B4Ctom1

I want to post this here because this is where my peers are and I doubt there is enough "know how" in general engines. I bought a set of retrofit hydraulic rollers (crane) and I'm looking at a few cams for my 412 SBC with the possibility that it may eventually either get my NOS-5151 kit or a small ATI blower of its own. The motor is huge so I have been looking at cams in a neighborhood a little higher than I would normally. I intend to keep the RPM range below 6500 rpm and it has a super ram and 200cc pro-action heads with 9.9:1. If the engine were smaller I would be looking at a 220 to 228 at .050 cam but because of its size Im looking at 230 to 238 at .050 cams. 1)Am I off the mark here? the cam will have 112 to 114 lobe sep and 290 to 305 duration and lift somewhere in the neighborhood of 575 to 595. I will be running 1.6 rockers and was looking at this crane HR-230/359-2S-12.90 IG (part # 119661) cam, the other thing is that it calls for a crane 99838-16 spring which is huge. Actually its much more serious of a spring than I have seen in some solid roller setups. It lists as a double 1.46 spring with a 110# seat and a 320# open load. I understand that hyd rollers are heavier but wont this collapse/pump down the hydraulic portion. 2)Anyone else working/worked this out?

Damon

Near as I can tell, a hydraulic roller needs a spring that is a "comromise" between keeping the valve under control at the insane accleration rates a roller can impart to them and keeping the lifter from collapsing, on the other hand.

In short- if you use the spring recommended you will get the best possible results.

A roughly equivalent flat tappet spring would have about the same seat pressure but only about 280 open pressure (about 40 lbs. less). I would say that if you go with that cam/spring combo you might want to stick with 1.5 ratio rockers, at least starting out. Higher ratio rockers will increase the pressure seen at the lifter by quite a bit since they lift the valve higher and also apply pressure to the lifter at 1.6X the spring pressure instead of just 1.5X. Hope that makes sense.

89ProchargedROC

too small imo...you have over 400" i'd go a little bigger. But thats just me. My cam is 232/232 and its suppose to peak aroudn 6500 with my little 355" motor. You should be able to go higher than that with the big 400" motor you have

so in short my opinion would be this:

nitrous motor = more cam
blower motor = looks good on paper

i'd also stay with the 1.5 for the time being. the lift for that cam is right where it needs to be

Kingtal0n

yeah tom if you ever plan on putting forced on it, K.I.S.S. IMO hehe.

my 303/313 (234/244) LSA112 was conducive to 7-9# boost on a 355 made good power to a peak 6200 RPMS but I noted when i dropped to the XE 262/270 (218/224) LSA110 My boost went up and so did my power. but i could still ride it out to 6200 RPMS. boost is good for that...

oh and it got better fuel economy and was more streetable and didnt shake the fenders off the car next to me at lights.

do we see a trend forming...

B4Ctom1

The cam I listed above is actually huger than I wanted to go ( I wanted to go in the upper 220's not the lower 230's, but since it is a 412 I figured what the hell), this car's main duty is as the cruiser/show car so I really dont want to go to the upper 230's lower 240's of duration (thats more like for the "race car" 91 Z28). I dont know for how long it will remain N/A but drivability is sort of a concern for now, long distance drivability even. With the stock rear it is likely it may never see the track, but who knows. The heads are pro-action 200cc's and they dont exactly have the nicest "low lift" flow #'s so thats why I wanted to go with the 1.6's and way over .500" lift (closer to .600" actually but not over). I do feel a little better after I did some research of crane vs. comp spring pressure for hyd roll cams. I found they both basically run the same pressures on this type of cam. It turns out the spring pressure, although very stout is no where near that of a solid roller in the similar size. It just seemed high to me, the problem was more of my perception of the spring pressures, than in the catalog mis-listing the springs.

B4Ctom1

nevermind that last post, don't say I never take your advice I just bought this I will be running a 1.6 rocker so my lift will be like .595" http://www.cranecams.com/motorsports...ler/119681.htm

Damon

Oh man, that's a BIG LUMPY SUCKER! If you got the airflow to support it you'll make BIGTIME top end. If not, it'll be a dog.

B4Ctom1

well the pro actions are not horrible in flow if you look at the high lift #'s, so with my 1.6's I get that lift. I figured with the 412's cubes and stroke, as well as the superams characteristics I would trade a bunch of the massive tourque I would have had for more mid and higher RPM hp. I wont be reving totally out of hand due to the heavy TRW pistons and only having stock (but "prepped") rods and cast crank. It is also only a 2 bolt main. I dont want to start screaming the RPM's and have something depart the plan or the pan. I will probably keep it in the 6000 to lower 6000 RPM range for max RPM.

Damon

I think you're going to need more than 6000 RPMs to get the most out of that cam. If 6000 is your self-imposed rev limit then you could get a lot more "area under the curve" from a smaller cam. Shifting at 6000 with that cam is going to be like leaving a good party at 11 o'clock. It's just gonna start gettin' good when you leave!

I have become very familiar with how Crane "words" their cam descriptions. Whey they say "serious performance only, no street use" they mean it. For a weekend dragstrip warrior it'll do great, with well matched components. Slogging along stoplight-to-stoplight it's not going to like at all.

Are you SURE this is what you want? Exchanges of product can almost always be worked out. Gut level reaction- you really want a cam with about 10-15* less duration than this, apples-to-apples, and that's still gonna be pretty raucous.

B4Ctom1

yeah but there was somebody right above telling me he's running like 230 @050 range on his 350 and thinks my 412 needed more, so more is what I got.

I like the 1.5 rocker idea but I already have the new 1.6's and this cam is .595" lift with the 1.6's. the heads flow around 260 CFM but not until around .600" lift.

83 Crossfire TA

iTrader: (2)

Donno… I like it. If it’s truly going to stay NA I would have gone with something with a tighter LSA (probably around 110), but with some boost or spray that will be a nice cam. NA I bet that you’ll see over 500lb-ft at under 3000rpm, and probably a HP peak in the 5000-5500rpm range.

BTW, I’m pretty sure that those cam specs on that page are mispublished… If they’re right then it’s got a lot more then 248 @ .050 on the exhaust and a shorter LSA…

B4Ctom1

well '83 Crossfire TA' heres the cam card LINK take a look, Its already bought and I got it for $175 barely used, so it is non returnable anyhow. Curious if someone can plug it into DD2K just to tell me what the overlap is?

83 Crossfire TA

iTrader: (2)

That one is much better... If you look at the 'cam specs' on the first page that you sent, that the exhaust opening and closing numbers at .050" work out to be 299*...

B4Ctom1

299 @.050" its not that huge! No its only 240/248 @ .050" I got the thing today and its better than I hoped! the guy never really told me, but the cam appears to be totally new, never run.

Damon

Tom- yeah, I see 240* intake duration @ .050 on the card. Did the math on the opening and closing points and it's correct- 240* @ .050

B4Ctom1

I know its huge but so is the motor, you know? I think torque will be no problem considering the stroke and the intake being used.

B4Ctom1

The rest of the shortblock is done atleast. My cam button and stuff will be here soon hopefuly

83 Crossfire TA

iTrader: (2)

No, I think you're missing my point. If you look at the specs on the first linked page that you sent, it adds up to 299 at .050. If you look at the second one (the actual cam card) it's correct there.

Kingtal0n

Omg tom when i first looked at your picture i thought one of my contacts had fallen out

B4Ctom1

Ok that said do you think the cam is all wrong still?

Sorry my wife took that without flash and I didnt know until later it looked like that but I like the effect.

83 Crossfire TA

iTrader: (2)

OK, I’ll give you the cliff’s notes version:
- cam good
- cam specs on the page that you sent, wrong

B4Ctom1

perfect, can you tell how many degrees overlap this will have?

83 Crossfire TA

iTrader: (2)

I can’t tell you, I can’t get the cam card page to open now. If you can post the event timing I can, but in a nutshell, you add the exhaust valve closing ATDC to the intake opeing BTDC and you’ll get the #

B4Ctom1

back from the dead, I used to play around with desktop dyno but the variables make it difficult to give any credence to, like a G-tech meter. But like the G-tech if you simply use it as a judgement too for characteristics it is somewhat helpful. Well, someone gave me a copy of DD2K and after running it I came to a few conclusions. My cam although it was dirt cheap, it seems I should have gone with the 119661 crane even at the higher cost. The good news is that I built the engine with a removable front plate and the lifters can be removed without pulling the intake. So the cam removal wont be a total nightmare so if anyone runs accross this cam or one similar drop me a line please. Here is the cam card for my 119681 in the engine now.

83 Crossfire TA

iTrader: (2)

OK, so you’ve got 82*, 41* at the crank, overlap at .004” and 16*, 8* at the crank, at .050”

NOSFEDGTA

My 383cid with afr 190s, super ram, 224-230@50 with 530-540 lift with 1.6's, 112ls and an ill programmed dfi put down 497ftlbs to the rear tires at 2950 rpm!!! with a 2800 stall. Your 412 with that cam listed above should make great power and torque. I ran a comp cam with the same duration and slightly lower lift in a 406cid that ran great... it was carbed though

Drew

NOSFEDGTA

I also forgot to mention that the same cam I listed for my 383 I now have in a carbed 355. When I dynod it, it made 423ftlbs to the ground @3100 with a edelbrock performer rpm and a 750 dp!!

Drew

B4Ctom1

I wrote 119661 cam but what I meant was the 119841, I have the one on the card (119681) in it right now and it doesnt seem to be the best. There is of course alot of power there, but after looking at this DD2K stuff I see it could be beter alot better when compared just apples to apples. Here is a LINK to the two dyno files, the head files and the two cam files. Drop them in your DD2K folder and see for yourself. tell me if I am missing anything. open to suggestions of other different hydraulic roller cams that are retrofit like mine, oh and base circle is important (412)...

P.S. the lifts are changed on the two dyno files because I have 1.6's, the cam files are with the 1.5 the manufacturer lists.

83 Crossfire TA

iTrader: (2)

Why worry about what they were originally designed for (your ‘roller retrofit’ comment)? Most decent cam grinders out there now will custom make anything you want on any blank that you want for the ‘normal’ price. For example, if you look through the comp book you’ll notice that all you have to do is change the prefix of the part number to get whatever lobes ground on any blank that you want, so you could get the same XE roller cam ground as a retrofit or ’87-97 (with either length dowel pin), or even as a ford cam.

You don’t even have to know that, you can just call them and tell them something like “I want an XE270 ground as a retrofit roller with a 114LSA” if that’s what you wanted. Or as I did a little while ago “I want a ’87 and up roller SBC blank with 3313 XE lobes for both the intake and exhaust with a 112LSA” and that’s what I got (270* .006 and 218* at .050, 112LSA and .529” lift with 1.6 rr’s).

B4Ctom1

except it wouldnt be offered at the summit price of 279-299 it would be at the suggested retail of 350-380

83 Crossfire TA

iTrader: (2)

I'm fairly certain that I paid under $300 for the last one I ordered from them. If they’re cheaper from summit just get the part # from comp or whoever and order it from summit, I’ve done that before also.

B4Ctom1

I know you do alot of math do you mess with DD2K? did you plug in the files from my link? did anyone?

83 Crossfire TA

iTrader: (2)

Yes, I do a lot of math, but I also did just download your files and open them in DD2K… what do you want to know about it? I don’t know that I saw anything exceptionally good or bad…

B4Ctom1

the difference between the two is like night and day as far as the output curves and the characteristics.

83 Crossfire TA

iTrader: (2)

You have the one ending in 81 entered with the cam #'s set to .050" but you entered the advertised #'s.

for that matter, with most modern cams, you have to compare either .050 to .050 #'s or advertised to advertised, since the modeling doesn't seem to have any way of compensating for a steap lobed cam vs a shallow lobed cam.

B4Ctom1

holy crap! all that crying for nothing
thanks for bringing that to my attention!!! all is well!!!

I fixed the ones in the link as well

Wesley Harris

ok can I run solid roller lifters on this cam???

DIGGLER

iTrader: (1)

17 year old thread.. lol
to answer your question- yes, but it wont really be "right". most hydro roller cams wont have a ramp to gradually take up the lash like a solid roller cam would. you would need to run pretty much zero lash with solid lifters on a hydro cam.