i ve heard a lot about keeping lobe sep at 112 in these forums to get it to work with speed density in my 93. i am doing a 5.8 swap in. i already made the mistake in the past by running a slight cam in a 5.0 in this truck and it wouldnt run. i made sure that i got a cam that will work this time by calling comp cams tech line and they told me that the 210/214@50 478 485 lift and 114 on the lobe sep will work very well with speed density. i even second guessed them on the sep along with the guy at jegs and they both said it is what makes the cam work. well i was looking at the specs of the cam the didnt work in my 5.0 and it was a roller cam with 210/215, .533 lift and114 on the sep. i know that windsors have the extra 1/2 in stroke but why will a similar roller not work in my 5.0 vs the flat tappet i ordered for the 5.8. am i getting the wrong shaft at the parts counter?

 

when i bought my cam i was told that with computerized engines you want to go with a min of 112 of lobe sep. 114 is the norm for the computer cams. i was told if you dont have enought lobe sep it wont creat enought vacume for the comp to run. i still have Speed density and the crane cam p/n 443901 seems to work really well and its got 112 of lobe sep

 

Moved from the 87-96 forum to the performance and general engine building forum. User doesn't have e-mail turned on.

 

Well the higher the lobe seperation the better as far as speed density goes so 112 + will work fine. I cannot say why your cam didn't work in the 5.0 it appears it should have what were the advertised duration? If summit or jegs says it will work they are more than likely correct, not always but in this case they should be. 114 degrees you should be fine, good luck

 

i just was scared to get it all together all over again.... do u think the roller cam would work with the computer , i know u can swap cams between 5.8 and 5.0.
i was looking for my post and couldnt find it where i left it....lol

 

The roller cam will work with the computer but will the roller cam work with the 5.8 not all 5.8 are roller compatible as I believe only 93 1/2 up used or were set up for roller lifters. That is something else to consider. If your block is pre 93 then just use a hydraulic flat tappet you will make a little less hp but still have a nice driver nothing to loose sleep over. Just a thought

 

i was already going to put the roller cam in but didnt when the maf conversion got tricky with the e4od elec trans. i drilled holes next to a magnet and tapped threads and bolted the spider boss from the 302 in there. all it really has to do is hold the retainers for the lifters in place to keep them from spinning i also ordered the roller pushrods for the corect length. i pulled it all when i scrapped the idea of maf for now and ordered a new cam. i was kinda frustrated that the cam i ordered was comparable in specs to what i ordered.

 

yeah as long as you use a reduced base circle cam with a 5.0 spider or you could have used a retro fit kit and used any roller cam. Gotcha, why did you give up on the roller? You could still use it. Later

 

i thought because it didnt run the 5.0 it wouldnt work at all. the 5.0 wouldnt idle or run for beans. i drove it and it didnt want to go but once. i might still be able to, but want to know why it will make a 5.8 run with the stock system but not a 5.0?

 

Hey if your in doubt don't use it. I don't wanna insult you or anyting but could you have misaligned the cam when you installed it, maybe off a few degrees? What do you mean it would only go once? If all things were okay then you could get a chip to make the computer understand what is going on, given all things are correct Later

 

i only got it to really scoot once and it impressed me as much as when i used to rive all the new mustangs at the ford dealer i worked for. it wouldnt idol or nothing. i would have to have the throttle open a lot wider and it still wouldnt run. it is possible that i could have skipped a tooth but usually i am pretty careful of that. i took apart another windsor to the block in my 79 b/c i thought i messed something up there too, i have done about a dozen of these and maybe i am forgetting something all of a sudden.? funny how a guy just loses his mind. i line the the two marks up at the middle. lower gear tdc up and cam down valves closed . mark down. ????????????? i think i will use the flat tappet anyway. no use pushing the springs to .533. i like keeping lift under .5 b/c i am under the impression i wont beat my springs so much. just that money is gettin tight especially with three trucks and a marriage. it seems i have a shelf full of cams and a truck that hasnt run right half the time i owned it and the other half it was in the garage...lol.

 

Well good luck

 

you know i forgot, does having a 93 with the elec e40d trand make a difference? please tell me it dont.

 

The Lobe Sep.Angle wrestles w/the Intake Valve Closing (IVC) spec as far as which is more important at low rpms. The IVC (Duration) effects the TDC Overlap and the IVC. while the LSA will effect airflow velocity at low rpm's due to TDC Overlap. Once the rpms build and the slumbering air increases in velocity then the LSA's only other effect is the character it gives your engine's ability to rev towards peak power: as in "Peaky or Broad".

I would also want to know what your Duration spec was on your previous cam as a 112 to 114 LSA is minimal by today's standards. Comp Cam's pretty much swears by a 110 LSA almost clear across the board: dont know about the other brands but Comp Cams likes the 110 LSA: with their Intake ground 4 degrees advanced and their exhaust 4 degrees retarded making the lobe centers 106/114.

Duration is what determines your Dynamic Comp Ratio. If your previous cam w/the mild LSA utilized an excessive duration and nothing else was done to the Static Comp. Ratio-then I would venture to say it was the duration spec that caused your previous cam not to work....and not the LSA spec. All this assumes the cam was installed correctly.

Woulda-Shoulda-Coulda...doesnt really matter I guess: accept I hate hearing of someone wasting time and money when they should be out enjoying their ride!

Kevin,

 

it was 69 cc heads and a 114 lobe sep. .533 lift and 208 /215 @50