Cam Grind Suggestions

[blykins]

I like this Howards cam suggested by Frnkeore:

252342-10 CL252342-10 265 265 230 230 .560 .560 110 106 .022 .022 1,13

Is anyone using this cam? Id like to know how the idle and idle vacuum is.

Without doing some measuring, you can't just choose a camshaft that easily. 

What if your CJ heads have been milled to death?  What if your compression ratio ends up at 10.5:1?  The cam up above would never work with something like that. 

No single pattern cams for most Fords.  You're just leaving horsepower on the table.  In some cases, lots of it. 

Here's an example of where I would start the conversation on choosing a cam:

*Application (street, street/strip, drag race, pulling truck, etc.):
*Desired camshaft type (flat tappet, roller):
*Any specific journal diameter or core requirements?:
*Desired peak horsepower rpm (what rpm where peak hp is produced, not shift point):
*Desired idle quality:
*Vacuum brakes?:
*Vacuum rules?:
*Forced induction/Nitrous?:
*Engine Family (Windsor, Cleveland, FE, 385 series, Modular, etc.):
*Bore & Stroke: 
*Rod Length:
*Lifter bore diameter:
*Cylinder head manufacturer and model:
*Valve sizes (stem and head diameter, length if possible):
*Compression ratio:
*Intake manifold:
*Carburetor:
*Transmission:
*Rearend gear:
*Vehicle weight:
*Fuel that you're running: 
*Rocker arm ratio:

That usually gets enough information to get the ball rolling and initiates further conversation on desires/expectations. 

There's several guys on this thread that could spec and sell you a camshaft, I'm not jonesing for business, I'm just saying that you can get in some pretty bad trouble by pointing at a cam in a catalog without knowing exactly what you have.  The compression ratio is a big thing that I have to really stress with my customers.  These engines have been rebuilt, milled, and cut to death over the past 60 years.  You just can't take at face value what you have.  It all needs to be checked out and measured.

In addition to all of that, a solid camshaft will lose duration at the valve due to lash.  Depending on the lobe, you can end up with manners that you're not expecting.  Everything has to be taken into account.

[Rory428]

If by "good idle", you mean fairly stockish, I am very happy with the mild Oregon flat tappet solid that I have in my .030" over 428. It has .528" gross lift, and 228 @ .050 duration. It idles almost like a stock Cobra Jet, pulls strong from idle up to 54-5500 RPM, has the solid lifter "sound" and is very street friendly. In my 4025 pound 59, it has gone 12.5s at 108 MPH thru the mufflers and full tailpipes, and on the dyno, it made 470 HP and 515 ft/lbs of torque. It has a pair of TFS heads, a Performer RPM with a Holley 780 vacuum secondary carb, with iron adjustable rocker arms, a Duraspark distributor and module, with a pair of FPA mid length headers. I am running a wide ratio 4 speed Toploader and 3.50 gears., and it is very driveable in town, and decent on the freeway, although I do change to 2.91 gears for longer freeway trips.

[Hotrodjohn71]

Thank you.

I greatly appreciate and highly value all the advice. I take everything into consideration.

[frnkeore]

I like this Howards cam suggested by Frnkeore:

252342-10 CL252342-10 265 265 230 230 .560 .560 110 106 .022 .022

Is anyone using this cam? Id like to know how the idle and idle vacuum is.

I take it that you don't want to measure all the things that are being suggested and/or you want it ASAP?

If so, this would be a good "safe" shelf type cam with a CR of 9.5 - 9.7 and good pump gas. You can run it at 10/1 if you retard the timing 4° to 112 ICL.

Call Howards and ask for Kirk. Tell him you want the following:

Intake lobe - bf230320 265 230 0.320
Exhaust lobe- bf240337 275 240 0.337
with a LSA of 114 and a ICL of 108

You'll have .030 more valve lift on the ex side so, make sure you account for that, when setting up the springs.

Have them send that cam info to Competition Products (they own Howards) and order it from them. Make sure you get the lifters from them, also. You'll get free shipping that way.

I just ordered a HFT & lifters, last week, it was $360 shipped. Make sure you get their lifters and use high zink engine oil.

[My427stang]

Want it bad...get it bad....

I certainly make no money if the cam is ordered from Brent, but buying without knowing where you are is not how most do it.  That being said, you never know what could have been or what a little change in taper or .200 duration could deliver if you never tried.

[frnkeore]

As I said, It would be a "Shelf" type of cam but, a dam good one for a SFT FE. It would be of the type that would be similar but, much better than the Ford HP era.

[Barry_R]

Want it bad...get it bad....

I certainly make no money if the cam is ordered from Brent, but buying without knowing where you are is not how most do it.  That being said, you never know what could have been or what a little change in taper or .200 duration could deliver if you never tried.

I can agree - and disagree at the same time.  When I was doing the EMC deal I had the "opportunity" to try multiple cams in an engine on dyno.  I think we had three in a single day once.  We were looking at a 3500 or 4000 RPM wide average, so it was not just chasing peaks.  After ordering the "right" cam I would usually end up trying prior year's sticks or alternate ones based on initial results.  It was eye opening to see how some stuff that was drastically different on paper ended up giving startlingly similar numbers for average output.  I think the punch line might be to get as close as you can - and tune from there.  As hot rodders, we all get fixated on horsepower and torque peaks.  The "right" cam decision might - maybe should - be based on expected behavior at throttle positions other than WOT.  That's where the expertise come in to play.

[My427stang]

Want it bad...get it bad....

I certainly make no money if the cam is ordered from Brent, but buying without knowing where you are is not how most do it.  That being said, you never know what could have been or what a little change in taper or .200 duration could deliver if you never tried.

I can agree - and disagree at the same time.  When I was doing the EMC deal I had the "opportunity" to try multiple cams in an engine on dyno.  I think we had three in a single day once.  We were looking at a 3500 or 4000 RPM wide average, so it was not just chasing peaks.  After ordering the "right" cam I would usually end up trying prior year's sticks or alternate ones based on initial results.  It was eye opening to see how some stuff that was drastically different on paper ended up giving startlingly similar numbers for average output.  I think the punch line might be to get as close as you can - and tune from there.  As hot rodders, we all get fixated on horsepower and torque peaks.  The "right" cam decision might - maybe should - be based on expected behavior at throttle positions other than WOT.  That's where the expertise come in to play.

I'd buy that, but you also knew the heads you were running, the compression, valve job, even more importantly the goal of average power was defined, with some experience mixed in.  However, we still don't even know if the original poster wanted or needed truck style idle, or something rowdy, or something in between.  Acceptance of vacuum canister and sound of the 60s made it sound like we were sort of getting there.   

I know you get it, and in general, a 10 degree split is a decent cam for the head, but is 42 degrees of overlap at .020 and 7 at .050 right, then consider lash effects?  I'd want a reason or two to pick something like that with a head that can use some help to pull on the port (especially if the intended use needed it) and I'd want to know compression before I flirted telling a guy it would be happy.

I am solidly in your camp with the comment of picking the cam based on where and how you want it to behave.  I am not a peak guy unless that's the goal and that's rare for me.   I'd recommend "plan the flight, fly the plan", and I wouldn't advise someone to buy parts without digging deeper

[blykins]

Agreed.  42/7 degrees of pre-lash overlap is not a direction I would head with a factory cylinder head.   On a cam that small, you could run that cam on a 109-110 LSA, still make enough vacuum to work a brake booster without issue, and potentially make a lot more average/peak hp/torque because of the extra overlap.

Doesn't matter, we are all just sitting here going back and forth on a combination that no one knows the details on.   We're all just basically practicing our typing/grammar skills.

[My427stang]

Agreed.  42/7 degrees of pre-lash overlap is not a direction I would head with a factory cylinder head.   On a cam that small, you could run that cam on a 109-110 LSA, still make enough vacuum to work a brake booster without issue, and potentially make a lot more average/peak hp/torque because of the extra overlap.

Doesn't matter, we are all just sitting here going back and forth on a combination that no one knows the details on.   We're all just basically practicing our typing/grammar skills.

Indeed!

[frnkeore]

I know you get it, and in general, a 10 degree split is a decent cam for the head, but is 42 degrees of overlap at .020 and 7 at .050 right, then consider lash effects?  I'd want a reason or two to pick something like that with a head that can use some help to pull on the port (especially if the intended use needed it) and I'd want to know compression before I flirted telling a guy it would be happy.

Food for thought:
First, I never said my cam would be optimal, for anything!
But, I believe my cam specs will give better fuel mileage, and higher hp, above above 4k. As well as be a bit better on octane tolerance, up to 10/1 CR using a 4° adjustment.

That's assuming Brent's would be 109 LSA +4° but, he didn't say.

Average hp to 5.8k would be very close.

Cam challenge anyone?

[My427stang]

I know you get it, and in general, a 10 degree split is a decent cam for the head, but is 42 degrees of overlap at .020 and 7 at .050 right, then consider lash effects?  I'd want a reason or two to pick something like that with a head that can use some help to pull on the port (especially if the intended use needed it) and I'd want to know compression before I flirted telling a guy it would be happy.

Food for thought:
First, I never said my cam would be optimal, for anything!
But, I believe my cam specs will give better fuel mileage, and higher hp, above above 4k. As well as be a bit better on octane tolerance, up to 10/1 CR using a 4° adjustment.

That's assuming Brent's would be 109 LSA +4° but, he didn't say.

Average hp to 5.8k would be very close.

Cam challenge anyone?

A person cannot state any of those things you just said without just estimating general behavior based on the few cam specs provided, and that's my point.   We still haven't heard all the details of the use, fuel, gear, etc.  The term "better" cannot be determined without more info.

If the original poster got us even a few of those things on Brent's list, we could have a recommendation building.  If he was close to me, I'd cc the heads, measure deck clearance, at least eyeball the dish, if not measure, then dig in with the guy to see what he intends for the car.  However, there is not enough info to jump to a part number. An hour or two of work and the owner to have exponentially better choices and a real prediction of what the car will do.

If you want to play though, my gut (without almost no information on the engine and use) tells me you are undercamming by a little on lobes, by a lot on LSA, and thinking ICL will offset the peak RPM.  That is indeed how they did it from the factory, but they were hobbled back then.

As far as a cam challenge, I wouldn't touch it with a 10-foot pole, especially with no stated purpose and engine variables.


 

[Hotrodjohn71]

There is so much more to this camshaft decision than I imagined. I am learing alot just reading your responses.
For practical reasons and upon considering the pros and cons I have learned heretofore,  I think I will want to go with a Hydraulic roller lifter cam instead of the pre mentioned solid flat tappet option.

Even though I wanted the sound and feel of a SFT that I had before, I also feel like my preferences can evolve in favor of a possibly better and more durable roller lifter which wont need a break-in and will allow me to not have to keep zddp in the oil.

I think I would rather not go with roller rockers as from my research,  the good reliable kits are very expensive.
 And not altogether sure my cam lift will be over .550 so would I be ok utilizing a stock Ford or Isky stock style adjustable rocker with an appropriate length pushrod with the Hydraulic roller cam?

My driving style these days will not be bracket racing or going to the track too much. I will be driving around town but want to be able to blast down the country roads from time to time.

I realize what you are saying about needing data to evaluate what a good grind would be. Head cc info, and other data.

I will gather that information over the next months as this build (and the car) are in the very preliminary stages. I have a TON of rust repair.

Meanwhile I will be reading and learning more.

[blykins]

You can run any of the factory FE rockers with a hydraulic roller.  With hydraulic roller spring loads, I would run end stands and I prefer to run a solid spacer in between the rockers instead of springs. 

You’ll have to weigh the costs of the items that you’ll need to buy against buying a complete kit.

[Barry_R]

You can run any of the factory FE rockers with a hydraulic roller.  With hydraulic roller spring loads, I would run end stands and I prefer to run a solid spacer in between the rockers instead of springs. 

You’ll have to weigh the costs of the items that you’ll need to buy against buying a complete kit.

Agree 100% with this.  Although I really like roller tip rockers - they effectively uncouple the rocker from the valve tip - makes for better guide life.
First time I did a hydraulic roller with OE nonadjustable rockers it was for a budget conscious stroker, and I was kinda stunned at how well it ran.  Removing that swinging 7/16 bolt (AKA adjuster) from the rocking mass added an easy couple hundred RPM of smooth power to an already known and tested combination.