FE Power Forums
FE Power Forums => FE Technical Forum => Topic started by: bsprowl on September 18, 2026, 11:55:48 AM
-
I think this cam was used on the Cougar '68 427s.
Is it much of a step up from the CJ cam C60Z-B?
I haven't seen much about it.
-
During all the 428cj discussions IIRC it was Dennis K who mentioned the C8AX-C was the goal for the 427/390hp but it either wouldnt pass smog or drivability. So the good old 390gt/428cj cam was used instead.
C8AX-C is listed as "optional" for the 428CJ LOL but that was just to make it NHRA Stock legal.
Same grind is the stock 70-71 429CJ cam. A little rumpier than the 428CJ cam but liveable even in winter BTDT.
Per Muscle Parts it adds 13-15hp vs the 270-290 428CJ cam, and I believe that having run a couple of em.
C8AX-C is 220-230-116 at .050, Ken at Oregon used to like to grind about 220-230-112 for a little more kick. And a rougher idle.
-
Is it much of a step up from the CJ cam C60Z-B?
I haven't seen much about it.
For me, it was too big of a step up from the CJ cam. Too much low rpm loss of torque, in my #4160 1966 Galaxie 428 C6, with a stock converter.
-
I installed the C8AX-C in my '70 Shelby GT-500 for a short time, but it was difficult to stop due to low manifold vacuum at idle and low speeds. Definitely a step up from stock, but not a daily driver type. Joe-JDC
-
It won't give you more vacuum but, would make it a much better cam if you advance it 6° (at least 4) and you could add a electric vacuum pump to the system for the brakes.