Went out to the shop I found what looks to be a 292 Comp cam for bbc
on the shelf.
one end says "comp cam" "2?2"
can't really make out the middle number kinda looks like a 5 or maybe a 9 ,
the other end say "292" with maybe a jacked up "h" and it just has
"P" stamped farther away.
took some measurements off the lobes and it appears with 1.7 rocker ratio
they would be .552" or .553" in that range I think this would be at best
had one that was .549" so calling it .550" lift, this is inline with comp cams
292 cam 244/244 @.050"
Well I think I'm going to stick this in the 454, I think it would work fine
with the low 8.0 or 8.5 whatever compression the engine has, just added
the rpm intake and dig up an old 750 carb.
use the 3k stall behind it and turn this thing to 6500 rpms or so where
ever it mph best at.
Anyone done this before?
I found one example:
"Had a STD 454 with 049s stock valves 2.06 & 1.72
96000 miles on it when pulled from the donar car. (My dads old 72 Caprice Wagon) Never pulled the heads or oil pan.
Ran the Comp Cams 292 hydralic cam with all matching valvetrain components.
Holley strip dominator intake & 850 carb.
At 8.1 comp it ran best at 42* total timing & #26 Autolites !!!
T400 and 3.90 gears.
Ran 11.80s "
=========
Will it work yes,will it be best cond to run 244 deg dur @.05 in 8.1 comp,absoultely NOT which i am user you already know is the case.
Friend asked me to put that same hy ft comp 292 cam in his 70ss 396 bbc now 408 ci with approx 10.1 comp along with matched springs etc and stock 290bbc heads for 70 bbc with headers,old scool eddy torquer AL intake with angled carb,750dbl puper ,m21,331's out back .
when i got the carb & timing all dialed in it ran very well ,could go down the road on clean blk top in 2nd gear at approx 3k-3500rpm and punch it and car would go sideways up the styreet smoking the tirres.
When you were von upper rpm in 3rd gear at approx 5,600-5800rpm it was pulling so hard the back end was trying to break loose,thing was fast for mwhat it had in it.
Ran well in town to but the only draback was 6.5-7mpg tops and i had the dbl pumper leaned out as much as possible too.
Well at today fuel prices thats killing his crusing budget so i to inc fuel mileage a lot and keep some decent perf i rec he have me install this hyd ft perf cam (222/226 deg dur @.05,.525"/.525" gross luif,112 deg lsa) along with the stock intake & stock 7040205 q-jet he had that i would tweak a bit for better perf which he let me do.
But i left the v-springs for the 292 comp cam with little more seat/open pressure in the motor for better top end perf with the milder ft cam which worked out well.
Well i gotta tell ya i was pleasantly surprised at just well his motor responded to that much milder cam/setup on paper ,its had tom=nes more trq/upm from bottom to 3,500-4k rpm and it still pulled herd thru approx 5,700-5,750 rpm or so!
Overall that much milder setup on paper felt roughly 95% as strong as the much hotter 292 cam with eddy al trq intake and holley 750 dbl pumper did.
And the big payoff was not only that the motor had much more trq in a more useable rpm range for street use but that fact fuel consumption went from 6.5-7mpg on avg with 292 cam & hotter setup to 10.5-11mpg with milder cam ,stock int with tweaked by me q-jet & ign timing curve in same exact driving cond piciking up a whopping 3.5-4.5 mpg (4mpg on avg) which was a 50-55% reduction in fuel use or 50-55% inc in mpg dpedning on how ya look at it.
I have the same basic setup in my 69 with m20 & 331's with 402 bbc with same cam,little less comp at 9.7 or so with 063 heads and stock ex manifolds and less v-spring using the springsa rec by mfg for the cam and its all done in my motor at 5,450-5,500rpm tops!
Dont get me wrong,that cam pulls approx as hard as my friends motor does to my lower top end rpm.
It will rpm past 5,500 rpm to 5,700+ but its not pulling/making anymore power above 5,500rpm so i dont go past 5,500rpm or so .
But my friends car/motor having headers and beefier v-valve springs with more seat/open rating for the hotter 292 cam extended the rpm range of still making power in his motor by approx 250-300rpm + which you can really feel.
I have gotton as high as 13.7 mpg in mixed driving but havent had a chance to check all open road crusing at approx 60-65mph with 3:31's ,but i would think 15-16mpg would be a relistic fuel mielage est knowing what mpg it got in mixed driving and the setup it has .
But that cam in my pretty stock motor pulles a heck of a lot stronger with noticeable more power then for ex a stcok 396 /325 or 350hp cam did,thats for sure!
And that cam has approx 14" vac @ 900-950rpm idle ,the 292 in my friend car idling 959-1k rpm had approx 5.5-6" vac or so on a good day (pwr brks were shakey /kinda stiff at idle but worked none the less) and thats with 20-22 deg base timing and 38 deg total all in by approx 2,400-2500rpm.
Ran eve more spunky with 40-42 deg total but then it would sometimes detonate when on it hard @ WOT (didnt detonate with normal driving not @ WOT) on a hot day so backed off total timing to 38deg to avoid him having to run real lead octane booster thats pricey.
With the 292 cam i ran a vac adv off ported because idle vac was too low to run vac adv on full int vac all the time .
Thats because the low idle vacuume made for an unstable idle speed not being stong enough to holding the vac adv at its full stop position being fully deployed all the time like it should at idle (to maintain a stable idle) where the low idle vac with the 292 cam made the idle speed search up & down when the vac adv was on full int vacuume all the time not ever reaching its full on stop fully deployed position which is key for a stable idle with vac adv.
So at least the motor got some additonal timing from vac adv on ported int vac when throttle was off idle which the 292 came needed.
But the milder cams 14" idle vac has enough vac at idle to keep the vac adv fully deployed for a stable idle.
Scott
