David Vizard's PowerTec 10 EP 36 Ford's 303 cams? 'Horrible or Mediocre at best↓↓
Вставка
- Опубліковано 10 вер 2024
- Powertec 10. In this, episode 36 DV lets loose with some pretty heavy duty criticisms of Ford Performance 303 series of cams intended for the 289 - 351 CID Windsor engines. Undoubtedly these somewhat heavy duty putdowns are going to be a little controversial among hard and fast Ford fans but if you know DV then you will also know he can back up all his claims.
IOP Porting software
davidvizardperf...
TorqueMaster software
davidvizardperf...
If you are savvy enough to read this description For a limited time you will receive a $25.00 refund on purchase of the full versions of above software's. To receive the refund you need to drop me an email with your invoice# after purchase @ davidvizardseminar@gmail.com
If you purchase the 90 day trial versions for $10.00 The same as above applies after purchase of full versions plus the $10.00 trial purchase price for a total of $35.00 refund.
Email davidvizardseminar@gmail.com
Website davidvizardperf...
Facebook / davidvizard434
waltersengines...
www.flotekhead...
jonescams.com/
The famous B cam... Back in the day it seemed like every Fox body had one in it or they wanted one! I might have something for us to demonstrate on this cam scam... Great Video like always from my friend and Mentor
B camis about a sound
But every 302 i part out still has the factory cam lol
Back when those cams were supposed to be 'It' for SBFs I had a rework 351W/Vortec blown car come in - it ran hard enough but I never liked any of the 303 grinds and sure enough.
Supposedly I was the 'go-to' guy for the Fords, but I wasn't that kind of guru just paid attention to detail.
I had Comp grind a custom profile I came up with for the car and pitched the 303. When it came in it went 490rwhp (w/boost) on the rollers, with my grind it went 484 - naturally aspirated - and 635rwhp with the same boost as the 303.
That was before there were 'proper' (N/A or boost) grinds for the SBF, on this one I went similar to under-water exhaust marine grinds with some specs of my own. The car idled at 800, used less fuel, was strong down low and when the boost came in the car that was next to it was now car-lengths behind.
That one sticks in my mind the most, but every 303 cammed SBF that came in left without the 303, N/A or boost they had way more power across the band and much happier drivers!
M and M Precision Power Inc.
So what works with 306” stock GT40P heads and carbed?
I have my first B303 cam, I never really cared for the specs on them but decided to try one. I didn't like it from the first time I hit the throttle, I think it's the slowest reving camshaft I've ever seen. Thanks for all the technical information. Hope you have a Merry Christmas
That's why you spray a B Cam. Nitrous loves the B.
@@hoost3056 nitrous helps any camshaft. I got tired of filling bottles 30 years ago, been running turbo ever since.
Back in the day when I ran a Z28, I tried quite a few factory Chevy high perf cams (from the ORANGE parts book with the stop watch on the front). There were lousy compared to after market cams. I quickly learned that small block Chevy rockers were the weak link as burnt up very fast when revs were demanded. For some reason, Chevy performance failed to tell people that the first upgrade they had to do in a small block , was to ditch the ball Rockers. The LS finally moved to a needle rocker. The small block Chevy cams were so DEAD, they covered up this deficiency of the weak rocker arm. thanks David, Merry Christmas and all the best in the New Year !!
Thank you, David. I am a believer of the tight LSA. Quite a few years ago, you speced a cam for my street/strip car with a 406 SBC. 105 LSA - and 251 duration @0.050 - the idle lope is definitely there and it isn't easy to tune for the street, but the midrange and top end are astounding. I love your books, articles and videos that go into camshaft design, I always learn something. Thank you again for sharing your knowledge with us. Have a Merry Christmas, Pete.
Im considering a 105 LSA for my 406 pontiac with 6X heads 8.5-1 comp and wondered what vacuum # you see with your engine and if you're using a QJ. do you run a vacuum booster for Power brakes?
@@waltmucha2499 - I don't recall the vacuum. It's enough for the power brake booster from a Datsun 280ZX that I have in the Datsun 240Z that the 406 SBC is in. But I have a feeling that this booster may be more forgiving than other designs as to the minimum vacuum required to work. Also, it's not just the LSA but the duration and static compression ratio that creates the vacuum at idle. I have 10.3:1 static compression. Lower compression like 8.5:1 will probably have a very lazy low end if there's anything like 250 deg duration at 0.050" in you cam.
@@pete540Z Thx for the info.
Whats the rest of the specs and how does it run? Did you dyno?
The 5.0 Revolution was based on the stock HO SEFi engine being the modern day emissions compliant equal to a 64-67 289 K code solid lifter 310 at lash cam engine. 271 to 306 HP gross was about 190 to 228 HP net like the HO was. It did the same thing the 64 - 67s did with a lot less duration. No one else did any science on Five Oh cams for Ford, except Peter at Ford EEE. Everything you say Mr Vizard...100% in line with what two dyno guys said about the Watson's cam profiles devised for deTomaso and the Australians 5.0 by Tickford's David Flint. The basic brilliance of the forged pistons, EFi intakes and exhaust and the optional Alan Root/ GT40 heads were a crutch to the bad choices made for emissions and CAFE based choices for cam profile. The fact that the 300 HP White 1994 Mustang 351 used the 1980 G code Panther HO and 1973 Marine 351 Windsor cam profile proves that all the 303 roller cams were way off the ideal for any self respecting performance OHV V8. 21 year old hydraulic cam tech was better than the newer 303 roller cams.
With your advice from videos on UA-cam, i made an impressive 302 na motor.
Producing 445ft lbs and 480 hp
It has 400ft lbs plus from 2700 to 5000rpm and made peak power at 5900. Thank you
bet David laughs at this crap, that's is almost 100 bhp/liter at 5900 impossible mate, that would be better than a Formula A engine
What were the specs on your combination?
David, I found your channel today and have really been enjoying it! Looking forward to the rest of the SBF head tests. I installed a B303 in my Blueprint long block due to it being on the shelf (actually the previous owner installed it in the old engine that blew up), set it at +4 if I recall and it makes good power, to the tune of 230/278 wheel. This engine is bored .040 with a TFS Street Burner intake as well as Mac longtubes and a custom tune. While it's not great power, I've heard from a few other SBF people that those numbers are pretty impressive for stock E7TE heads. Anyways, keep up the great work and I agree there are WAY better camshafts out there than the Ford cams, but I feel mine is a good example of "if you have it use it!"
This is interesting as a couple of years ago I replaced a Comp High Energy hydraulic lifter cam in my 289 Ford with a Mike Jones spec'd cam. (I didn't know much about Jones, but I thought that providing engine data to someone who would then spec out a cam was better than picking blindly from a catalog.) Mainly I wanted a solid lifter cam for the sound. But what a difference it made as the Jones cam has a 109 degree lobe separation angle and shorter durations as David notes. With the shorter duration and the earlier closing point, it also captures more compression on this 9:1 compression ratio engine, which also contributes to the better performance. Compression test went from about 160 psi to 176 psi., idle is very calm and power brakes work fine. Very pleased with David's concepts.
DV. Thank you so much 4 sharing all your GOD-given wisdom
Hi DV
I recently built a SBF 347 with edelbrock E street heads for my 70 mustang .
I bought an Isky 270 mega cam straight from the catalog. when I started assembling the engine I talked to the local Cam/Cylinder Head Expert in my Town who does Heads/Cams for lots of top race teams . He told me my cam was to big and I'd hate it for a street car. he tried to sell me a smaller cam. I purchased your book how to build HP. After reading the cam spec chapter by pure luck the isky 270 mega cam was almost the ideal cam for my engine and my requirements.
The engine has excellent vacuum at idle and is an absolute torque monster through the mid range.... Couldn't be happier ☺
Yes!! do a special on porting the "Cadillac 500" early cylinder heads! fat flow please!!
Thanks David. I always enjoy what you present because you show all your reasons for why you’re saying what you’re saying. Whether i agree or not is up to me but I have more than enough information to decide. Merry Christmas to you and yours.
Goid stuff always; no fluff, just the facts please is always the best approach. Back in the 90's I bought 3 of your books. Back then I just began my adventure of understanding why the engine behaved the way it does. In the late 80' to early 90's.., the windsor 5.0 and Buick Turbo hey days; the mfg's were still in a teansitioning from the old school carburetor musclecars 116 leaded fuel days to the modern emission days and relatively new fuel injection. You touched on it early in your video when you commented on power begins in the head, in that - how does the cylinder heads service the displacement. In the early 5.0 days, the factory cast iron cylinder heads were only 135cc servicing a 302 ci block on a static somewhere in the 9's for "a performance car. Everything on that 5.0 engine was a compromise as you put it. The Buick guys in the 90's had their turbos so it was a natural decision to utilize a procharger on the 5.0. I too get tired of the "cult mind" bragging about their ignorance when talking hp/tq. I always ask them, "How would you qualify when engine parameters, say a cylinder head or any parameter really, is too small, medium, or large based on the output of said engine's power being mild, medium, or maximum? Most ppl with an ego wont answer but a few every now and then give me their honest answer.., "I dont know". The person that admits they dont know is someone I can have an honest conversation with. I have given up on most tech lines and most engine builders; I dont need too as I can do it myself. Anyway, your vid on the 303 cam brought back memories. Your books back in the 90's were the books that got me thinking about engine efficiencies and how to qualify them, thx for what you have done and are still doing!
P.S: I would like to attend one of your seminars if you are still doing them. Just wish I had the time.
With a set of (brand insertion) powerheads e7te ported heads with a very close to 80% i/e flow ratio the E cam works fairly well imo. Really liked mine. Almost 270whp with good intake carb and exhaust.
How much better would the correct cam be ??
Interesting point here how superior exhaust flow can somewhat compensate for a wide LSA , good ta know and consider when comparing cams, reinforces what David said about heads specing the cam.
Hey is it possible to get you to Port 1 intake and exhaust port on Cadillac big block heads especially the earlier small chamber ones
thanks David waiting on the next vide already have a bcam in motor in car now. I have a new 306 with fcam and GT40p heads about ready to go in but i might go ahead and get a cam that you suggest
Never thought I’d see a racing cam with a slower ramp rate than stock 😳
Thats wild! I noticed back in the day they were slower and weaker than flat hydraulics but I did remain focused on it.
Thanks DV for driving this home. I will listen this time. We all have to learn the hard way. Thanks again
I had a 1985 GT Mustang 302 with a E303 cam in it with valve job, rockers, good flat top pistons, 95 GT Ford heads and headers. I actually really liked that cam for daily driving and some racing. Drove the engine for 12 years. Never failed. Engine is still running in a 66 Mustang 4 speed. Engine was carbureted by the way. No emissions.
This was very interesting David. GM did exactly the same thing with the Hot Cam. The lobe designs are fine but how they were used isn't. Regrind that non HO 5.0 cam that I sent to you with the lobes of your choice and it'll easily blow away any "303" cam.
Well the lobe designs are bad too because the ramps are so slow, that also creates a problem when you tighten the LSA, you get to much overlap. The 303 cams have gross duration numbers that are better suited to cams with 240 ish degrees @ 0.050 .
I learned in the 70s that the dirt track cams made more power, or worked better on the street. Maybe it took a little while before I knew why, but, I won a lot of races back then
I used to run the f303 cam with a set of ‘70 351w heads all ported and ported rpm intake. Ran great in my 85 gt
I love it I don't have an opinion I have a Dino. DV you have never hurt my feelings. You have always spoken the truth. And nothing but. The truth
I think that torque is what makes the horsepower
useable on the street and
on the track . Great presentation , Thanks 🇺🇲🇵🇷👍
Very educational. You help people realize that there is so much more to building an engine.
Wow, DV I’ve got a lot of your books and used some of your ideas to success in cheap 2v 351w enduro class racing. Less is more. We are winning with the flat tappet ford moter sports or speed pro 214-224 cam I selected from the old desk top Dyno program from 20 years ago! It made the most torque in the rpm range we were expecting on the track. Listening to my buddies they said the cam is not big enough....lol but I do know it has a wide lobe center angle...which I didn’t like even then as a tight center will bring in the torque...
I have a few E cams on the shelf, I was such a believer in the program.... I’m stuck with them. 45 ft pounds of torque at lower rpm for the street would be so welcome....
I appreciate your thought process and experience David Wizard!
Thank you. Interesting and clear, a bit lengthy but informative.
I was beginning to worry. But you're okay and that's what matters🤗. That being said thank you for listening to my suggestion.☺
As you said Mr Vizard, the lobe acceleration of motorsport cams was based on the factory cam. They will probably go 100k miles
When I put the E303 in the Rangers 302 I advanced it 4 degrees which put it at 106 LCA and it idled and drives like a stock 5.0, but with 1.72 roller rockers and solid roller lifters. I had both the B and E cams to choose from that i had less than 100 bucks in both but I can see where advancing the cam and a tighter lobe separation makes more torque down low. Looks like the E cam is the best of the other 303s. Always looking to learn no matter how painful to watch that they're not what they were hyped up to be.Thanks DV
30 year old technology
aluminum flootek heads, b303 cam, lt headers, trick flow track heat, 1.6rr, full accessories. 310hp/333trq to the wheels.
stock 302 short block
5 speed tremec.
B303 for the win. stop hating
I tried an x303 in my mustang back in the day, it ran ok with stock bottom end & ported e7s. Switched to a comp xe258, car picked up 3 tenths & 4mph. Retarded that cam 4° & it picked up again for a total of 5 tenths & 6mph. Car ran 7.7 @ 87 with 3.55 gears, full exhaust & street radials. No bottle.
I noticed NO mention of the EEC IV fuel injection that people had to deal with when they changed cams and how hard it was to get the system to accept rumpity rump cams. Still to this day there are mustangs out there with hunting idles and dying coming to a stop.
Thanks David. Great info!
I want to install a camshaft on my 302 5.0 ho 1988 I am between a new trickflow stage 1 or an anderson that sells me my friend I have gt40p mounted heads and rockers 1.7 of cobra flat piston .30 hypereutectic speed pro will you know if I have any problems between valve and piston? Will it work with the same stock rods?
Love these videos. If you're ever looking for new material ideas, I for one would be very interested in hearing your thoughts on porting and chamber work on u-flow (both intake and exhaust on same side) cylinder heads such as Ford 300 or Jeep 258/4.0 straight sixes.
Its a side flow head
DV and a friend did a 2f landcruiser engine, they said it gained 40hp and became nearly unstallable, ive asked him for more specs and have not recived an answer.
There is a big difference between the Jeep 4.2 and the 4.0 head, isn't the 4.0 head actually the factory upgraded (substantially so!) version of the 4.2 head ?
The int port on a 4.0 is similar to a small block chevy so just follow the same mod recipe and you can't go wrong.
Both heads the spark plug is in a decent location so that's a good thing and the chamber layout is good too.
They come with decent intake and exhaust manifolds (4.0's) great engine to mod !
I've found the piston pins wear, pin is worn on top side on a few teardowns now , u rarely see that on a SBC, maybe the jeep just doesn't throw enough oil up there, note to self always run lots of oil pressure on a jeep motor ! keeps the T-chian alive too which is another thing they like to wear out.
It's fantastic to find someone who will do what they say they will. That's very rare in this day and age.
I use that verbatim. Sad but true today.
All you have is your word🤘
Great to be learning from you.
Discovered your channel a few hours ago and I was hooked. Thanks for sharing your VAST wealth of knowledge.
I had a 95 302 HO from new and looked into making it run better. First to go were the stock rockers...1.72 rollers are much better. And if you ever pulled the valve springs off of a stock HO the retainers are HEAVY...and they had rotators along with some really wimpy spring pressure so the engines would flatten out about 4000 rpm. A better set of springs, lightweight retainers without rotators and the roller rockers made a significant improvement in the 4000-6000 range. The induction was very restrictive too...I was seeing 18+" H2O when the filter and MAF were stock. A K&N along with some judicious removal of material got the restriction down into the 5" range. For sure you want to do these things first before digging into the camshaft...though I'm sure David is entirely correct in his video about them you shouldn't be changing cams until you have picked the 'low hanging fruit' so to speak.
50tussin would disagree on the mighty B cam. 🤣 he’s going 6s on some cobbled up junk with a b cam.
Excellent work. I had a 87 hatch 5.0 5speed. Stock cam a while then b303 then lunati…
Awesome content David! I always enjoy your videos, even when you show me how much I don't know i.e. every video. Keep the videos coming. Merry Christmas!
Another excellent insight into heads determining the correct camshaft. Thank you DV
I would like to fish your opinion. Building a 308 Winsor stock polished cast crank, factory +40 block with Iron 1970 351 Torino heads ported by me (while being supervised by a highly respected cylinder head professional). I tried to abide by many of your recommendations and chose the Lunati 30350742 flat tappet solid lifter cam. But I calculated roughly 400-420lbs spring pressure @ .570 lift. How much street use do you think I should expect to get out of my valve train with Lunati 73129 springs 437 lbs/inch? 7000 rpm is the target. Thanks.
I Just came across the summit racing 303 plus cams are these any better or are we still looking at the same thing
I have nagged about the sound before and I do it again. Could you please see to it that the spoken word is on both channels? When using earbuds it is a bit annoying when one only produces faint back ground music or static. Content wise very interesting, even if I don't have anything with big V8'S; the principles apply to my 1.5 litre Cologne V4.
I consider the SBF an adequate engine with limited breathing in stock form (I had an ‘89 notchback 5.0 5-speed). Your cam comments appear to be referring to that basic configuration. My current project engine is bigger and has significantly better stock heads, but may have its own problems as far as torque production is concerned. I’m referring to an LY6 6.0/364 with stock rec port heads. In comparison to a 302 or 351, I would surmise that cam requirements are quite different. I’d like to hear your comments about how those differences affect lobe separation and intake centerline. For the sake of discussion, I have picked a cam with 225° duration at 0.050” and 109.5° intake centerline. LSA (or LCA) is 113° and the exhaust lobe is 238°. This results is about 5.5° of overlap at 0.050, a relatively small amount but significantly more than a stock LS3 cam, for instance. Lift is 0.620” intake and 0.605” exhaust, though that does not define how fast the lobes are. My assumptions are that with this much cylinder head on this size engine (too much?), and with a stock torque converter, I would have a useful combination. Your comments on how cam specs vary with engine parameters such as head flow and energy, and displacement would be enlightening for us viewers. Thanks again for your lifetime of contributions to this science!
Brian, I am going to start toward this goal of getting the right cam first time. Have patience and we will get there.
I appreciate the video.
Though I haven't put my motor together I have erroneously bought into the Ford alphabet cam hype. My only saving grace is purchasing a Ford cam at a Craigslist price.
I will be porting a set of GT40P heads to mount on a stock lower end with the addition of at GT40 (non EGR) intake. I have the option to stay with a speed density set up, or change to mass air, with either option I will use a tuner and tuning software.
My 1986 Mercury Capri is a dedicated autocross car used a couple times a year for hill climb events. Most events I am in are below 60 mph in second gear. In some events speeds approach 90 mph in 3rd gear. The car has a 1991 WC T5 with 3.27 rear end gears. On the outside range I drive the car 300 miles to some events.
You mention some recommendations for cams that are a definite improvement over the Ford cams. How might I get a better sense of what cam I am looking for. This is a one off I am not a professional engine builder.
So I got your "How to Build Horsepower" book yesterday and dove into the cam chapters. Based on my understanding of the chapters, assuming the stock 1.85 intake valve size and stock 302 displacement here is what I have come up with. 45-50 overlap. 109 LCA. 266 duration.
The rpm range I rapidly rise and fall with autocross is 2000-5000 rpm, but that will rise on more open events with longer straights.
Having done some cam research online looking at: Lunati, Isky, Comp, Speedmaster, and Crane you are spot on in noting that catalog cams may have some positive attributes, but are unlikely to check all the boxes for a particular application. Finding a lobe center smaller than 112 is unusual and overlap falls into a broad range as well.
I have a set of 1.7 Crane roller rockers that could provide with some flexibility in regards to lift.
This channel is dead for now, find his other channel here: www.youtube.com/@DavidVizard
@@SinsBird Thanks
Glad to hear this because I always thought they were mediocre cams.
Very good to know. Thanks a lot
Back in the heyday of Fox bodies, it seemed the B303 was the hot item for the guys who didn't know much but wanted to look and sound cool. Kind like chrome valve covers and glass packs back in the 70's. They usually were outrun by the guys who put their $$$ into good heads and long tubes.
Hello David , A question, about those factory Ford camshafts , were they Hydraulic rollers ?
was the Isky and Jones cams also Roller or were they flat tappet , ?
I sent jones build info for a high torque 355 chev small block for a hydraulic flat tappet engine with Vortec heads
I was looking for high torque , 325-370 HP , in a heavy 4300lb vehicle , stock 1800 type converter , stock 3:00 gears ,
They replied with a mild duration , 112 lobe seperation angle under 490 lift ,
I believe this cam will out perform the factory Hydraulic roller
Thank you David ,
Your info is priceless , thanks a ton for the content you put out on video....Keep 'em coming !!!!
Merry Christmas !!
How do we get some of your 128 Theory camshafts?
Mr Vizard a great video as usual..I would however like to ask how the stock H.O. roller cam specs came to be about as you've shown?..Its my understanding that they were 210 @.050"?...You have the .050" spec listed as 222 degrees?
Panther, those numbers were from Ford issued specs. You have me now worried that my source may have been wrong. Any comments here???
DV
@@marvingvx1 . It has been commented about by a reputable cam grinder who has had a fair amount of experience with the factory cams who has suggested that 222 at .050" is likely a bit off from their findings...The remaining specifications are indeed correct and fall within tested ranges as well as what can be found with a search for the cam specs via the internet..You would find 210@.050" to be the common in regards to that particular specification on both intake and exhaust lobes..Thank you for your reply Mr. Vizard.
A lot of people buy cams based on the sound they make. The actual performance is a secondary consideration. Ford was probably catering to that crowd.
I just thought about other details related to the sbf build I am writing about. I am shooting for about 400 hp. This 93' Mustang LX will a 4:10 9" shortened rear, 5 speed manual transmission and 10" tires and likely a 10 point cage. And would a cam spring with less pressure actually keep up with the Lunati 30350742LK? I am really found of the way this cam looks on paper. I haven't found any springs that would match other than their 73129s. How do I get rates for your recommendations?
I have 2 valves gy6 139 qmb,4 cams A5-9.Planned to reduce for more tourque.Speed limit on 60km\h.Porridge on high rpm.More closed.Found 4 ngk plugs Standard,platinum,iridum and Ruthenium.Actually 6 as I read Tungsten and Gold-Palladium.More genres.So you change smaller noozles,better burn.Also "forbidden to use copper seal grease,because of "over-tourqe" will will damage engine and spark plug malfunction".F1 car has copper valve-seat.So maybe copper top-gasket,with oil-breather.And smaller valves and smaller cam.Ordred high voltage coil 45 000 v for 10$ and drag-coil 30$ on aliexpress."Sometimes they come back" Stephen King 1991.
IF you had a similar cam to the Jones 210duration but say it had 205/205 @50 would you get more TQ gains below 3000rpm? This question pertains to someone who owns a 5500lb Bronco with heavy 35" tires and 302ci
You talk about exhaust having a big effect but what about on turbo engines since they typically in a street version will run with slightly more exhaust back pressure than boost. I would assume this would pretty much kill any scavenge effect.
Most Turbo cams are pure guesswork on the part of the cam grinders. I will cover what you need to know on turbo cams in a separate video.
Dave V. ,,, wondering if your lobe center spefications changed after the advent of asymmetrical lobes ?
Crane lobes are used on these. I agree with them having two wide of a LSA.
Professor when will you look at the gen V LT1 cam I'm building one and need to know what you find is the way to go thanks
I agree .thought that 30 years ago.ran a lunati and destroyed b e,f,x nonstop.
DV for president You are the man thanks professor
He wasn’t born in the US…..
I just came across another channel that was saying that you don't want too much head intake flow under 0.100" lift because you get intake reversion. To my way of thinking, if you are getting excessive reversion then your valve closing event is incorrectly timed. To my way of thinking, the effectiveness of the valve overlap period pretty directly affects the quantity of the inducted charge that enters the cylinder. Maximising low flow, increases port velocity earlier, resulting in higher velocity and port energy at the end of the induction stroke. His comments sound more like suboptimal camshaft selection or set up. What area your thoughts on this?
Less intense lobes because people miss gears often. Wide LSA because some people use automatic transmission with highway gears. Their end goal may have been to avoid excessive phone calls. IDK.
Could you do a cam spec selection for the Pontiac engines?
I had kind of passed this one by at first [being a chevy guy]. But you know what? Good decision, DV. The windsor has its peculiarities [like 1.84/1.54 valves], and as such deserves a closer look: there is something to learn. Thoughts on advance, overlap and lsa will go a long way to folks enjoying their engine investments a whole lot more. If I had to guess... ford engineers were handed some kind of intesnsity limit guideline for valvetrain [or created a flawed math model derived from lower quality valve springs], and told to work around it? I really do not know.
What about boosted engines? I've always been told to use cams with very little overlap? The one in my 306 Ford is a Trick Flow 542/563 lift and 224/232 duration on a 112 degree lobe separation angle. I used 1.6 rockers. I run 12 pounds of boost . Is there a better off the shelf cam for my engine? Trick Flow 170 cc track heat heads and Edelbrock EFI performer RPM intake and 60 # injectors. The heads are hand ported and port matched as is the intake.
James, I am going to do a video on cams for turbo motors in the near future.
DV
Has anyone been able to find the episode 36 addendum mentioned at the end of this video ?
Thank you for making the videos, it seems that in various aspects of engineering people don't use test equipment to verify their results. It must be very frustrating to deal with.... I wonder what proportion of modified engines have actually been on a dyno?
Ooo thank your DV!!!!! You are the man! Now how do I get the cam I want? I have settled with a roller cam. Comp. crs283t hr-107 t thumper part # 20-6000-9 , dur @ 50 227 ,241 . It says lobe separation is 107 . Card also says intake center line is 102 . This is on a 360 . My goal has been to have a good motor going down the Interstate at 3000 . Seam fine to me but I wanted a smaller overlap to have a better running motor. I don’t care about the idea. I have a single plane elder Brock intake in eldenbrock head. It runs Purdy good but does not pull hard like I thought it would. As far as I know I have the centerline at 101 . Degree the cam with gears was hard cause I am not a pro but I got it done. I don’t drag race it . Just street fun going down the Interstate (speed limit here is 80) . Is there a better cam? Cause like you said going through the books don’t see anything like what you are saying. But I really like what you are doing on here and the work you are doing for us. We need more people like you. I would love to go to your seminars but it’s a dream some day.
Thank you DV for the truth
David, found you on UA-cam now I'm hooked.... I have a question..... I know setting up a cam we normally phase in number one cylinder.... Have you ever tried to phase in all the cylinders and then average it out, wouldn't that make better horsepower Then just relying on number one cylinder.... Also shouldn't we take in account for crank flex under Heavy loads.....
Thanks for the information which revealed much truth! Your videos are top notch with so much viable information.
Do you offer a camshaft recommendation service? I have an old school 427 FE street engine with non stock stroke and would like to be able to keep up with some of the LS crowd but also maintain driveability. Thanks for the videos David.
yes. Email me at davidvizardperformanceseminars.com
Hey David, how come you didn't talk more about the E cam which was on the right LCA for a 302? Based off your old chart (You talked to me years ago about my Chevy TPI motor and I put in a DV270HRH cam into it based off our talk) but the Ford E cam actually is on the right LCA and if you advanced it 4 degrees, it would also have more overlap. However, based off your older article (I am basing it off your camshaft section of your Max Chevy book or even your How to Build Max Horsepower-I literally have most of the books you have published in the last 10-15 years except the first Big Block book which has been out of print for awhile) the Ford E cam advanced 4 degrees would actually fit into your formula of a street performance or maybe even Street Strip as 60 degrees overlap in a 302 is quite large. If someone really was insistent in staying Ford parts all the way, wouldn't that be the most "correct" cam for the 302? Granted that vacuum might not be that great compared to the Isky or Jone's cam.
I’d be curious to see other popular generic cams added to this list, Comp XE and Anderson “n41” for example.
Also, what valve springs to use on E7 and GT40 heads approaching.500 lift like with an e303 style cam.
Is getting rid of the exhaust rotator an option? Is a beehive style spring available similar to what you see with Vortec heads?
Thanks again!!!
Is the rotator on top of or under the spring ?
@@luckyPiston on top, same as a SBC.
@@Buck_Em_Garage Than its pretty straightforward, assuming int & exh v/v stems are the same diameter , pick up a 8 intake retainers and swap them on the ext and voila u can run a bunch more lift.
One way to do it is buy a complete cam kit for your application or you could see what springs the cam manufacturer recommends and then just use those specs.
@@luckyPiston I was under the impression that springs with the rotators were shorter than the intake springs. I’d like to go to a beehive style, currently running an E303 cam.
**insert thunder clap here*** King Lord God B cam, ruler of street and strip, along with his mistress, 1.7 roller rockers, DOMINATES all comers. No other camshaft, either past, present or future can or will hold a candle to the TITAN of automotive performance. Blaspheme and know the wrath of the almighty!!
- ????? -!
i had you spec out a hyd roller for my 408 clevor cam is awesome super responsive like a nascar cup engine going to get you to spec out a 6.o gm with ls-3 heads as soon as terry walters can get to it,hope for 500 plus horsepower.thank you for your videos i did meet you out at terry walters about 5 or 6 years ago when i was building my kaase boss 429 my cam had to be balanced something nobody talks about
I love you set man I'm sure glad the game is knowledge always liked all the folks always been around older folks and learned everything I know from older folks so we appreciate you keep on doing what you do I'm certainly subscriber and I will stay a subscriber and I will share your information
Love your work sir.
THANK YOU DAVID YOUR THE BEST, CANT WAIT FOR THE NEXT ONE
Wide LSA for less overlap, less emissions, smoother idle.....cheap and easy, but not good.....DV thanks again for the absolute truth....as difficult as it may be, it still needs to be said!
Vizard again teaching the world the way it’s supposed to be. Can u imagine how much horse power and torque has been lost because of all those lazy tard cams they made for DECADES. Excellent stuff I’d LOVE to do a back to back test on a dyno to prove it to the naysayers :)
All hail the mighty B cam!
Great video. Thanks DV. Regards Greg
Where's the "episode 36 adendum" video?
Have you ever tested Mopar cams?
Hello Mr. David Vizard I was wondering how is the value for hydraulic intensity is determined. Could you shed some light onto that and if you have already done so, may you point out the video where you did? Thank you so much for your knowledge!
- Alejandro
You take net lift and subtract it from gross lift , that's the time in degrees spent lifting the valve off its seat to 0.050" lift, the idea is the faster you yank the valve off the seat and get it above the 0.050" (the point at which you have meaningful flow) the more time you can spend flowing through the port , this is critical when trying to achieve 100+% volumetric efficiency.
@@luckyPiston thank you very much!
great vid. keep them coming please.
Like it.
I guess I can count myself lucky none of the six companies I asked have come back with any suggestion on cam for me =D
How well will the Jones cam do in a stock 351 liked the video a lot
David right again as usual I think if you take any of these ford cams your talking about and weld a weight to one end to make a base so you can stand it upright off of the floor then take an old piston and weld it upside down on the other end of the cam shaft they make a pretty cool ashtray which in my book it would serve a better purpose for an ashtray then it would in a car engine as far as horsepower is concerned.Great video, great information and one great man thank you for all you do appreciate you
i have always hated b cams and im so glad its justified here. also where do i pay so i can get advice on a cam for my 306 lol
Absolutely terrible for performance but can get you a good sound! I of course I had a couple. But NEVER again! Everyone is out to make money. PS I did go 6.50s in the 1/8 with SBE, eddy heads and an F303 in a coipe with a stock T5 and a king cobra clutch! Pretty impressive 4 real back then. Never broke trans because I used that clutch, it could have been .2 .3 faster. Now I got one on my channel that goes near 4s with a 357W.
I'd wondered about all the "303's" having the same centerline; it didn't seem right, and I'm glad I never bought completely into it.
study DVs LSA guide
Just about every cam manufacturer I've looked at seems to have fallen in love with some particular LSA, and used it for all their cams for all engines. One example is Isky. Everything is 108 degrees. For Comp often it is 110 degrees. Crower has some variation, but loves 112 degrees. Howards uses many different ones, as does Lunati. The old Mopar shafts the LSA decreases as the duration and lift increase.
The point is, to many companies through the same grind at all engines. These were likely all designed on a SBC. Many don't even bother to make a different grind for the BBC. They can't all need the same thing.