Installing small cam in Stroker?

-

340six

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 4, 2009
Messages
1,040
Reaction score
1,414
Was just thinking, since many of us are always worried about to big. Former bottom of the page guy many years ago.
We all know what to big does, I hope.
Figured it would be a good subject.
Smaller than most would go, in say a 408,416,422.Something small like 218,222 @50 high lift like Engle, Hughes, Comp, fast rate right under, over .500
10-10.5, aluimiunm heads light port to clean up/ port match. duel plane with 4bbl or six pack
2.5" exhaust on 340 manifolds cleaned up some or small headers like Dougs.
Something that would run
A/C. Pull toqure on street and have big Cubes on highway.
Or just a waste of a stroke
 
Last edited:
From what you just described, sounds like a decent stock-stroke 360 would work.
 
I've always been a fan of so-called "undercammed" builds. I built a 416 back about 1995. I dressed it out like a stock 340 including 340 exhaust manifolds and the 340 camshaft. Ported J heads with 2.02 valves, stock 71 cast iron intake and a Demon Sizzler Thermoquad. Put a warmed up 727 behind it with a 3.23 sure grip in an 8 3/4. Stuck it in a 67 Dart GT. That thing had so much bottom end torque it'd scare you. I never got to run it, because somebody wanted it more than I did and offered me way too much money for it. lol

Here's how I see it. If a small bore and stroke would fill all the bills, then why did auto makers make big blocks? That's essentially what you're doing building a stroker, is making a big block. Big block stroke. Trust me. A small cam in one will give you gobs of immediate torque just off idle, right where you want it on the street.
 
My builder just finished mine( he still has it). I can’t wait to run it!
The cam grinder had all the car specs which includes being at 5k feet.

I wanted a street engine that would be easy on the valve train.

1970 340/418. The cam is fairly small and, like Rusty said, makes some torque.

IMG_1616.png


IMG_1612.jpeg


Attachment.jpeg
 
At 10/10.5 Scr, and such an early ICA,(say 60/62*) you might, at low elevation, have a problem with too much cylinder pressure/detonation. Ima thinking it would take a careful choice of parts, and best gas, maybe better than best.
But, if it can be made to survive, yes mega-torque at low rpm, like a supercharger on a stockish small block.
 
On you tube
Some guys took a 360 out to a 408. All else the same, only added 34 hp
 
Yeah and anything over 250hp from a stop is already spinning the tires; and a streeter like me, up here in Manitoba, is risking losing his driving privilege's, and hefty fines, every time I top out Second gear, spinning all the way.
But you know, a small-cam stroker at 5000 ft, could/would be the bees knees.
Having learned so much from my dynomite 360 combo, and
having the GVod behind the CommandO trans, I know I could have been nearly as happy with a lot less cubes and/or a smaller cam. I'm not ready to say 318 for a DD, quite yet, but, it could be on my horizon.
 
A mild 390-422 etc. Is basically just a mild big block, it's just gonna make 300-400+ hp just at a lower rpm than a similar 318-360.

Depends on what your doing/want might not be a bad thing. If you want to run 2.76-3.23 gears, I think it's a good way to go even for a mild combo.
 
At 10/10.5 Scr, and such an early ICA,(say 60/62*) you might, at low elevation, have a problem with too much cylinder pressure/detonation. Ima thinking it would take a careful choice of parts, and best gas, maybe better than best.
But, if it can be made to survive, yes mega-torque at low rpm, like a supercharger on a stockish small block.

Agreed, in my engine builds using a 210-220 @ 0.050" hits the my magical 200 PSI max (per Vizard) for the street max cylinder pressure in the mid 9.5:1 or so. I personally would likely kick that duration up to 230-240 @ 0.050" with that much compression. The aluminum heads will help with detonation as well. With that high compression you will find you will still maintain most of the low RPM torque you would have had with the short duration cam in the 9s for compression.
 
Agreed, in my engine builds using a 210-220 @ 0.050" hits the my magical 200 PSI max (per Vizard) for the street max cylinder pressure in the mid 9.5:1 or so. I personally would likely kick that duration up to 230-240 @ 0.050" with that much compression. The aluminum heads will help with detonation as well. With that high compression you will find you will still maintain most of the low RPM torque you would have had with the short duration cam in the 9s for compression.
I only have a 367, but it has run 192psi in a previous iteration, with a Hughes 223/230/110 cam, and alloy heads.
I concur that the bottom end was ferocious.
I worried about the following winter, during it's annual freshening, I found the thin 028 Headgasket was migrating into the valley. I had just caught it.
So, I switched to the 039FellPros and re-decked the block from zero to plus .007, to maintain the quench, where it remains to this day. With the slightly larger chambers and the later Ica, the Scr was slightly reduced and the pressure dropped to 185ish.

I would still be running that combo, if the cam had not eventually dropped lobes, right after an oilchange, four years after it's birth.
It was and is to this day, my favorite iteration I ever built; it had everything I could have wanted in a streeter.
----------------------------------
The next cam, another Hughes; 230/237/110, was a bit of a disappointment., I retimed that cam, but it was no use.
This was compounded a lil later, after I installed a GVod which required the H to be cut out of my dual 3" exhaust. Between the two changes, the bottom-end went away big time.
I should clarify; the bottom end I was used to, went away.
-----------------------------------------
The good news is that this prompted me to find a 3.09low Commando trans, and just like that, the bottom end was back ........ with a lil to spare.
So I said, Oh, what the heck, and retarded that cam.
And just like that, the top-end was back. It ain't quite like the 292/292/108 cam I started out with, but on the whole of it, it's good enough that it's still in there, all these 20 years later.

In conclusion, I don't care what anyone says, if you have never run in the 190s or better pressure, with an SBM, a manual trans and 4.30s; man, outside of a BB, you haven't had a decent rush.
And Better yet is; 3.55s, the Commando, and a GVod being used as a splitter.
My Barracuda, the one time I tracked it, sprinted to a 93mph on street tires with the 3.55s. I never expected that! To me it was just a nice DD. I made four runs that day, with only one completed. I parked the car, ate the track food, and watched my friends try, without success, to better my trapspeed, with their DDs.
Pressure is heat is torque is power.
My Opinion;
Looking back to my youth, a lack of pressure had always been a total disappointment, and on the street, it never got all that much better with the addition of band-aids, like stalls and gears.
Alloy heads taught me about pressure, and I'm hooked.
----------------------
There used to be a fella here on FABO, that was working on an Iron-headed combo, to showcase 170psi. If anyone could pull it off, he had the smarts for it.
However, I ran in the 190s on 87E10, and still do; I wonder if that is possible at 170 with iron.
I miss that guy. I never told him that I learned a lot from him. If you see him, tell him thanks.
 
I only have a 367, but it has run 192psi in a previous iteration, with a Hughes 223/230/110 cam, and alloy heads.
I concur that the bottom end was ferocious.
I worried about the following winter, during it's annual freshening, I found the thin 028 Headgasket was migrating into the valley. I had just caught it.
So, I switched to the 039FellPros and re-decked the block from zero to plus .007, to maintain the quench, where it remains to this day. With the slightly larger chambers and the later Ica, the Scr was slightly reduced and the pressure dropped to 185ish.

I would still be running that combo, if the cam had not eventually dropped lobes, right after an oilchange, four years after it's birth.
It was and is to this day, my favorite iteration I ever built; it had everything I could have wanted in a streeter.
----------------------------------
The next cam, another Hughes; 230/237/110, was a bit of a disappointment., I retimed that cam, but it was no use.
This was compounded a lil later, after I installed a GVod which required the H to be cut out of my dual 3" exhaust. Between the two changes, the bottom-end went away big time.
I should clarify; the bottom end I was used to, went away.
-----------------------------------------
The good news is that this prompted me to find a 3.09low Commando trans, and just like that, the bottom end was back ........ with a lil to spare.
So I said, Oh, what the heck, and retarded that cam.
And just like that, the top-end was back. It ain't quite like the 292/292/108 cam I started out with, but on the whole of it, it's good enough that it's still in there, all these 20 years later.

In conclusion, I don't care what anyone says, if you have never run in the 190s or better pressure, with an SBM, a manual trans and 4.30s; man, outside of a BB, you haven't had a decent rush.
And Better yet is; 3.55s, the Commando, and a GVod being used as a splitter.
My Barracuda, the one time I tracked it, sprinted to a 93mph on street tires with the 3.55s. I never expected that! To me it was just a nice DD. I made four runs that day, with only one completed. I parked the car, ate the track food, and watched my friends try, without success, to better my trapspeed, with their DDs.
Pressure is heat is torque is power.
My Opinion;
Looking back to my youth, a lack of pressure had always been a total disappointment, and on the street, it never got all that much better with the addition of band-aids, like stalls and gears.
Alloy heads taught me about pressure, and I'm hooked.
----------------------
There used to be a fella here on FABO, that was working on an Iron-headed combo, to showcase 170psi. If anyone could pull it off, he had the smarts for it.
However, I ran in the 190s on 87E10, and still do; I wonder if that is possible at 170 with iron.
I miss that guy. I never told him that I learned a lot from him. If you see him, tell him thanks.

Yup. Low end torque is defined by 2 things, pressure and cubic inches.
 
Yup. Low end torque is defined by 2 things, pressure and cubic inches.
All torque across the power band, plus VE%.

Seems like the idea is that low cr, v/p or whatever losses more down low cause of it, I never see this when looking at various dyno charts, lower cr just brings the overall torque curve down a few percent per point of cr, same with VE% just raises or lowers the overall torque curve. I never see a low cr engines below 3000 rpm or whatever rpm were the torque just fall off a cliff cause of cr.
 
Yup. Low end torque is defined by 2 things, pressure and cubic inches.
Iam 169 with iron heads 16 btdc runs fine on 93
Prior 340 had 185 psi iron heads 94 octane it was temperamental if it got hot i would add booster to it for street races
 
I was up at the flash light drags today, it is held at the local airport.
An old guy walking with a cane had a super sweet 67? Chevelle, super clean street car.
He backed over to the AV-gas pump 110 low-lead and filled up.
The car had two gas fill necks behind the license plate.
When he lifted the hood, big block, nitrous, there was a valve, to switch between race and street gas. Pretty cool set up.
FYI 110 was $5.75 a gallon.
 
Here's the 360 vs 410

If you subtract say 15 hp for the cr bump looks like at 2000 rpm and 5000 rpm the hp would be about the same, 2800 to 4000 rpm looks like there would still be a decent hp bump.

1724639000512.png


Here's a different stock (4bbl & headers) 5.9l with Adding a 212/218 seems to give the best bang for the dollar 3000 to 5500+ rpm.

Been nice to see a cam upgrade on the 410 above.

1724639238060.png
 
Last edited:
Some smart individual on another mopar site made 550 hp or so in a stroked 383 with the 484 cam...Having built and ran more than one stoker engine my experience agrees with the smart people seen above. It is not required to have a a big cam in a stroker engine to make the big power but you do need a six pak. :steering:
 
Especially when some of that 34 hp is from an increase of almost 2 points of compression.

2 tenths of a point ? That not much.
How much HP and torque gain/loss are you attributing to 2 tenths of a compression?

I think the original poster could go to a very slightly larger cam and have the same vacuum and idle characteristics as the smaller cam in the shorter stroke and size motor.
 
2 tenths of a point ? That not much.
How much HP and torque gain/loss are you attributing to 2 tenths of a compression?

I think the original poster could go to a very slightly larger cam and have the same vacuum and idle characteristics as the smaller cam in the shorter stroke and size motor.
I never said 2 tenths, 5.9l was stock cr and 410 was 10.73:1 so about 1.73:1 gain if stock is 9:1.
 
Or just a waste of a stroke
A 408+ is gonna give you more torque at 2000-5000+ rpm (= hp) especially with aluminum heads can a 360 make the same overall hp as a mild 408+ yes but will need more rpm gear stall etc.. To do that, is that worth going stroker that's up to you but the more power you can make at street friendly rpm, rpms that you can easily get at from average road speeds with normal gearing like 2000 - 5000 rpm the more useful that power would be to you.
 
-
Back
Top