That’ll have a nice rough idle.
just one more cam selection thread
- Thread starter scott657
- Start date
-
That would be a dandy too.
It was so nice I used it twice. 2 different engines. It fit the bill then.
So far I like my wife’s Hyd. roller @ 224@050 and the ported heads. The heads extend the power another 500 rpm. Super streetable with a lowly 2400 stall. You wouldn’t ow it wasn’t stock save for the thumping out of the mufflers it drives so nice.
And then, you hit the hammer and know better.
So far I like my wife’s Hyd. roller @ 224@050 and the ported heads. The heads extend the power another 500 rpm. Super streetable with a lowly 2400 stall. You wouldn’t ow it wasn’t stock save for the thumping out of the mufflers it drives so nice.
And then, you hit the hammer and know better.
SSG_Karg
Enhanced member
It’ll sound like a hot rod AND run like one.That’ll have a nice rough idle.
Howards answer to the Thumper or Whiplash?
SSG_Karg
Enhanced member
Kinda. Run it with a set of 1.6 rockers and some Rhoads lifters and it would be an animal.
The idle like a top fueler but smooth out like grandma's slant 6 at about 2200 rpm or so.
I’m using Rhodes lifters on a single pattern cam now but only on the intake side. The cams rpm range is a little out of the builds available parts. Cutting down the intake duration helps. 1.6 rockers always a plus if the head can handle the lift.
It’s a temporary split pattern cam. LMAO
It’s a temporary split pattern cam. LMAO
Wyrmrider
Well-Known Member
That's more like it
340 cam or any 268 class cam is a dog with 3.23, stock converter and low compression
as I said, let AJ pick an intake closed point and pick a cam to match
The Howard selected 711451 is just too big with an rpm range higher than OP desires and 108 LCA it's a 270 class cam like the comp 268 but would definatly out muscle the comp
just a strawman but I mo go with the Howard 711381-10 around 480 lift on the intake 255 adv to build some dynamic compression
howard says 1800 for stock converter to 4800 very strong torque
want a wider LCA then the VOODOO
about 10 degrees shorter than the Crane 69391 (adjusting for the difference in measurement used) but more lift and much more area under the curve
why give up driveability?
340 cam or any 268 class cam is a dog with 3.23, stock converter and low compression
as I said, let AJ pick an intake closed point and pick a cam to match
The Howard selected 711451 is just too big with an rpm range higher than OP desires and 108 LCA it's a 270 class cam like the comp 268 but would definatly out muscle the comp
just a strawman but I mo go with the Howard 711381-10 around 480 lift on the intake 255 adv to build some dynamic compression
howard says 1800 for stock converter to 4800 very strong torque
want a wider LCA then the VOODOO
about 10 degrees shorter than the Crane 69391 (adjusting for the difference in measurement used) but more lift and much more area under the curve
why give up driveability?
I like a lot of the Howard's grinds. Lots of lift per given duration. You could say that takes advantage of Mopar's larger lifter diameter.......that said, I simply don't agree that you HAVE to take advantage of the larger lifter diameter in every build. It's just not necessary.
AJ/FormS
68 Formua-S fastback clone 367/A833/GVod/3.55s
- Joined
- Jan 19, 2014
- Messages
- 25,866
- Reaction score
- 13,175
IMO
a cam of about 224/230/***@.050 is a sweet street cam
But if it's on a 268/114.... like the Mopar, it makes the intake closing angle very late, so it need a lotta Scr to pick up the bottom-end. The 114LSA makes the overlap less compared to a cam of less LSA. Some folks think that overlap kills fuel economy, but
IMO the later closing intake/ earlier opening exhaust kills fuel mileage faster in two ways.
First the piston on compression stroke, at low rpm, is driving some of the just-inducted mixture back up into the intake manifold making low-rpm AFR about impossible to get right.It's gonna be rich, and so city fuel economy just doesn't exist.
And second, on the power stroke, the early opening exhaust sends a lot of energy straight out the tailpipe, instead of delivering it to the crank.
With log manifolds it just gets crazy in there, but worse is the logs kill the overlap anyway so why would anyone sacrifice the pressure and the extraction, for a non issue on the overlap.
IMO, when running logs, I would tighten the chit out of the LSA to reap the benefits of the earlier closing intake/ later opening exhaust and killed overlap, .... on a low-compression engine.
Now if a guy is running headers and cruises at more than about 2200, then the overlap cycle of a [email protected] cam is already cleaned up and all the air in the intake is moving in the same direction, so now you can lean out the carb for hiway fuel-economy.
The 224 cam
IMO is right on the borderline of making excellent street power in a 360, and with manipulation of the LSA and ICa, can also make a great power WITH economy choice. There are just so many ways to make it work. And the higher the compression ratio the better it performs.... until you run outta anti-knock headroom.
But here's the thing; If you could get a 224* cam with a slo-ramp 268 advertised, or you could get a 228* fastramp 268... or even a 230* faster ramp 268* ....
Or more importantly for a low-compression engine. What if you had a choice between a 224/268 or a 224/264 or a 224/260? In some 360 combos each 1* of intake closing can be 1 to 1.25 psi., so among these three, you can pick up an easy 5psi cylinder pressure.
Then if you factor in the difference between a 114LSA and a 108 LSA, each timed say 4* advanced, you can maybe pick up another 8psi. Now in a low-C engine that comes to the difference of 123psi@104VP and 135psi@123VP..
And I know 104VP is a total dog V8 at low-rpm, while 123VP is a tuff as nails 318Streeter
So while a 224* cam can be a heck of a nice street cam; as you can see without cylinder pressure it needs help, cuz 124VP is still crap for a 360.
Now if you pump it up to 9.8Scr you might enjoy 166Psi@144VP, and now it's getting interesting.
Or if you put some alloy heads on it, then at 10.8Scr you might be enjoying a ripper at 187psi@163VP... and I can tell you that 163VP feels like a 440Magnum of yesteryear.
All three examples with same 268/110 cam in at 106
The point is;
with a low-compression 360 it is very easy to pick the wrong cam.
And part two is that it is easy to pump up a 360 to get the compression to where you want it. Not always cheap, but pretty darn easy.
But I just gotta say one thing for this combo a 268 is too big
and the reason is this;
the 224* cam power-peaks at ~ 5200 which with 3.23s is 49mph with 26.4 tires.
The torque peak will be around 3900 or 37mph.
The low-c 360 with a 268 cam is gonna be dead, dead, dead below ~2000, dead dead to 2800 and a lil dead to 3200. So pretty much any 4bbl-318 streeter with a bit of a TC and 3.55s is gonna waste it, to probably 50 mph.... or more; how embarrassing would that be.
Oh I know, just put a 3000TC behind it and 3.91s. Standard answer. Well there goes another grand. You might as well put that money where it does the most good,into Hi-C pistons.
Or for the cheapest solution of all;
leave the engine alone and just put 4.10s in the back and nothing else. The stock cam torque peaks at maybe 2800, and with 4.10s that is now 21mph. But with 4.10s it will spin right from the get-go, and that spells ton-O-fun.
'Course hiway cruising is out, except maybe, 50mph=2600. Oh well, think of it this way; with about a 23% reduction in roadspeed from 65mph, you mpgs will go up about half that so 11%. Hey it only costs you 23% more time to go from A to B,lol. It's like paying yourself, to drive but with before income tax dollars, finger to the man.
a cam of about 224/230/***@.050 is a sweet street cam
But if it's on a 268/114.... like the Mopar, it makes the intake closing angle very late, so it need a lotta Scr to pick up the bottom-end. The 114LSA makes the overlap less compared to a cam of less LSA. Some folks think that overlap kills fuel economy, but
IMO the later closing intake/ earlier opening exhaust kills fuel mileage faster in two ways.
First the piston on compression stroke, at low rpm, is driving some of the just-inducted mixture back up into the intake manifold making low-rpm AFR about impossible to get right.It's gonna be rich, and so city fuel economy just doesn't exist.
And second, on the power stroke, the early opening exhaust sends a lot of energy straight out the tailpipe, instead of delivering it to the crank.
With log manifolds it just gets crazy in there, but worse is the logs kill the overlap anyway so why would anyone sacrifice the pressure and the extraction, for a non issue on the overlap.
IMO, when running logs, I would tighten the chit out of the LSA to reap the benefits of the earlier closing intake/ later opening exhaust and killed overlap, .... on a low-compression engine.
Now if a guy is running headers and cruises at more than about 2200, then the overlap cycle of a [email protected] cam is already cleaned up and all the air in the intake is moving in the same direction, so now you can lean out the carb for hiway fuel-economy.
The 224 cam
IMO is right on the borderline of making excellent street power in a 360, and with manipulation of the LSA and ICa, can also make a great power WITH economy choice. There are just so many ways to make it work. And the higher the compression ratio the better it performs.... until you run outta anti-knock headroom.
But here's the thing; If you could get a 224* cam with a slo-ramp 268 advertised, or you could get a 228* fastramp 268... or even a 230* faster ramp 268* ....
Or more importantly for a low-compression engine. What if you had a choice between a 224/268 or a 224/264 or a 224/260? In some 360 combos each 1* of intake closing can be 1 to 1.25 psi., so among these three, you can pick up an easy 5psi cylinder pressure.
Then if you factor in the difference between a 114LSA and a 108 LSA, each timed say 4* advanced, you can maybe pick up another 8psi. Now in a low-C engine that comes to the difference of 123psi@104VP and 135psi@123VP..
And I know 104VP is a total dog V8 at low-rpm, while 123VP is a tuff as nails 318Streeter
So while a 224* cam can be a heck of a nice street cam; as you can see without cylinder pressure it needs help, cuz 124VP is still crap for a 360.
Now if you pump it up to 9.8Scr you might enjoy 166Psi@144VP, and now it's getting interesting.
Or if you put some alloy heads on it, then at 10.8Scr you might be enjoying a ripper at 187psi@163VP... and I can tell you that 163VP feels like a 440Magnum of yesteryear.
All three examples with same 268/110 cam in at 106
The point is;
with a low-compression 360 it is very easy to pick the wrong cam.
And part two is that it is easy to pump up a 360 to get the compression to where you want it. Not always cheap, but pretty darn easy.
But I just gotta say one thing for this combo a 268 is too big
and the reason is this;
the 224* cam power-peaks at ~ 5200 which with 3.23s is 49mph with 26.4 tires.
The torque peak will be around 3900 or 37mph.
The low-c 360 with a 268 cam is gonna be dead, dead, dead below ~2000, dead dead to 2800 and a lil dead to 3200. So pretty much any 4bbl-318 streeter with a bit of a TC and 3.55s is gonna waste it, to probably 50 mph.... or more; how embarrassing would that be.
Oh I know, just put a 3000TC behind it and 3.91s. Standard answer. Well there goes another grand. You might as well put that money where it does the most good,into Hi-C pistons.
Or for the cheapest solution of all;
leave the engine alone and just put 4.10s in the back and nothing else. The stock cam torque peaks at maybe 2800, and with 4.10s that is now 21mph. But with 4.10s it will spin right from the get-go, and that spells ton-O-fun.
'Course hiway cruising is out, except maybe, 50mph=2600. Oh well, think of it this way; with about a 23% reduction in roadspeed from 65mph, you mpgs will go up about half that so 11%. Hey it only costs you 23% more time to go from A to B,lol. It's like paying yourself, to drive but with before income tax dollars, finger to the man.
Last edited:
Wyrmrider
Well-Known Member
low compression, stock gears, stock converter and 255/70 tires and you would stick an old school 268 in it, not even the later xe UD Harold better version?
remember
Street only(occasional burnout)
Probably won't go north of 5000 RPM to be honest
there is no longevity bonus from a long ramp universal chevy grind as it does not use all the MOPAR lifter- the mopar may actually be easier depending on the acceleration
Mopar Performance, Engle, Crower, and special order Crane etc all Have Mopar grinds that are not radical
now why
a universal (chevy) master is for the smaller SBC base circle
Mopar has a similar base circle to a BBC
A smaller base circle requires a pointer nose than a larger base circle for the same profile
so which wears better? (and will tolerate more spring pressure if needed)
little pointy nose or round big nose?
No one said it was easy and there are always tradeoffs
but with MOPAR profiles you can have your cake and eat it too
Now some of the faster MOPAR profiles - like some Howard's and the XE-HL series from comp can be a little noisier than Lunati and Bullet has both
The Jones is not Noisy at all
that said do not just order profile from a lobe list
you can't tell how radical or if designed for longevity or for max effort/ regular maintenance (although looking at the spring required gives a good clue)
jones cam is real easy on the valve train as is the one i worked with bill Jenks at Moon
as said above, Mopar lifter size and base circle allows a less stressful design, or a hotter design, or both
remember
Street only(occasional burnout)
Probably won't go north of 5000 RPM to be honest
there is no longevity bonus from a long ramp universal chevy grind as it does not use all the MOPAR lifter- the mopar may actually be easier depending on the acceleration
Mopar Performance, Engle, Crower, and special order Crane etc all Have Mopar grinds that are not radical
now why
a universal (chevy) master is for the smaller SBC base circle
Mopar has a similar base circle to a BBC
A smaller base circle requires a pointer nose than a larger base circle for the same profile
so which wears better? (and will tolerate more spring pressure if needed)
little pointy nose or round big nose?
No one said it was easy and there are always tradeoffs
but with MOPAR profiles you can have your cake and eat it too
Now some of the faster MOPAR profiles - like some Howard's and the XE-HL series from comp can be a little noisier than Lunati and Bullet has both
The Jones is not Noisy at all
that said do not just order profile from a lobe list
you can't tell how radical or if designed for longevity or for max effort/ regular maintenance (although looking at the spring required gives a good clue)
jones cam is real easy on the valve train as is the one i worked with bill Jenks at Moon
as said above, Mopar lifter size and base circle allows a less stressful design, or a hotter design, or both
Paralysis by analysis. I swear a wet dream could get messed up in here. LOL
There are probably 40+ camshafts that could fit the bill from the cheap summit cam on up. Find one that has the qualities you desire and go with it. The tune up and installed centerline will make a HUGE difference in how it will run. I'd keep the duration shorter and the lobe separation angle tighter if some idle chop is desired. It doesn't take a super computer to pick one out for a cruise car.
SOS when it comes to these threads.
There are probably 40+ camshafts that could fit the bill from the cheap summit cam on up. Find one that has the qualities you desire and go with it. The tune up and installed centerline will make a HUGE difference in how it will run. I'd keep the duration shorter and the lobe separation angle tighter if some idle chop is desired. It doesn't take a super computer to pick one out for a cruise car.
SOS when it comes to these threads.
Slantsix64
Well-Known Member
Scott this is the camshaft i was telling you about COMP Cams Xtreme Energy Camshafts 20-222-3 Nice lope to it good power range. But if your not going to turn it up past 5000k leave the stock camshaft
That's not a bad one. It would work well. Keepin it simple.
Challenge accepted!!
Open the cam catalog and pick one at the bottom of the page of the race section
Just kidding, please don't.
LOL, how does the famous saying go????
“.750 roller!”
“.750 roller!”
Go big or go home?
Last edited:
The way I see it, it is just simply a simple question blown out of proportion needlessly.
Give your (sane) recommendation and move on.
Give your (sane) recommendation and move on.
Should be a good one for a stocker.
That cam is similar to the Crane cam I listed only on a 110 rather than a 112. Lift and duration specs are all in the ball park.
The 262h Comp made 12 extra horse but 6 less ft/lb when compared to a Hughes Whiplash on a stock 318.
ir3333
Well-Known Member
here's the comp xe268 but in a warm sbc with dart heads.
i think the 262 has stronger numbers.This is comp cams own dyno sheet.
it peaks just below 5000 rpm
i think the 262 has stronger numbers.This is comp cams own dyno sheet.
it peaks just below 5000 rpm
Yup! That’s why mine was a lowly 216@050. Summit has a different rpm band listing than what MY Crane cam care has. Why I don’t know. But at 216@050, it is just a few hundred rpm off idle and doesn’t require a converter change even in a low compression 1979, 318.
Been there done that.
Been there done that.
-
