Wow, I'm gonna need some flow numbers from those heads to make this accurate.

 

Hey Ratsmoker, heres what I have on the #'s

Intake

.200 165
.250 198
.300 228
.350 249
.400 265
.450 279
.500 289
.550 296
.600 302

Exhaust

.200 111
.250 130
.300 145
.350 160
.400 174
.450 185
.500 193
.550 198
.600 201

Thanks for running this, and let me knwo if there's anything else you need!

 

JW, I need to know the Lobe Separation Angle and the intake centerline or the opening and closing events. It would be inaccurate without them.

Here is 94F150s graph. Not too bad but I was expecting better. I think some 1.7 rockers would actually help you on this one. The lift is pretty small on that cam. A bigger cam might be better but I don't know what you use the truck for or how much the computer will let you do.

 

Thanks for that Ratsmoker,

looks like I'm in the 1 to 1 range for HP to CI, was hoping to be a little closer to the 1.2 to 1 range.

Any ideas on changes to make before I throw this in the truck..I use the truck for pretty much everything, its 4x4, I tow (5,000 lbs) and I like to race. Any other cam ideas? How much gain would you see with the 1.7 roller rockers?

The computer is a 94 or 95 VEX-1 Mustang computer that I will have reprogrammed for the truck.

I have a set of Edelbrock Performer heads with 2.02/1.60's, full port and polish on these also. I dont have any flow #'s on them though. I recall the Performers have a smaller Combustion chamber than the TFS heads also (TFS is 61cc). Any Idea how much addtional HP gain with the higher compression running the Performers?

I have the Vortech X Trim SC that was on the Bronco, but I dont think I want to go that radical, so any N/A suggestions to get another 50-70 HP ?

Oh yeah, The MAS and injectors are 42's, I also have 77's that were for the SC application.Forged JE Pistons, Eagle Forged rods, Scat crank, upper girdles.Fully balanced engine. The Converter is a PI Stallion triple clutch with a 23-2400 stall. Tranny E40D with level 10 rebuild and shift kit, B&M Deep finned alum pan, Red Line synthetic, rad cooler + addtional cooler in front of rad. 8.8 rear-end with 4.56's, Detriot Locker, 35" MTR's.Dont know if any of this info helps gain any more ideas or not, thought I'd check though.

Thanks again Ratsmoker!

 

If you are going to be towing you probably do have the right cam. I wouldn't bump the compression up mich either. I checked the 1.7 rockers which would give you a lift of .566/.578 and it gave you another 5HP peak and about 1 more at 2,000. I thought it would give you more. Getting headers with bigger primaries might give you a good bump. Maybe 10HP.

From what I hear the TFS heads are better quality than the edels and I doubt the edels would be flowing much better. Any bigger than the ones you have and port velocity may suffer. I think you will be happy and the 5,000lbs shouldn't be any problem whatsoever as long as it stays cool!

Desktop dyno has shown to be dead on in some cases and pretty far off in others so you never know. I think you will make more than it predicts.

I'm not an injection guru by any means so I have no idea what the computer is going to do to you. I've seen much wilder injection builds though.

 

I changed the above graph to compare the 35-328-8 cam to it. I think I like it better. Its a little smaller but give much more power across the band. The dotted line is the smaller cam.

 

That looks better than the existing cam for sure. I'll have to look that one up. Do you think the 1.7 rockers would be beneficial on this cam? How about the stall speed on the converter (23-2400)?

 

Ratsmoker

I am gonna have to ask you to delete the graph you supplied for 94F150-408 camshaft/combo. It makes mine look pathetic. Just kidding, I will see if I can get my hands on the specs you need to run the cam grind, to make it accurate. thanks

 

I believe I have found the specs.

A332 Ford motorsport

advertised duration....int/exh 290/300
duration @ .050..........int/exh 214/224
lift at the valve............int/exh 472/.496
(or lift at the lobe........int/exh .295/.310)

This is the rest of the information I was given. At .050 lobe lift, intake opens right at top center and closes 34 degrees after bottom center, and exhaust opens 49 degrees before bottom center and closes 5 degrees before top center. So it has no overlap at .050 lobe lift.

Intake centerline is 107 degrees after top center and exhaust centerline is 117 degrees before top center, so the cam appears to have a 112 degree lobe separation angle, and it appears to be phased 5 camshaft degrees advanced.

Thanks

 

I think they would. Its hard to say how much. Might check your valve/piston clearance before you bolt it all up. A 2000-2500 stall should work great. Just get a big tranny cooler. I could not believe how much heat they generated over a stock converter until I burnt my hand on the floorboard.

 

I don't like that one JW. Large advertised duration and small .050 duration and low lifts = Lathargic valve movements. This is good for engines that need to last a long time but kills performance. This cam would make your engine idle very rough and have terrible bottom end power. The 268 smokes it on all aspects.

 

Hey Ratsmoker,

I went to Comp and looked at the 328-8 cam, and their specs listed for that cam are with the 1.7 rockers and the stall at 2500, so I guess I answered my own question there!

I was looking at a few of their other grinds, and one that caught my eye as being similar to the 35-328-8, but speced with the 1.6 rockers is the 35-518-8,what do you think of that one?


Would the next sizes up be too big or would they possibly work given the larger displacement. The two larger being the 35-522-8 and the 35-314-8.

The 314-8 still has the same duration at .050, so I would have to assume that alot would also depend on my piston/valve clearance. I checked on the build sheet, but the heads were installed on the shortblock at a later date, so the clearance isent listed.

Maybe you will know the answer to this question...Why are the valve timings on the cam cards listed for the 35-328-8 and the 35-518-8 both listed at .006 and the cam that I currently have in the engine (35-306-8) listed at .050? The 306-8 is a blower cam. There is a big difference in where the timing events are taking place and I was wondering if that is where the primary difference occurs in the blower cam vs. N/A cam?

Thanks again for all your help Ratsmoker!

 

The main difference between a blower cam and a N/A cam is the Lobe Separation angle (LSA, LCA or LDA). For blown engines you want to reduce valve overlap so you aren't pushing air into the intake valve and right out the exhaust valve before it closes. Also a high LCA cam lowers cylinder pressures so you can run more boost safely.

A blown engine usually likes cams with a 112 - 116LCA. A N/A engine usually likes a cam with a 106 - 112LCA.

An N/A engine likes overlap (low LCA) as it will produce a scavenging effect and increase low end and mid range power. A low LCA also increases cylinder pressure.

There are many exceptions to these rules but it works for the most part.

You want to know both your adv. duration (.006) and your .050 duration as this will tell you a little about how fast the valves will move. A cam with a 290adv and a 240 .050 duration will get the valves open much quicker than a 290adv cam with a 220 .050 duration. Opening and closing valves faster makes more power at the expense of slightly shortened valvetrain life.

I'll look into those other cams in a sec.

 

Thanks for that Ratsmoker, the cam that is in there now has the valve timing (not duration) listed at .050, unlike the rest of the cams that have the timing listed at .006. I checked the other blower cams and they were all listed at .006, so I dont know why that one is listed differently, but I already like the difference in the the one that you ran, much better torque. I'll be curious to see what the others will do. Again, much thanks for doing all of this. I hope I am able to return the favor some time.
Kevin

 

thanks ratsmoker

Man the low end went bye-bye with that one, huh? To think that is the original cam I planned to use, I guess patience and research does pay off sometimes. I think I will stick with the XE262 for now.........or 268.....still haven't made up my mind, I do have a new set of valve springs on the way though, so I am getting closer . Thanks again