Hi, i have been looking for a UD cam for a 383 I am helping build. it is'
383 small block all forged eagle bottom end
Probably will use 210CC trickflow aluminum heads that will be ported and hopefully flow 280's. Possibly be using ported 195's however.
10.7-1 compression
1 3/4 headers
2800 stall
Victor Jr. intake
3800 ilb car
Looking for a SOLID FLAT TAPPET CAM
I was hoping for a split duration cam; with about 240 duration at .050. Maybe someting like a 236/240, or a 240/246 duration cam, with mid 500 lift numbers with 1.6 rocker arms. I was looking at the 280/284 but it has too much duration for my likings! any help ist great! I know UDHarold has already posted his number, but one more time would be great!

Don't hold your breath !!!

Harold (UD Harold) is now at Lunati.

1-901-365-0950 Ext. 135

I'll give you a reply tomorrow after work, when I find out how things are going at work.....

UDHarold

UD what happened???? still looking for a cam?

Cody,

I've been fighting the Flu, so I've been a little slow in replies.....

First, what rod length do you have? If it's 5.7" or longer, you need either a small-base-circle cam, or rods made to clear the cam. Please let me know which one it is.

With you converter and car weight, I'd use the SBNF80/NF72-110, 267/275 at .020, 239/47 at .050, .544/.566 valve lift with 1.6s--.016" valve lash hot--, and 110 LSA, 106 ICL. It does not have a Lunati part number yet, so use 40199 for their custom solid cam with TF80/TF72-110 as the grind. It runs about $165.44.

This cam will pull very good from 2500 to 7000, with HP peak around 6200. It will need a good Carter 172-gph mech pump and some 1/2" #8 fuel line.

Let me know if you have more questions....

UDHarold

I still havent figured out why you need 1/2" fuel line, when the needle valves going into the carb or so small? What is the dividing line between 3/8" and 1/2" fuel line? Some people can attain such great performance with 3/8" fuel line ;) but the cams that Harold supposedly designs need much more fuel. Enlighten me :confused:

Bob, there was just such a topic awhile back, do a search and you should find it.

http://www.chevelles.com/forum/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=4;t=017370

I realize that,but still,Ed ran an Ultradyne cam with a 3/8" fuel line,now he's running much more cam and still running 3/8" line with quicker e.t.'s yet...why not leave the stock 3/8" line,just go with a higher volume pump such as the Mallory Comp 140? Wouldnt that serve the same purpose?

Originally posted by Rapid Robert:
I realize that,but still,Ed ran an Ultradyne cam with a 3/8" fuel line,now he's running much more cam and still running 3/8" line with quicker e.t.'s yet...why not leave the stock 3/8" line,just go with a higher volume pump such as the Mallory Comp 140? Wouldnt that serve the same purpose? Exactly my thoughts, but I think that under certain circumstances with big cams and big acceleration rates, the extra line diameter and larger pump help overcome both g's (fuel becomes heavier during hard acceleration) and resistance in the line (bends, etc).

Sometimes 3/8" line is OK on one car and sometimes its not OK on another car. Most choose overkill since it typically does not hurt anything to have a more-than-adequate fuel supply. Getting the fuel up to the carb at the right pressure is really the challenge.

I dont know why somone who has to replace their fuel line wouldnt just put 1/2" in it anyway. Its not like its much more, its only going to take an afternoon anyway, and it will save you the headache of doing it later. Hey the man says 1/2" put fricken 1/2" fuel line and the good fuel pump in it. Geese its not like carter is giving him a cut of the money cause he says to use there pumps right? So there has to be a reason. The reason is prevention. So if somone comes back and says my car is starving of fuel or running like crap theres the starting point he can say.,...i told you to put the fuel pump and line in. Congrats on everyone who runs 3/8" line and has a good ET. Its bragging rights for all of ya....i guess if thats somthing to brag about. Me....ill put in 1/2" line and not worry about it.

UD harold, I really like the specs on that cam! just what i was looking for, however do you know the advertised duration on that cam? did i miss it? also is that one of the new grinds that you designed. We will be using 6 inch rods, with the eagle 3D H beam rods that are supposed to clear the cam, i guess we will see!

Originally posted by Nickel333:
I dont know why somone who has to replace their fuel line wouldnt just put 1/2" in it anyway. Its not like its much more, its only going to take an afternoon anyway, and it will save you the headache of doing it later. Hey the man says 1/2" put fricken 1/2" fuel line and the good fuel pump in it. Geese its not like carter is giving him a cut of the money cause he says to use there pumps right? So there has to be a reason. The reason is prevention. So if somone comes back and says my car is starving of fuel or running like crap theres the starting point he can say.,...i told you to put the fuel pump and line in. Congrats on everyone who runs 3/8" line and has a good ET. Its bragging rights for all of ya....i guess if thats somthing to brag about. Me....ill put in 1/2" line and not worry about it. ----

graemlins/beers.gif :D

cody,
267/275 @ .020 is advertisied. It will be a few degrees more seat to seat but Harold will have to answer how much as I don't know the rate of lift between .016 & .020 lash & 1.6 rockers change it a bit at the valve.

Cody,

The cam grows about 5° in seat duration, 2° on the opening side, 3° on the closing--It's assymetrical..

If I tell a customer a cam will pull to 7500 with a good fuel system, and in his engine it will do only 6200, who's to blame? I try to tell each customer who would need a good fuel system, what the cam will require. It will not perform as advertised with an inferior fuel system.
In Ed's case, he had my BB288/296H10, the most popular BBC hydraulic I have ever designed. I have sold thousands of them, and I tell everyone they need an upgraded fuel system. I have had hundreds, if not thousands, tell me of fuel stravation at high RPMs. In the 330 HP 454 jet boat this cam will not rev over 4200 with the stock fuel system, and over 5500 with 1/2" lines, etc.
Ed had a 3/8" line and a single Mallory 140. The cam did not have any top-end HP when advanced 6°, as we reccomend. Ed retarded the cam until 2° retard(112° ATDC ICL), and it ran fine for him. In other words, he tuned the cam for the available fuel. In his mind, he thinks I don't know what I'm doing, as he got satisfactory performance doing it HIS way.
If anyone else insists on running inferior fuel systems, my cams will probably run the best 2° retarded. For everyone else, they run the best 4° to 6° advanced.....

UDHarold

Would this cam also work well on a 408 SB with 195 or so heads same stall and similar specs?

Originally posted by UD Harold.........
If anyone else insists on running inferior fuel systems, my cams will probably run the best 2° retarded. For everyone else, they run the best 4° to 6° advanced.....


Haha, way to go, Harold! graemlins/hurray.gif

Whittaker,

Of course it would, just start pulling a little lower. Very wide torque band, good street manners, if you like a lot of torque.

UDHarold

BTW, any 3.75" stroke engine needs a small base circle cam.....

I am definetly not the expert, but i have heard from many people who have built 383's who didn't need the small base circle cam when using H Beams'. Anyone care to chime in on this?

Most H beam rods have more clearance than stock rods as do the capscrew type I beam rods.
It all depends on the size of the lobes & the LSA.
Some of the cams out there end up with smaller base circles & they don't bother to tell you about it so they clear real good. You could get the same grind on a larger base circle & it could hit :mad:
Chances are you will be fine but it would be a real good idea to check before balancing :D

One caution about cams with a smaller base circle(as in reground). They can cause pushrod/rocker geometry problems like needing a longer pushrod. I've had experience with that from someone you wouldn't expect it from.

Originally posted by UDHarold:
Ed had a 3/8" line and a single Mallory 140. The cam did not have any top-end HP when advanced 6°, as we reccomend. Ed retarded the cam until 2° retard(112° ATDC ICL), and it ran fine for him. In other words, he tuned the cam for the available fuel.
UDHarold I had a conversation with Ed about the cam when I was installing it in my engine and he said he retarded it 2* because of V-P clearance, not because of his fuel system.

Ed told me that,also,Yesterday on DragRaceResults...
So Ed is saying he never advanced the cam, according to instructions, and so he never knew whether or not his 3/8" line and 1 Mallory 140 was adequate or not. His system is adequate for a retarded cam.

UDHarold

Originally posted by UDHarold:
BTW, any 3.75" stroke engine needs a small base circle cam.....
UDHarold[/QB]Harold when I ordered my cam you stated that I did not need a small base circle cam.
BTW: I'm using Eagle H-Beams w/6" rods w/3.750 stroke, so do I need to get small base circle cam to ensure I do not have rod to cam problems.
Thanks: David

i used the scat 5.7 H rods on my 383 with a comps 294hr cam. regular base circle cam. i think 2 cap screws required a little relief work but not much. Dave

Originally posted by UDHarold:
His system is adequate for a retarded cam.
Hey now with the name calling. ;)

Sounds like a good cam, (SBNF80/NF72-110). If I get a chance to change out my hydraulic Lunati Bracket Master II cam (246/246) I'd like a crack at that one. My motor is very similar, a hair bit more compression, 2800 stall, but I'd have 1.5 rockers. Really neccessary to change out to 1.6? Maybe time to step up to some needle bearing fulcrum roller rockers?