383 bolt-ons/Desktop Dyno Sim

[cougs]

All,
I've been playing around with desktop dyno a bit.  Starting with a stock '68 383 Magnum with 10:1 compression, stock stall, and 3.23 gears (going to 3.73 in a month or so) and adding the following:

- DP4B Edelbrock intake
- Proform 750 CFM Carb (rec'd by Ron)
- TTi 1 7/8 headers, 3" pipes
- Hughes HMC2942BL Whiplash cam 229/242 at .050 .518/518 107 CL

I was originally considering going with a milder cam upgrade and keeping the H.P. manifolds but the speed bug got me! 

Anyway, I'm having a difficult time deciding on a cam.  The whiplash has a mean idle and is a slight step up, performance wise, over the 268/284 adv .450/.458 stock cam.  If I go any more aggressive, it kills the torque and only maintains the horsepower. 

Anybody have any cam recommendations to put into the simulation?  I'd like to get to 425 hp w/o giving up a lot of torque and I'd like to maintain my stock torque converter.

[XH29N0G]

I'll let others respond to this.  I think the bore and stroke are different than what you used (I thought they were 4.25 and 3.375 (I hope I did not misread the image- there was an RB version from the late 50's that I think has the numbers you list, but the low B version 383 from the late 60's has a shorter stroke).  This will have an impact on the torque, which my   are that I would work to that with the 383.  Other than that, I do not know how realistic (in absolute terms) the dyno programs are.  I assume if they match the build they have the potential to be realistic, but that depends a lot on who builds the engine and what the parameters are that go into the calculation.

[cougs]

Crap, you're right, I picked the wrong 383!  I'll change it and send a new shot. 

[cougs]

OK, so it appears that now that I've selected the right bore and stroke the engine is performing better. 

Any feedback??  Can I squeeze a little more out of it with a different cam?

[A383Wing]

I got basically the same program on my computer, when I was using this, I chose what RPM I was going to be running at most of the time...then had a cam ground for those specs...

few years later, I took the car to a dyno and ran it....readings from computer dyno and real dyno were pretty accurate to each other

[cdr]

that is WAY off, look at the torque. not out of a 383 !!

[fy469rtse]

I'm with CDR on this, alloy heads ? , you will have more chance with using single plane manifold similar to the the Holley torque 2 I think I used, I went with comps range HE range, but wished I went with hydraulic roller,
That simulator looks wrong ,

[Cooter]

Almost identical torque readings with same cam as the small block Chevy 383 up top.
and thats with 3.750 stroke.
A good reference for build, but wouldn't count on a simulator. Any more HP and your either gonna have to increase the cylinder heads/cam/rpm range.
I recommend you stroke it out.

[cougs]

Almost identical torque readings with same cam as the small block Chevy 383 up top.
and thats with 3.750 stroke.
A good reference for build, but wouldn't count on a simulator. Any more HP and your either gonna have to increase the cylinder heads/cam/rpm range.
I recommend you stroke it out.

That's where I'm leaning.  I could get this torque out of a stroker for sure. 

[cudaken]

Cougs, if it is not to much trouble could do a test using old MP Hemi 284 BB cam and the 509 cam with a troker intake?

that is WAY off, look at the torque. not out of a 383 !!

Why's that CDR? Stock they had 425 foot pounds.

Cuda Ken

[firefighter3931]

In that engine combination i'd run this Lunati Cam :

http://www.lunatipower.com/Product.aspx?id=1578&gid=362

I recommended that one to Jackson who has a very similar 383 build to yours....see below for results 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BAWpWcgqX6w


Ron

[cougs]

Cougs, if it is not to much trouble could do a test using old MP Hemi 284 BB cam and the 509 cam with a troker intake?

that is WAY off, look at the torque. not out of a 383 !!

Why's that CDR? Stock they had 425 foot pounds.

Cuda Ken

Ken,
Send me the cam specs with intake centerline and I'll run it. 

Here a comparison between stock and this combo.  The sim says a stock 383 HP should do 420 ft/lbs at around 3,500 and 330hp at around 5,000. This isn't far off at all...at least for this combo.  This is fun to play around with, but I agree, experience and real-world use will trump this any day!!

[cougs]

In that engine combination i'd run this Lunati Cam :

http://www.lunatipower.com/Product.aspx?id=1578&gid=362

I recommended that one to Jackson who has a very similar 383 build to yours....see below for results 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BAWpWcgqX6w


Ron

Ron, I ran this cam and the power was better all the way to 4,500 RPM!  After that, the Hughes Whiplash did better.  Brings up a big question.  The VooDoo cam seems to produce more total power throughout the RPM range (more area under the curve) which should make the car faster, right? 

Jackson's car sounds great!

Thx,
Brock

[1974dodgecharger]

Is that program to the wheels or engine fly.  Makes u all happy inside that it gives u such high numbers....then u get on a dyno and cry 

[cougs]

Is that program to the wheels or engine fly.  Makes u all happy inside that it gives u such high numbers....then u get on a dyno and cry 

Flywheel.......gross hp.  Doesn't even take accessories like water pump and alternator into account.

[A383Wing]

Is that program to the wheels or engine fly.  Makes u all happy inside that it gives u such high numbers....then u get on a dyno and cry 

Flywheel.......gross hp.  Doesn't even take accessories like water pump and alternator into account.

yes, at flywheel

[cudaken]

Cougs, here are the specks for the cams I asked about.

MP P4120235 duration 282/284  @0.050 241/241 Over Lap 68 Center Line 108 lift .484/.484

MP P4120237 duration 292/292  @0.050 248/248 Over Lap 76 Center Line 108 lift .509/.509

I know they are really old design's but I like to see how they compare to the newer cams. I have ran the first one a couple of times and really liked it.

Thanks in advances!

                  Cuda Ken

[1974dodgecharger]

Is that program to the wheels or engine fly.  Makes u all happy inside that it gives u such high numbers....then u get on a dyno and cry 

Flywheel.......gross hp.  Doesn't even take accessories like water pump and alternator into account.

Sweet.....

[BSB67]

Gross, corrected flywheel hp.

[BSB67]

Cougs, if it is not to much trouble could do a test using old MP Hemi 284 BB cam and the 509 cam with a troker intake?

that is WAY off, look at the torque. not out of a 383 !!

Why's that CDR? Stock they had 425 foot pounds.

Cuda Ken

Ken,
Send me the cam specs with intake centerline and I'll run it. 

Here a comparison between stock and this combo.  The sim says a stock 383 HP should do 420 ft/lbs at around 3,500 and 330hp at around 5,000. This isn't far off at all...at least for this combo.  This is fun to play around with, but I agree, experience and real-world use will trump this any day!!

The factory hp rating was a little optimistic.

[firefighter3931]

In that engine combination i'd run this Lunati Cam :

http://www.lunatipower.com/Product.aspx?id=1578&gid=362

I recommended that one to Jackson who has a very similar 383 build to yours....see below for results 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BAWpWcgqX6w


Ron

Ron, I ran this cam and the power was better all the way to 4,500 RPM!  After that, the Hughes Whiplash did better.  Brings up a big question.  The VooDoo cam seems to produce more total power throughout the RPM range (more area under the curve) which should make the car faster, right? 

Jackson's car sounds great!

Thx,
Brock

Brock,

I'll take a cam that produces better bottom end & midrange power vs the one that produces the best peak number anytime. The car will accelerate harder and have better throttle response. When racing it's the first few hundred feet that are the most critical. 

Try re-doing the program and plug in 9:1 compression and see what happens. The factory 10:1 ratio was overly optimistic and the real/actual number is closer to 9:1. A cam with 229@.050 intake duration is going to be less than ideal with 383 cubes using a stock converter, inmo. With a short stroke 383 in a heavy street car with modest stall you want to maximize torque to get that beast launched and accelerating.   



Ron

[cougs]

Cougs, here are the specks for the cams I asked about.

MP P4120235 duration 282/284  @0.050 241/241 Over Lap 68 Center Line 108 lift .484/.484

MP P4120237 duration 292/292  @0.050 248/248 Over Lap 76 Center Line 108 lift .509/.509

I know they are really old design's but I like to see how they compare to the newer cams. I have ran the first one a couple of times and really liked it.

Thanks in advances!

                  Cuda Ken

Ken, PM me your email and I'll send these over

[cougs]

In that engine combination i'd run this Lunati Cam :

http://www.lunatipower.com/Product.aspx?id=1578&gid=362

I recommended that one to Jackson who has a very similar 383 build to yours....see below for results 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BAWpWcgqX6w


Ron

Ron, I ran this cam and the power was better all the way to 4,500 RPM!  After that, the Hughes Whiplash did better.  Brings up a big question.  The VooDoo cam seems to produce more total power throughout the RPM range (more area under the curve) which should make the car faster, right? 

Jackson's car sounds great!

Thx,
Brock

Brock,

I'll take a cam that produces better bottom end & midrange power vs the one that produces the best peak number anytime. The car will accelerate harder and have better throttle response. When racing it's the first few hundred feet that are the most critical. 

Try re-doing the program and plug in 9:1 compression and see what happens. The factory 10:1 ratio was overly optimistic and the real/actual number is closer to 9:1. A cam with 229@.050 intake duration is going to be less than ideal with 383 cubes using a stock converter, inmo. With a short stroke 383 in a heavy street car with modest stall you want to maximize torque to get that beast launched and accelerating.   



Ron

Ron,
Thanks. Good point. The last thing I want is a sluggish launch. Adjusting to 9:1 compression reduced torque by about 15 ft/lbs across the whole band   

I have another question.  What do you think of the 268/284 .450/.458 Stock Magnum cam?  I know it's a 45 year old design but with its duration is *should* make decent power (at least according to the simulation).  This is what I have now.  The problem I have with it is that it doesn't lope like I would like and doesn't have the top end I'm looking for, but it does launch the car!  Are the specs on the stock cam again, a little exaggerated?  It seems to not lope and have a lot of low end which is surprising due to the duration.  

[firefighter3931]

Brock,

The stock Magnum cam works well for what it is but with a small overlap the idle is pretty sedate. Duration is short which helps build bottom end power and torque. The lunati is 3* tighter on the LSA (112 vs 115) and has another 14* duration at .050 valve lift so it should pull better up top. The increased valve lift won't hurt either. That is a faster lobe than the factory cam so it will make more power.  

I'd like to see it compared to the 262 VooDoo on the same graph  

Oh ya, it'll definately have a more agressive sound at idle  



Ron


Ps. While you're playing around with the dyno sym try inputting small tube header just to see what that does to the torque number. A 1 7/8 header is a bit big on a mild pump gas 383 and it will hurt torque. The ideal size would be 1 3/4 but i understand your reasoning.....stroker coming in the future. I was in the same boat when i purchased the TTI's and bought something that was a little too big in preperation for a future build.

[cougs]

Brock,

The stock Magnum cam works well for what it is but with a small overlap the idle is pretty sedate. Duration is short which helps build bottom end power and torque. The lunati is 3* tighter on the LSA (112 vs 115) and has another 14* duration at .050 valve lift so it should pull better up top. The increased valve lift won't hurt either. That is a faster lobe than the factory cam so it will make more power.  

I'd like to see it compared to the 262 VooDoo on the same graph  

Oh ya, it'll definately have a more agressive sound at idle  



Ron


Ps. While you're playing around with the dyno sym try inputting small tube header just to see what that does to the torque number. A 1 7/8 header is a bit big on a mild pump gas 383 and it will hurt torque. The ideal size would be 1 3/4 but i understand your reasoning.....stroker coming in the future. I was in the same boat when i purchased the TTI's and bought something that was a little too big in preperation for a future build.

Ron,
Here's the VooDoo vs the Magnum.  Note that the VooDoo is installed on 108 ICL and the Magnum is on a 113 ICL.  The darker line is the Magnum cam.  I changed the sim to a 650 CFM carb, 9.2:1 compression, and small tube headers.   The 750 carb was doing very little.  The large headers didn't appear to hurt torque much but I agree it was overkill for a mild 383. Also, I'm running a FirmFeel pitman arm and idler arm which won't work with the 1 7/8" headers
Let me know what you think!   

[firefighter3931]

Interesting....looks like 30 ftlbs at peak volumetric efficiency which isn't all that surprising given the rate of lift on that lobe family. What is surprising is that it falls off faster than the Magnum cam which shouldn't be happening due to the increased duration at .050 valve lift. 

They look pretty close to me....not sure i'd be swapping the cam out on that one at this point. 


Ron

[cougs]

Ron, are my specs right on the Magnum?  I show the magnum has more duration than the VooDoo

Magnum:
268/284 adv.
228/241 @ .050
.450/.458 lift
Lobe Center: 115
ICA: 113

VooDoo:
262/268 adv.
220/226 @.050
.475/.494 lift
Lobe Center: 112
ICA: 108

[Cooter]

Change the EXHAUST valve size to proper 1.740...If going from 2.080 to 2.100 is a big leap, you might as well get the best results you can with stock Magnum valve sizes.

[firefighter3931]

Ron, are my specs right on the Magnum?  I show the magnum has more duration than the VooDoo

Magnum:
268/284 adv.
228/241 @ .050
.450/.458 lift
Lobe Center: 115
ICA: 113

VooDoo:
262/268 adv.
220/226 @.050
.475/.494 lift
Lobe Center: 112
ICA: 108

Ok....the little lightbulb in my noggin just turned on, lol !!! 

Never thought to ask what specs you were using for the Magnum cam....the numbers you posted are partially correct but the actual duration is off. The correct spec is 208/221 @.050 and i''m going to guess you used 228/241 ? If that's the case then I can see why the numbers appear close. Try re-inputting the correct values and see what comes up 



Ron

[cougs]

Ron,
I corrected the cam specs and changed the valve open/close events to be tied to duration at .050 for both graphs.  This makes more sense with the way the stock cam behaves in real life!  I was always suspicious that a cam with those specs had such little top end!

Here are the sims.  Let me know what you think!

[firefighter3931]

Brock,

Ok, that looks better....the Lunati should be making more power than the Magnum cam with the more agressive lobes and increased lift & duration. 

Here are a couple others i like for unported iron heads. These are old Crower performance grinds with big split pattern and lots of additional exhaust duration to compensate for the weak ex port on an unported factory head.

Crower HDP 271 ( pn: 32242)

Crower HDP 282 (pn 32243)

http://www.crower.com/searchresults/

The 282 is probably a bit big for your needs but it'll be interesting to see what your dyno software shows with both of these grinds. I've used both in the past with excellent results 



Ron

[cougs]

Brock,

Ok, that looks better....the Lunati should be making more power than the Magnum cam with the more agressive lobes and increased lift & duration. 

Here are a couple others i like for unported iron heads. These are old Crower performance grinds with big split pattern and lots of additional exhaust duration to compensate for the weak ex port on an unported factory head.

Crower HDP 271 ( pn: 32242)

Crower HDP 282 (pn 32243)

http://www.crower.com/searchresults/

The 282 is probably a bit big for your needs but it'll be interesting to see what your dyno software shows with both of these grinds. I've used both in the past with excellent results 

Ron, here is what I show.  I don't know the install center line on these so I'm picking something that looks good.  The 32242 looks better for this.

[firefighter3931]

I like the HDP271 (32242) grind on this build....looks like the extra exhaust duration is helping it hang on longer in the upper RPM range. I had the HDP 282 (32243) in a mild build 440 with factory heads and it made very good power and was quite streetable. Good top end pull (5800 rpm)

With the smaller displacement 383 the 271 is a better choice. The other one is too big for the displacement with 9:1 compression.

I'd say it boils down to the 271 Crower or 262 Lunati....maybe run those two on the same graph and see what it shows.

Installed centerline on both of those Crower's is 108....fyi 



Ron

[cougs]

I'd say it boils down to the 271 Crower or 262 Lunati....maybe run those two on the same graph and see what it shows.

Looks like the Lunati wins.  Builds more torque with the same peak hp at the same RPM

[firefighter3931]

Thanks for running the comparisons Brock 

I'd have to agree with you....the 262 VooDoo cam is the best choice for this combination. The faster rate of lift lobe creates more torque and it's evident in a side by side comparison. I think we have a winner ! 


Ron

[XH29N0G]

Thanks both of you for posting all of this.

[Cooter]

Brock, if you'd be so kind....I got one as I have to really old version of this and not even close.
I'm curious about my 440 build. If you could, punch some numbers, I'd be much obliged.

440 std bore six pack pistons, .020 in hole.
stock rod.
stock crank
camshaft is Voo Doo..513 in. .533 ex. 234 in. 242 ex. @.050 duration.
Compression is somewhere round 10.8:1
"915" iron heads with 2.140 in. 1.810 ex. Heavily ported, no flow bench numbers, but bowl work as well as port work.
closed chamber.
700 Holley DP carb on Eddy. "Torker" intake.

2" primary headers, with 3" collectors.

[cougs]

Should I install new valvesprings when I install the cam?  The heads have the stock springs.  What about rocker arms while I'm there?

Also, I plan on running the Proform carb.  Vacuum or mechanical secondaries?  650 CFM or 750 CFM? 

I plan on doing this swap in a couple weeks.  Then I'll install the headers after I break in the cam. 

Ron and everybody else, thanks for your input on this!

[XH29N0G]

See what Ron and others say.  I did not install new springs, but I had recently swapped in RPM heads.  In my case, Ron recommended changing the pushrods.  After installing the lunati cam, I did get a tick that started - related to some of the stamped steel rockers.  When I swapped the bank of those, the tick stopped.  I do not know how common that is and assume it was related to wear and just became more obvious with the slight change in lift.

[cougs]

Cooter and Ken, Check your emails.  thx!

[70sixpkrt]

Would you be able to dyno mine?

440 bored .030=446
KB 237 pistons .003 deck height
Forged crank .010 under
Eagle 4340 H-beam rods
Comp is 10.25:1
Eddy heads 84cc with stage 1 and bowl blend
Straightline Cam 234/242@.050 540/525 solid with 112 lsa (4* built in) installed straight up
6-pack aluminum manifold with stock carbs. (Using ProMax stuff)
Comp pro-magnum 1.5 rockers with 3/8 Smith Bros. pushrods
TTI 1 7/8 headers with 3" X cross-over exhaust to the tips
MSD 8546 dist.
MP MSD 6AL
Dana 60 with 3:54

[cdr]

Would you be able to dyno mine?

440 bored .030=446
KB 237 pistons .003 deck height
Forged crank .010 under
Eagle 4340 H-beam rods
Comp is 10.25:1
Eddy heads 84cc with stage 1 and bowl blend
Straightline Cam 234/242@.050 540/525 solid with 112 lsa (4* built in) installed straight up
6-pack aluminum manifold with stock carbs. (Using ProMax stuff)
Comp pro-magnum 1.5 rockers with 3/8 Smith Bros. pushrods
TTI 1 7/8 headers with 3" X cross-over exhaust to the tips
MSD 8546 dist.
MP MSD 6AL
Dana 60 with 3:54

your car makes about 400 hp

[70sixpkrt]

Is that at the rear wheels? On the actual dyno mine made 491hp and on a chassis dyno it made 398hp. It can make a little more power since I was running rich.

[cdr]

there are some things to consider,,the baro,temp.humidity the day of your run at the track. the tune of engine,  this is off of your mph

Your ET / MPH computed from your vehicle weight of 3900 pounds and HP of 400 is 12.44 seconds and MPH of 107.67 MPH. this is flywheel.
this is from wallace calculator. http://www.wallaceracing.com/et-hp-mph.php

[Cooter]

I just wanna say to give props here, thank you Brock for taking the time to dyno my junk.
I know this can be a pita, and I am looking into this version if DTD. Again, I was surprised at how much power my old junk iron headed 440 was making.

[BSB67]

Is that at the rear wheels? On the actual dyno mine made 491hp and on a chassis dyno it made 398hp. It can make a little more power since I was running rich.

There seems to be a disconnect between the dyno numbers that you have gotten and the actual performance of the car.  Atmospheric conditions might account for it if you were racing in extreme conditions.  If you give me the actual race weight of the car, and the date and time and location of the runs, I can figure your actual and correct hp pretty close.    Fuel delivery problems can result in your mph (i.e. horse power) numbers to be off from what they should be.  Your measured hp numbers and parts list suggest to me that your car should mph at 112-113 in decent air.

The Moroso Speed Calc has you at 390 ish actual, net flywheel hp.  (not gross, and not corrected).

[firefighter3931]

Should I install new valvesprings when I install the cam?  The heads have the stock springs.  What about rocker arms while I'm there?

Also, I plan on running the Proform carb.  Vacuum or mechanical secondaries?  650 CFM or 750 CFM? 

I plan on doing this swap in a couple weeks.  Then I'll install the headers after I break in the cam. 

Ron and everybody else, thanks for your input on this!

Hey Brock,

I would install new springs and upgrade the pushrods. If the rockers are in good shape just run them. 

Here's your shopping list ;

Valvesprings : http://www.summitracing.com/int/parts/cca-911-16/overview/

3 bolt timing set : http://www.summitracing.com/int/parts/cca-2109/overview/make/dodge

Heavy duty chrome moly pushrods : http://chucker54.stores.yahoo.net/hydbchromemoly.html

Hyd lifters : http://www.dodgecharger.com/forum/index.php/topic,95605.0.html


As for the carb, with a heavy car and a 383 i would recommend a vac secondary 750 street series proform carb. You also need a throttle adapter (Holley 20-7)


That's a neat program and it looks to be pretty close to what a dyno would show. I have an ancient version of desktop dyno and don't even bother using it anymore.


Ron

[cougs]

Would you be able to dyno mine?

440 bored .030=446
KB 237 pistons .003 deck height
Forged crank .010 under
Eagle 4340 H-beam rods
Comp is 10.25:1
Eddy heads 84cc with stage 1 and bowl blend
Straightline Cam 234/242@.050 540/525 solid with 112 lsa (4* built in) installed straight up
6-pack aluminum manifold with stock carbs. (Using ProMax stuff)
Comp pro-magnum 1.5 rockers with 3/8 Smith Bros. pushrods
TTI 1 7/8 headers with 3" X cross-over exhaust to the tips
MSD 8546 dist.
MP MSD 6AL
Dana 60 with 3:54

No problem.  Check your email.  Just under 500 hp......

[cougs]

I just wanna say to give props here, thank you Brock for a king the time to dyno my junk.
I know this can be a pita, and I am looking into this version if DTD. Again, I was surprised at how much power my old junk iron headed 440 was making.

No problem!  Just for everybody's information, I was using Desktop Dyno 5 from Comp Cams.  Unfortunately, it's not downloadable but Jegs sells it.  It's about $70 if I remember.  It's worth it just for the entertainment value alone!!  It also works on Win 7 unlike the older versions. 

[A383Wing]

I got version 3.1 on my computer...have not used it for a long time now

[cudaken]

Brock, I just printed out my results. Is the 2.020 intake and 1.60 exhaust the default vale sizes? Mine has 2.08 intake and 1.74 exhaust valves. I was shocked by how low the flow is on the exhaust side with the Hemi cam at .500 lift, only 130.00 CFM versus the intake side at 219.00.

Other eye opener was how little of a gain the 509 lift cam had over the Hemi grind cam. Hemi cam was a head till 4500 RPM, then both where at 390 HP. Maybe because of the smaller than stock valves?

Ken, and thank you.

[cougs]

Brock, I just printed out my results. Is the 2.020 intake and 1.60 exhaust the default vale sizes? Mine has 2.08 intake and 1.74 exhaust valves. I was shocked by how low the flow is on the exhaust side with the Hemi cam at .500 lift, only 130.00 CFM versus the intake side at 219.00.

Other eye opener was how little of a gain the 509 lift cam had over the Hemi grind cam. Hemi cam was a head till 4500 RPM, then both where at 390 HP. Maybe because of the smaller than stock valves?

Ken, and thank you.

Ken,
Are you saying that the sim said 2.02/1.6 for the valve sizes?  I'm showing that I ran it for 2.08/1.74.  Let me know.

As for the marginal increase when going to a bigger cam...I see that a lot when I'm trying more aggressive profiles.  I think it's because we're limited by the flow of the stock heads.  Running more cam actually makes the car slower at times although peak hp may go up.

[cudaken]

Brock, on page 3 of the print out it does say Test Diameter IT 2.02 EX 1.60. 

Ken

[firefighter3931]

I'd be interested to see a dyno sym using the 509 in a 383.....even with stock heads it should pull hard to 6400-6500 rpm. 


Ron

[cudaken]

 
Ron, not in my book! Now this is with the undersized valves.

         509    HP     Torque            Hemi Cam         HP     Torque

2000 RPM   140   368                                       146     385

3000 RPM   234   410                                       244     427

4000 RPM   342   449                                       348     457   

5000 RPM   424   445                                       423     445

5500 RPM   441   421                                       443     414

6000 RPM   433   379                                       423     370

6500 RPM   396   320                                       369     298   

7000 RPM   344   258                                       318     239         

Only reason I bought the 509 cam was for a later project that had nasty 906 heads with, gosh about $2000 worth of work. Had Maxie Wedge valves and tons of flow work. But I got side tracked.  I need to add that was 15 years ago.

With the correct valve sizes 509 should fair better, but will lose some more bottom end.

I have all so asked for the Voodoo specks. Much easier to read than the grafts posted here.

Ken

[70sixpkrt]

Cougs I got your email. Wow. Those are the numbers I was expecting. Thanks for spending the time on doing this. This was my last time slip. I was in the left lane.

[cougs]

I'd be interested to see a dyno sym using the 509 in a 383.....even with stock heads it should pull hard to 6400-6500 rpm. 


Ron

Here're the results of the two cams......284/284 .484/.484 vs. 292/292 .509/.509.  I'll let you guess which is which!  I also adjusted the elevation to 600 ft at 68 degrees.  I had it set to 1,000 feet earlier which is my elevation.  Elevation and temperature make a big difference as we all know

[Cooter]

That .484 241@ .050 purple shaft pulls great if you got the compression.

[70sixpkrt]

And this is my cam card.

[firefighter3931]

I'd be interested to see a dyno sym using the 509 in a 383.....even with stock heads it should pull hard to 6400-6500 rpm.  


Ron

Here're the results of the two cams......284/284 .484/.484 vs. 292/292 .509/.509.  I'll let you guess which is which!  I also adjusted the elevation to 600 ft at 68 degrees.  I had it set to 1,000 feet earlier which is my elevation.  Elevation and temperature make a big difference as we all know

Thanks for posting that.   It's pretty obvoious that the lower compression responds better to the smaller cam. This is why cam selection is such a critical component in the build process.

Here's a good one if you're interested to see how badly the wrong cam can make an engine run. Mike was running the MP 590 solid in his 440 and after a few tweaks were made it really came around. The engine was re-dynoed at the same facility by the same operator so the numbers are reliable. I knew what the outcome would be but it's nice to see the numbers there in black and white.  

http://www.dodgecharger.com/forum/index.php/topic,6000.0.html

*pay close attention to the graphs on page 1 comparing the original combo to the re-tweaked version. At 3500 rpm it picked up over 140ftlbs of torque.  

Ya think this puppy was overcammed and mismatched ?  



Ron

[1974dodgecharger]

I'd be interested to see a dyno sym using the 509 in a 383.....even with stock heads it should pull hard to 6400-6500 rpm. 


Ron

me too since thats what I have....

[cougs]

Hey Brock,

I would install new springs and upgrade the pushrods. If the rockers are in good shape just run them. 

Here's your shopping list ;

Valvesprings : http://www.summitracing.com/int/parts/cca-911-16/overview/

3 bolt timing set : http://www.summitracing.com/int/parts/cca-2109/overview/make/dodge

Heavy duty chrome moly pushrods : http://chucker54.stores.yahoo.net/hydbchromemoly.html

Hyd lifters : http://www.dodgecharger.com/forum/index.php/topic,95605.0.html


As for the carb, with a heavy car and a 383 i would recommend a vac secondary 750 street series proform carb. You also need a throttle adapter (Holley 20-7)


That's a neat program and it looks to be pretty close to what a dyno would show. I have an ancient version of desktop dyno and don't even bother using it anymore.


Ron
[/quote]

Ron,
Should I replace the spring locks and retainers while I'm replacing springs?  I'm trying to keep this on a budget but if i'm going to be there.....   

thx,
Brock

[firefighter3931]

Ron,
Should I replace the spring locks and retainers while I'm replacing springs?  I'm trying to keep this on a budget but if i'm going to be there.....   

thx,
Brock

Brock, The 7* stock stuff is fine with those spring pressures as long as they are in good shape. 


Ron

[cougs]

Ron,
Should I replace the spring locks and retainers while I'm replacing springs?  I'm trying to keep this on a budget but if i'm going to be there.....   

thx,
Brock

Brock, The 7* stock stuff is fine with those spring pressures as long as they are in good shape. 


Ron

Thanks, are the new valvesprings required for the lift of the cam or is it just good to do?  The car has the original springs which were checked out 6,000 miles ago (keep in mind this WAS 1994)

[c00nhunterjoe]

My set up, similar to the 509 cam using bone stock 516 heads with specs entered from moparts on heads. I would say its relatively close. My heads hurt me alot but on a good night i pull 105-108 in the 1/4.

[firefighter3931]

Ron,
Should I replace the spring locks and retainers while I'm replacing springs?  I'm trying to keep this on a budget but if i'm going to be there.....   

thx,
Brock

Brock, The 7* stock stuff is fine with those spring pressures as long as they are in good shape. 


Ron

Thanks, are the new valvesprings required for the lift of the cam or is it just good to do?  The car has the original springs which were checked out 6,000 miles ago (keep in mind this WAS 1994)

It's a combination of both lift and spring rate. The more aggressive lobe requires additional coil bind room and open/seat pressure.


Ron

[stuubi]

I'd be interested to see a dyno sym using the 509 in a 383.....even with stock heads it should pull hard to 6400-6500 rpm.  


Ron

Here're the results of the two cams......284/284 .484/.484 vs. 292/292 .509/.509.  I'll let you guess which is which!  I also adjusted the elevation to 600 ft at 68 degrees.  I had it set to 1,000 feet earlier which is my elevation.  Elevation and temperature make a big difference as we all know

Interesting numbers for 284 cam,would you be interested to make some changes,just to copy my plan for my 383?Cam is same but there's few mod's i'm planning to run..
maybe we can pm?

Pete

[Mebsuta]

nm

[stuubi]

Maybe not then,sorry for the Q.

Reason i asked was that my EA program stalled on me,and i takes few week's to get new one.
I have my own engine balancing between few mod's.

But no harm done.

Thanks anyway.