Ok....here we go AGAIN!!! Looking for a 340 CAMSHAFT

-
RustyRatRod said:
Thanks. I cannot ever remember what the discrepancy was......and it sure ain't much.
Click to expand...


One of the lobe center lines was 3° off on my cam (I believe it was the exhaust lobe - I have the data buried in my email somewhere), but Ken said that they can bump it to be right on spec... However, they could not add the .006" lift to the exhaust lobe to get it dead on... So he can make a cam identical to mine, or bump the exhaust lobe to be right on if desired...

I worked with another FABO member @dibbons to have this done... I'm not sure if he followed through and had one made for himself and how it runs, we need to ask him... He reimbursed me for the shipping cost, I just supplied the camshafts to do the study with Ken Hoard.... I had one of each of the 340 camshafts (340 auto and 68 340 manual grind) that were custom ground to the book specs from another member that I bought many years back, and we sent both to Ken to map the lobes from...
 
Last edited:
krazykuda said:
One of the lobe center lines was 3° off on my cam (I believe it was the exhaust lobe - I have the data buried in my email somewhere), but Ken said that they can bump it to be right on spec... However, they could not add the .006" lift to the exhaust lobe to get it dead on... So he can make a cam identical to mine, or bump the exhaust lobe to be right on if desired...

I worked with another FABO member @dibbons to have this done... I'm not sure if he followed through and had one made for himself and how it runs, we need to ask him... He reimbursed me for the shipping cost, I just supplied the camshafts to do the study with Ken Hoard.... I had one of each of the 340 camshafts that were custom ground to the book specs from another member that I bought many years back, and we sent both to Ken to map the lobes from...
Click to expand...

Which way would it throw the lobe center off? Do you remember? That could actually end up being beneficial if it tightened it up 3*
 
RustyRatRod said:
Which way would it throw the lobe center off? Do you remember? That could actually end up being beneficial if it tightened it up 3*
Click to expand...


I'm not positive, but I think it was 3° less (tighter) on the exhaust lobe center line and the lobe center... If he bumped the exhaust lobe 3° more, it would be dead on to the factory spec for all lobe center lines and lobe center... The intake lobe center line was right on....

Like I said, I have the data sheet from Ken Hoard buried in my email somewhere...
 
Wyrmrider said:
you may not make much more hp but you can pick up a ton of torque
why would anyone get a stock 340 cam from a big grinder?-loosers thats who
for a 59 year old stock cam get an elgin, wolverine blue racer, speed pro- great quality- you deserve it
save some serious coin
you did not say if you have a low or high compression 340 so all suggestions so far are bogus
only clue is that with headers you do not need a hugh spread between intake and exhaust
stock heads just a medium split, portef or afternaeket heads eveb less
so how about some details

thats a good cam but $$$$$ and eventhough it has the same duration as stock it breaths much deeper
post up your ompression gears etc before asking for cam advice
btw 340 cam is 210-220 @ .050
Click to expand...
 
Wyrmrider said:
you may not make much more hp but you can pick up a ton of torque
why would anyone get a stock 340 cam from a big grinder?-loosers thats who
for a 59 year old stock cam get an elgin, wolverine blue racer, speed pro- great quality- you deserve it
save some serious coin
you did not say if you have a low or high compression 340 so all suggestions so far are bogus
only clue is that with headers you do not need a hugh spread between intake and exhaust
stock heads just a medium split, portef or afternaeket heads eveb less
so how about some details

thats a good cam but $$$$$ and eventhough it has the same duration as stock it breaths much deeper
post up your ompression gears etc before asking for cam advice
btw 340 cam is 210-220 @ .050
Click to expand...
Currently all stock 1970 340, 727 auto and 3.23 gears. The exhaust manis were misplaced apparently and I have a few sets of headers laying around so I’ll be running those instead, they will only help in the breathing Dept! O heads, and I’ll certainly put a electronic ign kit in it for dependability. Besides that, imagine a 340 Duster that somebody ran out of oil in the late 70’s/early 80’s.....and pushed it into a garage and left it, that’s what we’re dealing w here!
 
krazy- you talking about the 68 stick shift cam?
Johnny Dart is refering to the Voodoo line not the mass produced budget line
So v24 It could be a high (realistic 9.2-9.5 motor) not a low 8:1 73 motor unless someone rebuilt it over the last 50 years)
can you do a compression test?
the cams requirements for the two motors are quite different
If it is high you are looking at a 262-264 @.006 with those gears and converter (not a 268) 262 nearer 9:1 264 nearer to 9.7
if it turns out to be a low compression motor 248 MP 250-256 @.006 I would not use a 268 MP cam in a low compression 340-360
any of these can have the area (or more) of the MP cam and more than the stock 340 cam
If you need to know why pm AJ/FormS
 
Wyrmrider said:
krazy- you talking about the 68 stick shift cam?
Johnny Dart is refering to the Voodoo line not the mass produced budget line
So v24 It could be a high (realistic 9.2-9.5 motor) not a low 8:1 73 motor unless someone rebuilt it over the last 50 years)
can you do a compression test?
the cams requirements for the two motors are quite different
If it is high you are looking at a 262-264 @.006 with those gears and converter (not a 268) 262 nearer 9:1 264 nearer to 9.7
if it turns out to be a low compression motor 248 MP 250-256 @.006 I would not use a 268 MP cam in a low compression 340-360
any of these can have the area (or more) of the MP cam and more than the stock 340 cam
If you need to know why pm AJ/FormS
Click to expand...


Yes, I'm talking the stock 68 340 4 speed cam...
 
Wyrmrider said:
krazy- you talking about the 68 stick shift cam?
Johnny Dart is refering to the Voodoo line not the mass produced budget line
So v24 It could be a high (realistic 9.2-9.5 motor) not a low 8:1 73 motor unless someone rebuilt it over the last 50 years)
can you do a compression test?
the cams requirements for the two motors are quite different
If it is high you are looking at a 262-264 @.006 with those gears and converter (not a 268) 262 nearer 9:1 264 nearer to 9.7
if it turns out to be a low compression motor 248 MP 250-256 @.006 I would not use a 268 MP cam in a low compression 340-360
any of these can have the area (or more) of the MP cam and more than the stock 340 cam
If you need to know why pm AJ/FormS
Click to expand...
Thanx for the input sir, it’s certainly the high comp engine, 1970 to be correct! Very valuable info, I think it’s time to do some research on some of these cams mentioned above.
 
Dart fever.....I like what I’m seeing there. Love the specs too. I am going to look into this one fosho!
 
Is anybody familiar with this Crane PowerMax cam? Good choice....?

1AECA2FE-D610-46F6-BB2A-04577B83904C.png
 
krazykuda said:
I'm not positive, but I think it was 3° less (tighter) on the exhaust lobe center line and the lobe center... If he bumped the exhaust lobe 3° more, it would be dead on to the factory spec for all lobe center lines and lobe center... The intake lobe center line was right on....

Like I said, I have the data sheet from Ken Hoard buried in my email somewhere...
Click to expand...
Is this additional info since the thread about factory camshafts?
If so, it would be great to put those details into the books, and the Dynomation software.
 
Dart fever and RRR and V24
That cam has nothing to do with 340 except the wide 114 LCA
its the old HE .842 series only .464 lift from a 268 cam? red flag warning
see the comp lobe list page 11
I'd rather have the 268XE if I was forced to make a choice
Comp's Mopar Purple Plus and the HL lobes do not go that short
AFIK comp has nothing for mopar shorter than 274 look elsewhere
what pistons and what real compression are you shooting for?
pick your cam duration based on where you want your torque curve, trans gears, etc
then pick compression to match with the cam duration you picked
stock heads?
stock intake and carb (nothing wrong with them worth spending money on at this point- easy to change later)
if you end up with a true 9.7 you are looking at a 264 @.006 cam
9.0 256 with 460 lift
etc
 
I have a Lunati VooDoo 702 cam in my car and it runs well. It has 19" of vacuum at idle if you have a brake booster.
Its a couple steps bigger than a 340 cam but it works great in a daily driver. Way more modern grind than an old 340 cam. Push the easy button and don't overthink it!
 
Wyrmrider said:
Dart fever and RRR and V24
That cam has nothing to do with 340 except the wide 114 LCA
its the old HE .842 series only .464 lift from a 268 cam? red flag warning
see the comp lobe list page 11
I'd rather have the 268XE if I was forced to make a choice
Comp's Mopar Purple Plus and the HL lobes do not go that short
AFIK comp has nothing for mopar shorter than 274 look elsewhere
what pistons and what real compression are you shooting for?
pick your cam duration based on where you want your torque curve, trans gears, etc
then pick compression to match with the cam duration you picked
stock heads?
stock intake and carb (nothing wrong with them worth spending money on at this point- easy to change later)
if you end up with a true 9.7 you are looking at a 264 @.006 cam
9.0 256 with 460 lift
etc
Click to expand...

Oh I looked up the lobes myself. I realize they have just taken 2 lobes from 2 of their series. Intake is high energy like you said and the exhaust is a Magnum series grind. I did say it was their version of the 340 cam. And they don't even have the wide lobe separation! They have it on their usual 110. Just giving the OP an option to look at. There are better grinds.
 
Last edited:
RustyRatRod said:
I've run it in several small blocks. It's a damn good grind. I call it the "Crane Magic Cam" because it's very docile, yet it pulls like a freight train.
Click to expand...
Calling RustyRat! Your inbox is full so hopefully you catch this! Anyhow, it’s time to put this Crane “Magic Cam” into my car and I know your a big fan of it. ANY suggestions on installing? Install straight up or +4degrees maybe?? Going into a 72 cast crank 340 but has the 428P pistons in it so I’ll guess 9.0:1 compression w J heads.
ANY HELP or suggestions would be appreciated!! Thanks in advance!
 
V24x2 said:
Calling RustyRat! Your inbox is full so hopefully you catch this! Anyhow, it’s time to put this Crane “Magic Cam” into my car and I know your a big fan of it. ANY suggestions on installing? Install straight up or +4degrees maybe?? Going into a 72 cast crank 340 but has the 428P pistons in it so I’ll guess 9.0:1 compression w J heads.
ANY HELP or suggestions would be appreciated!! Thanks in advance!
Click to expand...
I would put it the 4* advanced just like the card says. My inbox is only 3% full. Maybe yours is full?
 
you missed the rest of the typical thread title: "Looking for 340 cam that runs in the 11s and gets 35 MPG"
:lol:
 
Several years ago, I had an all original, numbers matching 72 340 Duster. I rebuilt the 340, standard bore 68-70 pistons, 2.02" valves in the J heads, factory intake and exhaust manifolds and a 650 DP. The cam was a MP hydraulic, either a 274/.480 or 280/.474, maybe the Hemi grind. With 3.55 gears that car was a blast to drive. That cam was borderline for the stock converter and probably would've benefited from something like a Holeshot converter.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top