I think Ken Gies (techg8) could build him a carburetor pretty quickly. He might even have one all ready to go. https://v8buick.com/index.php?forums/everyday-performance-llc.172/ https://www.everyday-performance.com/
Maybe the cam problem if it is, might be that the lift for both intake and exhaust are the same. Most of the Buick cams have a good spread on intake to exhaust lift and duration The 210 cam has@1.55 rr 459-470 lift with 1.60rr 473-485 and duration @.050 is 218-230IE advertised 265-280 the 288 cam has@1.55rr 460-460 lift with 1.60rr 475-475 and duration @.050 is 223-230IE advertised 284-288 The 210 cam has more lift on that exhaust and that 288 cam has both lifts the same at 475 I would bet the 210 cam is the better cam What I find interesting is the 290 cam is given a fair idle rating and those other 2 cams get a good idle rating The 288 cam should be considered a moderate idle rating fair ide rating is heavy lump on TA site With the 290 cam they go back to a bigger spread on the intake-exhaust lifts so go figure. Go to 10.0 and use the 290 cam lol
FYI you can get clamp on 02 sensor bungs so that you don't need to do any welding, just in case you decide to go the AFR gauge route: https://www.summitracing.com/parts/hok-71014302rhkr
The 284 is not a big cam. 223/230 duration @ .050 Was the cam degreed? Was it installed "Dot to dot"?
Some timing sets have been known to be off in the placement of the dots if that’s all that was guiding the installation of the gears and chain!
Excuse me but some of these posts are a bit over my head, I’m a mechanic by trade but not an engine builder. I’m curious what peoples dislike with this cam are? Is it performance or street tuning? I have that cam in my 350, it was degreed and I have a quadrajet built by everyday performance, the heads were ported and polished with large valves, and I have one of Jim’s converters, I am so far happy with the engine. But I am comparing it to my stock 70 two barrel engine.
Maybe you have the correct pieces to get this cam running properly. I can't figure it out either I have a cam that is bigger than all 3 of those and I am not having any problems.
The TA 284-88H cam is not a big cam, but everything is relative. The larger an engine is, the milder any cam will act. The 284 cam in a 455 will behave much milder than in a 350. Everything is combination dependent, especially with larger cams. If you try to run a moderately sized cam in a smaller engine with a single plane intake, 2.56 gears, a big carburetor, and a stock converter, it will yield disappointing results.
There are few threads on this website that go back several years dealing with this cam. People who struggled to get their car tuned. In some cases the cam was removed. This particular build were talking about today has the gearing, the stall, and the compression. It should run great. 284 is advertised as streetable but a slight improvement over the 212. But I think we can all agree that anyone that uses the 212 is much happier than those that use the 284.
People that have run the 413 cam in the 350, and 455 say it lacks low end torque, ESPECIALLY in the 350, but I never had that issue with the 413 in my 350, it ran like a scalded dog
99% of my problems were because of my big carb. Obviously the 256 gear is a disappointment but shouldn't hold me back with as much trouble that I've had. Heres this 1 minute long video i shot of me doing a nice burnout last fall when I first got the 600 cfm carb close to dialed in. This guy has pmd and said he would cry tears of joy if his car ran as good as mine. It took me alot of work to get where I am. But with his combo it should be easy. Also, for the record I'm convinced the sp3 intake is perfect and not the problem. This conclusion is due to how well my car drives with the 600 cfm carb. Also, I watched a power Nation episode the other day featuring a build with a trick flow single plane on a mopar. Very similar to the sp3. Made extremely good torque through the RPM range. And they went on about how a streetable single plane is a great option. TA nailed it with the sp3. Laid about 75 plus feet rubber, car shifted at 4000rpm and that ended it.
Sure, you found a solution to the mismatch, and that is great. Like I said, everything is combination. I'm happy that you are happy with the way the car runs on the street. That's what counts. Take the car to the track and get some numbers. I can tell you that the same carburetor that you are very happy with will probably hurt the peak HP. It's an air flow thing. Do you still have the stock converter and 2.56 gears?
Yes i do. But I got my 2004r sitting on the shop floor. Slowly getting the rest of my combo. With the 600 cfm my zero to 100 mph time stayed the same. I hit 120 once with it no problem. I think the air flow calculator at 110% efficiency and 6,000 RPM said I needed a 650-cfm carb. I've spun the tires past 6000 a few times. I like it. Certain surfaces I hook too quick though. It only burns out for a few feet. But Like I said in the vid I couldn't hardly spin tires at all with the quickfuel. Problem I'm having with the 600 carb is 30cc accelerator pump was not enough and the 50cc is almost too much. too much fuel from a dead stop... I haven't messed with the carburetor much though. But it's sweet that I can go out turn the key fire it up and drive it and never have to feather the gas. Just enjoy the drive.
I can tell you from experience that EVERYTHING feels fast on the street. Getting it on the track is very often an eye opener. I can't tell you how many times after getting my time slip, I thought to myself, Damn, I thought it was faster than that.
My car isn't what I'd consider fast. Zero to hundred takes about 17 seconds. Overall the performance is a little disappointing. But that is why I'm going to continue working on the combo. My Firebird I had right out of high school was extremely fast. would do 150 no problem. I hit 140mph on the local "rural" on ramp often. *Going up hill* I have no self-control and I really don't still so I don't really need a car that fast LOL...the buick is tame.
Yeah… my car could spin the tires from a stop right now, but not for more than a couple feet. Maybe you’re right about the carb! But I still feel like I’ve been through enough with the q jet and qft to think that it may not be carb related after all. Believe me I hope it is. I also don’t want to get another carb try to tune it and end up with another carb sitting on the shelf, but I guess it’s easier than a cam swap at this point. But that may be where I’m headed if another carb doesn’t work.
When I got the engine back from the builder as now, I wasn’t satisfied with the way it ran. I started looking for solutions to fix the way it ran. Many on here suggested the cam was not properly degrees. With the help of Mike from TA, he helped walk me through how to degree the cam. Turns out it was installed dot to dot, but was ground 4 degrees retarded, so I bought an adjustable timing set and advanced it 8 degrees so we’re now at 4 degrees advanced. After this, the qft I had on the motor at the time (seemed to run the best) then ran even more rough. I messed with that carb another few weeks, then said screw it… and put the q jet back on. For the first time I had adjustability back in the q jet. Turning the idle mixture screws actually made a difference where they didn’t before. So I got the q jet adjusted as good as I could and now drive the car as is. But rides are limited to cooler weather, or short trips around town because of the heating/rough idle issues. It’s one of those feelings that you know the engine isn’t running 100% so you try not to slam on it too hard and I find myself just putting around town most of the time
