tow combo for rockys

grumpyvette

Administrator
Staff member
DAVE said:
Hi,grumpy

Have read quite a few articles about 383 vs 350 and to be honest have read right around a circle if you know what I mean.
Had a 350 rebuilt a few years ago and have found out the money paid doesn't guaranty quality of work- so here I am again spending more money on an engine that I think most 'competent' builders should have no problem meeting spec. Anyway I spoke to a engine builder at the time and his comment was that the 383 disappointed at the track- so I stayed the course on the 350 and have regretted the decision, now I'm reconsidering this. Just a few questions:
Application is 1989 chev K1500 4x4, 700r4, stock type converter, 3:73 gears, FIRST Fuel Injection TPI, AFR vortec heads, Edelbrock TES shorty headers into 3in single exh, Dynamic EFI ecu (speed density), oe roller block. I pull a tandem a few time a year over the Rockies but otherwise this is a daily driver. I would prefer to run 87 octane around town and when working her- load up with premium. The current builder would like to go 10:25 min as mentioned by Tony Mamo when buying the heads- I just don't know.......9:1 right now (was running RHS iron 2.02 vortecs) and I previously was 9.5:1 with GM vortec heads no issues.

- I was told that the 5.7in rods are a little more octane tolerant than the 6in. because they move off of TDC faster (thinking about Scat 7/16 I beam cap screw).
- I know a little about cams but not enough to make a efficient choice- using 210/214-525/530 @110 (1.5) roller right now, springs are too stiff (was up sold to 150lb) using LS7 lifters, want to change to a more conventional cam with more duration and quieter valve train.
- I know the cam has a bug influence on compression- so I would like a suggestion- 2 in fact. Want to keep piston to head .035 max.
- going the 383 route what would you suggest- I think with the AFR heads the chambers are as good as it gets for the 23 heads so 10:1 should be no problem, cam? What do yo think?
- staying with 350-9:1 that I have I know there are cams that increase compression (DC?) how well do they work and should I consider?

Appreciate your time,

Dave


since your building a 383 and have purchased some good quality parts and obviously put some effort into thinking this thru,
Id suggest checking your fuel rail pressure and injector pulse duration on the current TPI set up before assuming its a failed combo because
it might simply be a fuel delivery issue holding the power back to some extent, Id also verify the exhaust back pressure because that single 3" exhaust may be a problem.
pipechart.gif

,heres what i see trying to match your request,
the scat 7/16 cap screw 5.7" rods are as good upgrade,
the FIRST TPI is a really nice INTAKE
PDRM1966a.jpg

and those AFR VORTEC HEADS ARE GREAT for the application
http://www.airflowresearch.com/index.php?cPath=24_117
190afrvortec.png

those heads have a 65cc combustion chamber Id strongly advise opening the quench to at least .040 rather than the .035 you mentioned
you did not mention the truck/car weight or tire diam.
assuming your block has NOT been deck milled it likely measures near 9.023 which will require a .015-.018 shim head style gasket to get close to the tight quench.
this crane 119671 hydraulic roller cam meets the requirements
http://www.cranecams.com/product/cart.p ... il&p=24189
crane119671.png

but with the heads and quench,youve selected to use and crane cam timing the 383 SBC would require a 22 cc dish piston with those heads to give you near 9.25:1 static compression

calc.png

YOU MIGHT WANT TO READ THIS (PAY ATTENTION TO THE DENVER CALCS)
http://victorylibrary.com/mopar/cam-tech-c.htm

keep in mind because your operating at higher altitudes your engine can effectively tolerate a bit more compression that you would get by with at sea level simply because the air your compressing is effectively less dense, thus theres less actually being compressed in the cylinder
 
Last edited by a moderator:
GVRW= 7200lbs
wheel hieght= 30in

Thanks for replying, appreciate all your responses to numerous posts by me and others- very though out.
My issues are of mechanical and reliability in nature, due to my location it was easier to replace the RHS heads than wait 3 weeks for a daily driver. The builder used self aligning roller rockers with guide plates that destroyed the heads guides, and when replacing I measured the piston to deck- pass was good at zero, drivers not so much, so between the metal shavings, the decking, and a persistant valve train noise despite new lifters, and low oil flow to the rockers (in my opinion- hot pressure measured 40 psi, but oil to the rockers was a seep rather than a generous flow, they may have used restricters but I think they are a liability in this case.) So with my confidence in shreds I hauled the engine out and sent out to be torn apart and see what's going on. The pistons currently used are Mahle 4032 20cc D dish spec'd for iron, Mahle at the time seemed to have a glaring hole in compression choices- I would have preferred 9.5.
The new FIRST TPI has been modified to use my old TB as it would have been a huge hassle to use as supplied and my oe fuel rails.
Are the LS7 roller lifters a decent piece? I think the oe parts are the benchmark in this area- but not necessarily the best, just looking for a good quality lifter to last.
The cam I was thinking about was 220/225-.525/.525 @110 with 1.5 rockers. I don't think there is a need to go to .550 for the marginal returns in flow. Cranes quality on par prior to reorganization?
I know the exhaust is a weak link- 4x4's are a pain and I don't see the point of routing both to one side, I'm working on the Y-pipe, after the collectors from 2.25in to 2.5in in the Y and the Flowmaster Y is 2x2.5in to 3.5in, cat is gone with a 3.5in Dynomax bullet in place, necks down to 3in with Dynomax UltraFlow (biggest) and then out to the bumper.
Slowly gathering parts for a 411 conversion down the road and will install EFI Conversions 24x crank reluctor now.
 
dfarr67 said:
GVRW= 7200lbs
wheel hieght= 30in

Thanks for replying, appreciate all your responses to numerous posts by me and others- very though out.
My issues are of mechanical and reliability in nature, due to my location it was easier to replace the RHS heads than wait 3 weeks for a daily driver. The builder used self aligning roller rockers with guide plates that destroyed the heads guides, and when replacing I measured the piston to deck- pass was good at zero, drivers not so much, so between the metal shavings, the decking, and a persistent valve train noise despite new lifters, and low oil flow to the rockers (in my opinion- hot pressure measured 40 psi, but oil to the rockers was a seep rather than a generous flow, they may have used restricters but I think they are a liability in this case.) So with my confidence in shreds I hauled the engine out and sent out to be torn apart and see what's going on. The pistons currently used are Mahle 4032 20cc D dish spec'd for iron, Mahle at the time seemed to have a glaring hole in compression choices- I would have preferred 9.5.
The new FIRST TPI has been modified to use my old TB as it would have been a huge hassle to use as supplied and my oe fuel rails.
Are the LS7 roller lifters a decent piece? I think the oe parts are the benchmark in this area- but not necessarily the best, just looking for a good quality lifter to last.
The cam I was thinking about was 220/225-.525/.525 @110 with 1.5 rockers. I don't think there is a need to go to .550 for the marginal returns in flow. Cranes quality on par prior to reorganization?
I know the exhaust is a weak link- 4x4's are a pain and I don't see the point of routing both to one side, I'm working on the Y-pipe, after the collectors from 2.25in to 2.5in in the Y and the Flowmaster Y is 2x2.5in to 3.5in, cat is gone with a 3.5in Dynomax bullet in place, necks down to 3in with Dynomax UltraFlow (biggest) and then out to the bumper.
Slowly gathering parts for a 411 conversion down the road and will install EFI Conversions 24x crank reluctor now.



USE OF OIL FLOW RESTRICTORS ARE ALMOST ALWAYS A HUGE MISTAKE


you can,t use self aligning roller rockers with guide plates , as you found because of that exact result that is almost guaranteed

necks down to 3in with Dynomax UltraFlow (biggest) and then out to the bumper.
as you stated, this looks like a potential problem

The cam I was thinking about was 220/225-.525/.525 @110 with 1.5 rockers
the crane cams lower lift might result in a few less peak hp but the cam lobe acceleration rates and max lift will also likely result in noticeably less stress and wear on the valve train
 
Lets just say that when I started questioning the quality of build, I heard of marine engines built by these guys failing.....the plates came with the heads and I questioned him on their use- but he insisted it was OK. They rebuilt the heads on their dime.
I'd like to discuss compression ratio- I barely understand static vs dynamic (I understand what they are but not in relation to spec'ing octane tolerance), I can only compare GM vortec at 9.5:1 to my alum head version- most articles say you can up the compression 1 full point to be equal to iron, so at 10:1 I thought I was safe....
 
OK, first fact! the piston can,t compress anything until both valves fully seat, static compression is based on the volume compressed between the piston starting at bottom dead center and compressing everything into the combustion chamber , head gasket quench,volume, that remains when the pistons at TDC
cpr2.jpg

definition.jpg

compress_06.jpg

quenchjj.jpg

Octane_Requirements.gif

0311phr_compress_07_z.jpg

Cylinder-Pressure-lLrg.gif

dynamic compression is the ONLY compression the engine ever sees or deals with, it measure compression from the time both valves seal the chamber,and that is always lower simply because the valves always seat after the piston is already moving upwards on the compression stroke.
crane119671.png

if we look at the crane cam I linked earlier you see the valves seat at about 75 degrees after bottom dead center

RELATED INFO YOU MIGHT NEED
viewtopic.php?f=55&t=2718&p=41142&hilit=octane+calculate#p41142

viewtopic.php?f=52&t=4299
 
viewtopic.php?f=56&t=495
How do you judge the i.d of a pipe?

3" o.d = 2.87" diam. inside
2.75 o.d = 2.62"diam. inside
2.5 o.d = 2.37" diam. inside
2.25 o.d = 2.12" diam. inside
a bit of math shows a single 3" exhaust tends to become restrictive at the 320-340 hp level, that doesn,t mean you can,t make more hp, but it certainly makes it more difficult

General exhaust pipe air-flow is about 115 CFM per square Inch.
an engine usually requires approximately 2.257 cubic feet per minute per horsepower to maximize intake flow and exhaust flow at about 115 cfm per square inch


so assuming your building a 500 hp engine / 2 (divided by 2 as there's normally two header collectors on a v8) we have 250hp per header collector, (open header collectors) multiply that by 2.257 cfm and you see you need 565 cfm and divide that by 115/square inches and we see we need a 4.9 square inch minimum exhaust collector pipe, per side (open header collectors).
its a rule of thumb or rough guide on the expected combined potential max exhaust port flow rates of the exhaust primarys, taken from an observed average of hundreds of recorded dyno results, and not taking into account any flow loss or restriction,and calculating some heat expansion ,its basically worthless except as a way to figuring what size exhaust pipe size thats likely to work, or what size will be restrictive to flow
tubingsizeversusarea.jpg


as a cross check 500hp /8=1129/8=142 hp per header primary , 2.257 x 142/115=2.76 sq inches 0r a header primary a bit larger than 1 3/4 and smaller than 2" or a 1 7/8 to maximize peak hp, per header primary, but keep in mind you'll spend most of your time below peak rpms so a slightly smaller 1 3/4" primary on a street strip engine that sacrifices a bit of peak hp for better mid rpm torque makes sense, and once you install longer exhaust pipes and mufflers you'll need to steep up the exhaust pipe size cross section past the header collectors or they will tend to be restrictive at the minimum size the formula predicts

btw A LOT of guys that have an engine combo that seems to nose over or loose power rapidly at 4500rpm -5000rpm, and blame it on the cam, eventually find out its never been the cam, or bad valve springs or the carb, but, its a restricted exhaust system that's caused the power to fall off as the rpms build up, that's one reason Ive said many times you need to go back to basics and tune up your current combo and find out what the current restrictions are before throwing parts and cash at a car hoping to improve performance!, you can,t hope to make things better until you've removed the weak links from the chain, as they say
 
Sometimes we have to live with compromises- the exhaust currently is one of them for me. I haven't been disappointed with the performance of the 350 but can see this as limiting as the displacement increases- down the road perhaps. But I do understand what you are saying- I favor stainless and Stainless Works has a nice set of long tubes but I choked on the $1300 price and they way they are routed. Have to pay for the new engine first. To be honest- I'll be coming up short on that 500hp number, likely by 100hp I'm being realistic about budget, component longetivity, fueling costs, usage, talked to the engine guy today briefly- should be interesting what he puses as he admitted that he favors high compression, I had to remind him of the application, he also said the heads were limited which focussed him on torque production instead.

My Edelbrock HiFlo TPI was fairly sorted and EBL is OK to work with- one wide band manufacturer here is 14point7 I just bought his Spartan unit- unreal how small it is, a step up I hope from the LC1.
 
im sorry i read this thread twice and i dont understand how exactly you feel the current setup is underperforming? is it running out of breath early? does it just not make torque?

also... for torque... i think the cam should be about 45 degrees overlap on the 350 and a 106 LSA which should put you at 257* duration on the intake side... because of the need for towing torque and the improved exhaust flow on the AFR vortecs i dont think you need a split cam with a long exhaust duration since that only seems to push power up the rpm band (all else being equal)
 
No, actually I would have been happy not to touch the engine- mechanical issues. So I pulled it and am waiting on a full report on condition, needs one bank decked to true up both sides for sure. So am considering stroking.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_1732.JPG
    IMG_1732.JPG
    726.7 KB · Views: 36
  • IMG_1733.JPG
    IMG_1733.JPG
    1 MB · Views: 36
  • IMG_1734.JPG
    IMG_1734.JPG
    505.4 KB · Views: 36
typically on these forums resizing the image to 800 pixels wide makes em fit nice....
 

Attachments

  • IMG_1732.JPG
    IMG_1732.JPG
    297.5 KB · Views: 35
  • IMG_1733.JPG
    IMG_1733.JPG
    560.1 KB · Views: 35
  • IMG_1734.JPG
    IMG_1734.JPG
    246.4 KB · Views: 35
Philly,
you brought up an interesting point about cam styles- I was interested in the single pattern but kind of gave up on it since the split pattern is so overwhelmingly popular. As I read some articles on it- to me it was mostly in how well the actual head exhaust port performed but people included the exhaust system in their choice. I might have understood that wrong.
 
HERES TWO RELATED BITS OF INFO, BUT KEEP IN MIND THE LONGER EXHAUST DURATION CAM TIMING WAS DESIGNED IN MANY CASES,TO HELP OVERCOME A RESTRICTIVE EXHAUST FLOW THAT USING MUFFLERS AND SMALL EXHAUST PIPES ON A STREET CAR OFTEN FORCE THE ENGINE TO WORK WITH
ISKY Tech Tip - 2003

Longer Exhaust Duration: Is this really necessary?

Most stock camshafts from American production V8, V6 and 4 cylinder engines manufactured today are ground with the longer exhaust lobe duration. Or, another way of looking at this is that they are ground with shorter intake durations! The former embraces the viewpoint that either the Exhaust Ports or Exhaust Pipe system is somewhat restrictive, and is in need of an assist. The latter suggests that the intake system is rather efficient and cam timing can be trimmed back a bit with out much sacrifice in power, in order to maximize throttle response and cruising efficiency.

Take your pick here. There is no absolutely correct viewpoint - because both are probably true! In a stock engine running at conservative RPM levels, for the sake of overall efficiency, fuel economy and a quiet smooth running engine, this staggering of intake and exhaust duration is quite common and appropriate.

However, High Performance is another thing entirely. Change one factor, let's say in this case, the exhaust system (installing headers and larger pipes) and you have just negated in most cases, the need for that longer exhaust lobe. Now couple this change with a different intake system and camshaft and you have really scrambled the equation. But, wait just a moment. Why is it that so many people (racers & cam grinders alike) insist on running a cam with longer exhaust duration regardless of what equipment is employed? The answer is "habit". Most of them have been somewhat successful in doing it their way and will probably never change unless virtually forced by circumstances to do so.

Before we go any further however let's review what it actually is we are trying to do with an engine when we attempt to make more power. Our best result comes when we are cognizant of the fact that an engine is basically an air pump. We pump it in and out (although in a different form) and we have problems when one side or the other is restricted. Balance or the equilibrium or flow should be our objective, unless of course we are not trying to make more horsepower!

Example #1 (Oval track racing) Here, I have often observed that the most experienced drivers are those who are most likely to run a single pattern (equal on intake and exhaust duration) cam. Why? Because such cams always, I repeat always make more torque! These veterans have a more educated foot and greater experience in feathering the throttle in the corners. They can therefore, utilize the benefit of added torque, in the lower to mid RPM range, to their advantage.

Their counterparts, the younger drivers on the circuit, generally are not as experienced and may at times actually get "crossed up" in the corners especially with a lighter car or when they are learning the ropes. In their case, a longer exhaust duration is often the more appropriate choice. It will often help them to drive better, more "flat footed" if you will, without consequence. But please for the sake of accuracy, let us be truthful. The benefit comes from an actual bleeding off of low to mid range torque, which is always what happens when Exh. Duration is lengthened, not from any improvement. The improvement, (if any) would come because of an improvement in scavenging at the extreme upper end of the power curve and would usually be marginal at best. Yet the so-called "extra power" potential of a longer Exh. Duration cam is most often why they are touted - power most people are backing away from at the end of the strait away!

Example #2 (Drag Racing) At the drag strip it's a little different and I feel more honest. Here, racers have long enjoyed longer exhaust and longer durations across the board (If I may add specifically for the purpose of "killing" low-end torque) to keep the tires from too easily breaking lose. This has been successful and sometimes actually results in a slight increase in top end power - something you can actually use in drag racing since it is a full throttle endeavor through the lights. Keep in mind here though, it's quite possible that a longer duration cam overall would have done just as well or better. In other words if you needed that longer exhaust for top end, perhaps the intake could have benefited from such a lengthening as well.

One of my favorite expressions is how "The Drag Racing mentality has infiltrated the ranks of Oval Track". Many have crossed over and made the switch in the past 10-15 years and some have brought their preconceived notions about how to cam an engine with them. A few may actually read these concepts and if they do so will at least come away with a better understanding of what they are doing. On the other hand they also could find that this information might actually help their cars to run just a bit faster!

Note: Readers may find Camfather Ed Iskenderian's Top Tuners Tip #33 "Can an Exhaust System Over-Scavenge the Combustion Chambers" to be a relevant precursor.

back to top



Tech Tip - 2004

Intake Restriction and Over Scavenging: "Waste not...Want not!"

It is certainly an over simplification to make the statement "that which is not wasted, should be inducted". However, in the case of restricted intake systems and in particular 2-BBL carb rules, it is not far off the mark. Engines with such restrictions are "choked off" to the point where they will not run much past 6500 RPM (if even that high) without dropping off sharply in power. You might have trouble running very fast yourself if someone had your windpipe choked down to say 50 or 60% of it's normal capacity. Under such conditions, would you volunteer to give blood at the Red Cross? Of course not, but without knowing so, racers often do the equivalent with their engines by running a camshaft better suited for a 4-BBL class! How So?

If you'll recall in last months tech tip: "Longer Exhaust Duration: Is This Really Necessary?" I discussed how, through habit, many racers and cam grinders alike are predisposed to running camshafts with longer exhaust durations, whether they need to or not! Well, in the case of restricted intake applications, if there was ever a situation in which you'd want to avoid the longer exhaust "trap" it's here! Especially the 8, 10, 12 or even longer degree spreads, I often discover people employing.

Use such a cam at you own risk - and don't be surprised to find that your exhaust temperatures are unusually high. Your headers in fact may even glow cherry red. There is a very good reason for this. Raw (unburned) fuel is burning "late" or in the pipe (header/manifold). You may have a good equilibrium of flow going here but there is just one problem. Much of what should be inducted into the cylinder is being scavenged out the exhaust! You see, although back pressure in an exhaust system can be restrictive, the only thing that could be even worse is a reduction of it to the point where you are now, in effect pulling a vacuum. In the case of an intake restriction, very slight back pressure is preferable to avoid "over scavenging".

Yes, Yes I know. You are probably thinking "what's wrong with a little scavenging?". Well, nothing if you can afford it. But with intake restrictions (either small 2-BBL carbs and/or restrictor plates) you must be very careful. You already have reduced intake potential and therefore simply cannot be cavalier about valve overlap and scavenging or you'll be way down on power and have those nice bright cherry red pipes to show for it! Case in Point: One racer who called me was in this exact situation and was running, not surprisingly, a 14 Degree longer exhaust duration. It was Friday afternoon and he needed a cam the next day for the last "points race" of the season and UPS had already picked up at Isky. "Too Bad" I said, "You don't have a set of those low ratio break-in rocker arms because they could really help in this case". " I do have some" he said "but they are only 1.2:1 ratio - is that okay?" I told him to use them (on his exhaust valves only of course) and he finished the race 2nd having come from the back of the pack. Later we made him the right cam so he could avoid this make shift approach.

Unfortunately, the symptoms are not always as obvious as in this case to allow for a speedy diagnosis. Also, it's not only longer exhaust duration that causes the problem. Although it is usually the primary offender, it is often coupled with too close a lobe separation angle of say 104 Degrees. A widening to 106 Degrees or preferably 108 Degrees (some go even wider) is usually prudent.

I am not absolutely dead set against a slightly longer exhaust duration in these cases as a 2-4 Degree longer exhaust lobe is permissible under some circumstances (if your running a completely stock exhaust system including mufflers for example). Each case is different, depending upon the equipment employed. I might even recommend shorter exhaust duration to some; if I feel they have "overdone" their exhaust ports and or exhaust system a bit. What matters is the end result and if you're out of balance on one side simply employ what I call the "Great Law of Compensation" to bring you back to that equilibrium of flow.

So, how can you tell if you may need to make some of these changes in your camshaft? Well, short of trying a lower exhaust rocker arm ratio, you can increase exhaust valve lash .004" - .008" temporarily to see if there is any improvement. You can also try and increase restriction (smaller headers or pipes, or in the case of open headers a longer collector) and simply observe the results. Remember, "One test is worth a thousand expert opinions". Keep this old axiom in your "tool box" and you'll be ahead of the game. How do you think Smokey's shop got to be "The best Damn Garage in Town" anyway? Yes, he had those country smarts, but his experiences in racing and his willingness to test are legendary!

back to top
 
yep an appropriate header is a major factor, to include collector length. the negaive pressure or vacuum wave created by exhaust pulses provides far more suction on the intake port than the actual cylinder going down on the intake stroke.... think about it, the valve are open, as the piston goes down, yea theres some suction, but not really as it isnt a sealed cylinder... its the exhaust that does most of the work here, on properly tuned exhaust with the proper valve events air and fuel will be pulled through your intake port at over 80 mph... thats the velocity everyone talks about when they talk about making ppower. as far as popularity goes... forget whats popular. hell you could even forget the most popular companies in the camshaft game right now. that shits all snake oil. do some reading here on grumpysperformance, some simple math, and find yourself the RIGHT cam for your build.

the right cam costs just as much as the wrong cam.
 
the right cam costs just as much as the wrong cam. Too right....the cam in the 350 makes good power- the manufacturer Ed Curtis later admitted that it would be noisy, I don't go for that.

I try to stay away from Comp, and I don't really want to deal with the expensive boutique flavour of the month either- not that I'm cheap but I would rather pay for go and not 'show', Throw some names at me as I'm not in the industry- looking for lobes easy on the valve train, chevies have been around forever and they like what they like, I'm sure there have been many advances over the years in fluid dynamics, modeling, etc but I don't need to pay for bleeding edge bandwagon.

Interesting, I sent Mike Jones a request for cam- more info on here that what I supplied him. $450 for billet cam (? better than cast), I just missed that Crane 109671 on Amazon for $300 wasn't sure at the time but the more I look at it the more I like it- just wonder at the quality these days.
Cam# LT1, HR69340-70340-114 268/272 @.006" 220/224 @.050" 142/146 @.200" .510"/.510" Valve Lift w/1.5 rockers 114 LSA
I was conferring with a retired top tier engine builder some time ago and he like 108 lope separation for the 383, but this would be a carb app in nascar or some 500 wot racing I think.

I asked about a 220/220 510/510 at 110 but he said the cylinder temps might be a problem for compression vs octane.

Agreed- lot of reading to do.
 
i think isky, crower, and crane are really big enough companies to give you competitive technology however small enough to give you great pricing. and with 45* overlap and a 106 LSA you arent in any race car territory its 257* advertised duration not @.050 or anything like that. it should have a nice rumble in the idle and should still work with vaccum assist. this is all for the 350cid motor tho.
 
For Longevity with Soft Cam Lobes Call ISKY CAMS
OR CRANE CAMS.

Most Don't know how good Isky Cams are till you try one, install, degee it in.
Ultra Precision Ground.
Actual IVO, IVC, EVO, &EVC Timing events @.020" & .050" ARE DEAD NUTS ON.
And do they ever make torque & HP.
WIDE USABLE POWER BAND.

COMP CAMS WENT TO HELL.

CRANE IS A LEGENDARY COMPANY & BACK.
GOOD CHOICE TOO.
 
the only thing i would call comp for is maybe if i want a 4 pattern cam ground to my specifications. but that to me is like a belt drive timing system... big$$$ bells and whistles
 
The 280 Magnum was a Great cam for the Smog era 1974 455 Pontiac V8 I had in the GP.
I spun a Main bearing eventual. I didn't build the short block.
Someone Took another #2 Main cap & Stamped it themselves by hand.
All Poncho V8 engines had Casted in Designated main caps from Factory.
I was bummed Phil.

So I took the 403, set in the car. Raised engine 4 inches, figured out motor mounts.

I had a Comp Cams P290B6 grind I used in the TA for years.
255/266 @.050" on a 106 Average of Intake & Ex.
I ran it at 104. Chain stretched to 106-107 after 500 miles.
Nice Cam.

Then Ran ISKY. Never go back to Comp.
At least 40-50 Ft/lbs torque everywhere.
 
Back
Top