Stockish 340 upgrades, cam needed

-
more head than you need so ignore those big numbers
pick your rpm range
pick the torque curve you (she) want
you have 4 speed and taller gears
and stock exhaust
problem is stock exhaust likes wide lca to keep from glowing cherry red
most shelf cams have narrower lcas once you get past the small ones
I would do nothing till you cc those heads
do you have a B3 kit? no use pushing the envelope without one
so you might want to find a shelf cam with a 112 best shot is crower so PM Dart19666 maybe Engle
else you are looking at a custom grind Bullet or Engle may be cost effective
would be easier with a solid
lots of good suggestions but focus on that axle ratio- you can't give away torque with a driver
 
A question for Wyrmrider... How are you factoring the TTI 1-1/2 to 1-3/4 step headers and 2-1/2 inch TTI full exhaust as stock? Those CNC heads are really the only part of the build that's somewhat awkward, but not really when you realize the flow is nearly identical to a pair of well ported X heads up to .600 flow. Remember back before the aluminum head craze when a set of X heads was the Holy Grail and very few people this side of the pro comp classes worried about flow past the .600 lift mark? I've not run any compression figures yet, but as long as it's just slightly north of 9:1 and factoring in all the other hardware going along for the ride, I'm sure it's going to work way better than just okay with the .506-220 @.050-108 grind. Once everything is tuned in to optimum, I don't think anyone involved is going to be disappointed with the power output and street manners this combination is going to have.
 
Garrett Ellison said:
A question for Wyrmrider... How are you factoring the TTI 1-1/2 to 1-3/4 step headers and 2-1/2 inch TTI full exhaust as stock? Those CNC heads are really the only part of the build that's somewhat awkward, but not really when you realize the flow is nearly identical to a pair of well ported X heads up to .600 flow. Remember back before the aluminum head craze when a set of X heads was the Holy Grail and very few people this side of the pro comp classes worried about flow past the .600 lift mark? I've not run any compression figures yet, but as long as it's just slightly north of 9:1 and factoring in all the other hardware going along for the ride, I'm sure it's going to work way better than just okay with the .506-220 @.050-108 grind. Once everything is tuned in to optimum, I don't think anyone involved is going to be disappointed with the power output and street manners this combination is going to have.
Click to expand...

I'M Disappointed!
That it don't have a 4" stroke:p
This has been a vary good thread so far!!!!:thumbsup::thumbsup:
 
LO23M8B said:
You might want to look up the definition of effectively. I never said it would change the cylinder pressure.
Click to expand...
You might want to do the same thing and in fact you should dry well learn how to comprehend what your reading and just exactly WTF your saying as well.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
rumblefish360 said:
Bullshit, bullshit, bullshit, bullshit.....
Click to expand...

I to was in LO23M8B mind set and most of us were, at one time or another.
This trend of thought has been around sence the first mopar alu head was poured into a mold.
I believed that the compression need to be raise because of the much better heat transfer of he alu.
I believed that there was a power loose if you didn't.
I believed that you could get away with more timing and compression with alu head or that it required it.

When i watch the Engine Master Video comparing the alu to the iron, It shattered all of my "I Believe"
So instead of righting a two page aka what i leaned i gave a link the LO23M8B, so he could learn as i had and as any on else on here could/can.

That's what this community is all about teach and learning to make or mopars better and stronger.

If anyone mist the link its on post #70
 
Even though it's probably complete overkill for the customer in this instance, I still really like the idea of the 3.65 inch crank that was for sale that I mentioned when this build started in another direction on the first thread, especially with the 3.23 gears and the weight of car. Just an example of what could be done with parts selection and a 3.65 inch crank: Icon 1742-080 forged pistons would come .023 over deck with a 9.60 deck height and have a 9.6 cc dish. An SCE 569096 Pro Seal .060 thick head gasket with a compressed volume of 12.917 cc's. and yields a .037 piston to head clearance for quench. Assemble as is for a 10.5:1 compression ratio, or get the the valve reliefs fly cut enough to add 4 cc's and get 10:1 compression. Either way, with 382 inches, the .525/.531(.560/.566 with 1.6)-273/277-226/230-110 LSA is looking good at this point. The "big deal" for this engine (but probably with a 3.55 or 3.73 gear) would be a Howard's 710862-08 solid lifter cam. .558 I/E ([email protected]), 266 advertised, [email protected]. And it would be at the point where an 800-DP or larger would be mandatory and an air gap would be beneficial. You'd probably regret if the wife weren't wearing Depends before she drove it...
 
Has anybody asked the wife what she wants? I know a few that can handle anything under the hood. Others might be happy cruising with a stock engine.
 
Yes Mike, She wants it to be nice and streetable, not trying to stall every time she lets the clutch out from a dead stop. Whatever power is after that she can deal with it. Kim
 
oldkimmer said:
Yes Mike, She wants it to be nice and streetable, not trying to stall every time she lets the clutch out from a dead stop. Whatever power is after that she can deal with it. Kim
Click to expand...
So after all of this expense, it just need a 5 or 6 speed with a real low first gear:thumbsup:
Just pulling on your leg a little.:D
 
oldkimmer said:
Yes Mike, She wants it to be nice and streetable, not trying to stall every time she lets the clutch out from a dead stop. Whatever power is after that she can deal with it. Kim
Click to expand...
Hi again. This is why I recommended the cams I did. But I believe with those intake ports you are going lose a lot of velocity. If it were me I'd fill the bottom of the ports a little and this would pick up the velocity and improve overall drivability and power. Huge ports are not always better.
 
Cudafever said:
I to was in LO23M8B mind set and most of us were, at one time or another.
This trend of thought has been around sence the first mopar alu head was poured into a mold.
I believed that the compression need to be raise because of the much better heat transfer of he alu.
I believed that there was a power loose if you didn't.
I believed that you could get away with more timing and compression with alu head or that it required it.

When i watch the Engine Master Video comparing the alu to the iron, It shattered all of my "I Believe"
So instead of righting a two page aka what i leaned i gave a link the LO23M8B, so he could learn as i had and as any on else on here could/can.

That's what this community is all about teach and learning to make or mopars better and stronger.
First let me say I didn't get to the article yet. But I have done testing in the past and the problem I had was I couldn't find the exact same ports on the stock vs as poured alum. heads. The alum.heads had a much improved designed port and chamber. So the dyno numbers would be of no use. But if someone does a flow test on both heads and checks the velocity at the same points you could have a better comparison if the chambers are the same. I will read the article as I still learn something new everyday. Thank you all.
If anyone mist the link its on post #70
Click to expand...
 
rumblefish360 said:
You might want to do the same thing and in fact you should dry well learn how to comprehend what your reading and just exactly WTF your saying as well. I'm sorry if I said something to inflame you. Please stop.
Click to expand...
 
I don't know why my stuff doesn't come out right I said I'm sorry if I said something to inflame you. Please stop.
 
The test was with a chev head made by the same manufacturer with the same port/valves exc the only difference between the two was the material it was made of.
They also flow tested both heads before the test. well worth watching!!!!!
 
I would like to say to everybody have a Happy Easter and hope you and your family are well.
 
Cudafever said:
The test was with a chev head made by the same manufacturer with the same port/valves exc the only difference between the two was the material it was made of.
They also flow tested both heads before the test. well worth watching!!!!!
Click to expand...
I going to get a cup of coffee and watch it now. Thanks.
 
Does anybody know what Jenkins said when he looked at a small block mopar head? He said if I had to race with those heads I'd quit racing. lol
 
Cudafever said:
The test was with a chev head made by the same manufacturer with the same port/valves exc the only difference between the two was the material it was made of.
They also flow tested both heads before the test. well worth watching!!!!!
Click to expand...
Funny thing is they kept talking about the iron heads flowing a few cfm better, BUT if you paused the tape when the flow table was posted that was only true at the low to moderate valve lift. Between .5 and .6" the situation reversed and the al heads flowed higher. Not that the differences should have mattered enough either to impact the conclusions.
There still are some reasons to use iron heads in certain situations (like class rules) but thats not relevant to this thread.
 
I have been spying on this thread and not saying anything because so many good opinions and experts on the subject. But one factor I haven't seen maybe I missed it was tire size? and vehicle weight. have you mocked up the rocker arms yet with the pushrods find clearance problems you may or may not want to relieve . most people just go back go 1.5 I don't see that you will be able to take advantage of a modern fast rate cam with 323 gears. I would use 00.51 cemetic head gasket and move on . I would also look at the Howard Rattler Series hydraulic camshaft I believe it will be forgiving on the bottom and also have a very nice chop,chop 227/234@50 on108 very nice combo if tire size does not exceed 26in diameter.
 
Mattax said:
Funny thing is they kept talking about the iron heads flowing a few cfm better, BUT if you paused the tape when the flow table was posted that was only true at the low to moderate valve lift. Between .5 and .6" the situation reversed and the al heads flowed higher. Not that the differences should have mattered enough either to impact the conclusions.
There still are some reasons to use iron heads in certain situations (like class rules) but that's not relevant to this thread.
Click to expand...
Did you hear them commenting on the iron running on after they shut it off.
i have yet to own a alu head but the only real advantage to keeping the iron head is that you don't have to worry about pulling threads out.............and if you torque them to spec you won't any ways.
It was a real eye opener for me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top