JAKEJR

Oh, okay then; Go For It.

I was offering my opinion based on what you stated in your original post "stock heads".

If you're now going to change heads and that you like an over-cammed engine then that changes things.

Jake

speedracer2536

iTrader: (15)

ya i mean i totally can agree with you if i was just to leave it stock and then call it a day but im gonna do supporting mods as the money comes so i figure it can be overcammed for a little.. know what i mean?

JAKEJR

Sure, I see, if that's how you plan to go about it. Lots of guys do their mods in stages - spreads the cost over a longer time period.

With that healthy cam in a 350, there are a few other things to consider:

Vacuum reading so the power brakes continue to work properly

Need for a high stall converter if you're running an auto trans

Rear end gear change to better keep the engine in its new, higher power range

PCM re-programming will be a must.

Maybe someone who's running that (or a similar) cam in a 350 will chime in and share their experience.

Good luck.

Jake

Greaseymec

iTrader: (9)

I,m running that cam in my 12.3CR 383 with a well built bottom end. I have stock ported LE2 heads. The 918 springs that I am running are not enough for this cam. Getting ready to change them for a set of Golds. Im seeing valve float just above 6400 rpm so I am a bit limited at the moment. This cam does pull fairly hard. With fair track prep on high 1.50 60' the car will run low 11.50s all day long. I have seen a 11.38 run but it was only once. Extending the rpm range might get me really close to 11.00s. I know a few who have taken this cam into to high 10s NA. It is a good cam but the engine has to be set up for it.

Mec

96capricemgr

iTrader: (1)

There is the thing, this cam needs to see 7000rpms in a 383. I think your hope of dropping more than .3 with a valvespring swap is ambitious at best but uyou will gain something.

The 918s are insufficient because Comp's rpm ranges are so terribly far off. Believe they list this as good to 6200rpms, you are seeing float at 6400rpms and need to rev higher yet.

If you look at that Comp's spring recommendation is OK within their rpm recommendation. So the whole problem is they have a very wrong rpm recommendation, probably because they do not account for what the LT1 manifold does to the powerband.

With a 350/355 and a 7100rpm pcm limit and GOOD heads all you will need for duration is around 230degrees. Weak heads will choke a cam at a lower rpm.

Greaseymec

iTrader: (9)

Its gonna take more than a valve spring swap to knock off .3. I need tires and weight loss along with a better converter to get me there. Just for the record I didnt ask for a critique. Simply posting my experience with the cam.

Mec

96capricemgr

iTrader: (1)

When you aren't clear you give the newbs the wrong impression.

You said.
To me it sounded like you though that one change would do it. Thank you for clarifying.

I bares repeating that you have a stroker that needs these rpms and a 350/355 would need to rev higher yet, meaning this cam is a poor choice unless looking to go to aftermarket management and wind it up past the pcm's capabilities.

Greaseymec

iTrader: (9)

Well put. I do agree.

Mec

bowtienut

iTrader: (1)

My cam with 228 intake duration in a 350 is shifted at 7000 and pulls strong to the 71xx PCM cutoff.
So yes, OP.......that 292 is way too big, plus you need the valvetrain from hell to rev those xfi lobes anywhere near 7000 rpm.

ElkySS

iTrader: (6)

if ur looking for a cam that drives well and makes good power on stock heads, i recommend the ai 226/234. thats what they are going to recommend if you call them. my car made 363rwhp and 356 ft lbs on stock heads with impala ss head gaskets. through a 12 bolt and it had a miss. i drive it everyday and is a very easy cam to drive with. braking was unchanged. and according to my snapon scanner, the map sensor shows more vacuum than stock

blackz93

iTrader: (2)

Something's wrong with your scanner then! lol

ElkySS

iTrader: (6)

its a brand new verus from snap-on. the shop i work for paid 8k for it.

blackz93

iTrader: (2)

Then you're reading it wrong. I reckon it's impossible to have more vacuum at idle with a bigger cam.

96capricemgr

iTrader: (1)

Probably reads in absolute values so it is reading more manifold pressure which is less vacuum.

ElkySS

iTrader: (6)

i ment wot. not idle. should have specified

blackz93

iTrader: (2)

That's not a good thing either!

And besides, why would you used that(higher vacuum at WOT) in an argument about brakes?

Puck

iTrader: (17)

WOT is not supposed to pull vacuum unless you have an intake restriction.

chavez885

iTrader: (12)

I have this cam, enjoying it so far. Pulls really hard up top. Driveability is good, will be much better once i get some gears as I get some low RPM stumble. It needs gears to keep it in the power band, I shift @ 6500.

Can't wait for gears/tires/re-tune and she'll be a lot more fun to drive. Still working out a few kinks. Idle below, been re-tuned since and idle dropped a bit more and more mileage on motor. Details of motor in video, with 500 miles on new motor I put down 330 rwhp and 350 torque. New dyno numbers in March.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=trRIIr4vnb8

ElkySS

iTrader: (6)

well my k&n filter is pretty dirty. i guess ill clean it and try again. lets try not to jack this guys thread.

1 Craz28

I love mine. Plenty of power all through the rpm range. Good midrange and great top-end. The only problem I have is when the EGR valve opens at idle? But my brakes have never worked better.