I'm working with Charles Reichard at CamcraftCams to develop a grind for my blown 340 (350 cu.in.) with alloy ('64) 300 heads. Having just read the popular Hot Rodding article by Vizzard, I'm starting to understand things a little better. Obviously the engine is under-valved, but just as obviously using a blower compensates for that somewhat. There are other compromises as well. Has anyone used that CompCams cam selection software that Johnny Hunkins thought was so great? I was wondering how it pans out on Buick engines. Anyway, for this motor, max horsepower is not the goal, obviously or I wouldn't be using the '64 heads and stock valves. And here's where the entire build goes outside the box. The compression is 10.8:1, chosen to enhance fuel economy and low end torque as well as increase efficiency overall. Bear in mind that alloy heads will tolerate a little more compression, so in comparison to iron heads you'd want to think somewhere around 10:1, maybe less. The small valve to displacement ratio would indicate a lobe centerline angle (LCA) of about 102* based on the chart in the article. Long rods were used. Charles tells me this moves peak power upward and I think he said that it would tolerate more lobe separation. Use of the blower would also seem to dictate less overlap and therefore a larger LCA. How much larger is the real question, the trade off seems to be that as overlap increases (LCA decreases and duration increases) economy tends to decrease. Plus, there are the rumors about GN motors running zero overlap cams, which would sound like a good thing with a blower. Also as duration increases, effective stroke decreases, dynamic compression decreases, and economy decreases, whereas power can actually go up due to better filling of the cylinder. It's all very confusing to start with, and adding the blower to the mix makes it doubly so. Just about when I think I'm starting to understand it, along comes Vizzard and says the motor will run best with a tight LCA. YIPPEE! As if I wasn't confused enough already. And then just for fun he says a flat tappet cam gets the valve lifting quicker and makes more volume under the curve for a low or moderate lift cam. OK, fine. I wasn't planning on using roller lifters anyway. Hopefully I can get ahold of Charles this week sometime and when I do I'll let y'all know where we are. I don't know exactly how this will apply to what some of you are doing about cam choices but at least it ought to give a bit more perspective. Jim
Probably not. It's a fairly rough idle if I'm not mistaken. I have one but have not yet installed it. The TA performance site lists it as having a lumpy idle and idles at @ 700 rpm in gear. They also claim it's a good street/strip cam with 30+ HP gain, maybe less, maybe more with a 350.o No: They said I could get away with a stock converter but you'll get more punch with a 1800-2200 stall.
would the TA 310 be ok for a weekend cruiser with power brakes? or would the TA 290-94H be a better choice? and would be goin hydraulic not solid. thanx scott
Note the lack of low rpm torque with the 310, peak rpm power can only be used with the right gearing, head porting, and compressionover 10:1: http://www.tworock.com/mjd/buick/350/ta-310.jpg The 290-94H is a great cam however I do not have a dyno run for that one... If you have ported heads it is a good cam, if not go for a milder cam The Ta 212 is a favorite of mine for a street car with ocasional strip runs. Have a look at the extra torque down low in rpm range, great with highway gears, no head porting, or even low compression. http://www.tworock.com/mjd/buick/350/ta-212.jpg
TA just shipped my (TA284-88) on Friday (hope it gets here today), it'll be going into my 340. I chose this cam because its got the most aggressive profile that's ok to run with factory valve train and TC. BTW, my compression is 10.2:1 and my gears are 3.55:1.
The TA212 is a perfect street cam if you like a little lope, and still gets great performance and fuel economy. The 284-88 actually has a smoother idle than the 212, but more upper end power, and slightly more lower end torque. Nice cam..... really runs great if you have port work done. I am building a 9.5:1 right now that will use the 310 and I will do some porting of my heads in my shop. 3.90 gears w/2400 stall..... so I really want a sceamer. Got a care package coming from TA as we speak.....so some time this summer i should have that in..... if not earlier.
Mike Atwood, where have you been, dude? o No: Seems like forever since we've seen ya on the board! Hope you're doin' well! :TU: Keep us up-to-date on this new mill!
Back to cams... I bought an old Lunati SP1 from Dave Gramlow that'll be going in the LeSabre come spring (or, the first week that there are consistent temps above 10*C). We'll see how that turns out. BTW, I've inadvertantly lost the specs to this cam. Something tells me valve lift was around .450/.470, and that duration @ .050" was something like 214/224, and LC was 110*, but I'm not certain on any of those. Anybody have specs for this cam lying around? I'd really like to be sure.
My last motor had an old crane cam,pn.900211 grind no.h224/304-2-12. IT was.494/.520 lift . Had a fair idle an made good power. My new cam for my build is a ta413. Anyone here using one in there 350,how do you like it.
Just ordered the new TA roller cam set up i am going with a 212 grind Ill be parting the lunati sp29 when i am done.
i run a comps 268h. decent cam. when i rebuilt the motor 4 yrs ago, i really didnt know too much about buicks. limited parts and what not. did go with the 10;1 pistons, but if i could do it over, a much bigger cam dor sure. amybe the 310, or so.:3gears: :3gears:
Doing good....been real busy this past year! Time to "make time" to do things I enjoy. I have 1 head just about finished..... doing a little port work. i'll post pics in a day or so if i can. Hopefully the port work will wake it up with the 310.
I the stock NHRA alot of us run the Bullet brand of race cam. Stock lift with gobbs of duration hydrolic lifters. Dan:dollar: :dollar: :dollar:
I just checked their website, and they only had listings for Chev, Olds and Pontiac; no Buick parts. Do you have part numbers and specs? o No:
Is anyone using the Lunati 67002 (Voodoo) cam? http://www.lunatipower.com/Product.aspx?id=1496&gid=287 I'm kinda leaning towards this one as my cam choise.
