Yeah, the stroker option is one thing that made me want to go with a Windsor... All the hard work has been done already whenever I decide to upgrade again.
So the Alphabet cams are outdated, but the stock 25 year old HO cams are OK ? That don't add up. And Ford's been into roller cams (and SOHC, DOHC motors too) for far longer than 25 years. They've been at it since the late 50's. And were heavy into both the SOHC and DOHC motors thruout the 1960's. No disrespect intended, but you're spouting the same old line everyone else does on the net about Ford's alphabet roller cams. Yea, they're 25 years old, but the tech behind em is even older as with what's been learned about cams and cam timing events for 100 years (by everyone). Point is they just plain work. And they do an excellant job. And the only way you'll know the difference between your cam and mine would be to run both in the same motor in the same application on the same dyno on the same day back to back. Which is just what Ford did when they designed the profiles on these cams, right along side their O.E. rollers. Read the book on this, I did. There's more research into the design of these cams than you'll ever guess until you read the story. Each of their O.E. rollers were tailored to a specific application to perform to a specific set of standards, the only reason the alphabet cams are mostly single patterned is due to the fact that they're intended to fill a niche in the aftermarket performance market, not to a single specific application. And with aftermarket heads, which generally as a rule breathe better than Ford's stock heads. Each application is unique unto itself, what works in your motor to what you expect, will never neccessarily be what someone else wants for their car/truck. The Comp XE266HR was tailored to a specific circumstance/application, but it may not be what someone else wants in a cam. It's got no more engineering in it than an alphabet cam does. But you did make a wise choice in buying it used, I'll grant you that. I've paid as little as $50 for a B303 and I paid $115 for my Z303 (new in the box, secondhand) I was extermely pleased with the performance of both to the point of even thinking of shelling out $200-300-400 for a custom cam or an off the shelf aftermarket (such as a Comp hyd roller) would be a huge waste of my money and time Sorry for the rant, but I get tired of hearing that same old tired line over and over about this subject. Nothing could be further from the truth.
Now you're putting words into my mouth. I said "Some guys like running the stock GT cam with 1.7:1 rockers in DD". I didn't say they were "ok" and I still believe they and the alphabet cams are outdated. The new cams and springs do so much more with their fast ramps and accelleration rates. There's a reason guys will sell you a B cam for $50... And I wasn't telling the OP to get a XE266HR for his application, I was pointing out that a new, modern cam can be had for cheap.
351w in these cars is a b&^(h to say the least. definately go with a 302 based motor unless you're planning on a m2 clip
Why do they sell B cams ? Cause they've bought into the same line of thinking you have. The B303 is a great cam, even better with 1.7 rockers. As for the "they can do so much more" ? Once again, you'd have to try both in the same engine on the same dyno to see the miniscule difference, if there is one. And even then as I said before, what works in one application may not be what someone else wants in theirs. The SOHC 427 also could be considered to be outdated too, but it's still an awesome motor. Many of Comp's cams have been around for many years, including the XE266HR. It too could be considered to be outdated now with the trend towards variable cam timing in today's engines, which in itself is rooted in 100 year old tech, dating back to the steam locomotive. Not everything new is "new" And there's much to be said for so called "outdated" tech.
And you have your head in the sand. Yes, roller cams have been around forever but the lobe profiles that could not be manufactured 25 years ago are now possible with now available CNC cam grinders. Spintron test equipment is now available to let you see exactly what a valvetrain can and cannot do at various rpms. Core materials are better. You can read all the books you want. My experience on the subject is a little more first-hand. I used to design the electronic controls and machine operating programs for Landis CNC camshaft and crankshaft grinders. I've worked on designs for grinders that are used by every automotive manufacturer in the world. My most common projects were for GM Powertrain and Ford. I did the cam grinders for Ford/Jaquar right after Ford took them over and updated their engine program. I was working on cam grinders for Ford's Triton program a year before Ford even announced to the public that they were coming out with a new V10. Sometime when you have nothing better to do install one of the old alphabet cams into a block with a degree wheel and dial indicator and plot the valve events for all the lobes, not just the #1 cylinder. They are all over the place. Most of these cams were subbed out by Ford to the cheapest mass production grinding houses they could find. I think some people just like to argue for the sake of argueing...
*ahem* Despite the various arguments going back and forth concerning camshaft designs and who has their head in what pile of sand........... The above quote should be a keynote in this thread. "Everyday driver to school and back." Anybody else catch that part? Drop a fresh 302 roller engine in the car with a small camshaft, dual plane intake, small-ish carb and get your butt to school. Plenty of time after school to build street killers. PS: "E" cam is a good daily driver unit. The Comp Cam NX264HR (35-552-8) is a good choice too. I'm very fond of the TFS Stage 1 cam (TFS 51402000). Works really well in street/strip applications and has good daily manners.
I have a '95 roller rocker 302 set up. I went with the f303 cam with the dual springs and 1.7 rockers. ( As well as the double timing chain, Hi flo water pump ...). It runs great, I drive it daily (in fact it is works parking lot right now!)
I voted 302 roller. Also, I had a '91 5.0 and sold it, along with all the fuel injection stuff and computer. Guy was buying it for his Falcon. Sold everything for $300. What I'm driving at is: if fuel economy ever becomes an issue (college life sucks sometimes), there are tons of articles out there about F.I. conversions for 5.0's. If not, there was a build article in Car Craft a few years back about a 400hp 5.0 with a stock cam (AFR 165's, Weiand intake, Demon carb, Tri-Y's, and 1.7 rockers for a better area under the curve ). The build price for this was around $2,600, if I remember correctly. Great info! A while later, a 500hp build with this same setup, except AFR 185's and a 331 stroker kit. Again, if I remember correctly. I don't remember, for sure, if they used the 331 kit or not. It might still have been just the 302. So, in conclusion: 5.0= flexibility, room to grow, bolt on horsepower with ease of installation, and you will still have that 351W in the garage for you're blown, nitrous-fed 393 knuckle-dragging beast you're gonna stuff in the car after you graduate college and have a cushy, high-dollar job! Happy wrenching, whatever your choice! Eric
Go 302. Get one with forged pistons and 9:1 compression. If that's not enough they make these things called superchargers.
And you still missed the point I was making about the miniscule difference all that makes in practical applications, differences that can only be seen on a dyno.
I voted 5.0L roller oem cam or with these upgrades for fun ;a 85 5.0L cam(you can keep the oem valtrain) if no emission checks required e-cam or b-cam,degree'd advanced at least 2 degrees and associated hardware....t-chain,springs,locks and retainers. 1.7 rockers optional for a bit more lift....always check valtrain geometry.
