Team Chevelle banner
1 - 9 of 9 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
10 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 · (Edited)
Going with a bigger cam and better set of heads in my 496. I'm hoping to get at least 720hp out of it. It currently has a Comp Solid Roller .646/.663 Lift 244/248 Duration @.050. Along with 990 GM Heads. I'm thinking of going with a Solid Roller from Bullet, .746/.755 Lift and 262/270 Duration @.050. Was thinking the AFR Magnum 315cc Head. Is this combo to much for a 496?? Do I need a bigger head than a 315?? Car is 80% Track 20% Street
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,934 Posts
First pick the head and then call Bullet and have them grind one to the heads. I think the 315 will be fine for what you want to do. What is the car like, rpm goals, shift points, weight, how quick is it now compared to where you want to be?? I ran a backhlaved 70 for many many years.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
648 Posts
The 315's should be more than enough unless you intend on lots of RPM.
I my opinion you might want to consider the 300's.
They don't really give up any airflow and would have better port velocity. ( better average torque/power )
I was pondering a 496 before I went with a 532, and the 300's were what I was going to use on it.
The 300's will easily make 750hp without issue.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,309 Posts
The 315's should be more than enough unless you intend on lots of RPM.
I my opinion you might want to consider the 300's.
They don't really give up any airflow and would have better port velocity. ( better average torque/power )
I was pondering a 496 before I went with a 532, and the 300's were what I was going to use on it.
The 300's will easily make 750hp without issue.
The difference in port velocity between the 300 and the 315 isn't enough to make any real significant difference but the quality of airflow between the two is. There is no way the 300 would be a better choice over the 315, especially when you start considering intake manifold choices. Even the 305 is a better choice than the 300.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,309 Posts
Going with a bigger cam and better set of heads in my 496. I'm hoping to get at least 720hp out of it. It currently has a Comp Solid Roller .646/.663 Lift 244/248 Duration @.050. Along with 990 GM Heads. I'm thinking of going with a Solid Roller from Bullet, .746/.755 Lift and 262/270 Duration @.050. Was thinking the AFR Magnum 315cc Head. Is this combo to much for a 496?? Do I need a bigger head than a 315?? Car is 80% Track 20% Street
You definitely don't need a bigger head. The 315 will take some rpm to really fill it's shoes with a 496 but not a bad choice. It won't need a lot of cam to make some really good power. Intake manifold will have as much to do with how much power you make. Unfortunately, the intake you really need is almost impossible to find right now (Ede 2907).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
465 Posts
You may want to fill out the form on Jones Cam Designs website and let him make a recommendation. They're well respected in most motorsports and their cams are similarly priced to the competitors. Dick Jones developed the "parametric inverse radius roller cam" design for camshafts. They have a form that asks alot of questions and Mike Jones will turn around the recommendation in a day or so. FWIW - I have no vested interest in Jones Cam Design.

I used to exchange some emails with Harold Brookshire (founder of Ultradyne years ago - RIP) and he was always willing to help out. I haven't spoken with anyone at Ultradyne/Bullet so I don't know much about them. I'm not sure how Bullet ended up with Ultradyne but I know Harold had to sell it. After Ultradyne he went to Lunati and developed the Voodoo series.

In speaking with an engine builder that I respect very much, he worked primarily with Harold Brookshire and Mike Jones for all of his cam shafts.

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
First pick the head and then call Bullet and have them grind one to the heads. I think the 315 will be fine for what you want to do. What is the car like, rpm goals, shift points, weight, how quick is it now compared to where you want to be?? I ran a backhlaved 70 for many many years.
The car is in full street trim, weighs 3630 with me in it. Looking to run low 10's on motor. With the combo in it now which is pretty mild ran 11.13 at 119 shifting at 6300. I plan on never going over 6,800 rpm with the new combo, plan on giving it a 150 shot as well. The car leaves hard now on motor and I want it to stay that way
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,934 Posts
The car is in full street trim, weighs 3630 with me in it. Looking to run low 10's on motor. With the combo in it now which is pretty mild ran 11.13 at 119 shifting at 6300. I plan on never going over 6,800 rpm with the new combo, plan on giving it a 150 shot as well. The car leaves hard now on motor and I want it to stay that way
Don't be afraid of rpm. Nothing wrong with spinning the motor to where it needs to be. My 548 and 565 were 7800 rpm engines. Peaked at 7200, shifted at 7500. 4.25" cranks are fine to rpm. Like Scott said, let the combo sort itself out. Don't put restrictions on it. Use your headflow #'s and let them design a cam for it and let engine speed work with the heads.

Mine was a little lighter at 3200 lbs. Went 1.21 in 60'.
 
1 - 9 of 9 Posts
Top