Camshaft Recommendation
Thread Starter
|
New User
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Camshaft Recommendation
Hope everyone is having a great New Year so far.
I bought a Holley Street Avenger 670cfm 4 barrel and an Edelbrock Performer RPM intake (1500-6500 rpm power band) for my stock 302. Can anyone recommend a good CAMSHAFT for my engine? The obvious choice would be the Edelbrock cam that is "matched" to the intake, however I'd like some imput on what everyone else would do. Perhaps a cam that would give me good lower end torque and would take advantage of the carburetor.
Thanks, Eric
from rainy Atlanta, GA
I bought a Holley Street Avenger 670cfm 4 barrel and an Edelbrock Performer RPM intake (1500-6500 rpm power band) for my stock 302. Can anyone recommend a good CAMSHAFT for my engine? The obvious choice would be the Edelbrock cam that is "matched" to the intake, however I'd like some imput on what everyone else would do. Perhaps a cam that would give me good lower end torque and would take advantage of the carburetor.
Thanks, Eric
from rainy Atlanta, GA
Laughing Gas
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 964
Likes: 1
From: Roseburg, OR
I don't know... it seems to me that with a 670 on your mostly stock 302, you're going to want a cam that performs better at higher RPMs. I think that's too much carb for that motor. Others will chime in (hey mods, let's move this to an engine forum), but I think it's going to be hard to make that thing torquey off the line with such a big carb.
Senior User
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 387
Likes: 0
From: Calgary
I agree that for a street driven truck you want to maximize low to mid range torque. I put a Summit cam in my '72 302 with the following specs:
Intake 204º
Exhaust 214º
which is pretty mild but the lift was;
Intake .448"
Exhaust .472"
Which is quite a bit more lift than stock. This gives me a smooth idle and a noticable increase in low end torque.
I agree the 670 cfm carb sound a bit big. I use an Edelbrock 600 cfm which I got for Christmas last year but would have preferred a 500 cfm.
Just my $.02.
Intake 204º
Exhaust 214º
which is pretty mild but the lift was;
Intake .448"
Exhaust .472"
Which is quite a bit more lift than stock. This gives me a smooth idle and a noticable increase in low end torque.
I agree the 670 cfm carb sound a bit big. I use an Edelbrock 600 cfm which I got for Christmas last year but would have preferred a 500 cfm.
Just my $.02.
Thread Starter
|
New User
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
I am finding out throught research, after the fact, that the 670 may be too big unless i change the cam and heads. I was originally going to go with the EDELBROCK 600 but thought the Speed Avenger 670 wouldnt be that much bigger.
Fordxxx - what would be the advantages of the Edelbrock 500 over a 600?
Is there anyway I could make the 670 work or is it just too much carb no matter what I do?
Would the Edelbrock 500 or 600 give me better performance than the 670?
Eric
Fordxxx - what would be the advantages of the Edelbrock 500 over a 600?
Is there anyway I could make the 670 work or is it just too much carb no matter what I do?
Would the Edelbrock 500 or 600 give me better performance than the 670?
Eric
Senior User
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 387
Likes: 0
From: Calgary
My thinking about the 500cfm carb is that the smaller primary venturies would result in higher air velocity through the carb. giving me crisper throttle response at low and mid range RPMs.
The fact is I never got the 500cfm and the 600 works good so I don't know if the 500 would have been better or not.
As far as the 670 goes, you may as well try it...it is not that much bigger than a 600.
The fact is I never got the 500cfm and the 600 works good so I don't know if the 500 would have been better or not.
As far as the 670 goes, you may as well try it...it is not that much bigger than a 600.
Fleet Owner
Joined: Jun 1999
Posts: 24,552
Likes: 74
From: Creedmoor, North Carolina
Eric, That surely sounds like overkill on the carb for a street machine. You will be dumping a lot of gas on the roads through the tailpipes.
I am currently running a 390 cfm carb on a 352 and found it performs about as well as the 600 cfm Edelbrock 1406. I have been able to move my mpg up from 10 to 14 with a better setup.
If you are building a drag truck you might be in the right ballpark.
John
I am currently running a 390 cfm carb on a 352 and found it performs about as well as the 600 cfm Edelbrock 1406. I have been able to move my mpg up from 10 to 14 with a better setup.
If you are building a drag truck you might be in the right ballpark.
John
