Here I go again, since I blew up project L-cheapo up on its maiden voyage I’m building up the 350 I was running. The motor is worse off than I had thought, found out my extreme energy cam tossed a few lobes. I had some valve springs break on me at one time, it happened within a mile of the house, and it made it home fine. A new set of name brand springs and I was back in business…. So I thought. This would explain why my buddies rusting started giving me a run for my money when I used to be able to run off from him. My machine shop also informed me that I would probably be greeted to oil smoke if I tried to reuse the rings I have even though they were still in great shape. He says that your cylinders aren’t perfectly round no matter how carefully you bore them, and the rings wear in to fit, and the likely hood of getting the rings back in the bore clocked exactly like they were when they came out is impossible. So re-ring it is.

So now I’m shopping for a new cam…..insert evil Cartman laugh……my Monte is no longer my daily driver so I’m thinking of stepping it up a notch. It will still get driven 20k miles a year, but it’s not my primary form of transportation. My last cam was a 218/226 with lift at .462/.480 with a 110 lobe sep. The heads I’m using are set up for over .600 lift, and the springs are good to .575. My carbide burs should be here early next week, so I’ll be porting on the ole 416 castings I’ve searched the net and compiled as many ported 416 flow numbers I can, and surprisingly they all fall with 5 cfm of each other. I’ve created a theoretical set of flow numbers based on the average of all the flow numbers I found.
Theoretical 416 flow
intake exhaust I/E %
0.05 32.5 19.8 60.92
0.1 64.9 47.65 73.42
0.15 97.05 73.75 75.99
0.2 127.75 99.1 77.57
0.25 153.15 115.7 75.55 Avg I/E %
0.3 176.4 132.85 75.31 72.89
0.35 192.1 142.2 74.02
0.4 205.55 150.15 73.05
0.45 215.35 153.6 71.33
0.5 220.9 158.1 71.57
0.55 220.7 161.2 73.04

As you can see the avg I/E % is lower than ideal. Could some one with desk top dyno run some iterations with these flow numbers and see what HP and torque advantages there would be going with a bigger cam say something in the 220-228 range on the intake and see what the difference a split duration cam has over a single duration cam. The motor has a high rise dual plane, headers, 2.5” exhaust with an x-pipe, and 9.8 to 1 compression. If the program takes into account quench, I have a horrible quench of .087. I’m not so much interested in the actual HP numbers it spits out as I am in the shape of the power curve and how the cam affects it.

 

He’s a quick list of cams that interested me. These are with split profile’s, I found single profile cams with same intake numbers on the exhaust for each of these.

Comp Extreme Energy (car grinds)

Adv. Dur. 268/280
.050 Dur. 224/230
Lift. .477/.480

Adv. Dur. 274/278
.050 Dur. 230/236
Lift. .487/.490

Comp Extreme Energy (4x4 grinds)

Adv. Dur. 262/270 (My Old Cam)
.050 Dur. 218/226
Lift. .462/.480

Adv. Dur. 270/278
.050 Dur. 226/234
Lift. .480/.498

Crane Cams (unsure of line name)

Adv. Dur. 278/290
.050 Dur. 222/234
Lift. .467/.494

 

It would be advantageous for you to obtain the IVO, IVC, EVO, EVC specs, both at 0.004 and 0.050. I've found that the 0.050 specs seem a little more realistic, but DD2003 uses both to assume the aggressiveness of ramp on the lobes.

At the LEAST, you need to add LSA and intake centerline to the above specs, to even simulate at all.

 

ahh, crap forgot to add the Lobe sep to those cams. I left the specs at work so I'll get them tomarrow. If DD2003 is like the older version, doesn't it have a cam interator that tries like every concievable combo and show you the "best" cam? I don't really have to run one of those cams, I'm more interested in what the ideal cam is, that way I can find a real cam that matches. I might just get me a copy of DD, any one know where I can down load a copy?

 

Yeah it has the iterator though you still have to base it on a cam.