Hey Madman, good to see you on here! Always enjoy reading your posts. Anyway, I have a 4 bbl manifold and original carb I bought for my '64 a couple years ago and never got around to installing. Still planning to give it a try. Been waiting to see if I could get enough funds together to rebuild the engine at the same time. Would the 10.25 pistons and T/A cam offering work better with the 4bbl than the stock stuff in there now?
Glad to see him back too. As long as the cam isn't too big, it'll work great. The TA 212 would be pretty radical for it you would think with smaller CID (especially for the 300 version), but the head flow should keep it in check somewhat by lowering the RPM potential some. As long as you get your compression matched to it fairly well enough, it should be a nice little performer. Just remember though that that cam will probably raise powerband so highway gearing may cause it to be a bit soft on the take off until RPMs can come up some... But hey, why don't I do some calculations with that combination to see? lol Ok calculation results forthcoming: Bone stock Buick 300-4 with 600 CFM carb, 7.75:1 DCR (9.81:1 SCR), stock untouched heads, iron manifolds, simple dual exhaust, using TA's 212 (small block on 110 LSA) cam (.454/.456 I/E lift @1.55rr, 218/230 @.050 with 280/285 @.006, 110 LSA @4*advance install (106 ICL) for 66* IVC point) comes to: Torque 324.5 @3625 RPM with exactly 270 hp @5000 RPM. Would need better gearing and/or higher stall converter. I'll do the same combination as above, with the 340 crankshaft for 340 CID: (stay tuned) I'm going to have to do these with better flowing environment. This power increase from adding TA's cam is just too impressive to leave alone in a stock environment... Well the 300 with those ported heads I calculated with the 340 earlier, above cam and compression, small tube headers and 750 CFM carb came to: 354.5 ft. lbs. @3750 RPM with 309.5 peak hp @5250 RPM. Pretty impressive for a .030 over 305 CID Buick 300, considering the head flow. Low RPM didn't do bad either. The cam has a surprisingly wide powerband. At 2000 RPM, it showed 324 ft. lbs., and at 6000 RPM it still had 291.5 hp... Same as above calculations, with the 340 crank making it 346 CID, lowers powerband as expected, adding more torque but losing some hp: 389 ft. lbs. @3500 RPM with 303.5 hp @4750 RPM. At 2000 RPM, it has 376 ft. lbs. and still has 281 hp @5500 RPM, but trails off fast after that with 253 hp @6000. We can see here that the heads are a major restriction with more cubes for higher RPM. The heads and engine design overall is better suited for the original 300 CID for a higher RPM performance engine. In 340 form, it's better suited as a moderate street combination for use with taller gearing and/or heavier cars. It got a major torque boost over the 300 combination, but a lower powerband and a little less hp. Gary
Sounds good. I tried T/A web site and couldn't find any cams listed for the 300 anymore. Maybe they don't carry them any longer. Northern shows a complete rebuild kit for 300 with cam lifters etc, but don't know much about them. They list compression at 10.25to 1 on pistons. Buick listed the 4bbl engines having 11 to 1 from factory.
Yeah I've been too busy for a while to get on here :ball: Ive jumped the GM ship and now Im a furd tech :shock: Hay, furds break more often and I sure don't hide my true GM loyalties :bla: Just because I fix them dosnt mean I'll drive one :laugh: Taking Ford training and traveling all over for the country for Ford certs' plus turning big flat-rate hours with a one-hour each way commute eats a lot of my time :blast: Plus I almost died a few months back (a long and unpleasant adventure that I wasn't expected to survive) and that chewed even more time :ball: But Im going to try and make some time for V8Buick Ive missed my SBB brothers, we may get heated with each other at times but its all over a passion for Buick knowledge :beer Glad to be back my friends :TU:
Isky still makes them. They are old school grinds, but Ed isn't called The Cam Father for nothing :Brow: Also remember that 215 cams interchange with 300s and 340s and there is a whole lot of aftermarket support for the 215/Rover V8
Wow, sorry to hear about the near death experience, but glad you pulled through! Now if you can survive the Ford experience LOL!
Well here ya go, Derek. Those two cams side by side with same DCR and everything else the same. This is the CC vs the 'modded stock Buick 350', and they're actually pretty close to neck and neck on averages. The modded stock cam would of course be easier on the valvetrain and therefore last longer, so it would be a no-brainer to me which one to use. :grin: Averages were taken from 2000-6000 RPM. Averages for CC cam: 321.1 ft. lbs. with 230.8 hp vs the 'modded stock Buick 350 cam' 320.7 ft. lbs. with 232.4 hp. Again, showing slightly less torque with slightly more hp. Gary
Excellent! Looks like your factory style modified sbb 350 converted to a sbb 300 cam wins because like you say, would be gentler on the valve train so springs would cost less as well as the cam would last longer. Makes me wonder what all the averages for all of those sbb 350 simulations were and which cam would of reigned supreme? :Brow: Derek
Yeah yeah I get the hint, but damn I got other things to do tonight besides clickity click on my laptop. lol!! That would take some time to do for sure! I'll probably get around to it eventually though, knowing how I am. Thanks for the encouragement Derek. Gary
NO! Thank you Gary, for all the time you put in to do these simulations! Glad your a Buick guy and not anything else. :TU: Don't worry about updating the other numbers, I'm sure you'll get another opportunity to do them again in another thread, there is always another "what cam" thread that pops up at least once a month. Derek
