Go Back   Third Generation F-Body Message Boards > Tech Boards > Tech / General Engine
Sign in using an external account
Register Forgot Password?

Tech / General Engine Is your car making a strange sound or won't start? Thinking of adding power with a new combination? Need other technical information or engine specific advice? Don't see another board for your problem? Post it here!

Welcome to ThirdGen.org!
Welcome to ThirdGen.org.

You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community, at no cost, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is free, fast and simple, join the ThirdGen.org community today!


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 11-24-2003, 06:28 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Fredericksburg, VA
Posts: 636
Car: '84 Z28
Engine: 350
Transmission: th2004r

Classifieds Rating: (0)
crane 278-2 or comp XE268

i'm going to be building a 350 and was wondering what the differences beetween the crane 278-2, with a 114LSA or having a comp XE268 ground on a 112LSA. does the comp have a more aggressive ramp rate? what would make more power and would either one of them give a better idle or better fuel milage?
TheViper is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 11-25-2003, 03:59 AM   #2
Senior Member
 
F-BIRD'88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 5,823
Car: 1988 Firebird S/E
Engine: 406Ci Vortec SBC
Transmission: TH-350/3500stall
Axle/Gears: 7.5" Auburn 4.10 Posi-Traction

Classifieds Rating: (0)
To understand and compare these two cams you have to first understand that CompCams measures their cams at .006" lift and Crane measures theirs at .004". Therefore the Crane cam will appear to have have a longer seat duration, than the Comp even while haveing a .050" duration of 2 deg less..

If you measured the Crane cam using Comp cams spec of .006"
you'd find that the seat duration would be about 264 to 269.
(I have not actually done the measurement). You'll find that the intensity of the two cams are very close.
If you wanted to you could phone Crane Cams tech line and they could probabily tell you the exact spec @.006" so you could accurately compare it to a simular Comp cam.

You have to understand that the specs alone don't tell you exactly how the cam will react in a motor as compared to another
seeming faster or slower action cam.
Often, it is just the opposite of what you'd expect.

That being said. the best way to compare these two cams is by the .050" durations and lobe separation angles and the installed intake centerline. (advance)

The Crane cam with its wider lobe separation will have a smoother idle, wider power band, more vacuum idle and favour a closed exhaust system. The extra exhaust duration also favours a stock exhaust ports poor breathing.
The crane cam *should* get slightly better mileage.

This crane cam with its wider lobe separation and longer exhaust durtation is very NOS friendly especially if advanced in the motor a few more degrees.


The Comp cam on the other hand has more overlap and more intake duration will have a little rougher idle , less manifold vacuum,, the power will come on later than the Crane but will make more peak torque (especialy through open exhaust).
It *should* make a little more peak hp too.
But may not if through typical closed exhaust.

Keep in mind these are simular cams. They will be more alike than different.

Recently there were a few advertisments in popular auto mags claiming that Crane's particular cam was better than Comp's.
(in a near stock motor) {it was} Comps reply was that they would have used a different Comp Cam to compare
to the Crane. (actually a much bigger Cam) they also claimed 100 some hp more. I emailed Comps tech line a for clarification and proof. they admitied that they tested their cam in the near stock motor through closed exhaust and the Crane cam did in fact make more power. Then the retested in a different motor with aftermarket heads and open headers etc etc and their larger cam with tighter lobe separation. (extreme energy). Well as expected it did infact out power the Crane in this near race motor., in dyno trim. (they compared their different larger cam to the same smaller Crane cam. Hardly apples to apples.

I questioned them on this and invited them to use my motor and car for a true fair apples to apples test of their best suited hyd cam against Crane's best suited hyd cam. Well they didn't accept the challenge. They replyed by admitting that the Crane is better suited to a near stock motor and closed exhaust.
Their cam series is better suited to a higher level of engine build and a open or free-er breathing exhaust system.
And they do not recommend using stock valve springs on any of their extreme energy cams.
(Crane also recommends an upgraded valvetrain for best results.)

All this aside, Crane and Comp hyd cams are very simular in lobe intensity and power potential.
They both have to work under the same conditions in a motor and are limited to the same physics.
Both are considered hi intensity, modern asymetrical high lift lobe designs.
Use the .050" specs to compare and select the right cam for your car and leave the lobe intensity
to the engineers. Use the manufacturers recomendations for selecting valve train parts.

I use both their products.

When a Comp cam suites your needs use it. When a Crane cam suites your application use it. They both work well.

I've used the Crane H-278-2 (HMV-278-2) . its a good one.
its easy to live with and makes good power.
I have not used the comp XE268-H10.
It will tend to want a little higher stall and some better exhaust.
Both like a higher rear gear ratio.

Why don't you phone Crane Cams tech line and ask for a spec on the Crane H278-2 at .006" instead of .004" and post your findings?
F-BIRD'88 is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 11-25-2003, 04:03 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Fredericksburg, VA
Posts: 636
Car: '84 Z28
Engine: 350
Transmission: th2004r

Classifieds Rating: (0)
thx, i think i'l go with the crane 278-2. i hope i can get started on the engine soon before i change my mind again.
TheViper is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 11-25-2003, 04:03 PM
ThirdGen
1992 Camaro




Paid Advertisement


Reply

Go Back   Third Generation F-Body Message Boards > Tech Boards > Tech / General Engine

Tags
278, 350, cam, cams, comp, compxe268, crane, hmv278, hmv2782nc, idle, intensity, specs, vacuum, vortec, xe268
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

 


1982 Camaro '82 || 1983 Camaro '83 || 1984 Camaro '84 || 1985 Camaro '85 || 1986 Camaro '86 || 1987 Camaro '87 || 1988 Camaro '88 || 1989 Camaro '89 || 1990 Camaro '90 || 1991 Camaro '91 || 1992 Camaro '92


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:08 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.5.2
All content copyright © 1997 - 2012 ThirdGen.org. All rights reserved. No part of this website may be reproduced without the expressed, documented, and written consent of ThirdGen.org's Administrators.

Emails & Contact Details