pipes with no mufflers. I could cruise down my street and set off every car alarm.

 

[69 Cuda 440]

Did mopar ever build a motor with 300* duration? I love reading these head to head threads and see the mopar almost always out cammed but still winning or giving a run for the money.

Yes,

Street-Driven,

The 1962 ~ 413 'Plymouth Super/Stock' and 'Dodge Ramcharger' engines hit the {300*} Duration Mark.

As well as the 1963 and 1964 ~ '426 Max-Wedge' engines.

The 1964 and 1965 Race Hemi's were a different breed of course.

The 1966 Dodge D-Dart was at {284*} Duration.

 

[MTmopars]

The street hemi was 284 as well, correct? I thought the max wedges were up there close. Those have to be underrated at 410-425hp.

 

[69 Cuda 440]

Now this is a 'Magazine Sales Ad'

1968 340 '4-Speed' ........ .445" /.455" {Lift} ~ 284*/292* {Duration} ~ 60* {Overlap} ~ 114* CL

{NHRA} ......................... .462"/.473" {Lift} ~ 276*/284* {Duration} ~ 60* {Overlap} ~ 114* CL
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1968 340 'Automatic'...... .430"/.445" {Lift} ~ 268*/276* {Duration} ~ 44* {Overlap} ~ 114* CL

{NHRA}......................... .464"/.468" {Lift} ~ 268*/276* {Duration} ~ 44* {Overlap} ~ 114* CL

 

[69 Cuda 440]

Jimmy GM,

These are the Specifications that you are looking for.

 

[75Sport]

We called that 151 cam a 30/30 because we didn't know what we were doing as kids. A friend and I took his 250 hp 327 and installed that cam, lifters and springs along with putting 2.02 and 1 5/8" valves in the stock "power pack" heads along with some bowl work and milling the heads a bunch. We put it in his 1964 Chevy ll with a 4:88 gear and a Muncie with a 2:20 low first gear. The year was 1966 and that car was fast on the street and ran ahead of the big blocks and the "new" Chevy ll's. We had left the stock 250 hp intake manifold and carb on the car but added a vet dual point distributor. He shifted the Sun tach at 6000. He sold it after he collected 12 points on his license. :burnout:

Dan

 

[Louie70Dart]

Wasn't he 327/375 hp engine the fuel injected version?

 

[75Sport]

Yes. Pretty sure the 365 hp was std carb.

 

[fratzog lover]

The L84 was also a two bolt main, contrary to bench racing urban legend. Rochester had Chrysler beat at fuel injection back in the day.

 

[69 Cuda 440]

The '151' Camshaft 'Hydraulic'

Lift ........................... .447"/.447"
Advertised Duration ..... 306*/306*
Duration @ .050" Lift ... 221*/221*
Overlap....................... 74*
Lobe Separation .......... 114*

Engine Applications ........................... Engine Code
* 1965 ...... 327/350 HP ................................ L-79
* 1966 ...... 327/350 HP ................................ L-79
* 1967 ...... 327/350 HP and 327/325 HP ......... L-79
* 1968 ...... 327/350 HP and 327/325 HP ......... L-79
* 1969 ...... 350/350 HP ................................ L-46
* 1970 ...... 350/350 HP ................................ L-46

 

[RustyRatRod]

The L84 was also a two bolt main, contrary to bench racing urban legend. Rochester had Chrysler beat at fuel injection back in the day.

Negative sir. Chrysler had the first EFI in 1957 on the 300 letter car.

 

[RustyRatRod]

That chevy cam was also ground to match an 11.25:1 static compression ratio. I have seen people use it in 8.5:1 engines and it wouldn't pull a greasy string outta a cat's butt.

 

[69 Cuda 440]

That chevy cam was also ground to match an 11.25:1 static compression ratio. I have seen people use it in 8.5:1 engines and it wouldn't pull a greasy string outta a cat's butt.

Correct El Mundo,

With the '151' Camshaft, you needed >
* Compression {11.0-1}
* 'Fuelie Type' Cylinder Heads with the 2.02" Intakes
* The good #200 lb. Load-Rate Valve Springs
* Good Exhaust {2.5" Manifold Header Outlets}

 

[Abodybomber]

ops:Seen too many stuff the grind in a stock mid seventies Chevy block(8.5 comp, if lucky) and a stock 1600 stall converter & 3.08's

 

[69 Cuda 440]

ops:Seen too many stuff the grind in a stock mid seventies Chevy block(8.5 comp, if lucky) and a stock 1600 stall converter & 3.08's

A-Body-Bomber

Those 1965 327/350 HP {L-79} came with a Holley {585 CFM} Carburetor
with 1 9/16" Throttle-Plates.

Bolt on a Holley {700 CFM} or {780 CFM}, Headers and 4.30 Gears >

And you were an immediate Street-Dominator that was not to be played with.

 

[Wetdog]

Negative sir. Chrysler had the first EFI in 1957 on the 300 letter car.

I found this old thread interesting and thought I would resurrect it with a correction. I think what Fratzog Lover is saying is that Chevy's Rochester mechanical fuel injection system on the 57 -65 Corvettes was more reliable and successful than Chrysler's abortive Bendix electronic fuel injection system, not necessarily that it was first. In fact, the Rochester unit for Chevrolet was introduced first in late 56 for the 57 model year. Chrysler's Fuel Injection system was introduced in September 1957 for the 1958 model year. Only 35 were produced and all were recalled due to significant reliability problems and were replaced with carburetors. So, he would be correct in saying, "Rochester had Chrysler beat at fuel injection back in the day," both in terms of being first and being more reliable.

 

[AJ/FormS]

My Mopar Performance Catalog, lists the 340 cam as 268/276/114/44 overlap, and 228/235@050, IDK if I believe those 050 numbers, but that's what is in the catalog. These Chrysler numbers appear to be at .008 tappet.
The 68 4speed cam is not listed but I seem to remember it being one size bigger, which in Mopar-ese would be; 276/284/114 .
My 69 service manual lists the same advertised numbers but does not specify at what lift, if you can believe that.......

I have a an old Hughes HE3038AL in my 11/1 367, which specs at 276/286/[email protected], and 230/237@050, and I like it.

I got three or four very low mileage original 340 cams here on the shelf; not used because of the 114 LSAs. Alloy heads love pressure. Pressure makes heat and heat makes power.

 

[RustyRatRod]

I found this old thread interesting and thought I would resurrect it with a correction. I think what Fratzog Lover is saying is that Chevy's Rochester mechanical fuel injection system on the 57 -65 Corvettes was more reliable and successful than Chrysler's abortive Bendix electronic fuel injection system, not necessarily that it was first. In fact, the Rochester unit for Chevrolet was introduced first in late 56 for the 57 model year. Chrysler's Fuel Injection system was introduced in September 1957 for the 1958 model year. Only 35 were produced and all were recalled due to significant reliability problems and were replaced with carburetors. So, he would be correct in saying, "Rochester had Chrysler beat at fuel injection back in the day," both in terms of being first and being more reliable.

My point was that Chrysler produced the first EFI. I stand by it because it's correct. Nothing electronic about the Chevy stuff. Although you're correct. It was more successful......but not by what I would call "a lot". They had their share of problems too.

 

[VOETOM]

My Mopar Performance Catalog, lists the 340 cam as 268/276/114/44 overlap, and 228/235@050, IDK if I believe those 050 numbers, but that's what is in the catalog. These Chrysler numbers appear to be at .008 tappet.
The 68 4speed cam is not listed but I seem to remember it being one size bigger, which in Mopar-ese would be; 276/284/114 .
My 69 service manual lists the same advertised numbers but does not specify at what lift, if you can believe that.......

I have a an old Hughes HE3038AL in my 11/1 367, which specs at 276/286/[email protected], and 230/237@050, and I like it.

I got three or four very low mileage original 340 cams here on the shelf; not used because of the 114 LSAs. Alloy heads love pressure. Pressure makes heat and heat makes power.

The 68 cam enabled my 69 four speed 340 to run about one mph faster and with good traction, about .05 to .08 quicker (with other part relatively stock). It did take shifting a few hundred rpm higher but not much more than the automatic cam.