Anyone know who grinds cams for Hughes?

[TexasRoadRunner68]

I bought a lot of used parts a while back. Cam was supposedly Hughes, but is engraved Demos cams and has their grind number. Any chance these are outsourced or did I end up with a mystery camshaft?

 

[BLK 68 R/T]

I thought at one time I had heard that Engle ground their cams?

 

[TexasRoadRunner68]

Well, im glad I got a brand new lunati voodoo cam rather than trusting this thing.

 

[rikkitik]

Despite what Hughes claims, their cam profiles are Howards.

 

[RemCharger]

I thought at one time I had heard that Engle ground their cams?

They were definitely engles. No idea when they changed to howards.

 

[Geoff 2]

What is interesting is the FT cams, above: for the same 050 duration, the FT cams have more lift than the rollers & generally only 1 or 2* @ 200 lift.

 

[Wietse]

Cam was supposedly Hughes

Guess they were mistaken then.
From what i know is that the "older" grinds were Engle grinds, maybe the newer generations use other grinds.

I got a 238/244 cam which uses the K60 and K62 Engle cam grinds.
Below a website that shows many (solid & hydraulic) cam profiles, maybe you can find something here.
Engle Racing Cams

 

[RJRENTON]

I bought a lot of used parts a while back. Cam was supposedly Hughes, but is engraved Demos cams and has their grind number. Any chance these are outsourced or did I end up with a mystery camshaft?

View attachment 1508496

View attachment 1508497

WHY would you buy a used camshaft, yet alone an UNKNOWN grind for an unknown application from an unknown company.....with no specs to compare ???? Just like buying "a pig in a poke" must have been cheap.
BOB RENTON

 

[TexasRoadRunner68]

WHY would you buy a used camshaft, yet alone an UNKNOWN grind for an unknown application from an unknown company.....with no specs to compare ???? Just like buying "a pig in a poke" must have been cheap.
BOB RENTON

It was in a cheap lot of parts. Overall it was worth if for the other stuff. Like I said, I have a brand new lunati in my build.

 

[rikkitik]

What is interesting is the FT cams, above: for the same 050 duration, the FT cams have more lift than the rollers & generally only 1 or 2* @ 200 lift.

I noticed the same thing years ago when perusing my Ultradyne catalog (pre Bullet days). So I called old buddy Tim at Ultradyne, and he explained the initial movement vs ramp velocity/intensity "thing".
A "true" .904 SFT can move off of the base circle quicker than a even a solid roller can, but the flat tappet ultimate lift rate is around .007-.0075 thou per degree. A solid roller however, can achieve a lift rate of +.009 per degree.
Howards SFT ramps are more aggressive than Ultradyne's in that they stay at max velocity a few degrees longer than Bullet/Ultradyne. This does require more spring pressure though, so the question of the oil/sliding Interface issue is more critical.
Howards, Ultradyne/Bullet, Mopar SFT's are generally more effective (have better profiles) than a lot of Hydraulic Rollers do. And, given the somewhat poor state of hydraulics these days, can be a better choice IF YOU ARE WILLING TO ACCEPT a bit more maintenance.
Tim mentioned (back then), that it wasn't uncommon for SBC circle track guys to open up their lifter bores to accept Mopar .904's, and run an EDM with a Mopar profile (particularly if they'd had a roller failure wipe out a motor).

 

[Geoff 2]

The larger lifter diam was the basis for using mushroom lifters, to get more lift & 'area' under the curve.

How has Howard's managed to get 0.020" or more lobe lift for the same 050 number than other companies??? That is a huge amount. They all use computers these days to generate their lobe series.

 

[rikkitik]

The larger lifter diam was the basis for using mushroom lifters, to get more lift & 'area' under the curve.

How has Howard's managed to get 0.020" or more lobe lift for the same 050 number than other companies??? That is a huge amount. They all use computers these days

It seems that Howard's lobes stay at max velocity just a couple degrees longer, which tranlates to the additional lift. This is where the extra spring pressure is needed, as given more lift over same duration requires "deceleration/closing ramp" to happen quicker (more abruptly) than a lobe with less lift for a given duration.
And yes/agree, cam manufacturers have used computer programs for years (all the way back to the '70's).
Harold Brookshire (Ultradyne's founder) was one of the leaders in lobe innovation. If you remember the early days of Pro Stock, General Kinetics, then Cam Dynamics, each had a period of being "THE" hot cam manufacturer. That pretty much coincided with Harold moving from company to company. And advancing lobe technology along the way.
IIRC, he was the first to introduce asymmetrical lobe programs (open fast, close slow), to the industry.
If you look at the Bullet "Master List", at the end of the roller lobe specs, you will see 3 letters. CRS = symmetrical lobe, CRA = assymetric lobe, CT (A or S) = torque profile (very aggressive ramp, not recommended for rpm).

 

[Geoff 2]

Yes, I get all that. But why wouldn't the Competition [ pardon the pun ] be doing the same because they would sell more cams.

They all have computers to design the lobes...or simply copy the Howard's lobes.

Brookshire was NOT the first to design asymmetrical lobes, he just spruiked the concept to make it sound like he invented them. He designed a lot of the Comp lobes when they opened in the mid 70s. My early 1970s Isky catalog had AS lobes in it.

 

[Wietse]

I guess each company has/had to consider the expected sales in this type of cams category.
The more cams and different grinds result in more stock to be kept on the shelves, and if sales are not that high in volume it would not be cost effective.
Specially if all you are offering is an equivalent of the competition their product.
IF you had something unique nobody else had put on the market yet, the above would work well until the competition is going to find out and do the same.

 

[rikkitik]

Brookshire was NOT the first to design asymmetrical lobes, he just spruiked the concept to make it sound like he invented them. He designed a lot of the Comp lobes when they opened in the mid 70s. My early 1970s Isky catalog had AS lobes in it.

I had said, IIRC in relation to Harold Brookshire introducing assymetric lobes. I did not recall correctly, a little research, and I found that OEM's have been using asymmetrical lobes since the late 40's.
I was very wrong......lol
Also, Brookshire referred to his designs as "unsymmetrical"(?) and used multiple polynomials to create the curves.
FWIW, Harold's actual claimed history from the man himself. (Harold passed away in 2015 RIP)

Since you asked, I'll give everyone a very very short history of me, so you'll know where I came from.
1969---Went to work for State of Mississippi as computer operator, rose to be lead operator at CDPA, Central Data Processing Agency.
1972---Began working on cam design program in my spare time.
Dec 15, 1972---Sold 310AP SBC solid to Reed Cams, Georgia, for $125.00.
1973---Made $3000 selling to Reed, Isky, Engle, Norris.
1974---Designed Reed's RxxxULX line of rollers, and a lot more, including Benny Parson's 1975 Daytona 500-winning cam. Also Shirl Greer's TF/FC NHRA National Champion Nitro Funny car cam, designed for Norris, and it was a True Chrysler flat tappet, with .438" lobe lift.
1974---Became General Kinetics' cam designer, worked with people like Bill Jenkins and Jack Roush on the cams for their ProStockers.
1976---Jenkins wins Pro Stock Natinal Championship, with GK doing large-barrel cams.
1977---I start in January with Competion Cams, as their original cam designer. Over the next 3 years, I design them hundreds of cams, including the 268 High Energy. I introduce them to the unsymmetrical cam.
1979---I write them their 1st in-house cam design program. Before that, we shared a program with Cam Dynamics.
1980---After negotiating since late 1976 for some stock ownership in Competition Cams, I leave and start UltraDyne on April 1st, 1980. The 1st month I design the 288/296F5 and the 288/296R6, the 2 most popular cams I ever made.
1981---In September, I hire my 1st employee, Mike O'Neal, who ran my shop, made all my models and masters, etc.
1982---We're running 2 shifts, from 7:00 AM to 12:00 PM. Tim Goolsby comes to work for me, he is Mike's brother-in-law. I also design UltraDyne's first hydraulic cams, such as the 272, the 276, the 288/296H.
From then on until 2000, we all just worked. UltraDyne grossed over $1.2 Million a year from 1990 to 1999.
2000---A number of independent factors began to take their toll---Federal Mogul acquiring my 2 major solid lifter core manufacturers, and their later Chapter 11, Lifter companies disappearring, tremendous cash-flow problems in the end of 2000, initially triggered by the UPS strike---We lost around $50,000 in the strike.
2001---A un-named cam company in Memphis hires 8 of my 12 employees, and 2 more just leave because they think --that's it. Only Tim and Gail are left with me.
2001-2003---UltraDyne is in the Chapter 11 'Death Spiral'. I take a $0 salary for 2002, and pump all my, and my wife's, retirment money into UltraDyne, along with all the equity I could get on my house, etc, etc, etc.
June 2003---Everything is gone, the government locks the doors.
August 2003---I go to work at Lunati, charged with completely re-doing their entire line of cams. Mike is already there, waiting for me, along with Steve Slavik, who worked for me for 13 years (Mike for 19...). Then I meet the corporate world.....
Oct 2004---Lunati introduces the VooDoo cams. And they really work good.....

This has been the line and times of a cam designer, and even with the down sides, it has been the time of my life, and I'm going to stay at it as long as I can.....
This has been the line and times of a cam designer, and even with the down sides, it has been the time of my life, and I'm going to stay at it as long as I can.....
No comments are necessary, you are all a great bunch, and as that Great American, Minnie Pearl, said, "I'm just so proud to be here!"

Thanks,
UDHarold

PS---None of those were re-packaged cams. They were ALL designed by me, and unsymmetrical, as always.

 

[Geoff 2]

Harold probably used the term 'unsymmetrical' because he knew asymm lobes had already been around for awhile; a way to make something look 'new & inventive'. It is called marketing.

 

[moparedtn]

I had said, IIRC in relation to Harold Brookshire introducing assymetric lobes. I did not recall correctly, a little research, and I found that OEM's have been using asymmetrical lobes since the late 40's.
I was very wrong......lol
Also, Brookshire referred to his designs as "unsymmetrical"(?) and used multiple polynomials to create the curves.
FWIW, Harold's actual claimed history from the man himself. (Harold passed away in 2015 RIP)

Now that's a career - hell, a legacy right there! Thanks for sharing this so that future readers can find it.