Aren't the extreme energy the comp cams line? I think it would be under warranty. But, I bought it through Summit and we moved since I bought it and I cant find the paperwork. So, I guess I'm outta luck. Also, I think the XE cams require a spring change. I'll stop bugging all and give a call to crane and comp. Thanks to everyone's advice. I think I'm a little closer to picking one. I'll let everyon know what the manufacturers say.
Brian Zack '70 Chevelle Malibu mailto:brianz@;dpsabq.com -----Original Message----- From: Brad Waller [mailto:brad@;ep.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2002 11:05 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [Chevelle-List] SBC Cam selection I would think that .467 lift is perfectly fine for the street. Of course, all combinations will depend on your driving style and the car setup. With your very stock setup, you don't want to go too far from where you are. You could look at something like the Crane XE262 or XE256 cam. They sound smaller, but they are more aggressive than what you have, and the lift is still tame. Both will give you great bottom end grunt. XE256 (I/E) lift .447/.454 duration 256/268 XE262 (I/E) lift .462/.469 duration 262/270 Talk to the Crane Tech line and see what they have to recommend, as well as if they have anything to say about your current cam issues. Is it under warranty? Brad Waller ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) '66 Corvette | 327/dead | 4-speed | Wilwood Brakes | 245/45/16 BFGs '67 Chevelle | ex-SS396 | 355/700R4 | '79 F-Body Brakes > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:owner-chevelle-list@;chevelles.net] On Behalf Of Brian Zack > Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2002 9:16 AM > To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' > Subject: RE: [Chevelle-List] SBC Cam selection > > > Is a .467 lift too large for the street? Thanks for the > replies. I dont > want to go too big. I know if I had considered going up to > say .480 I would > probably kill my driveability and low end torque and be over > camming it. I > guess I'll call Comp. cams and/or Crane cams and talk with > them to answer > any more recommendations or things to beware of. Tom, Did you > get the cam > specs on your Cutlass? > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Don [mailto:doverpeck@;cinci.rr.com] > Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2002 10:04 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [Chevelle-List] SBC Cam selection > > > > Just be careful Brian. The number 1 mistake street engine > builders make is > to over-cam & over-carburate. > Don > > > > I am considering doing the cam change because ever since I built the > engine > > about a year ago, the new crane cam and lifters will > clatter and tap every > > so often and I'm not sure if this could be damaging the cam > lobes too or > > not. I have tried re-adjusting the valves 2 or 3 times and > it seems to go > > away for a little bit then comes back. I have tried > different amount of > > turns starting at 1/2 turn after clattering stops and am > now between 3/4 > to > > 1 turn. I have also tries marvel mystery oil to see if that > would help a > > sticking lifter. No help. Being a daily driver, I can only > alow a weekend > > down time and dont want to just buy lifters and then get > into it and find > > out the cam is going bad too and not be able to get another > one right > away. > > I know eventually, a bigger stall converter (and tranny > cooler at the same > > time) will help my seat of the pants feel. I did a mild > polishing of the > > ports on the redone heads when I built it. I also want to > eventually > change > > to 2 1/2" exhaust and maybe 3:23(?) or 3:50(?) gears. You > know that with > the > > horsepower bug, you always want just a little more and still keep it > > streetable. ; ). Any other comments would be appreciated. > > Thanks > > > > Brian Zack > > '70 Chevelle Malibu > > mailto:brianz@;dpsabq.com > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Dave Studly [mailto:chevelle@;studly.net] > > Sent: Tuesday, October 22, 2002 9:00 PM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: RE: [Chevelle-List] SBC Cam selection > > > > > > Brian, > > > > I'm no expert, but it almost sounds like you're splitting > hairs. You > > mention the car being a daily driver, so I'm gonna assume > you're not drag > > racing it much. Adding .015-inch of lift is going to be > difficult to feel > > in the seat of your pants. Have you thought about switching to 1.6 > rockers > > instead? If you have .440 lift now with stock (1.5) > rockers, swapping to > > 1.6 rockers will take you up to .469 lift ( (.440 / 1.5) * > 1.6). This > also > > adds a few degrees of duration. A *much* easier swap than a cam. > > > > I dont think you'll really want a cam with more than .470 > lift and ~225 > > degrees duration (@ .050") with a stock converter. You > should be able to > > get away with stock valve springs in all of these cases. > Don't quote me > on > > that last part, though. > > > > You have a pretty well-matched combo for low-mid torque. > Carb tuning > (using > > a dragstrip or dyno to verify your results) can make a noticeable > difference > > in power and mileage if you haven't done so. It's not > glorious like a new > > cam, but it can be just as rewarding in the end. > > > > As an aside, I was just at the dragstrip this past sunday > and a friend was > > there with his 90's LT-1 Roadmaster station wagon. He upgraded the > exhaust > > which killed the good low-end torque he had (motor is > stock, except for > > slightly modded air box). To remedy that, he changed the > torque converter > > to one from a S-10 application (he estimated 2000-2100 stall, versus > > 1200-1300 stock -- no tach to truly verify these numbers.) > and picked up > .8 > > seconds in his quarter mile time and +5 MPH (it was also > only in the high > > 40s, low 50s temperature-wise). If you're not familiar > with quarter mile > > times, that's a *big* improvement. Getting the engine up > into it's torque > > band quicker makes all the difference in the world. > > > > As another personal aside, I ran my quickest and fastest on > Sunday with my > > 406-powered '70 -- 12.70 @ 107. I was pretty happy about that. If > there's > > one good thing about Ohio, it's low ETs in October! :-) > > > > Torque rules! > > > > -Dave > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:owner-chevelle-list@;chevelles.net]On Behalf Of Brian Zack > > Sent: Tuesday, October 22, 2002 2:28 PM > > To: Chevelle List (E-mail) > > Subject: [Chevelle-List] SBC Cam selection > > > > > > What is the largest cam any of you are running in a daily > driver with a > > small block 350. I have a '70 Chevelle Malibu with a 350 > 4-bolt main, > > cast pistons, 9:1 compression stock heads, edlebrock > performer manifold > > edlebrock 600 cfm carb, 1 5/8" headers, and dual 2" > exhaust. It also has > the > > stock stall converter and I think either 2:73 ot 3:07 gears > ( I have to > > verify that) Right now I have a crane energizer 266H which > is 266 duration > > and .440 lift. I am going to be changing to a larger cam > and was wondering > > what max. size anyone might recommend. I was thinking of of > the crane > > energizer w/ .467 lift or the crane energizer with .454 > lift. But, I dont > > think the smaller one would give me that much of a > difference. I think I > > would have to change my springs though and probably the > converter. Has > > anyone used a larger cam and not upped the converter? I > would assume it > > would probably hurt mileage and not have that great of low > speed torque. > Any > > recommendations? > > ----------------------------------------------------- To Unsubscribe please visit www.chevelles.net/list.html To start a new topic, send mail to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ----------------------------------------------------- To Unsubscribe please visit www.chevelles.net/list.html To start a new topic, send mail to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
