Bloomer Performance Engineering. Rod starts with one of the bare castings and ports them to the outer limit of the non offset rocker design. Here's a posting on them.
DON’T BE FOOLED!
Last edited:
Solid Roller camshaft selection those of you running a 408 race application - lobe seperation
- Thread starter rslscobra
- Start date
-
DON’T BE FOOLED!
I wouldn’t be surprised to see a 408 with good heads make good use of that much camshaft. In that application, I’d run as much lift as possible. If you’ve already paid to have the heads flow those big numbers, you may as well get all you can put of it. Of course, you start getting into other limiting factors like additional rocker geometry correction. There are springs available for up to .750 lift at 1.90 installed height if you have the piston to valve clearance for that much additional lift.
B3422w5
Well-Known Member
Most of the non offset heads don’t have much use for that much lift.
I got new springs already for the camshaft I ordered from Bullet and I have clearance. The one from bullet does not have as much lift as the one Race Brown recommended. Im going from 660 to 680, so will have to check push rod length but my current length may be ok.
Newbomb Turk
Well-Known Member
Pushrods should be the last thing you buy.
If you haven’t corrected the geometry you will need to. That requires longer pushrods.
The geometry was correct with the current 660 lift cam and has longer push rods already. I will need to recheck the geometry tho and yes those will be the last thing of needed.
Newbomb Turk
Well-Known Member
Yes, just need to make sure they will work with the increased spring pressure. Going from 600 open to 800. I’ll call Smith Brothers to verify this.
Newbomb Turk
Well-Known Member
Just remember they don’t think in terms of small block Chryslers and the jacked up lifter bank angles.
At your spring pressure I’d be running no less than a .120 wall single 7/17-3/8 tapered pushrod.
They aren’t cheap but the SBM is harder on pushrods than about any other engine I know of.
Smith Brothers will probably disagree with me but they are wrong.
And it’s not just Smith Brothers either. It’s Trend too.
TT5.9mag
Two atmospheres are better than one
At 800lbs open and mopars horrible lifter bank angle he’s gonna need the biggest pushrod that’ll fit in the hole with the thickest wall they’ll make it in.
Then maybe I’d be better off shimming my current springs to just under 2” install height to get the minimum recommended 250 seat pressure. My current springs are 240 seat and 600 open at 2”. I’ll probably change the cam too back to the lift I had and just increase the duration. Didn’t realize this would trigger a chain of events….Im learning mopar motors. Thanks for the info.
Last edited:
Think I’ll just go with this comp cam Bill was going to put in the car if he kept it. This way push rod and current springs will work as is. Not as big of a rabbit hole for me.
Comp Cam 20-718-9
269/654 276/655 106
Comp Cam 20-718-9
269/654 276/655 106
I have an unused lunati 251/251 on 105 Lsa but Bullet said it was too tight of a lsa for 414 small block. Ken at Or ground me a solid on 108Lsa and Jim at Racer Brown sent me a 107 lsa. Different opinions. Schneider seems to understand Mopar and has a nice catalog of patterns. Good luck. All SFT though.
Last edited:
Yes that does help because you call 4 different companies and they all have a different opinion. One says 102/104 for more torque and the other say 108. And I'm a Ford guy this is my first mopar.
Every cam I've got from Schneider has been spot on. I believe they spun off from Crower. Kevin & Jerry. Good folks!
On a 408;
2.02 - 105.02 LSA
2.08 - 105.68 LSA
2.15 - 106.41
For a 434;
2.02 - 103.56
2.08 - 104.26
2.15 - 105.03
A 26 cubic inch difference between the two. Notice how close the numbers are the trend of which they go. About a degree and a half tighter going to a larger engine. So is a 105 to tight? I don’t think adding two more wider is going to kill it.
According to D Vizard which is Chevy math for the 23* angle. Being the MoPar has a 18* angle, you could probably do with 2* less and be fine. 1* won’t show crap.
Take for what it is, an approximate and close.
Thank you
Newbomb Turk
Well-Known Member
I sent you a PM
Replied
Your welcome. Don’t loose your mind over it. As long as you’re close, it’ll be great. There is a time and a place to loose your mind over stuff like this, now is t the time. Again, just try and get as close as possible and rock it.
Getting the LSA and overlap is a difficult thing to do. 99.9% that get it or close to it loose it with a full exhaust style one not fruly well thought out. A pressure wave cancellation box is required or an open exhaust at the same diameter as the headers collector at the proper length is what’s needed. Rare is it ever done and I’ve never seen it. When I do it, most make fun of it or balk at it as not needed, over thinking it, a waste of time and energy if not just outright stupid.
But hey! If they want to throw away 30/40+ lbs of torque, please by all means, throw it away and wonder as a walk away in my car while you wonder WHY my car performs better for what it is. No sweat off of my neck.
And this car has 1 7/8 Herman headers and 3” full exhaust with tailpipes! I will probably change this too. But it is a nice setup.
B3422w5
Well-Known Member
Sounds good there. Like it better than the other one for sure
I like that grind in this application too. If I already had it and the heads are already set up for it, I would run it just to see how much difference it makes. I think it’s a lot closer to target than the starting point, for sure.
Last edited:
I don't have it, but my springs and push rods would work with this one. Jegs does have it in stock too.
-
