what do you guys think about this cam rec

[BLACK71]

What do you guys think about this one? This is what I got back from bullet cams. All stock 70 340.

GRIND CRA266/266F108+4
DUR @ .050 239/239
LIFT .536/.536
LSA 108
INT C/L 104

THANKS RICHARD
> Cam Type Interest: Solid
> Cam Used For: Street/Strip
> Track Length: 1320
> Class:
> Engine Make: chrysler
> Year: 1970
> Cubic Inch: 340
> Bore: 4.04
> Stroke: 3.31
> Block: factory 340
> Intake Valve Size: 2.02
> Exhaust Valve Size: 1.60
> Rocker Ratio Intake: 1.5
> Rocker Ratio Exhaust: 1.5
> Porting: None
> Compression Ratio: 10.5
> Carbureted Or Injected: Carbureted
> Carbureted CFM: 630
> Number Of Carburetors: 1
> Fuel: Gasoline
> Cast Iron Manifold: Yes
> Vehicle Weight: 3400
> Vehicle Make & Model: dodge challenger
> Transmission Type: Automatic
> Transmission Number Of Gears: 3
> If Automatic:
> Stall Speed: 2500
> Rear Axle Ratio: 3.91
> Tire Height: 27.1
> Tire Width: 10
> Is This A New Combination: No
> Current Cam: Hydraulic
> RPM At Gear Change: 4750
> Where Is Improvement Needed: Everywhere
> Idle Quality Desired: not important

 

[moparleo]

OK I give. What are we supposed to think about? Is this a theoretical engine or a real one ? If it is real, is it running or on a stand being built ? If its built on a stand, ahs it been put on the dyno yet to see how it runs and what it needs for a total package ? Or is it just, Sounds like a cool cam, man.

 

[BLACK71]

Its for the numbers motor in my 340 challenger..have a lifter that went flat so I figured now would be a good time for an upgrade

 

[Chryco Psycho]

Looks OK , lift may cause issues with piston clearance if you do not have valve reliefs & valve guides if they are stock as the retainer may hit the top of the guide , you will need matching springs obviously .
Looks like a decent grind for higher RPM , 110 cl will give it better idle & move the powerband down some

 

[BLACK71]

How hard is it going to be on my valve train...I was in planning on running 273 rockers...is thie gonna beat the snots outta my valves/seats

 

[moparleo]

Do not use the 273 adj rockers. They were not for a performance application. Adjustable rockers are not needed or recommended for a hydraulic cam.

 

[BLACK71]

Its a solid cam

 

[challenger6pak]

Are you changing the manifold or carb? Headers or manifolds? If not, it will work, but you would do better with a smaller cam for overall driving.

 

[moparleo]

Just go with a hydraulic cam. No special parts required, lower maintenance, lower total price, no downside. Just keep it lower than 5k RPM's.

 

[BLACK71]

I want the extra HP I can gain with a solid...the upkeep is no big deal...with no more miles its driven

 

[challenger6pak]

Motor parts work as a package or a team. You may see some increase but not the full potential until you change several things. If you aren't going to change several things....why bother?

 

[BLACK71]

That's kinda like saying why not pull the motor and build a stroker as you won't see maximum performance until you have the most stroke or biggest bore possible...just because I don't want to change the intake or exhaust manifolds doesn't negate the fact that a can can increase what I already have, hence the reason of sending my specs to the cam company so the can recommend a cam to work with the "package" I already have

 

[moparleo]

If you got the cam from the mfg based on the info that you showed us in post #1 , why would you be second guessing the people who made it ? Oh ,and yes the seats will get beat up if they are not already. Hardened seats for unleaded gas didn't happen until 1973. Two routes are induction hardening ( the factory method) and machining and pressing hardened seat inserts into the head. Next to headers, the number one area to make horsepower is the cylinder head. It is normally less expensive to get aftermarket heads that will flow much better than the stock heads than to build up a set of 44 year old heads.

 

[challenger6pak]

just because I don't want to change the intake or exhaust manifolds doesn't negate the fact that a can can increase what I already have, hence the reason of sending my specs to the cam company so the can recommend a cam to work with the "package" I already have

As I said you may see increase but not the full potential. You were asking for opinions.

 

[Challenger340]

IMO,
it will sound cool.... not much else.

 

[moper]

If it's what I think it is - I think it's a mismatch. Overall - a stock engine with 273 rockers is great. No problems there and they will take a lot of abuse as long as the spring pressures are not obscene. But that cam has a tight LSA, high lift, and advanced ICL. None of which to me are really great given the stock engine configuration. If it was me I'd be looking more for an FF lobe in the CTS or CTA configuration and an LSA of 112. The manifolds are not going to help you, so there's no point in going for any real overlap. Just open the exh valve quick and early, and close it before backed-up gasses can dilute the intake charge. Something like the FF271/352 CTA lobe on a 112LSA will give you something similar to the MP .528 but with a bit more under the curve and a faster rate of lift than the F266.
BTW - if your engine ate a lobe you may want to pull it and clean all the iron out of it first.