351w torque cam help!

Reply Subscribe

Thread Tools

Search this Thread

Mar 15, 2005 | 09:14 PM

bluepartsman

Thread Starter

Freshman User

Joined: Dec 2003

Posts: 36

Likes: 0

From: upstate NY

351w torque cam help!

I have a 1985 351wHO and I am putting in a new cam. Since I use the engine for mudding and need lots of torque I am putting in a torque cam. I have been browsing internet sites and got specs as follows for a particular cam:

.448/.472 valve lift
204/214 duration at .050"
270/280 advertised duration
112 lobe separation
Fits 351W Fords 1969-91 all - and trucks up to 1996 with hydraulic flat-tappet cam

It says it is a very good cam for torque and it will work with my stock size springs. Do these numbers sound right? I have been comparing them to the stock numbers but I just dont know enough about this stuff to be able to relate these specs to real world performance. Is there any one who can steer me in the right direction? thanks.

Mar 16, 2005 | 09:42 AM

Kemicalburns

Hotshot

Joined: Jul 2002

Posts: 14,285

Likes: 12

From: Bend,OR

call comp cams. they will get you lined out and take out all the guess work. your lucky because your 5.8 is carbed so you arent as restricted about cam selection as the efi guys

Mar 17, 2005 | 01:25 PM

jrocco

Senior User

Joined: Oct 2001

Posts: 300

Likes: 0

From: Crosby TX

I'm using the Comp Cams Xtreme Energy XE268H - Dual Pattern Grind, 224/230 Degrees at 0.050 and 0.508/0.512 inch lift, 110 Lobe Separation.

The torque curve comes up real fast. My build up got 352 Ft.Lbs At 3000 RPM and 395 at 4400.

Mar 17, 2005 | 05:53 PM

bluepartsman

Thread Starter

Freshman User

Joined: Dec 2003

Posts: 36

Likes: 0

From: upstate NY

jrocco, you have no problem with that much lift and your stock springs and all that. some one told me the other day that the lift I was looking at (.448/.472 valve lift ) was the limit for the other stock components. I just want to make sure and not have to do it all over again because either a cam doesnt perform the way I want it to or because a cam wont work at all and damage other things.

Mar 17, 2005 | 06:03 PM

fordxxx

Senior User

Joined: Jan 2003

Posts: 387

Likes: 0

From: Calgary

I have the cam with the specs you list in my 302 and am quite pleased with the results. A noticeable difference in low and mid range torque. I used the stock springs and rockers too.

Mar 17, 2005 | 06:15 PM

Netfly

Elder User

Joined: Jul 2004

Posts: 811

Likes: 0

I used the same cam to build my 85 351HO. Very nice results. Good torque, barely noticable lope at a idle. Check Edelbrock they sell that cam and a performer intake to match. I also added comp cams railed roller rockers. That lift is enought to need the rails, much more and you need guide plates.

Mar 18, 2005 | 08:35 AM

jrocco

Senior User

Joined: Oct 2001

Posts: 300

Likes: 0

From: Crosby TX

Quote:

Originally Posted by bluepartsman

My heads have "High Lift Springs", and I used 1.7:1 roller rockers instead of the stock 1.6:1.

The pistons are the stock style (dished), and there was no valve to piston clearance problem with this combo.

I used the GT40P heads and the compression ratio is 9.0:1. I got the heads from Central Coast Mustang. They supplied them with Stainless Valves, 3-Angle Valve Job and High Lift Springs.