|
Author
|
Topic: Cam Question
|
Dubz
Gearhead Posts: 443
From: Manitoba Canada
Registered: Oct 2002
|
posted 11-15-2002 02:05 AM
   
how do these cams differ for my 351Wstock duration (int.) 256��
duration (exh.) 270��
lift (lobe/int.) .260"
lift (lobe/exh.) .278"
lift (valve/int.) .425"
lift (valve/exh.) .450"
overlap .33�� comp cams 270 Duration advertized intake - 270, exhaust 270
Duration @.050" intake - 224, exhaust 224
valve lift with 1.6 rocker intake .500 exhaust .500
lobe separation 110�� edelbrock rpm (the torker has the same specs) Duration at .006 Lift: Intake 290��Exhaust 300��Centerlines
Duration at .050 Lift: Intake 224��Exhaust 234��Lobe Separation: 110��
Lift at cam: Intake .310 Exhaust .325 Intake Centerline: 106��
Lift at valve: Intake .496 Exhaust .520
Timing at .050 lift: Open Close
Intake 6��BTDC 38��ABDC
Exhaust 51��BBDC 3��ATDC
------------------
1974 Gran Torino, 351W
1970 Mustang Grande, 289
IP: Logged |
Dubz
Gearhead Posts: 443
From: Manitoba Canada
Registered: Oct 2002
|
posted 11-15-2002 07:11 PM
anyone??which would lope the best?
which would give the best torque
which would give the best hp?
IP: Logged |
itlbrnmoff
Gearhead Posts: 746
From: Indianapolis,IN.USA
Registered: Nov 2002
|
posted 11-15-2002 09:21 PM
OK..OK...  I'm not really an expert,but assuming your 351W is a stock factory 1974,it probably has 9.0 to 1 compression.The Comp cam is a single pattern...meaning the duration and lift specs for int. and exh. are equal.(I have a single pattern with about the same specs in my 302 and it's lopey)The Edelbrock cam is a dual-pattern...meaning the exh. duration and lift is a few degrees different to help scavenge the exhaust from the smallish Ford exhaust ports...On my engine,I grinded the big EGR bumps off from the inside of the exhaust ports near the exit.(this is also good for another 15 to 25 hp)so,I was OK with the single pattern cam...if you aren't going to do that,try the dual-pattern.If you're looking for a lopey idle,stick with the 110 LSA and 108 LSA...the 108 might have too much overlap causing too much cylinder pressure bleed-off making the engine feel low compression...the 110 is a better choice for a daily driven street engine...also don't go over the 225 @ 0.50 duration for a 9.0 to 1 engine...you should also use a good set of long tube headers...1 1/2"to 1 3/4" with a free flowing exhaust 2 1/4"to 2 1/2" piping for the street...hope this gives you a better idea of where you're going...get busy...   quote:
Originally posted by Dubz:
anyone??which would lope the best?
which would give the best torque
which would give the best hp?
------------------
1983 Mustang GT T-tops
306 cid T-5 3.45 gear
under construction
No traction devices
A cool Ford Racing Hat...
IP: Logged |
itlbrnmoff
Gearhead Posts: 746
From: Indianapolis,IN.USA
Registered: Nov 2002
|
posted 11-15-2002 11:15 PM
By the way Dubz...or is that doobies? You didn't mention whether or not you are racing the car or driving it on the street,so I gave you info for a decent street driver...it sounds like you're running a heavy car,so you might need lower gearing and/or a higher stall converter to get into the powerband quicker...those powerbands are tricky...if one of those breaks...man...noooo...I'm just kiddin'... ------------------
1983 Mustang GT T-tops
306 cid T-5 3.45 gear
under construction
No traction devices
A cool Ford Racing Hat...
IP: Logged |
Dubz
Gearhead Posts: 443
From: Manitoba Canada
Registered: Oct 2002
|
posted 11-16-2002 04:03 AM
it's gonna be a mostly street car, may see ocasional track use...has to sound like it's damn powerful, and back it up if challenged.allrighty, well here was my plan
-new flat top pistons w/ 9.5:1 comp (possibly higher, must run on pump gas tho, and not the super good stuff, i'm still in university)
-tested and resized rods w/ arp bolts
-edelbrock performer aluminum dual plane intake (non -egr)
-edelbrock 600cfm electric choke carb (non egr)
-Hedman tork-step headers (11/2�� to 15/8�� to 3��) with cutouts (non electronic)
-2 1/2" from the cutouts back
-40 series flowmasters
-heads ported and polished (new heads to come later)
-B&M Transpak for my c6
and i probably missed lots of stuff
Looking at dual idler gears instead of a timing chain as well, anyone use or know how good these are?
and all this on an engine from 74 that has 62k on it (what am i thinking...) [This message has been edited by Dubz (edited 11-16-2002).]
IP: Logged |
V8 Thumper
Gearhead Posts: 3467
From: Orange, Ca. United States of America
Registered: Dec 2001
|
posted 11-16-2002 07:41 AM
quote:
Originally posted by Dubz:
Looking at dual idler gears instead of a timing chain as well, anyone use or know how good these are?
They cost horsepower  Seriously, there's greater parasitic loss from a gear drive than there is with a good quality double roller. Ok, the gear drive does sound bitchin' . Gotta love that high pitched blower whine ... but that's just the thing, you've gotta really love it, because you know how loud they are idling through a parking lot at a rally or show, imagine driving freeway rpm's for any sustained time period. It'll drive you nuts after the novelty wears off. Oh hey: Several manufacturers advertise 'noisy' and 'quiet' drives, and that's not 100% accurate. NO SUCH THING as a 'quiet' gear drive, maybe quieter than screamin' but by no means a soft whisper  Your motor plans sound , a healthy little street thumper I run a Comp 270S and would recommend it to you, it's a great SBF cam. And yes, it's got some lope ------------------
1965 GT coupe, 333ci aluminum headed/solid cammed stroker, four speed, 3.70:1 9" All Blue Oval, no blue bottle
http://mustangsandmore.50megs.com/V8Thumper.html
IP: Logged |
itlbrnmoff
Gearhead Posts: 746
From: Indianapolis,IN.USA
Registered: Nov 2002
|
posted 11-16-2002 02:48 PM
That sounds like a plan Dubz...
I too wished I installed a gear drive...
But I didn't realize the actual power loss involved...just learned that from V8 Thumper.
When you get a good roller chain,try one of the better quality ones (quality = $$)... 
I used a factory part by Sealed Power and it's fine I guess,but I later found out that if you install by just aligning the timing marks,a factory piece could actually retard the cam timing a few degrees voiding any advance that was built into the cam... 
I haven't noticed,but I could be losing some power...
Keep us posted... ------------------
1983 Mustang GT T-tops
306 cid T-5 3.45 gear
under construction
No traction devices
A cool Ford Racing Hat...
IP: Logged |
Dubz
Gearhead Posts: 443
From: Manitoba Canada
Registered: Oct 2002
|
posted 11-16-2002 07:33 PM
So what are the benifits or a solid cam (and what is envolved) over a hydraulic cam? (what is my engine now?)i'm dumb
IP: Logged |
steve'66
Gearhead Posts: 6522
From: Sonoma,CA,USA
Registered: Mar 2000
|
posted 11-16-2002 09:05 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Dubz:
(what is my engine now?)
Hydraulic cam and lifters were stock on your engine. SteveW
IP: Logged |
Dubz
Gearhead Posts: 443
From: Manitoba Canada
Registered: Oct 2002
|
posted 11-16-2002 09:23 PM
for street use, wouldn't hydraulic lifters be better than solid? rollers would be ideal, but out of my price range i think...
IP: Logged |
steve'66
Gearhead Posts: 6522
From: Sonoma,CA,USA
Registered: Mar 2000
|
posted 11-16-2002 11:21 PM
Dubz,The factory picked the hydraulic cam for street applications. SteveW
IP: Logged |
Mustangsandmore Forums
UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone! 
