Another cam question 361

[qkcuda]

I just ran that graph through a torque to horsepower calculator and it comes up with 300 HP even at 4500 and 5000 rpm. If anything the 700 might do a bit better because of slightly more intake duration and a little higher lift.

 

[Aeronet]

I think the Voodoo 700 should perform a lot better than the Edelbrock 204/214. The 700 is a Chrysler specific cam designed for the .904 Chrysler lifters.
I started a thread about the 700 cam about a month ago. Wyrmrider posted some good info on it.
I want a cam somewhere between the the standard cam and the Magnum cam and the 700 fits the bill.
Out of an old Chilton's (keep in mind these are net ratings): '73 400 2bbl torque 310@2400
'73 400 HP torque 335@3600
Horsepower for the engines are 185@3600 and
260@4800 respectively.

 

[rumblefish360]

The Edelbrock cam has super lazy slow ramps.
The Lunati ramp is much better. It will add snappiness to the throttle.

 

[qkcuda]

That's what I was thinking

 

[qkcuda]

Gratuitous high torque Charger picture. I couldn't resist

 

[wyrmrider]

that edelbrock expensive for a white box cam
Elgin
wolverine
sealed power all have it and it is mostly usless unless you have to run worn out stock valve springs
It's seat duration is measures at .004 so you have to adjust to compare with lunati or howard
even so it's a lot of duration for not much lift/ area
thecam will wear well and rev well but leaves a lot of torque on the table due to short @.200

 

[qkcuda]

I was only using the Edelbrock as an example because it was the closest I found with some dyno results. The 700 seems like the proper choice. I read another post where a guy had a cam similar to the roadrunner cam in a 426 with a stock convertor and it was lazy on the low end. He also mentioned that he had the same cam in a 361 and it was soft at low revs.

 

[wyrmrider]

you do not want the road runner/ magbum cam in a low wait-small low compression motor

 

[qkcuda]

OK I'm going to throw in another variable. I did a lot of reading on the 516 heads, and they seem to be a bit of a bottleneck. I have a line on a set of 915 heads. The last 452's I pocket ported flowed about 250 CFM at 500 lift, and had great low lift numbers. Would that make the 701 a better choice?

 

[wyrmrider]

open or closed chamber
each takes a different piston
what rpm range>thus cam and compresion >will be best for you?
701 lunati cam? recap the question do we have to reread the whole thread?
cam duration based on your rev range
yes more flow can use a bigger cam but you then have the gears and converter to match, and compression

 

[rumblefish360]

Not being intimate with the heads at hand, anytime a better flowing head is up top the better the engine will perform.

 

[qkcuda]

I should recap where I am at now. The short block will be a stock 1966 361, which was rated at 9.2 compression with closed chamber 516 heads. I will replace the heads with pocket ported 915 closed chamber heads which will enhance flow, but have the same combustion chamber size, and therefore not affect the compression ratio. The intake will be a Performer 383 manifold (not RPM) with a Street Demon 625 CFM carb. Ignition will be Chrysler electronic with the centrifugal advance limited to run more initial, and vacuum advance. What will remain stock is the 1966 log style exhaust manifolds with 2 1/4 inch exhaust pipes (measured by me) into stock type mufflers and 2 inch tailpipes. It will also have the stock convertor and a 3.23 gear. The car will have A/C, PS, and PB.

The two cams I have it narrowed down to are the Lunati Voodoo 10230700 and 10230701. Here are the short specs on each.

700 253/258 (208/213 at .050) 454/454 112 lobe separation installed at 108 (very strong torque and increased HP, range idle-5000)
701 256/262 (213/220 at .050) 454/475 112 lobe separation installed at 108 (19" vacuum at idle, works with stock convertor, A/C, PB, range 1000-5500)

I have not been able to find actual cam cards for either, so I cannot determine the actual difference in overlap, which I know is critical. The goal is a cruiser which will get decent gas mileage running at about 2500 RPM on the highway, however, if I'm paying for a new cam, I hate to leave any horsepower on the table.

 

[Curiousyellow71]

Voodoo 701 sounds like more fun... probably no faster then the 700 out of the hole...more fun driving though.

 

[wyrmrider]

cc your heads, are you going to flow them?
they flow like 68s with same work
how far pistons down the hole?
think of the mr gasket .028 which is tiker but can't be helped
if your compression is down in the 8s then the 700
or custom cam
p[tion 1 the small hughes 252 intake ground by howard on a 112 (stock manifolds)
or just the stock small hughes on 113 but for that money i'd go jones
or Mike Jones for best power in a long wearing lobe
calculate copression before asking OR once you figure rough compression fill out jones cam request and ask him what cc to mill the heads to with his cam
dummy in 80cc if stock spec is 74 ( i forget and i had to open the chambers on my 915s to get compression down)
when you cc your heads do each end then mill to the smallest chamber of the 4

 

[joemish]

I have bought a 1966 Charger with a 361, automatic and 3.23 gears. It has stock exhaust manifolds and a stock 2 1/4 exhaust system into 2 inch tailpipes. It will have a Performer 383 intake, a 625 Street Demon spread bore type carburetor and MP electronic ignition. It has PS, PB, and factory A/C. I have an extra set of 2.76 rear gears sitting on the shelf. The car is not in my garage yet (long story) so I do not have access to do a compression test or assess the parts that are in it. I have driven it, and as far as I can tell the long block is all stock. Not even sure if the heads have ever been off, I assume they are still 516's.
My question is what would be a good cam to upgrade performance, especially torque? I am wondering if I have to be a little more conservative with the 361 versus a 383, kind of like a 318 versus a 340? My goal would be an honest 300 horsepower and as much torque as possible, which will cruise at 2000-2500 rpm (depending which gears I use) and get decent gas mileage. I just sold an 11 second street car, now I want a cruiser.

You want Torque. Throw a Dana 410 in it.

 

[Darter6]

qkcuda, What you are doing is so close to the last car/engine I built, but a LA 318.It's in a 63 Belvedere.
The cam is a Comp High Energy 268 H. .454/.454 lift,[email protected] 218*Lobe sep 110*.Installed at 108* 9.1 compression.
600 carb,auto with stock converter,3.23, Headers dual 2 1/2'' exhaust.
Car is bare bones as of now but plan on A/C,PDB,PS.As it sits it sounds good, runs great, and has no problem pullin' the B body around.
The 700 and the 701 to me are so close you may not tell the difference,so I believe you will be fine with either you choose.
All this talk about the 361 is getting me jones-in' to get mine built for the 63. Gotta have a Big Block in a "B" body ya know.

 

[rumblefish360]

I’d go with the 701.
Actual cam card can be found at Lunatipower.com, look up the cam.

 

[qkcuda]

I’d go with the 701.
Actual cam card can be found at Lunatipower.com, look up the cam.

I must be a bit thick. Whenever I go on that website all I can get is the short description under "details". How do you access the cam cards?

 

[rumblefish360]

BRB ...


Mutha! Fracker!!!!!

No! Your not thick! I even went to my paper catalog to look it up and it’s not there! Some-of- beach! Try an email or a phone call to get a fax sent?

 

[rumblefish360]

Sorry about that qkcuda. (Edited post above)
Perhaps that was the old site that had the information. Dam shame.