Help me select a cam -

[Garceau]

Posting this here as I think its most likely a build more for the racer crowd - even though this will be primarily a street car (but I go overboard so it makes sense)

Truth be told - I have been out of the game for a bit, and when I left I knew little to nothing about big hydraulic roller cams. I had large solid rollers.

I am NOT opposed to straight solid roller. But this is a street car that will see 2500 miles a summer. I am NOT opposed to running valves regularly, and I have good Harland Sharp rocker set up.

Motor is getting a full make over to included increased compression from 8.5 - 11.5 (ish)

505 inch based on 440 block
11.5:1 compression (obviously don't have final numbers yet since its still in pieces)
Indy-1 heads flow 375 @ .500 and 390 @600 lift
Indy dual plane intake
3.73 gears in rear

I will need a new carb or fuel injection system, and a converter as well - but all of that will be based off the finished long block.

My current cam is this - but feel its a bit small for the cylinder heads and increased compression

Cam specs

 

[RemCharger]

Any more info on the heads? Those are very stout numbers. Or, the one number.

 

[Garceau]

I dont have the full flow sheet handy and I know that would be beneficial....

but @ .500 they flow 375

 

[66Satellite47]

Look at Bullitt solid lifter 904 designs. Pretty sure the Indy -1 heads will like a mid .600 lift cam with nearly 280 duration. Just my opinion.

 

[cdr]

If this is a street car, I would suggest no more that 10 to 1 on compression

 

[rumblefish360]

I run a 11.3-1 ratio on 93 octane, no problem.

If 91 octane is your limitation 10.5-1 is safe.

You listed some specs of your current cam, but not the style.
Roller? Hyd.? Etc….
Also, what are the duration @050 numbers?

 

[cdr]

I run a 11.3-1 ratio on 93 octane, no problem.

If 91 octane is your limitation 10.5-1 is safe.

You listed some specs of your current cam, but not the style.
Roller? Hyd.? Etc….
Also, what are the duration @050 numbers?

you are ONE of VERY few that get away with 11.3 on 93 with an old engine design, is this with a 360 mopar ? or a 505 ci BBM , just ask Kerndog about it , he is one of MANY that had detonation problems

 

[Garceau]

I run a 11.3-1 ratio on 93 octane, no problem.

If 91 octane is your limitation 10.5-1 is safe.

You listed some specs of your current cam, but not the style.
Roller? Hyd.? Etc….
Also, what are the duration @050 numbers?

 

[rumblefish360]

you are ONE of VERY few that get away with 11.3 on 93 with an old engine design, is this with a 360 mopar ? or a 505 ci BBM , just ask Kerndog about it , he is one of MANY that had detonation problems

LA 360 @ .030 over, forged 3.58 crank, TF heads, flat top zero deck Federal Mougal H116CP (Think KB-107’s), PRW 1.6 rockers, .573 lift, rpm intake, summit 750, tti headers, cam below. I forget the head gasket thickness, but it’s 4.04 on the bore. I had Cometic custom make it. Pricey but worth it.

Stock converter custom stalled and reworked by Pro Torque, 904-3.55, 26X10 mickeys, Cal Tracs 340 T bars.

I forget where the timing curve is set at. MSD ready to run with the black bushing installed, vacuum advance hooked up, IIRC, Initial @ 15*’s, or so… maybe more. I forget, sorry.

All in a no option ‘67 Cuda. Under 3K in weight.

Here’s the cam card to the Comp Hyd. roller.

 

[rumblefish360]

View attachment 1390744

Who is it by? Between advertised and the 050, it seems a little lazy and with the parts listed, you could really step up the program. While I do think you can get away with that cam if you have 93, I don’t have 91 by me so I don’t actually know for sure if it’ll do, everything is going to be in your distributor timing, state of carb tune and a good converter.

What’s your best octane? Elevation?
What head gasket thickness are you using?
If your nervous, try a gasket at .050 since that’s the stated max for a good quench.

 

[RemCharger]

If the heads do what you claim it sounds like an easy 850+hp motor, which sounds dubious.

 

[Garceau]

Who is it by? Between advertised and the 050, it seems a little lazy and with the parts listed, you could really step up the program. While I do think you can get away with that cam if you have 93, I don’t have 91 by me so I don’t actually know for sure if it’ll do, everything is going to be in your distributor timing, state of carb tune and a good converter.

What’s your best octane? Elevation?
What head gasket thickness are you using?
If your nervous, try a gasket at .050 since that’s the stated max for a good quench.

That's the current cam that's in it now by comp. It's gonna be way too small for these heads and increased compression.

I can get anything I need for octane. 11.5 may be a slight bit much. But I can get 93 to 114. Elevation 1000 feet

As I said everything is still in pieces. I don't have final measurements for exact compression.

But I know many cam companies are so far behind I'd like to get going on this. Then when the cam is selected I should be able to order a new converter. Then next to swap out the 8.75 to Dana.

 

[rumblefish360]

Stab it and drive it like you stole it!!!!

 

[slepr1]

Ask Hughes Engines. They are a sponsor here. On their website there is a cam inquiry questionnaire asking all the info on your setup and what you want to achieve. I have a Hughes cam on my last build and I'm very happy with it.

 

[INTMD8]

Have some ideas but look at it in a different way.

Is the current cam a hyd roller?

I would say, start with, what is the goal of hp/tq, then at what rpm.

Next, am I making the best decisions to meet that goal.

 

[Garceau]

Have some ideas but look at it in a different way.

Is the current cam a hyd roller?

I would say, start with, what is the goal of hp/tq, then at what rpm.

Next, am I making the best decisions to meet that goal.

Current cam is hydraulic roller - specs above. Will be a bit to small with the increase in CR and new heads.

 

[66Satellite47]

I have no experience with a hydraulic roller cam. But I have run several solid rollers in my drag cars with 440 or 400/452 motors. I was amazed that my antique mushroom lifter cam was equal or better than each of them. Equal to the 660/280 Comp roller, only .005 slower than the Lunati .690/284 roller.

 

[Geoff 2]

Not surprised that a mushroom lifter cam could equal or outperform a roller, if full advantage was taken of the large lifter base. Would also depend on the roller cam.

Some roller cams are not that agressive.

 

[66Satellite47]

I'm pretty sure that my Lunati solid roller was about as aggressive as we got in those days. The mushroom was only slightly slower at the track. But I do know that cam designs vary a lot.

 

[1KoolBee]

Posting this here as I think its most likely a build more for the racer crowd - even though this will be primarily a street car (but I go overboard so it makes sense)

Truth be told - I have been out of the game for a bit, and when I left I knew little to nothing about big hydraulic roller cams. I had large solid rollers.

I am NOT opposed to straight solid roller. But this is a street car that will see 2500 miles a summer. I am NOT opposed to running valves regularly, and I have good Harland Sharp rocker set up.

Motor is getting a full make over to included increased compression from 8.5 - 11.5 (ish)

505 inch based on 440 block
11.5:1 compression (obviously don't have final numbers yet since its still in pieces)
Indy-1 heads flow 375 @ .500 and 390 @600 lift
Indy dual plane intake
3.73 gears in rear

I will need a new carb or fuel injection system, and a converter as well - but all of that will be based off the finished long block.

My current cam is this - but feel its a bit small for the cylinder heads and increased compression

Cam specs

View attachment 1390746

A few years ago I decided to take a close look at the Mopar "Fading Color" magazine cam test article from several years ago. I built a chart of the specs and results & found it pretty telling. Looking carefully at the results I spotted some inconsistencies in the way the specs were advertised in the article. Bottom line, the MP .590 cam fared well given its age. Also, after giving the cam vendors free rein to spec any custom grind they wanted, only one manufacturer really outperformed the old .590 MP grind, and that was Hughes. I’d give him a call. I realize every motor combo responds differently to varying cam parameters, but this was still a pretty telling test.(See attached PDF).