Guest bigjim240z Posted July 4, 2002 Share Posted July 4, 2002 ok..i have a 4 bolt 350 block, std bore, flat top hyperutetic pistons with the usual 4 valve reliefs, stock rods, crane 274 cam .214/224 dur @ 050 with .465 lift, roller timing chain, stock 64 cc heads with 202-194 valves, 1.6 rockers, screw in studs with guide plates, edelbrock performer intake, q jet carb(for now) and block hugger headers. will this combo get me at least 300 hp?..i hope it will be worth a little more but if not it will have to do..any feed back is helpful and appreciated..thanks bigjim Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Anonymous Posted July 4, 2002 Share Posted July 4, 2002 Your Crane Cam specs sounds like the Edelbrock Performer cam profile since you have the Performer manifold. Sounds like one very reliable combination from idle to 5500 RPM with a little extra compression to boot(10 to 1).You are probably tipping the scales sat 300 horse @ 5000 RPM and around 370 pounds of torque@3500 RPM. I do not know if a 600 CFM or larger Holley or Edelbrock 4 barrell would be improvement over the current carb.Do not take this as gospel abuot my guestimation but I consider your combo ideal (ie reliable) except for the carburator.I do not see any HP improvements without cam, manifold and carburator changes.It seems a member by the name Lockjaw was running specs thru a computer program to come up with HP but it seems a lot of folks are absent these days.Vacation?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Anonymous Posted July 4, 2002 Share Posted July 4, 2002 I think it'll put out a bit more, maybe 350hp by my own buttdyno 2002 Grumpy would be the guy to tell you for sure, but I'd say you have 300 hp easily and then some. Regards, Lone Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest greimann Posted July 4, 2002 Share Posted July 4, 2002 A couple of things need clairfication before I can pump the figure into DD2000. You say it is a Crane 274 cam, but the only info I can find on that cam shows 218/218 @.050 with .450 lift. Do you have the cam card with the .050 timing figures: IVO, IVC, EVO, EVC? Or a Crane part number such as 110171? Also you say your exhaust valve is 1.94. Do you mean 1.60? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bigjim240z Posted July 4, 2002 Share Posted July 4, 2002 i got the specs off the box...its a crane 274.i wish i had the box in front of me....just give me a ball park figure with your cam specs you found..thanks Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Anonymous Posted July 4, 2002 Share Posted July 4, 2002 I just noticed that too now that you mention it, I'm sure he means 1.60 exhaust, 1.94 would put the exhaust valve squarely into the intake at least as far as every chevy head I've seen, 202's barely clear the 1.6 exhaust valve as it is with only a small margin between them. Regards, Lone Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest greimann Posted July 4, 2002 Share Posted July 4, 2002 According to the computer: A cam with: 214 / 224 @ 050 duration .442 / .465 lift 112 deg lobe separation angle = 342 hp @ 5500 rpm and 381 lb-ft torque @3500 The Crane 274 H06 cam specs out at: 218 / 218 @.050 duration .450 / .450 lift 106 lobe separation angle = 342 hp @ 5500 and 373 lb-ft torque @4000 Notice that both cams have about the same peak power, but a key difference in the lobe separation angle will make a huge difference in the behavior at idle and low RPM. This is something the computer cannot model and comes from knowing cams and how they behave. The first cam has 112 deg LSA and combined with the given timing, will idle very nicely, not as smooth as a stock cam, but with a slight, slight lope. It is, in my opinion, an excellent choice for a daily,street driven car. The second cam has a 106 LSA and even at the conservative timing figures given will lope and shake like a Harley at idle. Low RPM performance will be poor until the revs come up and the motor "comes on the cam". This is not a good choice for a street motor. For further reading on this topic, pick up Motorbooks International, "How to Build and Modify Chevrolet Small-Block V-8 Camshafts and Valvetrains" by David Vizard. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Anonymous Posted July 4, 2002 Share Posted July 4, 2002 Interesting result. I would have expected the tighter base circle of 106 would have created a bit more low end torque, I'm guessing it has to do with the split duration cam and the exhaust being alot wilder. Isky for one is kind of opposed to split duration cams at least according to some stuff on they're web site (I'm assuming this is for non-roller cams, split duration seems to be used alot in later model roller cams for the TPI's and LT1's for example I think). Regards, Lone ps: Any cam close to 225 degs at .050 truly is about the extent of a true streetable cam, you may get by with more and live with it, but below 2500 rpms its going to be softer than an ant dancing on cotton IMHO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Anonymous Posted July 5, 2002 Share Posted July 5, 2002 Thanx Grieman ,,Settled a few questions on my part since I have another project 350 that I believe has 1.94/1.60 large chamber heads (70 cc)that I want to put a performer manifold and 600 CFM carb plus a 204/214 cam but now considering a 214/224. The motor is tight but needs a rear main seal. What HP would this bring? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Anonymous Posted July 5, 2002 Share Posted July 5, 2002 Question for Greimann???? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DavyZ Posted July 5, 2002 Share Posted July 5, 2002 Originally posted by Greimann:According to the computer: A cam with: 214 / 224 @ 050 duration .442 / .465 lift 112 deg lobe separation angle = 342 hp @ 5500 rpm and 381 lb-ft torque @3500 Oh goodie, this is the same cam that I installed in the V8 to get decent streetability and good power on a mild SBC. Thanks for the info Greimann. Lone you mentioned the "Dynobutt." Is that a rather large mechanical device or what??? Sorry, could not resist... Davy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest greimann Posted July 5, 2002 Share Posted July 5, 2002 Ok Tomahawk Z, here is your dyno sheet: http://home.earthlink.net/~dvgreimann/largeimages/z8tomahawk1.pdf The cams are patterned after the Edelbrock performer (204/214) and the Summit #1103 (214/224) Note that I assumed several things: Valves are typically paired in 2.02 / 1.60 or 1.94 / 1.50 sizes, So I assumed the latter. I assumed flat top pistons with the 70cc combustion chambers you get about 9.6 compression ratio. Also assumed dual plane manifolds and shorty headers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Anonymous Posted July 5, 2002 Share Posted July 5, 2002 Originally posted by DavyZ: quote: Originally posted by Greimann: According to the computer: A cam with: 214 / 224 @ 050 duration .442 / .465 lift 112 deg lobe separation angle = 342 hp @ 5500 rpm and 381 lb-ft torque @3500 Lone you mentioned the "Dynobutt." Is that a rather large mechanical device or what??? It used to be, I calibrated it alot and now its much more accurate and doesn't take as much room in the seat as it used to... , Lone Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Anonymous Posted July 6, 2002 Share Posted July 6, 2002 Greimann! Thanx, I saved and printed up the specs. I would be satisfied with any thing in the neighborhood of 300 HP.It is absolutely amazing how much knowledge and information is shared on this site.I learn something new almost daily. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.