I'm looking for opinions & experiences with hydraulic roller cam/lifter combinations on a 460. I am specifically looking at these Crane models with the matching hydraulic roller lifters:

Crane #359331
Grind HR-200/311-2S-12
Adv Duration: 264/274
Duration@050: 200/212
Lift at valve: 532/568
Basic RPM: 1500-5000
Min RPM: 800
Max RPM: 4600

Crane #359341
Grind HR-216/325-2S-12
Adv Duration: 278/284
Duration@050: 216/224
Lift at valve: 556/580
Basic RPM: 2000-5500
Min RPM: 1400
Max RPM: 5400

Hydraulic Roller Lifters:
Crane #35532-16
Ford V8 '63-76, 352-428 ci. & FORD V-8 68-97, 370-429-460 CU. IN.

The engine is a recently rebuilt (approx 10k miles ago) 1996 460 with these specs:
- stock block, crank & truck "football head" rods
- pistons with slightly smaller dish for 9.3-9.5:1 compression with the F3TE heads
- ported F3TE EFI heads with 2.19/1.76 valves & thermal coatings on combustion chamber, valves & ports
- 1.73 full roller rockers
- port matched EFI intake with thermal barrier coating
- Banks stainless tri-Y headers feeding into a custom 3.5" single exhaust (no cats)
- BBK dual 62mm throttlebody with ported upper intake to match
- 36# Bosch injectors
- 90mm Lighnting MAF
- '96 truck SFI/Mass Air EEC-V (AGANN strategy) with Tweecer and fully custom tuned by me
- rebuilt & beefed '96 E4OD w/ triple disc converter 2,200rpm stall, 6 pinion steel low & intermediate planets, 4-pinion steel OD planet, 5 plate direct drum, etc, etc.

Current cam is a custom Isky grind 270 adv duration (221 @050) with .542 valve lift 114 deg lobe centers.

I am looking to broaden the power band. I run this motor in a 6,600# truck with 5.13 gears and the current shift point is 5,200rpm. Right now the motor just doesn't seem like its reaching its potential. I'm thinking a roller cam should be able to keep the low end I have now and give me another 50hp+ on top, right?

 

"I'm thinking a roller cam should be able to keep the low end I have now and give me another 50hp+ on top, right?"

actually your low end will be improved by 20-30 ft-lbs and if you go the bigger of the two youll probably see 60-70 hp on top. if you dont mind spending the money on the setup (youll have to get custom pushrods and grind a bit on the pushrod holes in the heads, and get new springs/retainers/locks to control the heavy lifters, and possibly spring seat machining or new spring cups and locators) and keep the rpms under 6k, theyre well worth it. youll be looking at probably around 1200 dollars to get everything set up, but the extra torque and horsepower and broader powerband will be nice.

 

I actually ran some desktop dyno models with my ported head flow numbers and the different cam specs plugged in. The Isky cam I have now peaks at 461 hp @ 5k and 521 tq @ 4k. The Crane #359341 peaks at 445 hp @ 4,500 and 593 tq @ 3,500. However the real news is that the roller cam makes 100 # more torque from 2k-3.5k than my Isky cam:

rpm ... isky cam ... crane roller ... crane roller retarded 4 deg
2,000 ... 447 ... 557 ... 552
2,500 ... 473 ... 574 ... 571
3,000 ... 493 ... 590 ... 587
3,500 ... 518 ... 593 ... 594
4,000 ... 521 ... 566 ... 573
4,500 ... 512 ... 519 ... 537
5,000 ... 484 ... 458 ... 484
5,500 ... 435 ... 391 ... 414

The last column is the same roller cam but retarded 4 degrees. Notice it only sacrifices 3-5 tq down low, but matches the flat tappet cam's torque at 5k, compared to the straight up installation. The retarded cam also peaks at 460 hp but does it from 4,500-5,000 rpm!

BTW, I simmed the less aggressive roller and while it made about 20 tq more at 2k, it drops off rapidly above 3k. In fact, it made about 50 hp and 40 tq less than the more aggressive roller.



I'm pretty sold on the roller cam and luckily I already had the valve springs & retainers done with the other head work. All I need are the cam, lifters, pushrods, & stud conversion kit from Crane that is a bolt on with the 460. But, yeah, it's gonna cost $1,200. Kinda kicking myself for not just doing this in the first place 'cause the Isky cam, lifters and pushrods were about $400...

The really funny thing is a stock EFI 460 was rated at approx 230-240 hp @ 3,800ish and 410 tq @ 1,700.

 

what are the specs on the springs you had installed? with a hydraulic roller youre going to need alot more pressure... like 150-170 lbs seat and around 550 open. the ones im using on mine are crane 99896-16. i spent a bit of time doing research on springs and those came to be the best for what i wanted. plenty of clearance for a bigger lift cam too.

 

That's a good question. My head porter/builder got them based on the specs for my Isky cam and intended RPM range (5,500 max).

According the the Crane catalog, the requirements for the #359341 & #359331 hydraulic cams are Crane #96870
Closed 134 LBS @ 1.900 or 1 29/32
Open 378 LBS @ 1.340

I know he machined the spring seats and the had to install some kind of spacer... I'm going to be contacting him again after the holidays to look up the part number he used. Otherwise, I suppose they can be measured in the truck, right?

What do you think about installing the cam retarded 4 degrees? It seems to provide more overall power that way which makes me wonder why it wasn't just ground that way to begin with. I supposed I could order a custom grind as well.

 

what installing the cam 4 degrees retarded does is essentially reduces the lobe separation, making the powerband narrower and higher in the rpm range. what you have to ask yourself is "what rpm range do i want power at most" if your answer is 3500-4500 then do the cam retard or swap up to the next bigger cam- the 359351, if its 2000-3000 then dont. mine is a 545ci so i went with the 359351. another note on springs... the higher seat pressure gives you better mileage and a smoother idle, the higher open pressure gives you better valve control at rpm, and the spring rate was middle of the road. thats why i picked the 99896-16. they had best of both... good seat, good open, plenty of lift clearance before coil bind, and a lower spring rate than comparable lift springs for a longer spring life.
oh, and they cant be measured really without being removed. all you could measure is installed height and open height, you cant measure spring pressure or rate.

 

hello, i would go for the larger cam combination just always checking piston/valve
clearances. wondering what i.d. your tri-y pipes are or have you considered using tuned
length/4 into 1 headers. have no experience in tractor/mud pulling only street/strip

 

tri-y usually gives better low end torque, which is important in a big heavy vehicle but not in a light racecar, thats why he uses the tri-y setup

 

I used to run equal-length long tube Heddman headers. Aside from the fact that their quality sucked, the Banks headers seemed to make an improvement everywhere in the powerband. I know the Banks headers are not optimized for high-rpms because they are designed for a stock efi 460 which shifts at 4,200 and redlines at 4,500. However, despite that my current motor pulls impressively to whatever rpm I let it (for now, around 5,200 since the bottom end is still essentially stock) without ever feeling like it's "running out of breath." For a "torque" header they use pretty big primary tubes:
\

Regarding the power band, I think 2k-4k is where it will operate "most" of the time. Since the stall is 2,200, the only time my motor sees below 2k is cruising around 30-40mph in 4th gear with the tc locked up. Right now it does sound like its lugging a little in that range but still easily accelerates the truck with light throttle. On the other hand, I do tend to run it to redline daily, if for no other reason than to hear the big block roar and hustle my 6,600# truck up to speed (which it does admirably). Right now, it definately pulls strongest from 4k-5k.

Looking at those torque graphs it looks like running the midrange roller cam 4 deg ret gives me around 100#ft more torque from 2k-3k than I have now while only sacrificing a single HP at 5k. If I run the cam straight up I gain about 5#ft of torque at 2k but I lose 16hp at the peak. To me the 5# loss doesn't seem like a big deal since it's still 100# more than I have now. I just don't want to lose that "pull to redline" I have now.

 

did you try running the 359351 cam in your desktop dyno? i bet youll find it similar to running the 359341 4 deg retarded, only with more hp and torque in the upper end

 

I'm curious, What would advancing the cam 4 degrees do? I know on a stock 460 I installed a new timing chain set a few years ago & it made a big difference in bottom end torque & increased manifold vacuum enough to operate the vacuum cruise control on my 86 F250 4x4 on a 6% grade without slowing near as bad as before. I'm still tossing around what I want to do with my 86 F250 keep it or upgrade to a newer truck. If I keep it I'm thinking of rebuilding the engine for pulling a 10,000# travel trailer. I'm NOT a "diesel guy". I was just talking to a mechanic friend today about using a roller cam. LESS FRICTION has to add up to more power. With all the problems I read about today with flat tappet cams, in my mind the rollers are the only way to go. Oh yes more cost but overall I think it would be worth it.
I'm still curious if you run the roller Crane cam 4 degrees advanced what comes up. For me max torque in the 2400 RPM range would be ideal.
Thanks,
Craig

 

hi. thanks for the responce i just wanted to join in the discussion and offer my opinion
i have preference for tuned 4/1 headers/extractors,as we call them here for most engines
i build, yes my upper rpm range of 6500/7600 rpm is higher but i have found 4/1 pipes
generally better overall, for lower rpm power i would suggest a smaller primary i.d. of
1.75"i.d, 36"long/3.5 collectors and twin 3" pipes ( approximately) ,DON"T SHOOT ME !!
P.S. our 10.25 sec. lite race car F100 weighs 4100 lbs

 

I bought my Crane roller cam, matching hyd roller lifters, valve springs, retainers, etc. Now I need to replace my year-old Scorpion roller rockers because they are pedestal mount and the hole in the trunion is too small for the stud-mount conversion I need. FWIW, I really like my Scorps -- they are well made, no complaints. I'm bummed I now have to replace them...

Both Scorpion & Crane make compatible roller rockers, but the Scorps are Ford-specific and have a 1.73 ratio and the Cranes are BBC & "BBF compatible" but use a 1.7 ratio. The Scorps seem like the way to go but I was also trying to keep everything from Crane to stay "matched."

What do you guys think?

 

The 359351 sacrificed a lot more low end torque and the big gains from it are above 5k, in other words it seemed to move the powerband up by almost 1,000rpm. Retarding the 359341 cam moved the powerband less than 500rpm. If I were running a stroker 520-557 then no question I'd go with the bigger cam, but for my use on a "just" 460 cubes the 359341 seems like a better choice.

So I decided to go with the 359341 and after talking to Crane I'm going to install it straight up and see how I like it. When I thought about it, I don't know if I'd even notice a 15hp difference that's only above 4,800rpm on a 6,600# truck. If I want to change the timing, the cover it not that hard to take off to get to the timing set.

 

I have a stock Cobra Jet cam in a 88 EFI 460. It doesn't want to idle any ideas?? It has Speed Densety CPU. This cam is just above the stock cam in lift and duration. I'm going to look into this this weekend. Any help would be great!!