I was told this is the place to be for help with Voodoo cams?
Here's my combo:
Basically stock 350 forged crank, newer 1 piece style roller. 9.1 compression, 64cc Vortec heads with mild port work on the exhaust side. Upgraded springs to accommodate .550 lift. Edelbrock RPM air gap, Holley 750 vs. I can provide flow numbers if needed?
TH350, stall tbd. Rear gears 3.23, will be changed to at least 3.53, but not real soon.
weight 3000 lbs.

I've been looking real hard at the Voodoo Roller cams. The 270/278 in particular, part# 60121. I called Lunati and was told I could run the 282/290 in this combo, part # 60122. I feel this may be a little bit too big for the low compression. But that's what the tech guy told me?

Now this is a play car, so gas mileage is of no concern. Ideal rpm range, 1800-6000.


All opinions, advice, and suggestions are appreciated.:thumbsup:

I think I'd go for the 60121. That seems more in line with where you want to be.

*EDIT* just noticed you said 3000 lbs. Is this in a Z or something? :D

You could probably put a screamer in that thing, it isn't going to take near as much to get that moving as a chevelle.

No, it's a 64 Nova. I wish it were a 64 Malibu!

I've been comparing the Voodoo 270 against the Comp 270. Just by plugging the nubers into the dyno the Comps comes out on top. Beats the Voodoo pretty good, all around. If I change the 112lsa on the Voodoo to 110 like the Comp Cam, the numbers are pretty close. But I know those aren't real world figures.
I'd prefer to stick with Lunati. I've used the Bracket Master II cam in the past with good results. Plus I hear too many cam failures with CC cams. But these are Rollers so that may not be an issue?

those are deceptive #s. The voodoo is a hard cam to dyno on a computer.

I'll bet the real life #s will suprise you!

those are deceptive #s. The voodoo is a hard cam to dyno on a computer.

Why is that?

The one I remember dynoing was the VooDoo 60120, the 262/270 cam vs the Xtreme Energy 264HR. The VooDoo was 211/219 at .050, the 264HR was 212/218. The VooDoo lift was a little higher, and LSA was 112 vs 110.
From 5000 to 5600 the VooDoo averaged 10 BHP higher that the 264HR.
From 3200 to 4200 the VooDoo averaged 8 ftlbs torque higher that the 264HR.
But the best news was at 2500, where the VooDoo had 30 ftlbs torque MORE than the 264HR. It was 20 ftlbs more at 2800, and 3" more vacuum at idle.
With 9:1 CR, the 270 VooDoo is as big as I would run, and it works with 3.23 RAR.
Computer simulation programs assume that all cams flow air the same way, but they do not. If they did, one company's 300*, .500" lift cam would make power like another's. They don't.
A computer simulation program that gave an accurate Horsepower/torque curve would be similar to those used by the major car manufacturers, and would require the exact cam/valve lift curves, not just a couple of numbers.

UDHarold

Thanks for the info!

Iwanna64, you probably don't realize it unless you've been on this site for a while, but you just heard from the guy (UDHarold) that designed all the Voodoo cams. His word is pretty much gospel around here.

Iwanna64, you probably don't realize it unless you've been on this site for a while, but you just heard from the guy (UDHarold) that designed all the Voodoo cams. His word is pretty much gospel around here.

:yes: I'm fully aware, and very appreciative!:hurray: