Cam Choices

[My427stang]

It might be a good thing if the Edelbrock's chambers are bigger than advertised in this case.  It depends on how all the parts stack up, but it might be nice to have lower than 9.8:1 compression given the combo.

Picking a cam based on a compression ratio is the backwards way of doing it, in my opinion.  The cam should be picked first, based on other factors, then compression ratio selected or massaged.  I understand that in real life it doesn't always work that neatly.

JMO,

paulie

No doubt, but it works out the same either way in this instance, because the combo supports the use and he doesn't have a cam yet.  We are just backing into it.

I agree though, and I almost guarantee that that engine is below 9.8, unless he zero decks and cuts the heads.  In the end, this looks like a good combination of parts for the desired use.  With off the shelf 445 parts, it'd likely have a little bit too much compression, something I fought with trying to build a lowish-budget Probe stroker for my 4x4

If I didn't beat the drum I thought I beat, let say it to Dan one more time.  I showed you a guess that is likely close, if you want to build a high end build, measure everything or pay someone to measure everything.  ALL of those numbers I threw out were a guess for example only.

[ScotiaFE]

Lets make a WAG that Dan does not have a ready use competent machine shop that he can just drop off the
parts and pickup when done and swipe the CC.

Here is another cheapo way to get the same as a machine shop.
Head CC.
Get a 100 cc syringe from the drug store for 5 or 6 bucks and CC the heads on the kitchen table.
You will need a piece of plastic and a drill. The plastic must cover the head chamber.
Drill a hole in the plastic to squirt the water from the syringe in.
Smear a bit of vaseline on the head to create a seal and fill up the chamber with water from the syringe.
Head CC.

[My427stang]

Howie, no doubt at all in both of your recommendations, but that is a big WAG that he is going to build a nice stroker without a good machine shop

If not boring he needs to check taper, even if boring needs to  check decks,  check main alignment, etc,  if he doesn't have that machine shop support, he is spending a lot of money for something that could turn out less than optimal or give him issues.

That being said, something like cc-ing the heads, I do like that advice, its cheap and easy, and will save him the labor compared to paying the shop.

Checking deck height is fine too, but if the block hasn't been square decked, he will likely just get information that won't do him much good and take him a while.  Most old FEs are a little crooked, and the machine shop should fix that and BTW won't use his measurements anyway, if not and he leaves it, again, it's a lot of money to spend for extra cubes without ensuring it's done right.  I agree it will teach him something, but in the end, it still requires a good machine shop to fix

I'll stop preaching your advice is good as always, but for a first build, I'd sure recommend getting rid of a bunch of measurement variables, there is enough to learn without having to worry about stuff like that

[ChiefDanGeorge]

Let's say the deck is stock and is square, would I still need to have it cut and if so why?

I have beat this drum before, but the best bet is to take the block to the machine shop and tell them what deck height you want.  My hunch is that Barry's setup likes 10.155, but I am not sure without seeing compression height.  If you take the block to the machine shop and tell them, square the decks at 10.160 or 10.155, then you know they are right. 

Measuring in the hole is good for calculating, but if you haven't bored the block, or if the block needs main and deck work, numbers change.

Unfortunately, I still can't provide specifics for a recommendation.  Barry makes a few different kits for the 4.125 crank with different pistons and I have no idea what the compression height and dish size is with his kits.  I can guess though, but it is a guess and should be treated as one.

As an educated WAG....using a 10.160 deck height (ends up .010 below) and a 17cc dish with a 74 cc chamber (assuming Edels are a little big) and a 1020 gasket, you end up at 9.55:1  static.   Seeing these numbers and knowing the difficulty in keeping a 4.25 stroke below 10:1, I can see why he recommended this for your use.

Seeing those numbers, and assuming they are right (big assumption).  You could run as small as a Comp 268H to make some serious torque with decent quench and DCR at 8.02

However, this is all bench racing.  Some of many tweaks in blue printing come from actual deck clearance, actually measuring the heads, having the exact number for the piston dish or d-cup, and choosing the correct gasket to get where you want to be. 

So in the end, looks like you are real close and looks like Barry steered you right.    If it was my first motor, I'd ask Barry, "what should I tell the machinist to cut the decks to?  and "what cam have you had good experience with"     I'll also add if this is your first one, I'd likely go hydraulic roller, and that will likely enjoy slightly more advertised duration, and a little more compression (zero deck and/or thinner or smaller bore head gasket)

[RJP]

This is getting way more complicated for a 1st time engine builder than it needs to be. The OP is not building a race engine that needs to extract every ounce of power from it.  A street engine that will only see WOT about 1% of it's entire life leaves a much wider window for a "close" cam selection. I think I could find no less than 10-12 cams from all the prominent cam grinders that would work quite well for this application. Does it really make that much difference if one cam makes 5 or 6 HP more than another cam? Or if the peak torque is at 3400 rpm vs. 3600 rpm? Now don't get me wrong, I do firmly believe in custom ground cams for applications that truly needs it. The last custom cam I bought was for my twin turbo 460, it was done by Comp using their recommendations for turbocharged engines and using the perimeters I gave them. It has more intake duration [248 deg]  than exhaust [236 deg] ground on 114deg lobe centers. Not exactly the type of cam used in a N/A application. This cam allows the engine to idle smoothly at 750-800 rpm, start building boost at about 3K rpm and makes power and pulls hard to 7200rpm. On the other end of the spectrum I use an OLD, original 1962 406 solid lifter cam in my 4200lb 66 428 Galaxie LTD, it too runs well, idles smooth with the typical solid lifter clatter and pulls hard to about 54-5500, delivers about 15.5-16 mpg/hiway  In my previous post I recommended a cam that I have personal experience with. That cam, although may not be absolutely perfect for him, his car and his application I felt it would be close without over thinking and further muddling this 1st time builder's mind. I also went against my personal policy of not recommending a cam as cam selection is purely subjective. IOW what works good for one may not work good for another based on what is important to them. Some like a lumpy idle others like a smooth idle. Some want it to pull hard to 7K, others don't care if it makes power beyond 5K. Nice discussion here but can be a bit confusing and over thought. JMO     

[ChiefDanGeorge]

I am learning there are more variables in play from block to head than I had any previous idea of.
My thoughts with a cam is if I purchase that cool timing gear cover from Jay, if my first cam choice is not the best, I can swap it out fairly easily. I appreciate your initial suggestion have looked those up.

I also don't want to overlook something when I put this together, so while I have a bit of info overload now, at least I know some areas I was unaware of before.

I really do appreciate all the info!

This is getting way more complicated for a 1st time engine builder than it needs to be. The OP is not building a race engine that needs to extract every ounce of power from it.  A street engine that will only see WOT about 1% of it's entire life leaves a much wider window for a "close" cam selection. I think I could find no less than 10-12 cams from all the prominent cam grinders that would work quite well for this application. Does it really make that much difference if one cam makes 5 or 6 HP more than another cam? Or if the peak torque is at 3400 rpm vs. 3600 rpm? Now don't get me wrong, I do firmly believe in custom ground cams for applications that truly needs it. The last custom cam I bought was for my twin turbo 460, it was done by Comp using their recommendations for turbocharged engines and using the perimeters I gave them. It has more intake duration [248 deg]  than exhaust [236 deg] ground on 114deg lobe centers. Not exactly the type of cam used in a N/A application. This cam allows the engine to idle smoothly at 750-800 rpm, start building boost at about 3K rpm and makes power and pulls hard to 7200rpm. On the other end of the spectrum I use an OLD, original 1962 406 solid lifter cam in my 4200lb 66 428 Galaxie LTD, it too runs well, idles smooth with the typical solid lifter clatter and pulls hard to about 54-5500, delivers about 15.5-16 mpg/hiway  In my previous post I recommended a cam that I have personal experience with. That cam, although may not be absolutely perfect for him, his car and his application I felt it would be close without over thinking and further muddling this 1st time builder's mind. I also went against my personal policy of not recommending a cam as cam selection is purely subjective. IOW what works good for one may not work good for another based on what is important to them. Some like a lumpy idle others like a smooth idle. Some want it to pull hard to 7K, others don't care if it makes power beyond 5K. Nice discussion here but can be a bit confusing and over thought. JMO   

[RJP]

Don't get me wrong, too much info is always better than not enough info. But as a 1st time engine builder [We ALL started somewhere] trying to cram all this info into your head will just lead to overload as you cited in your last post. As Ross pointed out FE block decks are generally crooked and/or sloped in relation to the crank centerline. it is always a good idea to deck the block if for nothing else to assure a good gasket seal. But since this is being done anyway you may as well gain the most benefit from decking the block, that means zeroing the piston comp. distance to .005" to .000" in the hole. I wouldn't worry too much about that "cool" timing gear cover unless you plan on doing a lot of cam timing adjustments and with a proper cam selection you should not need multiple  timing adjustments unless you are really bored and are looking for something to do. Besides, how are you going to see any benefit of a timing adjustment on a strictly street engine. If you are racing it will show up in a time slip for better or worse but it'll only be in hundreds or thousands of a second and that way beyond "Butt-O-Meter" distinguishable.

[My427stang]

Well, I certainly agree with Bob that this sounds too difficult, but really the info he needs is not very difficult to get.  It takes longer to type this stuff than have it done.  Please don't get discouraged, you are bringing up good things and stand to have an awesome engine, just try to be specific and purposeful with your build.

This is an aftermarket crank, aftermarket rods, and pistons that are the quality of the race stuff of 15 years ago.  Heck, probably even better stuff.  Because it isn't cheap stuff, spending 250-300 to square deck and check main alignment on top of the balancing is money well spent.  Heck, this is a medium riser alum-headed 10:1 430-ish inch motor, that's what dreams were made of in the 60s and 70s!

If it was a Speed-pro equipped 396 stock build, or a rering, I'd say slap a cam in it and have a blast, but this motor is made of good parts.  it's worth a little blueprinting.

I agree completely with Bob, I would NOT buy a fancy timing chain or cover, not because they aren't awesome, they are, but with your build, all it takes is a little info to pick a cam and then you will never touch it again.   Instead, I would be darned certain I knew exactly what my parts were and I would machine the block so I knew it would be both reliable and at the specs the parts were designed for.  Like I said, lots to type and talk about, but it's really just knowing what you have for parts and doing a good prep of the block. 

[ScotiaFE]

Lots of good info for you Dan.

I'm one of those Speed Pro slap them together have blast kind of hacks
so take that fwiw. 

[plovett]

Not trying to muddy the waters more, but here is a cam I think might work good.

http://www.crower.com/camshafts/ford-332-428-compu-pro-hydraulic-cam-276-hdp.html

It has less split than the Crane HMV272.  I don't like 12 degrees of split even if exhaust manifolds are used.   This one has some split at 6 degrees, but not as much.  It has a tad more intake lift and a bit less exhaust lift.  It should be slightly better at low-mid rpms, yet it has enough advertised duration to stay out of trouble with the likely compression ratio range, and it should have good octane tolerance.

At the forefront of my mind is we're talking about an ~4300 lb. car with 3.00 gears and I think stock convertor.   

You could also get the Crane cam in a single pattern style.  It has a little tighter lobe separation angle at 110 degress.   The Energizer 272.  Crane has it or Summit has it, as well.  I am guessing the Summit cam is the exact same cam as the Crane, just repackaged and cheaper.

http://www.summitracing.com/parts/sum-1793/overview/make/ford

Just food for thought.

paulie

[RJP]

If it was a Speed-pro equipped 396 stock build, or a rering, I'd say slap a cam in it and have a blast,

If that isn't a signature line I don't know what is.... For the street I'm a Speed-Pro, slap it together and have a blast type of guy too. Street stuff...It ain't rocket science, its just fun.

[plovett]

Some reading that may be relevant:

http://speedtalk.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=29828&hilit=exhaust+manifolds

paulie

[machoneman]

Yes, I'd spend the time "blueprinting" the block, heads, intake and making sure both airflow and clearances are optimized.  Many a cam as noted would work fine. In a street car with mufflers, as RJP mentioned, it will spend the vast majority of time in the lower rpm range while WOT performance will be at minimal time. That said, one would barely notice a cam change or even the effect changing the the cam timing on what's in it.

Funny, made me think of a recent blog I read that had a fellow agonizing over whether to build 4-2-1 merge collectors (think Pro Stock!) , whether to go straight primary tube or stepped primaries, the exact placement of a X-pipe (ala' Dr. Gas) and the optimum size of the pipes out back.

This in a 4,000+ lb. barely re-worked 454 BBC, auto-transmission streeter that would never see a track! Crazy.   

[plovett]

I'm not with you guys who think it's "agonizing" to discuss these things.  It takes almost no energy at all.  Typing or talking or thinking about this stuff takes very little effort.  Even going out in the garage and measuring stuff is not that bad.  Agonizing is an emotional term and I don't think we're at the point being pushed to that level.  I agonize when I have a broken rib (and/or torn intercostal tissue) and 18 year old kids are asking me to keep playing pickup football with them.   I do understand and agree that we may be splitting hairs and talking about making very small gains.  Isn't that why we're here, though? 

So we're not talking about a racecar.  Does it hurt anything to try to optimize it? 

How about some more cam recommendations or questions about the combination/useage?

A big car with high gearing and a moderately sized engine might be a more difficult call than a light car with a huge engine and low gears.

JMO,

paulie

[ScotiaFE]

I agree Paulie.
The subject engine is a big under taking for a novice and he is here for info.
I say pour it on.
Talk, pictures, diagrams, charts, graphs, and smoke signals.
Both ways.
Don't be shy with the camera Dan.
You will only end up with a better engine.