I sent a fax to CC last week and just got my reccomendation back, I sent a fax to harold early last week, not back yet.
Tell me what you think.. (hydraulic roller to replace 286 @ .006 230 @ .050 .639 lift hyd. roller)
SPEC CARD
PART #: 11-000-8
ENGINE: CB 396/454
GRINDING INSTRUCTIONS 1
"" "" 2
GRIND #: CB 3376 /3377 HR110+0
SPC INST 1:
SPC INST 2:
J. DIAM: STD INT EXH
VALVE ADJUSTMENT
GROSS VALVE LIFT .613 .613
DURATION @ .006
TAPPET LIFT 295 305
VALVE TIMING OPEN CLOSE
@ .050 INT 14 46
EXH 59 11
SPECS FOR CAM INST. @ 106 CENTERLINE
INT EXH
DURATION @ .050 240.00 250.00
LOBE LIFT .361 .361
LOBE SEPARATION 110.0
ROCKER ARM RATIO 1.70 1.70 REQ

1970 Chevrolet Chevelle SS
4020lbs with driver
462 CID BBC
4.282 bore
4.00 stroke
10.15:1 CR
Eagle 6.385" rod
1.7 Ratio Crane Roller Rockers w/ crane girdle
COMP 928 Springs (new last year)
COMP Hyd. Roller lifters (new last year)
Carb is holley 4779 750cfm DP upper w/ 850 cfm DP baseplate, 73P 80S jetting.
Carter 120gph street pump, 1/2 line from tank, 3/8 line pump to carb.
Edelbrock Performer RPM Rect Port Intake
Dart 320cc rectangular port runner aluminum heads, 2.250 intake, 1.880 exhaust
no porting. 119cc chambers milled to 116.5
SRP forged pistons, domed to make 10.15:1 w/ 116.5cc chamber
TH400, 3400ish stall speed 9.5" converter
3.90 rear axle, considering 3.31 again. race tire 26*10.5R15 considering 28*10.5R15 " MT ET Street, street use is 25.6" BFG p315/35R17
Mobil 93
Dual 3" exhaust
2" primary hooker super comps


Thanks
Matt

I went through the lobe catalog, and the lobes are "xtreme marine hydraulic roller" lobes, and they are based on the "extreme energy" series of cams.
just thought that would help if anyone had any comments.

matt

my recommendation: buy from somebody else.

Harold is good, if you can get a recommendation from him I'd go with it. Sometimes he's hard to get hold of.

Tom

I have no experience with that cam but don't go back to 3.31s you won't like it.

Matt,

Sorry about the delay, I must have mis-laid your fax.....

I have 2 cams that might interest you. The first is the BB292/302HR10 (or HR12...) which is 240/250 at .050, just like the Comp Cams. At .200", the CC lists at 157/166, their website. Mine is 158/168, not much but will help top-end, as well as our seat duration being shorter, and unsymetrical to boot. Our lift is .600", and .3533" at the lobe.
We run this cam in offshore boats all the time, for extended full-throttle runs. I don't have a dyno-test, but the next cam smaller(236/244 at .050, same valve lift), made 630 BHP at 5400 in a 9.2:1 540 on 87-octane. The torque curve varied 125 ftlbs of torque, from 1500 to 5500.
You may like the other cam even more.....
It is my BB308HR10, 255/255 at .050, 175/175 at .200, and .650/.650 valve lift.
James McGinn, who posts here sometimes, has this cam in a 1969 Camaro, with a 534-cid engine(that's a 502 block with a 4.25" stroke). He drives it on the street, and it has run a best of 10.19 N/A.
Both of these cams are available now......

UDHarold
901-365-0950, ext 135

PS---You will definitely have to change that 3/8" fuel line for 1/2", and may need a big(250-gph) electric pump. To use the bigger cam, a 4000 SS converter and 4.56s may be in order too.
It just depends on how fast you want to go....

Matt, when in Heaven's name are you going to dump the hydraulic stuff!? smile.gif


If I was building a 468 street/strip motor that doesnt do 5000 miles/yr and back-to-back 11 hour runs to Nashville ( where a flat tappet seems a better match), I'd find or have done a cam with a very mild split in it, say specs at .050 would be 245-248IN/ 252-255 EX, keeping lift under .630 NET and LSA at 110 with that converter.

Stuff it in quite advanced to keep intake velocities up with those heads.

I'm not much into high dollar roller stuff, but suspect you can ease up ont he springs a bit with a SR AND rev the sunovaB, unlike those hyd slugs.

Was going to ask Harold, since the old website is kaput, if he had a grind like that for a 510" street motor. There I'd want approx 248/252@.050. SR of course, either 110 or even 112 lsa for idle/low speed smoothness.

Didn't you have an old UD SR cam spec'd like that before?

Originally posted by 427L88:
Didn't you have an old UD SR cam spec'd like that before? Gene, luckily I printed out Harold's online catalog before his site went down.
He shows a 276/284 SR with 245/253 @ .050, .660 lift and a 112 LSA. Power range is 3500-6500.
Close to what you're looking for.

Ah, not close Bill, SPOT ON! I'll let 509 Camaro know about it. SR version of my cam. Superb.

I nearly beat Jacks's 509 ( and ran 2-2.5 mph faster every run!), and he's freaking out about it!

:D

Gene I'm confused, are you suggesting a solid roller for me or a solid flat? Was that 245/252 SR idea for the 510 or my 460?
I gotta say I'm sold on rollers after looking at a few computerized lobe profiles. I just don't know if I should make that jump to a solid roller or not. I don't really want to keep bothering harold, but I should have asked for a comparable solid roller cam for the motor while I was at it.
two questions: I thought SR's needed stiffer springs than HR's, and 2) why does a small advertised duration solid have such high .050s compared to a hydraulic? for example the 295 comp cam has a 240 .050, but to get 240 with a SR, you only need 276?

Thanks..
Matt

Matt,

I'm no expert, but I think the Ultradyne/Lunati 276/284 street roller would be a real nice camshaft for your setup. If you keep the spring pressure in check and a good set of lifters (Crower Severe Duty or Isky's Red Zone) you should have no problems running a solid roller on the street. Just keep an eye on your lash and perform a periodic inspection of the lifters.

You might have to keep the 3.90 gears for it to work properly.

I'm seriously considering the 276/284 ground on a 108 deg lobe separation for my next engine buildup, either a 468 or a 496.

Originally posted by 427L88:
I'm not much into high dollar roller stuff, but suspect you can ease up ont he springs a bit with a SR AND rev the sunovaB, unlike those hyd slugs.I ran 11.88@120 (http://kjett.home.mindspring.com/Images/kenny6-1.wmv) with my full weight, stick shift, overcammed "hyd slug" smile.gif And that was spinning on a pair of borrowed slicks and babyshifting every gear for fear of breaking something.

BTW, Matt, I think that the cam that you've selected would perform extremely well in your combo. I'd have it ground on a 110LSA, or possibly even a 108, depending on your tolerance for vacuum (or lack there of). If your compression is actually a shade more than what your predicting you might even go a little bigger on the bottom say 250-255, IMHO. I wouldn't have a single reservation about running a Comp Cams piece. I've been running my XR-286 grind all year and beating the hell out of it, no problems whatsoever. My brother has been running a 306 grind in his LT-1 camaro. Logged nearly 20k street miles and countless 1/4 passes at 12.0/11.9 with nary a problem. Just make sure you order the right springs, have the head work done (install height, retainers, push rod geometry) by someone who knows what they're doing. Use a good quality lifter and forget about it.

Marv, my Biscayne combo that I'm putting together now is nearly identical to yours except the 310 Canfield heads and an HP950 carb. The weight is the same. So is the converter, gearing, exhaust, etc.
I had Bullet grind up an R276/390-R284/390 on 108*LSA. It's a solid roller. It is 246*/250* @ .050 but 167* @ .200 on both int. and exhaust.
The lift is .663 on both sides.
I should have this up and running within a few weeks and I'll let you know what it runs like.

P.S. $345.00 with the pressed on cast gear and 5 days till I had it.

Randy

Ken, why don't you share with Matt what you gained when you got away from those squishy lifters. Com'on, tell the whole truth! tongue.gif

Matt seems to want every little bit out of his mill, swapping to another hyd roller might not be worth it.

I didn't disparage Comp Cams, just MY UNPROFESSIONAL OPINION, that a hyd cam with that big a spread between intake and exhaust might not be optimal for him.

Originally posted by 427L88:
Ken, why don't you share with Matt what you gained when you got away from those squishy lifters. Com'on, tell the whole truth! tongue.gif
I don't think the "squishy" lifters had as much to do with the increase as did the smaller cam. That's right, the SR is smaller than the hyd. roller, hence the reason I said "overcammed" to begin with. The old cam had 85 degrees of overlap and the new one has 69. With 10.3:1 compression there's no doubt that the smaller cam will make more power (better cylinder pressure). You seem to be anit-hyd. roller, not just in this post but others as well. My hyd. roller 120MPH shows about 30RWHP more than your solid cammed car running 117MPH (race weight at the time was 3,910lbs if memory serves). I have every reason to believe that a properly sized hyd. roller would have been even faster than the 120MPH that was posted with Lunati 50250 cam. Hell, take a look at the numbers BigRedL-72 and his friends are throwing up with their hyd. slugs :D But, I digress. Everyone has their own opinion. Now if Matt is looking for MAX performance and doesn't mind springing for expensive lifters and good springs then a SR is the way to go, IMHO.

Ken, top mph is 118.75. The 117 mph was at 2/3 throttle! And it's a 439 using solid flat tappets. I don't know know what race weight is with me and 3/4 tank of fuel though. I wasn't comparing my car and yours my friend, not at all. You don't drive the car 300-700 mi + at a clip do you? And I'll never ET as well as you since I launch easy and run a stick. They aren't comparable IMHO. They would look good side-by-side though!

Yes, it's true. I think for guys looking for the max, solid flat tappets or rollers are indeed a better choice. I am biased. I DO diaparage hy rollers for max effort stuff. Big Red runs SOLID lifters on that hyd cam. And I agree, it's all about cylinder pressure.

Matt, that 276/284SR was for a mild stall ( 2600) street 510" Camaro. But it seems it would fit you well, as would Kenny's cam.

I'm just trying to get you to think solid. And a cam spec'd out at the same 240/250@.50 would be about right and smaller than the hyd cam.

Kenny, did the larger hyd roller require more or less spring than the solid roller? For Matt's information. And what else did it require for you to swap out to solid? New Pushrods?

Thnx.

Originally posted by 427L88:
Ken, top mph is 118.75 and that's with a 439 using solid flat tappets. I don't know know what race weight is with me and 3/4 tank of fuel though. I wasn't comparing my car and yours my friend, not at all. You don't drive the car 300-700 mi + at a clip do you? they aren't comprable IMHO.

Yes, it's true. I think for guys looking for the max, solid flat tappets or rollers are indeed a better choice. I am biased. And I agree, it's all about cylinder pressure.

Matt, that 276/284SR was for a mild stall ( 2600) street 510" Camaro. But it seems it would fit you well, as would Kenny's cam.

I'm jsut trying to get you to think solid.

Kenny, did the larger hy roller require more or less spring than the solid roller? For Matt's information. And what else did it require for you to swap out to solid? New Pushrods?

Thnx. At 460ci the difference in engine displacement is negligible, and the crankshaft in a 427 is quite a bit lighter than a 454 and will therefore accelerate more rapidly. When I had the stick in my car it was only trailered twice and was driven every weekend. I would drive as long as 3 hours in stop and go traffic in one direction to race, simply unbolt my BFG DR's and bolt on a pair of slicks and race :D went 11.87@117 with a 3.55 gear and 11.88@120 with a 4.11 (same track, different days). Would run 12.01 just like snapping your finger. So the two cars WERE comparable. I wouldn't have had a single reservation (other than the cost of fuel) about driving my car to from East to West coast back in them days. Now is another story, but I'm also not claiming to have a "street" car anymore. I trailer it ever where I go and my only interest at present is racing and more specifically bracket racing.

As for the hyd. vs solid springs...With the old Lunati 50250 I ran an Isky 8005-A spring. Seat pressure was 145lbs and open was ~440lbs. With the XR-286 I run a Comp 953 spring with 175lbs seat and 525lbs open. Logged over 100 runs with the solid. I've checked the valves twice and each time they were within .002 (running a stud girdle and good poly locks). I just checked the springs a couple of weeks ago for the first time since putting the engine together and they all showed ~170lbs with my Moroso hand pull tester, right about where they read when first installed. IMO people tend to exaggerate the maintenance associated with a small solid roller. If the lift is under .700, seat pressure ~200lbs, properly installed then I think it's a relatively (read check at the beginning and end of the season) maintenance-free setup.

In addition to changing springs/lifters with the new cam I also had to go to longer pushrods as a hydraulic lifter assembly is taller than a solid lifter. I also opted for titanium retainers to lighten up the valve train although steel retainers would work fine too.

Gene, not taking nothing away from your car. It is impressive to get in and drive from New York to Nashvillle and still run respectable times. Just trying to get you off your "I hate roller cams" kick ;) Hell, some of the money these guys have spent breaking in flat tappet cams they could have easily purchased a roller cam.

Matt,

Good luck with your project. I think you're headed in the right direction.

Kenny, brother you're misunderstanding me. I do not hate roller cams! Just can't figure out why guys use " HYDRAULIC and MAX POWER" in the same sentence. To me a solid( roller or flat) is free HP AND some tunability.

Call me old fashioned, Solids are where it's at man! And if'n I were in Matt's shoes, trying to push the envelope, I'd go SR in a heartbeat. No DOUBT in my military mind. But on the "small/street" side as you spec it out. HUGE power with those cams, and they do live.

Matt, you should call Comp back and say, hey, this is the cam recommendation I got, how does it compare to the AR288? See what they say.

I *really* appreciate all the help and comments. Since I'm not about to make this purchase right this second, I am going to give it some long and hard thought. I'm just having fun and am in no rush.

graemlins/hurray.gif

Originally posted by 427L88:
[QB...Big Red runs SOLID lifters on that hyd cam. [/QB]Actually the only motor that I have the solid rollers on a hyd cam is in our 406.
Very light spring pressure: 125 lbs on the seat and about 320 lbs open.
So far the Mph is encouraging @ 119 just need to get some issues sorted out.

The 534" that Harold mentioned and the motor in BigRed is all Hyd roller.

Matt,
If you decide to go the mechanical roller route, check this one out.

http://www.iskycams.com/partnum_template.php?partnumber=396620&compid=69&dealer=no

This is the cam that I'm using. Starts making power around 2600-2700, and pulls nicely to 6500 in a 460. Very streetable and easy on parts.

graemlins/thumbsup.gif

Just a question, if harold makes a 276/284 SR, does he make a 280/288SR? Gene's ride is a 439, I have a 460.. is the slightly bigger cam worth it, or stick with considering the 276/284 because of my rectangles?

matt

About the closest I can find is a 282 lobe 251@.050 and .710 lift.
That`s unless you want a more radical lobe then yes there`s a 280 w/253@.050 .725 lift.
There`s a 281 w/253@.050 .731 lift

Your cam selection will depend on how much converter and rpm`s you`re willing to settle on.
I`d stay either with the 276 or the 284(my choice)

Those lift numbers are astronomical, I'll stick with the more street oriented lobes.
Are you suggesting a 284/284 .660/.660 cam, or sticking with the 276/284 split?
Not to start an argument, but, how much improvement does a dual pattern make?

Matt

Maybe I overlooked something but I didn`t notice if your current setup has been run yet.
Do you have any time slips?
If so, can you post any numbers?

If this is a street car I would highly recommend a Hyd roller over a solid.
A differnt cam might just surprize you!

Yeah its been up and running just fine all this year. It made 550hp on the engine dyno, the old UD hyd.roller 296 @ .006 231 @ .050 .621 made 564 (with 9.6:1), this one now is a comp cam 286 @ .006 230 @ .050 .639 lift (with 10.15:1).
Peak power was at 6100 this time, but the way the governor is setup (I tried to tweak it and the situation blew up in my face..) so its shifting at 5500 and 5700. It ran 12.09 @ 113.4 w/ a 1.85 60', I don't have the slip with me, but 1/8 mile was 90.5 I think.
Other times were 1.80 60's but the slips were like 12.18 because the traction broke loose somewhere just before the 330 mark I think, either way I had to let off and go back on it.
I have no issues with the hydro rollers, course I've never own a solid anything so.. the jury is still out for me, but, who knows.
What is confusing me about cam selection at the moment is why hydraulics seem to need such large advertised durations to get the comparable .050 of a solid.. I'd like to pick a cam for a good DCR, so it seems like a small cam is in order, but I can't find a 280 adv hydraulic that has 240+ .050 duration..


matt

On a big block that cam would be 233@.050 .625 lift.
Why not have UDHarold make a new one!
Maybe he has some new grinds too, who knows.

I remember talking via E-mail with you, call him and at least you can have that original UD remade ;)
I run that cam on a 109 sep.

Originally posted by MadMarv:

What is confusing me about cam selection at the moment is why hydraulics seem to need such large advertised durations to get the comparable .050 of a solid..


matt I could be wrong but I believe it's because the advertised duration of hydraulics is measured at .006 lift and the adv dur of solids is measured at .020 lift (at least Harold's are per him). That's to get most of the lash taken up (.006 and .020 are lobe lifts I believe).

Does that seem like enough to make it appear that solids seem like they are 10 (or more sometimes) degrees of duration smaller at advertised when given the same .050 on a hydr?
The reason why it gets me going because outside of the adv measurement issue, I can't think of anything else. But the .006 .020 difference just dosen't seem like enough..
I guess so though. But now won't the advertised #'s screw up Pat's DCR calc because hydraulics are going to be advertised alot bigger, always having a lower DCR, or does it not matter and I am making a mistake?

matt