Rick,
“I think excellent long term durability is far more important”
-Stock engines are lame, performance engines are better, and high performance engines are the bomb. High performance engines and long term durability are two words that just flat out do not go together, whereas a performance engine with a mild cam and modest compression and a forged rotating assembly built for towing can offer excellent long term durability.
Between long term durability and budget (I have WAY too many hobbies to sink all my eggs into one basket), I am choosing the performance route. I am going to accomplish this by throwing simple “bolt-ons” onto my smogger Gen IV 454. This will be accomplished primarily by a camshaft swap.
Maniacmechanic1 is “generally” correct that you can’t throw a camshaft into a stock engine and expect high performance results, especially not for a smogger Gen IV 454. This so called “performance cam”, as opposed to a “high performance cam” that I am talking about is going to retain durability, not as much as stock since it will add stress that the smogger cam did not, but a lot better than most high performance builds. I think what happens is that some people get so wrapped up with the high end stuff that their perspective of “performance” vs “high performance” becomes somewhat superficial ending in an “all or nothing” type of attitude.
There is a reason why John Force’s grunts are constantly rebuilding engines that have not yet failed (built for short term durability). The higher the level of performance, the more all of the “little things” start to matter, less so when you are playing with a close to stock iron big block- they are virtually indestructible and hard to kill as long as you keep it mechanically within limits (don’t over rev, good oil pressure, correct timing curve, not ever running it to lean).
“than throwing something together fast and cheaply, that may not last very long”
-Speed is a product of both knowledge, mechanical ability, and level of laziness. Speaking of speed, I did a frame off on an 82’ S10 in about two weeks- it has taken me over twenty years to attain that level of confidence and knowledge. I laugh at some of the reality shows for how they can take so long while having a full crew to get the job done. All the problems they run into- and I sit there thinking how in the heck did you not foresee such issues when going over it in your mind???? That was like SO when I was 16 and just starting out, not that it never happens at all, but broken knuckles and unforeseen surprises have become extremely few and far between for me- not because I am necessarily “so good”, but because I think that is what separates the “good guys” from the “hack guys”- “yeah it (sic) frustrating at times. BTW, I am not claiming to be a great high performance mechanic such as yourself (always collecting more knowledge on it though), but I am a great stock, conversion, and mild performance mechanic.
Cheap depends on contingencies, such as what performance level one is trying to obtain. For example, it would have been a lot cheaper for me to get Autozone stamped steel valve covers than to get the GM Performance Aluminum “pretty” valve covers I went with. Apart from aesthetics and the heat retention of steel (which has little impact outside of “high performance”), the cheap valve covers would have been a viable option had I chose to go the “cheap” route with them. On the other hand, if I go with a hydraulic flat tappet and use cheap wally world oil lacking the required levels of ZDDP & phosphorus ect, cheaping out here would not be a good idea…
The idea here with cheap, concerning me, is the power to cost ratio. I am about $1000 in on my fully dressed long block. High performance guys are spending thousands just for that extra tenth of a second. My stuff is cheap, probably even crap by your forum elites’ standards, but so far it has lasted 15 year, and for all 15 of those years I have been allowed the pride of saying “I have a big block” (superficial, but that does mean something to me) and most importantly a few handfuls of other toys (the all in one basket theory). At the end of the day I enjoy the tinkering aspect more than the competitive aspect of it.
“if you can't afford to do it correctly, how are you going to afford to do it over when it self destructs after the original parts selected fail.”
This is kind of a weird area, in that there are different perspectives on what “do it correctly
” actually means. It can either mean “mechanically” (fastener torque, head gasket thickness, maximum valve lift parameters, tuning, balancing, ect) or “performance wise” (mismatching components in a way that negates “ideal” or peak performance and/or causes quick catastrophic failure such as revving a cast 454 crank up to 9k RPM, ect).
Fortunately, in my life, I have never had anything fail- I do stuff correctly… “mechanically”. Things just always seem to work out from me because I
always do it right the first time. Apart from being mechanically inclined, which in my opinion is a prerequisite and wrenching 101, I initially study, ponder, and gp over everything in my head before and during doing it. I then double and triple check everything- and you know what I usually find something stupid here and there during the double check.
Affording it- buy parts used and when you see them at the right price SNATCH THAT SH$T UP!! Do your own labor. Hope that if and when something does go wrong, you have saved enough money with such ideology to do it all over again (on your own)- and still be $$’s ahead of the guy who outsourced everything and had to have it new (this is also usually the same guy who is now scared to drive/use said investment). More money means more projects for us blue collar grubs, unless if you have the best of both worlds and you are wealthy- should consider yourself extremely fortunate, regardless if you had the intellectual ability to work hard to get to that point or if you got nebbied (nepotism). I suffer from extreme chemical sensitivity allergies (the bubble boy), therefore I really can only work for myself as I have to pay extra attention to ventilation ect. I am still a dirt bag though, I have had 41 years with the privilege of growing up in America- I really should have already found my slice of the FU money American pie.
“I can easily suggest a cam , but its a rather meaningless gesture, and all too frequently a waste of time and effort for both of us.”
-I am sorry if asking you to suggest a camshaft is a waste of time for you, it is not a waste of time for me as I value your opinion (on camshaft specs that is), especially if you cite with logical reasoning. I just kind of figured you were kind of into this kind of thing since it is your forum and you tend to post on just about every other forum out there. Possibly your posts are more of a bait and switch to leed OP’s to your checkout screen or physical shop (GRUMPY MAKES ALL SPEND MONEY HERE ! GET USED TO IT.”
I think you are thinking I am that ignorant newbie who watches Street Outlaws and says to himself “I am going to get a cam and have a high performance engine.” Nope, just trying to select a camshaft that would offer a little more torque across the graph, and if peak HP bumped (it will) that would be a great fringe benefit. I was even going to buy the cam from you, regardless if Jegs or Summit was cheaper out of respect- so there is your beloved forum dividend…
I came up with a list that I was going to choose from before I decided to ask your advice. I was asking your advice because:
A) I can’t seem to find out what the max lift with 049 heads is.
I know how high I can go flow wise (which will be way above what I will choose for a “mild” build, but not my max lift before machining is required) and yes I know I will need matching springs).
B) Will it work with my stall speed or will I benefit from a lower stall.
There are a million articles on stall speed selection, all leave out a lot of key details (proprietary). For example, duration plays a part, but so does gearing- both are never fully covered together without missing key pieces to the puzzle- though I have to admit the whole dead horse thing did leave me quite perplexed… This is why I gave all the info on the truck so I didn’t get the notorious “We need more information” post. Gears will be set at 456. Cam wanted now will be for 33”tires. Once future lift and 40” tires are on in a year or two, I will retain the 456 gears so that I can still have it on the HWY and mud friendly. A transfer case with a 5:1 doubler will be in place so that I can still crawl. Once all that is in place, I will get a new 496 and do it up “big boy $$ style”. I will probably stick with the 049 heads and either dome it or leave it low compression and roots it (and yes adjust stall speed accordingly).
I have actually thought about changing to 346236 heads so as to have fresh heads and a little more torque. Problem with this route:
1) I can’t seem to find anywhere what max lift is on this head (stock Rick, please no it might have been milled I can’t tell you BS- I can figure in a safe tolerance if that is the case) before machining is required.
2) Why spend $300-$400 on heads that I will only use for two years when that is almost a third of what I financially have into it (remember the whole cost to performance ratio thingy??).
3) Also, since my 049’s are “healthy”, why spend $300-$400 on heads to add just a little torque from the gain in port back pressure? I won’t be going over .500, so really the two heads would perform pretty similar other than the slight torque bump. That would be like 30% of my whole engine investment (15 years) for only two years of use. Peace of mind that I won’t drop a valve and ruin the engine like
Maniacmechanic1 said? News flash- the LS and Vortec engines have killed the big block market, along with fuel prices shifting popularity over to the diesel camp. Point being: 454 cores are a dime a dozen nowadays, and besides I would rather use a 73 block for that build because as soon as it is done I will refocus on my Caddy 500 for the 4X4 (seeing as though I haven’t put it into an air boat yet) and put the 496 in a Chevelle.
Pro for going with 346236: I have no way of knowing if the guy before me had the 049’s exhaust valve hardened, I can’t get leaded gas, the EPA is being a PITA about lead additives, I rarely find budget friendly lead additives on eBay any more. I may seriously go this route, I could even send cores to you to have you do what all you did in your 346236 peanut port write up, but fear that cost would be over 1k… or stock rebuilt and I swap out the springs depending on my cam selection.
Anyways, and finally, here are my narrowed down choices, first one is what I would probably go with if I could verify my max lift and then so on (non-computer controlled/dual plane/Edl-1904 Quadrajet / EDL1901 (I swap back and forth as I rebuild them). Prefer a broad torque curve with stop sign to stop sign low end grunt and as lopey idle as possible if possible:
Isky: CL396256262
Valve Lift Int/Ext. 0.490/0.488
Valve Lash Hot Int/Ext. 0.000/0.000
ADV Duration Int/Ext. 256/262
0.050 Duration Int/Ext. 202/208
Lobe Center 110
Isky: CL396256
Valve Lift Int/Ext. 0.490
Valve Lash Hot Int/Ext. 0.000
ADV Duration Int/Ext. 256
0.050 Duration Int/Ext. 202
Lobe Center 110
Isky: CL396262
Valve Lift Int/Ext. 0.488
Valve Lash Hot Int/Ext. 0.000
ADV Duration Int/Ext. 262
0.050 Duration Int/Ext. 208
Lobe Center 108
Isky: CL201262
Valve Lift Int/Ext. 0.435/0.445
Valve Lash Hot Int/Ext. 0.000
ADV Duration Int/Ext. 262/270
0.050 Duration Int/Ext. 208/216
Lobe Center 112
Isky: CL201258
Valve Lift Int/Ext. 0.425
Valve Lash Hot Int/Ext. 0.000
ADV Duration Int/Ext. 256
0.050 Duration Int/Ext. 202
Lobe Center 108
This cam is available in a 112 LSA also.
Isky: CL201258
Valve Lift Int/Ext. 0.425
Valve Lash Hot Int/Ext. 0.000
ADV Duration Int/Ext. 256
0.050 Duration Int/Ext. 202
Lobe Center 108
This cam is available in a 112 LSA also
I found this guideline, I have not found many option below @50 200 (my Buick did GREAT with @.050 214 with 7:8:1 ????):
8.00:1 185º Idle-4,000
8.25:1 189º Idle-4300
8.50:1 194º 800-4,500
8.75:1 200º 900-4,600
9.00:1 204º 1,000-4,600
9.25:1 208º 1,200-5,200
9.50:1 212º 1,600-5,400
9.75:1 216º 1,800-5,600
10.00:1 221º 2,000-5,800
10.25:1 227º 2,400-6,200
10.50:1 233º 2,800-6,400
10.75:1 236º 3,000-6,800
11.00:1 240º 3,200-7,000
11.50:1 244º 3,400-7,200
12.00:1 248º 3,600-7,400
AND… I will cite a few sources, for why this WILL work to increase performance, just not to turn my engine into a “high performance” machine (no harsh feelings here, but you really should get off the instant 40-50 HP kick, please don’t put words in my mouth that I didn’t say Maniacmechanic1, and “big gains” is subjective, not objective).
LOW COMPRESSION 01: -My first build at 16, will not really build, my first “bolt-ons”- a Buick 231 V6 with 7:8:1 that I Edelbrock Performered. That cam had a substantial lift comparison to stock:
Duration @ .050 Intake: 204 degrees • Duration @ .050 Exhaust: 214 degrees • Lift @ Valve Intake: .448” • Lift @ Valve Exhaust: .472” • Lobe Separation: 112 Degrees • Intake Centerline: 107 Degrees • Idle Vacuum @ 1000 RPM’s: 15”
This think REALLY picked up power, especially through a Metric TH 250 (which I did notice a loss when I swapped to the TH 350- remember that whole loss of drivetrain thingy, you see you notice that more when you are not dealing with high performance engines. HP engines make enough torque off the line (what I have coined “break free torque” that not only can you offset the duration for higher RPM horsepower without much negative impact on launch (actually positive as you can often hookup better and without having to pull out as much timing at launch) For what it is worth, it would beat a stock MC SS and kill a siamesed Pontiac 301 (sorry, had to add that in their for my Pontiac friend
And the absolute best part, the foreman and everyone else at the Ford dealership I worked at all told me I couldn’t do it, that with the low compression and stock heads it would be built “wrong” and end up self-destructing. To this day, that even fire 231 still runs and is sitting in my friends Chevette. He was the poorest of the group growing up- I gave it to him. I don’t expect a dividend out of everything I do for someone. I was just happy that he was happy to have “something”, even if it wasn’t “High Performance” and not “built right”. What I really loved was the 231 beating the Ford guys 68 327 Camaro (I know, sounds like a dubious claim, but he never changed/configured the carb or timing ect. He was one of those dealership mechanics that said he wouldn’t change what a GM engineer already designed.) I would have beaten me with his 68 uni-body pony car had he allowed me or someone to tune it…
Oh yeah, and this car had to pass emissions every year. For the first few years I just put everything back together stock. Then in later years, some bubble boy who couldn’t get out much cracked the code on GM CCC and I was able to reprogram the bi-polar PROM to pass the sniffer- with full Eddy dressing (and the air pump).
LOW COMPRESSION #2: Compare the various 502 crate engines… notice something? The HT 502- will, not super low compression, but low:
Engine
HT502
Horsepower
406HP @ 4200RPM
Torque
541FT/LBS @ 3700RPM
Compression Ratio
8.75:1
Block
Cast iron with 4-bolt main caps
Crankshaft
Forged steel, 4.000"
Heads
Iron oval port with 118cc chambers
Valves
2.07"/1.73"
Camshaft Lift
0.480"/0.483" Hydraulic Roller
Dur. @ 0.050"
204°/209°
(I would just throw this cam in if I was in the mood to do a full roller conversion, I am not…)
I am guessing you are still not wanting to recommend a camshaft for me, and will most probably just continue to dodge the question. In all honesty, parts dealers really “don’t” want the average person knowing what all can be accomplished with a low compression cast rotating assembly. Because this combination, along with droves of cheap and ready availability, would financially be ideal” for the majority of the population out there. Especially the low budget guys who have nothing yet, and say “I won’t have something until I can pay Grumpy $6000 to have it done right” (and in the meantime knock up their girlfriend and buy a fixer upper house and drift further away from the dream of having something “decent” that can burn the tires for two blocks.)
Hopefully, at minimum, you can answer the two questions that are really the most important to me:
-049: max intake/exhaust lift before machining
-346236: max intake/exhaust lift before machining
(You could also include lift with B-Hives for sh$ts n giggles if you know it/want to)
-Shaun-
PS: Thank you diesel guys for killing the big block, more for “us”. I have to admit, I get a little sick of hearing about diesels. The owners brag, I always say what would your diesel perform like if you took the turbo off? What would my 454 perform like if I put a turbo on? Your best diesel, a Duramax, like the 2016 my friend tuned and Def deleted, that I beet by two cars up to 100 mph with my 305’ed junk yard parts G-Body? Oh, you say you can build your diesel? What about if I put low compression pistons in a 572 and add a turbo to that? Diesel’s “need” turbos- touché. Then, while I see that look of confusion coming upon them, generally speaking, I remind them that any engine can beat any engine if you have deep enough pockets… and that is why I kind of like playing with the stock stuff, it lowers the ceiling challenge wise, and it rather easy on the pockets, often by MORE than 10%-40%, a lot more…
PSS: No Grumpy, I will not hold you liable or call you out if I screw up my engine installing a “better performing” camshaft. I will, however, gladly turn the 454 short block into an anvil stand if that happens
