Your car is really,REALLY cool.Please don't change the look,it's perfect!Have you run it yet?What kind of ET's?I had a '75 4dr w/roller 302-only ran 14s on motor,ran 12's on spray,lots of fun.
Nothing fancy here. The above mentioned CC E274 cam, springs, pushrods & roller tip rockers. Stock rods(debeamed and shotpeened). Block was balanced. Edel Performer RPM intake, AED modified Holley 750DP, AFR 185heads, MSD ignition, 10:1 TRW Forged, Carter HighVol fuel pump. Ohh and this engine is a 351w not a 302..but has some ugly looking bashed up headers on at the moment(have new Crites headers on order which should wake this thing up). Car made 327 HP @5600rpm + 333ft-lbs torque @ 4750rpm at the rear wheels last summer at the local Chassis Dyno shop. Trans is C4 with 2800stall, Rear is 9" locker with 3:43 gears. That is most of it..some other small things but to many to mention here.
I am not trying to be too critical here, but perhaps you should be careful about giving cam advice to folks with 302 engines. A cam in a 351 is going to act TOTALLY different than the same cam in a 302, no matter what. It's the whole apples to oranges thing, and that includes ET as well. My .02 Dave Edit: I should say... be careful about giving cam advice to 302 guys while using your engine as an example.
Totally understandable. Sorry for the trouble. I used the 268 and the 284 cam in my 302 as stated...and this was primarily what was being asked. In my current engine(which is under my pic) I gave my current cam...which I would not hesitated to use if and when I decide to do a 302 based engine again. I didn't mean to upset anyone...I'll make sure to use more detail next time I respond to something
I probably overreacted... I just saw some eyes lighting up looking at the 12 sec ET and thoughts of 'all I need to do is put this cam in my 302' dancing around their brains. A 302 will react differently and the statement about "super torque" will likely not apply to a 302 with your same parts. Sorry if I was abrasive. Dave
I had the same cam in my 302 Mav years ago, daily driver, and really liked it, no complaints at all for that purpose. Ditto 71Grabber's comments... sounded good, slightly rumpity idle (everyone knows you have a small cam), good power/torque, plenty of vacuum and pulled well to about 5,500 rpms
DDD ---> Disappointing Dyno Day FINALLY, the engine guy finished it up and did his thing with it on the ENGINE dyno today. After reading all the magazine buildup numbers, computer sims, AFR site articles all told me to expect 400hp/400tq minimum. My results were: 368 HP/405TQ Needless to say im very disappointed. I have a hunch he installed the cam straight up. These are cut on a 4° advance from Comp, so techically the cam would be advanced 4°. I may retard the cam 4° when it arrives here Monday. Also he had some plain jane headers, so maybe i can pick a little more top end with the cam adjustment and Hooker super Comps. He did say the HP was 360 at 5000 and 368 at 5700, certainly not peaky. He told me that no 2 dynos will read the same and the numbers i read in the mags are "Magazine numbers". Regardless..... im gonna need some NAWS. Me tonite drowning my sorrows ---->
You're "disappointed" about 32 horsepower???. it looks to me like it's pretty dang close to what you were told it would be, and 400 ft.-lbs. of torque is a LOT for a smallblock...
is that at the wheels? or engine? still even though 360 hp sounds low , ill bet that thing WILL move....
Something is wrong with the HP. The TQ is there but the HP falls on its face after 5k. First thing is im going to check the valve springs to see what they actually rate at. They were the Hydraulic roller option "supposedly" from AFR. Maybe i just got the normal springs, whatever they are. The engine/dyno guy said the "valve train became unstable". So im thinking they springs are too soft. If they do test out too soft ill get new ones. This should have easily revved to 6000. Im also going to retard the cam 4°. Im not done yet.
Check the springs before you jump into the cam. You have results that are close enough to the goal that you should only tweak one thing at a time. If you tweak multiple items and lose (or gain) power, you won't know exactly what caused it. If you gain power by changing multiple items, you deprive yourself of the knowledge that you may have gained even more by only changing one item. You may have lost 5hp with one change, and gained 15hp with another. So you are happy knowing you gained 10hp, but wouldn't you prefer knowing where the other 5hp went, rather than ignorant bliss? Also, the 5hp you lost, may be more than that due to the previous condition quite possibly being more friendly to the mod that gained power and that 5hp might well have been 8hp... Make sense? Start with obvious things before you start pulling the front of the engine off. Also, the torque is higher than goal, so you may have some mundane part that is different than the magazine combo... Smaller carb, dual plane intake, smaller primary headers, etc... that would cause this. It is a pretty good set of numbers. You didn't say if it was RWHP or FWHP... If it's RWHP, you got a monster there! If it's FWHP, you can look for about 295 RWHP, which is stout by any street car. What is the weight of your car? Dave
Thats from the engine dyno, flywheel #s. If it was RWHP i wouldnt be dissapointed at all. The springs in the heads are rated at 130 seat/ 326 open Im gonna get some springs that are around 160-165 seat/375-385 open. I went back and looked at some articles of similar builds and the all upgraded springs to aroudn 150-165/seat 375-385 open. thanks
They are double springs that came on the assembled heads from Keith Craft Racing. The spec sheet that comes with them has the part # 30500218. 130# seat 326# @ .550" lift
