CC306 vs. CC467
12-03-2007, 02:32 PM
#1
11 Second Club
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Missouri
Posts: 308
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CC306 vs. CC467 I was wanting to know the power gains of these cams?(assuming all bolt ons) i know general supporting mods, but are there special need for one or the other? What numbers would you expect out of both? Is the CC467 too big for a A4(say 3600 stall)? Does one prefer nitrous over the other? Obtainable on the streets? Will they run on a stock bottom end? Sorry for the all the questions, i am in the market for a cam.
12-03-2007, 04:17 PM
#5
LS1TECH Sponsor
iTrader: (7)
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Texas
Posts: 414
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That link is to a Crane cam with 222/222 @ .050.
The Comp 467 is 230/236 .050 (280/288 adv) 576/.570 lift (w 1.6) 113 LSA
The Comp 306 is 230/244 .050 (290/307 adv) .544/.576 lift (w 1.6) 112 LSA
Even though both have 230 degree sof duartion @ .050, they are prett different. I am not a fan of the wide LSA on either cam but you are just wanting the two compared so that is what i am doing.
The 467 has the XFI lobes that have faster ramps and need GOOD springs. The lower seat to seat timing will build a lil more low end power and make peak HP a lil sooner. Probably pull to 6200-6300 RPM or so with stock heads.
The 306 has milder lobes that open/close the valves slower and has overall less lift. This cam will work with less expensive springs (*although good springs are always a good idea) and will probably pull to 6400-6500 RPM with stock heads. The CC 306 has a lil more overlap due to the large exhaust lobe and overall higher seat to seat timing.
RWHP #'s are a result of the entire combination from air filter to tail pipe as well as trans type, rear end type, stall efficiency, customers willingness to work out all the bugs and fine tune everythinga nd just not shoot himself in the foot.
I believe both world make similar RWHP #'s but the 467 will make peak a lil sooner and make a lil more low and mid range power and be a lil more streetable.
Eiher one will like a 3000-3600 stall and pull to a RPM high enough to blow a stock bottom end if you let it.
The CC 306 will be slightly better for NOS but there are better choices than these 2 for any application.
The Comp 467 is 230/236 .050 (280/288 adv) 576/.570 lift (w 1.6) 113 LSA
The Comp 306 is 230/244 .050 (290/307 adv) .544/.576 lift (w 1.6) 112 LSA
Even though both have 230 degree sof duartion @ .050, they are prett different. I am not a fan of the wide LSA on either cam but you are just wanting the two compared so that is what i am doing.
The 467 has the XFI lobes that have faster ramps and need GOOD springs. The lower seat to seat timing will build a lil more low end power and make peak HP a lil sooner. Probably pull to 6200-6300 RPM or so with stock heads.
The 306 has milder lobes that open/close the valves slower and has overall less lift. This cam will work with less expensive springs (*although good springs are always a good idea) and will probably pull to 6400-6500 RPM with stock heads. The CC 306 has a lil more overlap due to the large exhaust lobe and overall higher seat to seat timing.
RWHP #'s are a result of the entire combination from air filter to tail pipe as well as trans type, rear end type, stall efficiency, customers willingness to work out all the bugs and fine tune everythinga nd just not shoot himself in the foot.
I believe both world make similar RWHP #'s but the 467 will make peak a lil sooner and make a lil more low and mid range power and be a lil more streetable.
Eiher one will like a 3000-3600 stall and pull to a RPM high enough to blow a stock bottom end if you let it.
The CC 306 will be slightly better for NOS but there are better choices than these 2 for any application.
Trending Topics
12-03-2007, 08:09 PM
#8
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (16)
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Currently In suspense.
Posts: 1,783
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Hey lloyd when you add 1.6 rockers rule of thumb is to also add 2 degree's duration @0.050.So in turn the CC306 actually becomes 232/246.I know thats not the exact science but i do believe you get more duration when you go to a higher rocker ratio.Just looking for a comfermation here.
12-03-2007, 08:30 PM
#9
That link is to a Crane cam with 222/222 @ .050.
The Comp 467 is 230/236 .050 (280/288 adv) 576/.570 lift (w 1.6) 113 LSA
The Comp 306 is 230/244 .050 (290/307 adv) .544/.576 lift (w 1.6) 112 LSA
Even though both have 230 degree sof duartion @ .050, they are prett different. I am not a fan of the wide LSA on either cam but you are just wanting the two compared so that is what i am doing.
The 467 has the XFI lobes that have faster ramps and need GOOD springs. The lower seat to seat timing will build a lil more low end power and make peak HP a lil sooner. Probably pull to 6200-6300 RPM or so with stock heads.
The 306 has milder lobes that open/close the valves slower and has overall less lift. This cam will work with less expensive springs (*although good springs are always a good idea) and will probably pull to 6400-6500 RPM with stock heads. The CC 306 has a lil more overlap due to the large exhaust lobe and overall higher seat to seat timing.
RWHP #'s are a result of the entire combination from air filter to tail pipe as well as trans type, rear end type, stall efficiency, customers willingness to work out all the bugs and fine tune everythinga nd just not shoot himself in the foot.
I believe both world make similar RWHP #'s but the 467 will make peak a lil sooner and make a lil more low and mid range power and be a lil more streetable.
Eiher one will like a 3000-3600 stall and pull to a RPM high enough to blow a stock bottom end if you let it.
The CC 306 will be slightly better for NOS but there are better choices than these 2 for any application.
The Comp 467 is 230/236 .050 (280/288 adv) 576/.570 lift (w 1.6) 113 LSA
The Comp 306 is 230/244 .050 (290/307 adv) .544/.576 lift (w 1.6) 112 LSA
Even though both have 230 degree sof duartion @ .050, they are prett different. I am not a fan of the wide LSA on either cam but you are just wanting the two compared so that is what i am doing.
The 467 has the XFI lobes that have faster ramps and need GOOD springs. The lower seat to seat timing will build a lil more low end power and make peak HP a lil sooner. Probably pull to 6200-6300 RPM or so with stock heads.
The 306 has milder lobes that open/close the valves slower and has overall less lift. This cam will work with less expensive springs (*although good springs are always a good idea) and will probably pull to 6400-6500 RPM with stock heads. The CC 306 has a lil more overlap due to the large exhaust lobe and overall higher seat to seat timing.
RWHP #'s are a result of the entire combination from air filter to tail pipe as well as trans type, rear end type, stall efficiency, customers willingness to work out all the bugs and fine tune everythinga nd just not shoot himself in the foot.
I believe both world make similar RWHP #'s but the 467 will make peak a lil sooner and make a lil more low and mid range power and be a lil more streetable.
Eiher one will like a 3000-3600 stall and pull to a RPM high enough to blow a stock bottom end if you let it.
The CC 306 will be slightly better for NOS but there are better choices than these 2 for any application.
12-04-2007, 07:44 AM
#11
LS1TECH Sponsor
iTrader: (7)
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Texas
Posts: 414
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sincal,
I have never measured witha degree wheel and dial indicator but it stands to raeson that the @ .050 would be changed 1-3 degrees. I have just never measured it to see the EXACT effect.
Gun,
send me a PM or email. Depends on how old the heads are. Over the last 2.5-3 years, they just get milled .010 and this allows the Impala gaskets to be used and the intake still fits. Heads older than that were usally milled .025-.030 and if using an Impala head gasket, you will usually have to slot the intake bolt holes or mill the intake to make it all line up correct.
Akira,
The LSA is not something you shoot for, it is something you end up with. You get all the timing events lined out (IVO, IVC, EVO, EVC) and put the amount of overalp in the cam you are after, the LSA is a bi-product. It jsut so happens that most cams that work well end up on a tight LSA. Once again, you do not go in to design the cam already knowing the LSA, it just happens.
I have never measured witha degree wheel and dial indicator but it stands to raeson that the @ .050 would be changed 1-3 degrees. I have just never measured it to see the EXACT effect.
Gun,
send me a PM or email. Depends on how old the heads are. Over the last 2.5-3 years, they just get milled .010 and this allows the Impala gaskets to be used and the intake still fits. Heads older than that were usally milled .025-.030 and if using an Impala head gasket, you will usually have to slot the intake bolt holes or mill the intake to make it all line up correct.
Akira,
The LSA is not something you shoot for, it is something you end up with. You get all the timing events lined out (IVO, IVC, EVO, EVC) and put the amount of overalp in the cam you are after, the LSA is a bi-product. It jsut so happens that most cams that work well end up on a tight LSA. Once again, you do not go in to design the cam already knowing the LSA, it just happens.
12-04-2007, 01:29 PM
#12
Sorry to highjack
but
Is a 306 going to be a terrible cam for a 383? Havent put the motor in yet and changeing the cam now would be much better than having to tear it all apart after I get it all together. Cars mostly a streetcar Id like it in the mid 400's. All supporting mods through an a4 with a 3200stall. Ive got a kit for the car, but I am thinking I wont spray it.
butIs a 306 going to be a terrible cam for a 383? Havent put the motor in yet and changeing the cam now would be much better than having to tear it all apart after I get it all together. Cars mostly a streetcar Id like it in the mid 400's. All supporting mods through an a4 with a 3200stall. Ive got a kit for the car, but I am thinking I wont spray it.
