|
Author
|
Topic: Questions about Edelbrock rpm cam
|
69stanger
Journeyman Posts: 50
From: Northridge, CA
Registered: Aug 2002
|
posted 10-02-2002 04:39 PM
  
hey guys-Hopefully by Chrsistams time I will have enough money for a head, intake, cam combo and I decided I wanted to do the Edelbrock performer rpm package, but I got a few concerns. Will I have cleareance issues using the rpm cam (290/300 .496 .520 110degrees)with the rpm heads (1.90/1.60)?? My car recently had a rebuild before I bought it so I am not sure what kind of pistons I have, but if they are stock will I have clearance issues. Also, will I need a new torque conveter if I use rpm cam? thanks in advance- Al ------------------
1969 Mach 1- 351 Windsor edelbrock performer intake, 670cfm Holley Street Avenger, Headers
IP: Logged |
Mpcoluv
Gearhead Posts: 945
From: Charlotte NC usa
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 10-02-2002 07:13 PM
I would look around at other cams before I bought the Edelbrock cam. Also I would not use the "advertised" duration figures, only the duration at .050 lift for comparisons.
Ask your self some questions:
"How much vacuum do I need (power brakes)?"
"What is my upper RPM limits?"
"Can I tolerate a rough idle?"IMHO picking the cam is one of the most important (and error prone) parts you will select.
Also why are you considering the 1.90 valve heads for a 351?
You need at least the 2.02 valve heads IMHO.
The cast iron World products "Roush 200" heads are a good deal if you are willing to use iron and clean out casting slag from the ports.
If you don't wan't to run a higher stall converter, pick a cam so that you won't havve to, like Alex's fav the Comp 270 Magnum.
IP: Logged |
69stanger
Journeyman Posts: 50
From: Northridge, CA
Registered: Aug 2002
|
posted 10-03-2002 12:26 AM
the only reason Im not picking the 2.02 valve size head is becasue I thought you had to have to use aftermarket pistons that have larger valve reliefs in order for them to work, maybe Im wrong 
IP: Logged |
Mpcoluv
Gearhead Posts: 945
From: Charlotte NC usa
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 10-03-2002 07:26 AM
quote:
Originally posted by 69stanger:
the only reason Im not picking the 2.02 valve size head is becasue I thought you had to have to use aftermarket pistons that have larger valve reliefs in order for them to work, maybe Im wrong
I didn't realize that you had "stock" pistons.
It depends on the cam if you need to increase the valve notch size. You can flycut the valve notches with the pistons still installed if you are careful. Look at this months MM&FF for an article.
You need to make sure no shavings get into the engine....
IP: Logged |
ccode67
Gearhead Posts: 1605
From: douglasville,ga,usa
Registered: Mar 2001
|
posted 10-03-2002 10:09 AM
Performer performer rpm cam works and sounds good, I have the 6022 heads, rpm intake and rpm cam in mine with 11cc dish pistons, plenty of clearance. Cam specs are 496/520 and 224/234 @ 50I think the clearance issue with the 6025 heads is with 289/302 engines, not the 351, doublecheck with Edelbrock to be sure though. With 5 speed and 3.50 gear, leaving the line at idle, it went 13.63 @ 105, poor 2.32 60 foot time. Street tires, full exhaust and trunk full of luggage. ------------------
Stuart MCA #48902
M&M #1091
67 stang 5 speed, 351W,
Edelbrock Performer RPM package Artificial Intelligence is no replacement for Natural Stupidity. http://mustangsandmore.50megs.com/ccode67.html [This message has been edited by ccode67 (edited 10-03-2002).]
IP: Logged |
69stanger
Journeyman Posts: 50
From: Northridge, CA
Registered: Aug 2002
|
posted 10-03-2002 12:49 PM
I opened up my PAW catalog and its says the Rousch 200 cast Irons heads (2.02/1.60) are "compatiable with all standard-type pistons."So could I use a Rousch 200 heads and 270Magnum cam and not have any clearance issues??
IP: Logged |
Mpcoluv
Gearhead Posts: 945
From: Charlotte NC usa
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 10-03-2002 01:35 PM
quote:
Originally posted by 69stanger:
I opened up my PAW catalog and its says the Rousch 200 cast Irons heads (2.02/1.60) are "compatiable with all standard-type pistons."So could I use a Rousch 200 heads and 270Magnum cam and not have any clearance issues??
You would probably be fine, but I would put a small layer of clay on top of one piston and check it anyways. You can never be too careful...
IP: Logged |
mustangzrule
Journeyman Posts: 87
From: Orion, MI
Registered: Sep 2002
|
posted 10-03-2002 02:42 PM
I would call Edelbrock and ask them. they will want the year of the motor so they can determine what valve reliefs you have if any. Also I am using stage 3 RPM heads 202 valves with the Perf RPM cam and a Vic Jr intake and the power is just plain impressive. I don't have any times, but to roast 275/60 street tires with a 279 rear end and a 2500 stall in second gear off the line, you still have to have low end torque. I like the RPM cam and I have it installed "straight up". No complaints.
IP: Logged |
69stanger
Journeyman Posts: 50
From: Northridge, CA
Registered: Aug 2002
|
posted 10-04-2002 01:07 AM
cool thanks guys for all the info.just one more question are the Roush 200 heads the ame as the Windsor Senior heads??
IP: Logged |
69stanger
Journeyman Posts: 50
From: Northridge, CA
Registered: Aug 2002
|
posted 10-04-2002 01:08 AM
Im also going to give Edelbrock a call tomorrow too.
IP: Logged |
Dubz
Gearhead Posts: 443
From: Manitoba Canada
Registered: Oct 2002
|
posted 10-04-2002 01:44 AM
hey, sounds like you are running what i am...351 Windsor, with edelbrock performer intake, Performer rpm cam (did you notice that it is the same spec cam as the torker setup?), i am plannin on a 750cfm carb, will that be too big. heads are to come soon, but i don't have millions right now
IP: Logged |
Mpcoluv
Gearhead Posts: 945
From: Charlotte NC usa
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 10-04-2002 07:42 AM
quote:
Originally posted by 69stanger:
cool thanks guys for all the info.just one more question are the Roush 200 heads the ame as the Windsor Senior heads??
They are a "Evolution" of the windsor senior heads. Similar with some tweeks.
If you buy hte Roush heads, get the version with the upgraded valve springs....
IP: Logged |
mustangzrule
Journeyman Posts: 87
From: Orion, MI
Registered: Sep 2002
|
posted 10-04-2002 09:24 AM
A 750CFM is a just a little bit on the big side for that CID and cam. 700-725 would be ideal. I am using a 600 because I had one already from my 302, and I lose top end about 500-1000 RPM before the rest of my combo should give out. At least on paper.
IP: Logged |
Dubz
Gearhead Posts: 443
From: Manitoba Canada
Registered: Oct 2002
|
posted 10-05-2002 08:26 PM
is it better to be a little on the big side?? could you re-jet or something so it would be allright?I know nothing about carbs so bear with me
IP: Logged |
69stanger
Journeyman Posts: 50
From: Northridge, CA
Registered: Aug 2002
|
posted 10-05-2002 09:29 PM
So you guys linke the Roush 200 heads with 270Magnum combo or do you gus think it is too under-cammed. I just basically want a street car with hardly any track use (maybe 3-4 times a year).
IP: Logged |
mustangzrule
Journeyman Posts: 87
From: Orion, MI
Registered: Sep 2002
|
posted 10-07-2002 09:04 AM
If you want throttle response, you want to be on the small side. If you want to make sure your peak HP is obtained, you want to be slightly larger. Larger venturis will respond to changes in throttle slower is why tou lose throttle response with a too big carb.
IP: Logged |
Mustangsandmore Forums
UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone! 
