Team Chevelle banner
21 - 24 of 24 Posts
I know you're leaning towards the smaller cams, and that really is the way to go with low CR small-blocks like ours. I'm running comp's version of the performer cam, a little less intake duration, and a little more exhaust or the other way around, either way its only a 2 degree difference, same lift and lobe seperation.

I'd say try a a more aggresive grind like the XE256 you mentioned.

If you do decide to go with the 268H, you might want to inquire about the 268AH if you're going to stick with CC, its supposed to be better. If you wan't a revised/better version of the 268H (which Harold designed), try the Lunati 301A5 cam out, he said he designed it to "whup" his older design all across the RPM range.
 
Save
I would think a stock converter would work fine, or a 600 rpm over stock. The engine should pull good vacume with a fairly smooth idle I would think. The Comp Cams etreme energy 4X4 series would probably work even better with the wider lobe seperation angle. I run one in a 355 in my fullsize chev 4wd and it pulls really strong for such a small cam. I did do some porting though and compression is at 9.3-1. Good lift for such small duration helps to build torque and that's what's needed for a heavy vehicle.
 
The .040" over, about 10 to 1 CR, 327 motor I gave my nephew had a Crane/Cam Dynamics 272/272, 110/105, .450/.454" Energizer cam in it AND it was GREAT in the midrange and above for such a little motor!!

But it did lack a schosh of lowend which is to be expected once you get away from anything from say the Crane 266/266 Energizer and the Performer cam on down to the stock great old -929 cam.. Imho..

pdq67

Best Car Insurance | Auto Protection Today | FREE Trade-In Quote
 
21 - 24 of 24 Posts
You have insufficient privileges to reply here.