I agree with Steve and George C. I cannot believe that comp cam
is “too High”, given .018 difference ; but respect George R statement—but that
clearance is easily checked at installation. ; I did find George R was a real stickler
for originality , on any question you asked him directly, (=What I called “Chevy
casting serial number match”sidering mentality, with original battery acid) right down
to crummy hinged power steering pump design of F that never worked after 20k
miles . I made a kit in early 70’s for my F’s to make that pump solid = end the
belt misery and the obviously tilted and rattling PS pump pulley. =Bad design,
even if on a 300.
I have to laugh , as when it came to his J, all ideas of “stock “
are/were off. = You keep yours stock to MOPAR spec, or I’ll kill you, ---but
mine is hot rodded to the max, but I’ll deny that. Smile .Love George R, wish
he could join this posting.
As far as degreeing in cams, this is a general thing that moves torque
output around a little vs. RPM , and might be changed by Chrysler to optimize cam
torque output to best complement the fixed vs. RPM torque boost provided by
ram, ----not by influencing ram action , (set by time between successive valve
motions, and length of tube ) but by moving the inherent cam torque profile to
better compliment , either smooth out or make more peaky, overall torque boost .
Probably smooth it out, vs. . RPM. I did notice Tru Roller cam chains sold by
HH for 392 has three keyway grooves for this, you need cam degree wheel to do
it right.
My .02.
Still no info on ID’ing these cams sitting on a bench. We have
now looked at three 392 cams 2 of which are supposed to be D cams and the 3 digit
numbers vary, although one J-Y looked at matched the last 3 digits on mopar
part number—for a NY er 392. Mystery remains.
I did find that comp cams offers a two level service to put any
cam on a machine and plot lobe, give you results, probably they know by looking
solid or hydraulic; first level adequate, upper one is to .00001 or something,
big $ ; maybe we should do this for each letter cam, then we know exactly the
lift profile. But for a B block, today’s over the counter hydraulics are better
than original for performance, with no real drawback . The technology has
advanced , for same or near same duration. What I would do on a wedge for sure,
(match duration within 5 degrees) and on a hemi if I had that choice at 270
degrees ; 280 may be too much with today’s grinds , do not want stalling and
low mpg. Note that you want and can have MOPAR only curves which are better
than generic Chevy; Chevy/Ford are limited by ~.870 lifter OD, all mopar are
over .900, allows for better profiles. But many cam suppliers just put Chevy
patterns on mopar cores. Comp does make this distinction, if you talk to them.
From:
Chrysler300@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:Chrysler300@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
Of Anna F Noia
Sent: Thursday, January 09, 2014 10:18 AM
To: News4ge@xxxxxxx; c300@xxxxxxx; Chrysler300@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [Chrysler300] Uplifting Cam Questions
I too want to know what your cam
specs are. I just completed a rebuild to use the short long ram. I had the cam
specs for mine (and still do somewhere) but cannot find them. I will locate
them and compare to all these recommendations. One point not really discussed
or even mentioned, is that the cam timing to the crank must be retarded 2
degrees at the timing chain gears. This is suppose to aid in the "sonic
ram effect" or something to gain even more horse power and response. Most
(or some) timing gear sets have multiple key locations on he small gear to
advance or retard the cam timing to the crank. This point is significant and
seems lost amoung all the other cam details being discussed. IMHO.
Best
Regards,
Stephen A. Noia
1-408-210-4736![]()
cell
From:
"News4ge@xxxxxxx" <News4ge@xxxxxxx>
To: c300@xxxxxxx; Chrysler300@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Wednesday, January 8, 2014 6:40 PM
Subject: Re: [Chrysler300] Uplifting Cam Questions
When I saw that you're still
searching for the right cam, I went thru my stuff again and checked the notes I
made during one of my many conversations with George Riehl regarding ram K cam
selection. I also had found the cam you're talking about at Comp
Cams and asked George about it. He said the lift is TOO HIGH. The
one he recommended is the special grind that I bought and like. I sent
you the specs on it some time ago. I still think you can't go wrong on
this one.
-----Original Message-----From:
Rich Barber <c300@xxxxxxx>To: 'C Bilter' <cbilter@xxxxxxxxx>;
Chrysler300 <Chrysler300@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; 'John Grady'
<jkg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>Cc: Chris Pinder <kmaniak@xxxxxxx>; Don Cole
<mr300k@xxxxxxxxx>Sent: Tue, Jan 7, 2014 2:18 amSubject: [Chrysler300]
Uplifting Cam Questions
I continue seeking guidance on a
replacement camshaft and related items in our ’64 300K ram engine. The
existing camshaft had a lot of pitting on the lobes. I want to retain the
solid tappets and adjustable rockers and find a cam that will provide operation
and performance similar to the original. I want decent idle, good vacuum
and good drivability.. I found the below-referenced pages on the club
website to be very thorough and helpful and went back to looking at the
multitude of cams available. I found the Comp Cam at this website to come
closest to the original specifications of lift and duration:
http://www.compcams.com/Company/CC/cam-specs/Details.aspx?csid=725&sb=0
This is what COMP says about
it: Solid-Good with stock converter & comp. Near smooth idle in 440.
Works good with 650-750 CFM carb. Excellent torque.
Specifications (Intake/Exhaust):
Comp
Stock-AMA Spec’s
Stock-Factory Drawing
Duration
270/270
268/268
268/268
Lift
.468”/.468”
.445”/.452”
.444”/.450”
I claim no experience or insight
on camshaft selection and did not find any other mechanical-lifter cam with
anything closer. Everything else had higher lift which I guess might
produce more horsepower, less vacuum and rougher idle.
· Does
anyone have actual good or otherwise experience with the referenced COMP cam or
any other replacement camshaft for a ’63-’64 ram engine?
· Does the
slightly higher lift put valve interference with piston tops at risk? I
did note a few nicks in the piston tops of the ’64 300K engine from the parts
car I bought.
· Any
experience issues with COMP cams in general?
· Since I
have a factory drawing for the cam, is there any interest in having some
precise replacement cams ground? The factory drawing has lift to five
decimal points at one-degree increments.
· The 300K
Supplemental Service Manual shows valve and valve spring specifications
http://www.summitracing.com/parts/cca-k21-246-4/overview/
I found the comparison of valve spring loads between the hydraulic-tappet
Firepower 360 and the mechanical –tappet Firepower 390 engines and the with the
same indicated 0.430” compression to be interesting and am wondering if
ram-spec valve springs are available or particularly necessary? AMA
specs and factory supplemental manual specs differ slightly, possibly due to
typo(s).
· And, are
the spiral-type surge dampers that fit inside the valve springs common items
and readily available?
Thanks and best wishes for a
Happy, Healthy, Prosperous and thoroughly C-300-K’ly New Year!
Brentwood, CA (Convertible
weather here)
The attached from the club
website is an old article but might be helpful in addressing some of your
questions re. the original cam specs. http://www.chrysler300club.com/tech/cam/gk.html
And, yes, you would be correct that the J cam would have been a little “hotter”
than the F (375 hp hydraulic) cam as far as lift but same duration and
less overlap. The J was faster in high speed acceleration (for example 0
to 100 mph) perhaps more likely due to lighter weight than the F and especially
with the use of short rams with exhaust headers (vs. long rams and log exhaust
manifolds) and perhaps the slightly larger exhaust valve size and larger 2.5 in
exhaust system, and certainly the solid lifter/cam setup allowed for higher
rpms as well and the setup was tuned to a 3600 rpm torque peak with the short
rams vs. 2800 rpm for long rams. The F Special (400 hp solid
cam) was clearly more aggressive (ie. tuned for high rpm power and less low end
torque) than the J/ram K cam. The F Special was intended for high
speed racing, not regular road use; whereas the J is perfectly suitable for the
road.
Sent: Monday,
January 06, 2014 10:05 AM
Subject:
[Chrysler300] Cam specs different years.
I have run into some issues
trying to identify 300 C or D cam specs, I have 2 what are claimed to be 300D
cams, but have no ID beyond 3 numbers stamped poorly, near gear , in
rough part of cam casting..sound right? Any one have a C or D cam they know is
real , with description? I do not have those stamped numbers handy.
This brings up looking in
aftermarket; only 392 “in production” “listings” seem to be Comp Thumper
series, but those are hydraulic for 392. In looking more, hot heads has a 280
cam , solid and hydraulic, from which info I ordered a hydraulic for a non 300
392, and it turns out to be an Isky cam; Might be too much for a letter car.
One person in their parts lists had a 270 Isky mega cam, both seem in
right area, but was unsure what original MOPAR duration was.(for 375/380 HP
cam) ; I did buy that 270 cam, price was right . That started me thinking about
hi po hemi cam specs ,355 hp 354 and 390 HP 392. How hot did Chrysler go on
cams? Having been young once , I also made the mistake of overcamming.
Much over 280 is asking for it , especially with old Torque flight converter.
(stall when you push D)
Without taking sides, a modern
hydraulic is probably better than a 50’s solid; for one thing you should pick
up lift due to lack of running gap, for same lift spec, and under 6K modern
hydraulics do not cause problems ; and adjustment of solids, esp with adj
pushrods, goes away, along with a big oil soaked messy hassle.....in going
through all this also found out solid lifter push rods for C D ,probably
all solid A block hemi, have 3/8 balls on both ends, hydraulics 5/16 ; on my
supposedly “D” engine someone used 5/16 push rods, 5/16 hydraulic lifters
with D rockers and supposedly D cam, all wrong . But Hot Heads makes 3/8 by
5/16 pushrods ( might be adjustable but lock them) so you could run hydraulic
cam and lifters with D adjustable rockers , using Chevy approach of one turn
tight beyond clearance click. But that means set up hot and oily. Not good.
This brings up more generally ram
cam specs , long ram, and J cam specs. I had a J , much more cam in it than F ,
or so it seemed ; ----and what was in 400 HP F?-
While a lot to ask, it strikes me
someone in club has all this at finger tips , maybe a list? Note also that
difference in duration between advertised lift and lift at .050 duration in
this range is about 50 degrees ; so a 280 is about 230 at .05.
Comments welcome ; it would be
good for all of us to know this data; and then comes how to tell what cam is
what. .
Also does anyone know a simple way
to tell hydraulic from solid grinds? I know it can be done at cam manufacturer
by some kind of cam plotter they have , which would show accell ramps on solids
before main lift event . Maybe dial indicator on lifter in partially assembled
engine, and plot it ? This problem will get worse, due to parts hoards with no
real history, and now they are very old piles indeed.
Thank you,--as I say comments
welcome.
Back to the Home of the Forward Look Network
Archive Sitemap