I'm looking to install one of these engines in my '68 to replace the oil guzzling 307. I would like to replace the cam with one that will provide a little more power and torque. The trans is a Powerglide, may later be changed to a 700R4, and I will be using a stock iron intake and Q-Jet along with iron manifolds and a 2 1/4 duals. This is a daily driver, so nothing too wild smile.gif Thanks to all.

comp xtreme 268, you will not be disappointed.

It depends on what the compression is.
If you are stating the advertised compression you can figure at least .5 less because of the way the stock tolerances add up.

He's right. I've got the Goodwrench engine, and I estimate the compression to be about 8:1. I am planning on putting the Crane 266 in mine.

That motor has no compression (about 8.2:1 at best) and total crap 993 70s smogger heads. Don't forget, it's "designed" as a cheap replacement for big-customer fleet applications (the image for the target market to keep in mind here is phone company vans) and is not a performance-oriented motor in any manner way shape or form. With that low cpmpression and poor flow, and exhaust manifolds in particular, IMHO a 268 is way too much, because it will end up with a very soggy bottom end and poor gas mileage with the stock converter. I wouldn't go any bigger than the XE262, and even that might be excessive in a heavy car. A wiser choice would be the XE256. That combo should give a motor with good torque and gas mileage, but a bit more pep than the anemic 929 cam it comes with. I'd recommend putting some better valve springs and rockers in it at the same time; if you go with Comp, get their 981 springs and retainers and stuff, the Fel-Pro positive valve guide seals (without which you'll be back into valve-guide oil-burning in 10 to 15,000 miles anyway), and definitely the Comp 1412 steel roller-tip rockers to replace the random-ratio rubber stock ones. The rockers make an amazing difference to how smooth even a stock-cammed motor will run, just by providing consistent valve action across all 8 cylinders.

Maybe consider a Performer cam and a set of cheap, $25 or $30 Z-28, -142 springs along with the better quality rockers??

And yes, the Crane 266 cam is a dandy too, imho..

pdq67

Yeah, the Performer Plus cam would work but, if you go with this cam, get it under another brand name. It is a generic cam sold by many companies for much less money (Melling MTC-1, for example). However, it has slow lazy ramps and there are better cams out there. I agree with RB69... that the XE256 would be a very good choice. The XE250 is worth looking at, too. Better than the Performer Plus cam. No need for roller tip rockers, although a set of aftermarket stock type rockers will fix the randomness of the factory rockers. The stock springs will work fine for any of these smaller cams.

Comp cams HE260. Best all around cam in the world for low compression 350's, and it works with the stock valve springs, and gets great gas mileage graemlins/thumbsup.gif

I reccomend the Lunati 301A1LUN, 254/262 at .0045". 248/256 at .006", 199/207 at .050, .401/.432 valve lift, and 112 LSA. It idles as good as, or better than, stock, works all power accessories, has excellent vacuum, pulls from idle to over 5000, adds torque across the RPM band, with about 35 to 40 more HP on the top. It also improves gas mileage.
It is available from any Lunati/Holley dealer...

UDHarold

Thank you all very much... this is exactly the info that I needed graemlins/thumbsup.gif