Upgraded 360 Cam?

-
CluelessMopar

CluelessMopar

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 25, 2021
Messages
56
Reaction score
42
Location
Pennsylvania
I'm planning on doing a higher performance cam in my 360 and probably a pair of Edelbrock RPM heads within the next year. I currently have a dual plane intake, headers, 8.75 rear with 355's. Will this Lunati cam be problematic if I'm running a stock torque converter?

End goal is just to add some more low-end torque to the car and help the engine come alive. Not looking to go crazy with power, but make it a fun street/strip cruiser.

Street/Strip Hydraulic Flat Tappet Cam & Lifter Kit - Chrysler 273-360 285/305

Or is there a different cam that I should be looking at? That's either more mild or more radical?
 
Last edited:
I would not recommend that cam for a low compression stock converter 360. You would be better off with a cam with much less duration. 65'
 
It will also depend on your compression ratio. Running that cam your going to need about 10:1, and a 3000-3500 stall converter. 65'
 
Do a compression check first and lets see what you have. Also, see if the engine has stock exhaust valve rotators. There may be a lot more needing done than just a cam swap. But this profile would give you what you want with a gain in low end torque and the stock converter.
Howards Cams, Hydraulic Flat Tappet Camshaft & Lifter Set, Chrysler SB, 215/215 @ .050, .455/.455, 112 LS - Competition Products
Notice that it's in stock and also comes with new lifters. So far, I've been reading only positive reviews of the Howards cam and lifter sets on break in. Also, what year and how many miles does the engine have on it? It may be time for a new set of rocker arms, most of the time the stock rockers are ovaled out where they ride on the rocker shafts. And it's also a good time to install fresh springs (901 series are compatible) and seals, but there are usually complications with locks and retainers if eliminating exhaust rotators unless you're having the heads rebuilt anyway.
 
Last edited:
What cam are you running now??
The cam you picked definitely ain’t gonna help low end.

Generally
Under 255 stock low power
255-265 streeter good low end torque
265-275 hot street
275 plus street strip to full race
 
273 said:
What cam are you running now??
The cam you picked definitely ain’t gonna help low end.

Generally
Under 255 stock low power
255-265 streeter good low end torque
265-275 hot street
275 plus street strip to full race
Click to expand...

It's the stock cam from the 360. I think the specs are as such: 252/252 duration. 410/410 lift.
 
Looks like you have a Stock 360 2 bbl cam there by the specs you posted. Also those original cams by this time usually have the lobes wore down a bit and the lifters cupped. Take a look at them at tear down, you are loosing performance there too.

A new 340/360 factory 4 bbl grind would be a big imporvement.

340 Camshafts.jpg


This one on the bottom of the chart ^^^^^ .
 
Dan the man said:
Stock 360 2 barrel cam. .410/.412× 252*/256*. The factory 340 cam is a nice upgrade, the 1968 340 4 speed cam, .444/.458× 276*/284*
Click to expand...

Is there a comparable cam I should look for online? Appreciate the help guys! I'm not sure how to go about correctly adding power to my motor.
 
CluelessMopar said:
Is there a comparable cam I should look for online? Appreciate the help guys! I'm not sure how to go about correctly adding power to my motor.
Click to expand...
Lunati has a cam that has same duration as the 340 cam and I think that the lift is in the low .500 lift range. A 4 barrel, headers, cam change, if you with something like the 340 cam you won't have to worry about compression or piston to valve clearance issues. All 360's came with a 8.4:1 compression ratio. Good flowing exhaust system is a good idea and a good tune.
 
CluelessMopar said:
Is there a comparable cam I should look for online? Appreciate the help guys! I'm not sure how to go about correctly adding power to my motor.
Click to expand...
You want to avoid cams that need high stall converters as this creates heat and heat is a enemy of the transmission and that creates more expensive trans coolers
 
Being you're asking the question about your converter lens itself you already know the answer will it be problematic no , will it be a good fit for a stock converter no. I ran that grind for years it's no powder Puff the 3:55 will be all right but you really need about a 3000 stall to take any advantage of the extra duration.
 
K.O. SWINGER said:
Being you're asking the question about your converter lens itself you already know the answer will it be problematic no , will it be a good fit for a stock converter no. I ran that grind for years it's no powder Puff the 3:55 will be all right but you really need about a 3000 stall to take any advantage of the extra duration.
Click to expand...

Understood. I wasn't sure what I could/couldn't get away with for my stock engine.
 
If you have the room for the exhaust lift, the [email protected], 269 @ .006, .455 lift Howards cam would work really well for your combination. But I just caught were you said EDELBROCK PERFORMER RPM HEADS as part of the program. That's going to bump your compression up and give you room for a lot of lift. It's a complete game changer and will require aftermarket rockers, too. If you could swing it, a retrofit hydraulic roller would be idea.
 
Garrett Ellison said:
If you have the room for the exhaust lift, the [email protected], 269 @ .006, .455 lift Howards cam would work really well for your combination. But I just caught were you said EDELBROCK PERFORMER RPM HEADS as part of the program. That's going to bump your compression up and give you room for a lot of lift. It's a complete game changer and will require aftermarket rockers, too. If you could swing it, a retrofit hydraulic roller would be idea.
Click to expand...
Heads will probably be in 8 months. Cam would be right now.
 
Dan the man said:
All 360's came with a 8.4:1 compression ratio.
Click to expand...
Not true.
Break out the measuring tools and be prepared to cry in the deep and low in the hole ratio of 7.8-1 and less sometimes.
Dan the man said:
You want to avoid cams that need high stall converters as this creates heat and heat is a enemy of the transmission and that creates more expensive trans coolers
Click to expand...
Not true. While an external trans cooler is IMO an excellent idea for even modest builds, it is not a must.
Buy once, cry once on a quality converter and your not going to have this issue.


Been there done that measured it and cried once.
Worth the wait every time.
 
rumblefish360 said:
Not true.
Break out the measuring tools and be prepared to cry in the deep and low in the hole ratio of 7.8-1 and less sometimes.
Click to expand...
Right on… I got a ‘76 360 that the pistons measure .060 below deck and have a 3.13 diameter dish .715 deep. And the ‘82 360 I measured a while back averaged .093 below deck with the same pistons. Some were only .089 deep and most we’re around .118 deep.
 
Garrett Ellison said:
Right on… I got a ‘76 360 that the pistons measure .060 below deck and have a 3.13 diameter dish .715 deep. And the ‘82 360 I measured a while back averaged .093 below deck with the same pistons. Some were only .089 deep and most we’re around .118 deep.
Click to expand...
I know that I'm going to start a up roar, but mopars are the most expensive cars to build and that's a fact
 
CluelessMopar said:
Heads will probably be in 8 months. Cam would be right now.
Click to expand...
Once again… What year of 360 and what did it originally come out of? And how many miles? Unless this is a fairly fresh engine, I would save the Eddy heads for a fresh build and a whole next level of planning.
 
Garrett Ellison said:
Once again… What year of 360 and what did it originally come out of? And how many miles? Unless this is a fairly fresh engine, I would save the Eddy heads for a fresh build and a whole next level of planning.
Click to expand...

It's a 76 that came out of a motor home with 727. I think the engine had about 80k miles on it when pulled
 
Dan the man said:
I know that I'm going to start a up roar, but mopars are the most expensive cars to build and that's a fact
Click to expand...

I like to think that chevies are just cheap. Most other platforms are "normal", then there's the weird low volume stuff from the pre '60s that costs a fortune no matter what, and you can't even get a torque plate for.

I mean, looking at upgrading the FE in my roadster makes me think a w8 build would be cheap.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top