Cam choices for a 512 build

[Paul G]

I am in the process of building a 440 to 512. This is going to be street engine. The car has power steering and brakes, A/C, and it is a cruiser. Block is at the machine shop, stroker kit is on the way to the shop. I am using the 440 source 512 kit. The block is being bored .030 over, the compression goal is to fall in the mid 10 range.

It is going in my 72 Charger that weighs 4000#
Planning on using the Trick Flow PP240 heads
Eddy dual plane intake
Holley 850 carb
I am going to use my 46RH overdrive automatic, and my hughes lock up converter with a 2400 stahl
8 3/4 rear end with 3.91 gears

What cam to use?

I am leaning toward a hydraulic roller. They cost quite a bit more, seems everyone is using them. Is it the best choice for street build? Back in the day all the big power engines had solid cams. Seems like no one is using them anymore. Must adjust lash once in a while, no big deal. Would a solid be a better choice for me to meet my goals and still be a mild engine?

My goals for this build are;

vacuum for power brakes
behave nicely when cruising at 70 mph around 2300 RPM in overdrive
Make as much power as possible while maintaining drivability and power brakes. 

I do not have a specific track goal or horse power goal as this is a street car. So lest call this my goal, I would like to out run or at least surprise the next SRT, Cobra, or hot Camaro at a stop light.

[c00nhunterjoe]

425 horse srt8, 707hp srt hellcat, or 9 second srt demon? Makes a big difference. Going to be hard to get your goals and beat a hellcat. They runs 10s all day long. Its possible to get a 10 second rb engine that cruise at low rpm but its going to take alot of cubes and alot of head flow. The trickflows are great out of the box but will need alot of portwork to fit this bill. If you are going roller, go mechanical no ifs ands or buts about it. The cam heads and compression will make or break this build if 10 second cruiser is the goal.

[Challenger340]

I wouldn't reinvent the wheel,
for the Pwr Brakes and A/C we use the CompCams #3016 Intake Lobe / #3037 Exhaust Lobe, Ground on 112* LSA and we typically install around 106/107 depending on how much pressure we have.
It's basically just the 23-711-9 Ground on 112 Lsa.
It provides a ton of torque(600+), and the powerports will surprise higher 5's with the right induction.
Give it any kind of Tire Diameter(28"/29") on the 3.91 cogs, learn how to leave without blowing the balonies off, setup the 727 to shift on it's own low 5000's, and unsuspecting SRT drivers will be quite aware. 
Remember, Torque is what you want on the street.

If I may offer some advice with HR's in BB Mopars ?
Do your V-Train geometry for the Rocker Adjusters, so that you have no more than 1 - 1 1/2 threads on the adjuster showing below the Rockers, but the Pushrods long enough so that the HR Lifter Plunger is darn near Bottomed Out !
In other words....
ZERO Lash PLUS 2+ Full Turns DOWN so the HR Lifter Plunger is damn near bottomed out like a Solid(within .015" to .020"), but only the 1- 1 1/2 Threads out below the rocker.
They will still run dead quiet, but you won't get the bleed down and tic problems when running it hard @ rpm.

[c00nhunterjoe]

Thats a nice mild cam and i like the tweak to the grind, but i dont see that drivetrain setup hurting a hellcats feelings, definatly not on anything less then a meaty drag radial.

[Paul G]

Not all SRT's are Hellcats or Demons. I already have 1 SRT10 in my garage. I would like my 72 to keep up with or out run it. Which should be possible making 600 foot pounds and weighing only 4000#.

[Paul G]

On other forums Comp cams are not well liked. They are called "chevy grinds". Has to do with not taking advantage of the large Mopar .904 lifter. Any truth to this? They prefer grinds by Jones, Engle, Lunati, Howard, etc.

[c00nhunterjoe]

Srt 10 trucks run mid 13s. Your car stock should be on its rear bumper. Beating the truck would not take much at all, let alone a 512. Gives you alot more room to work with to keep it tame and meet your goal. In that case, challenger340s suggestion will put you a solid truck to truck and a half length in front, if not more.

[Challenger340]

On other forums Comp cams are not well liked. They are called "chevy grinds". Has to do with not taking advantage of the large Mopar .904 lifter. Any truth to this? They prefer grinds by Jones, Engle, Lunati, Howard, etc.

Yep, that's one of the reasons I pretty much stay off them sites, not because of anyone's dislike of Comp profiles "per se", but the lack of understanding by people generally speaking, as to WHY they don't like something, or feel something else is BETTER, versus Cam manu's and Engine brand specifics, ie: BB mopars and inherent design flaws in Cam Profiles during operation.
You are a STREET Car right ? That you want to DRIVE ? with the least MAINTENANCE as possible ? A/C ? and I think I saw a LOCK UP Torque Converter somewhere in your Plans ?
I don't wanna get too long winded here,
suffice to say with any HR profile, not "just" BB Mopars, you are balancing lifeblood Oil Pressure..... against V/Spring pressure/rates, and with a BB Mopar's short Lifter Bores and the Oil gallery positioning so close to the bottom of that Bore's "wear" point in 40 & 50 years old Blocks, invariably.... keeping the Hydraulic Plunger portion of the Hydraulic Roller Lifter pumped up with Oil can be problematic versus leakage around the bottom of the Lifter Bore at the half moon wear point they all get over time......
meaning.... it don't matter if it's a "chevy" .842" Diameter profile, nor a .904" Mopar rate.... if you can't keep the Hydraulic portion of the Lifter pumped up against an .842" rate ? WTF is the point in trying an even FASTER/HIGHER .904" Hydraulic anything rate that just leaks worse = even less V/train stability and rpm capability ?
"Theory" on the internet is fine...... but it ain't worth a pinch 'O coon poo if it ain't backed up with having been there/done that and seen the results on an actual Engine Dyno !

Ain't No Big "ancient Chinese secret, 007, or TOP Secret" knowledge to know there are advantages to a .904" Diameter vrs .842" diameter to how FAST you can whack open Valves and move Valvetrains which is generally = Power ?
especially more so with Flat Tappet or Mechanical Cams and load bearing areas ?
But anytime you move stuff faster.... you gotta add V/Spring pressure to keep up = to keep stuff in contact against the greater inertia/weight moving faster.... and that includes Roller lifters, and with HYDRAULIC Roller Lifters that extra V/Spring pressure also collapses the already struggling to stay pumped up plunger in a BB Mopar because of the aforementioned inherent Lifter Bore flaws ?
Hence,
why I was mentioning in my earlier post, that if you are NOT Bushing the Lifter Bores for the HR lifters in a BB Mopar.... your best bet might be to run the HR Lifter damn near Bottomed out with longer pushrods so there is next to nothing to COLLAPSE within the HR Lifter to maintain lobe/rpm stability. Damn near running it as a Solid Roller but with still .015" to .025" Oil Plunger cushion for quieter.

And back to your "street" application with A/C, and wanting the least maintenance ? and NOT trying to "Race" or garner even extra iota of useless negligible hp ?
even if you run the HR Lifter as I described "damn near bottomed out" anyways..... even the QXX HR Rate profiles, or QXI Rate profiles, will offer very little more extra power/trq versus the QFI Rate profiles of similar duration @ .050", but invariably BOTH QXI and QXX should have at least some extra V/Spring pressure & rate for durability.

Go tell them dorks on the other Sites... that they can find pretty much any comparable Lobe offered from Lunati, Jones, Engle, Howards, etc., in any LIFT or RATE they want
Right here: http://www.compcams.com/Technical/Catalogs/CamLobeMasterCatalog.pdf

But that don't mean it will run any "better".... nor be any "magic"... no matter what they believe..... or wish it was..... because somebody else grinds it ?
BTW,
tell them guys also, to maybe.... just "maybe"..... as a suggestion ?....  go test/ R & D their Cam Rec's on an actual ENGINE DYNO a few hundred times before spewing their "folklore" as well.
Go ahead,
put an Engine on the Dyno, run it, tune it, get your best..... then change Cams right there on the Dyno, no other changes, same Engine, run it, tune it, get your best.... and PROVE one Manu's Cam of the same size is better !
Theory and REALITY can be a real bitch !

With the LOCK UP Trq Conv for Highway cruising in the mix, I'll stick with the Comp Cams 3016/3037 Lobes ground on 112 LSA (basically the 23-711-9 on 112)

If a little more top end pop is wanted ?
you could go to the 3017 Intake Lobe and the 3038 Exhaust Lobe, again on 112*

Both are very easy on parts.

[c00nhunterjoe]

  pick the cam manufacturer that has the coolest sticker for your beer fridge. Most of the master catalogs are the same. Another reason i laugh when people knock on racer brown because he has "old technology". Pick up the phone and call jimmy, he will grind you whatever you want and puts the extra time in to make it perfect- not just close enough to throw in a mass production box and ship. His cam is one of the reasons my boat anchor 383 ran so good. When it comes to the hydraulic roller and running bottomed out. For the cost of good lifters just run the solids. If you pick the right profile you wont have to run them so loose that they clatter obnoxiously. Then run a good thick valve cover to mask some clatter too.

[BSB67]

On other forums Comp cams are not well liked. They are called "chevy grinds". Has to do with not taking advantage of the large Mopar .904 lifter. Any truth to this? They prefer grinds by Jones, Engle, Lunati, Howard, etc.

Paul, I believe that I've read your post on one other forum.  I believe that only one poster there does not like comp lobes, and frankly most knowledgeable folks don't have the energy to unravel his scattered logic and misinformation.

Comp probably has more lobes to choose from than most.  And most grinders will have lobe profile(s) that will be great for you.  Once you pick the type of cam you want (HFT, SFT, HR, SR), the real art comes from picking the lobes, and placing them on the shaft.

IMHO, we get way too wrapped around the axle about the perfect cam lobe and the 10 HP it might give you.  Then, in most cases, piss away 50 HP on other aspects of the build, and lack of real tuning.  

I personally like the cam Jones picked, but any one can match those numbers.  The comp cam 286 is fine too, but I would put it on a 112° lsa.   But understand that the comp cam picks are off the shelf, the Jones was probably a custom.  

[flyinlow]

Its not just the engine. Hell cats and SRT's have Zeppelin transmissions. Eight ratios with a 4.71 first gear to get those 4400 lb. placoderms moving.

[BSB67]

..........Must adjust lash once in a while, no big deal. Would a solid be a better choice for me to meet my goals and still be a mild engine?

My goals for this build are;

vacuum for power brakes
behave nicely when cruising at 70 mph around 2300 RPM in overdrive
Make as much power as possible while maintaining drivability and power brakes.  

I do not have a specific track goal or horse power goal as this is a street car. So lest call this my goal, I would like to out run or at least surprise the next SRT, Cobra, or hot Camaro at a stop light.

FWIW, my motor that drives nicely through the neighborhood in 3rd gear at 1100 rpm (i.e. meets all of your requirements) in your car with a set of headers would give a Hellcat a real run for its money.

[c00nhunterjoe]

Russ, your engine with a slightly different cam that wasnt catored to manifolds. and headers would eat a hellcat.

[BSB67]

My cam, with a tighter lsa, headers, in Paul's lighter car and gear with a M/T tire could be in the very high 10s at 124, IMO.

[Challenger340]

  When it comes to the hydraulic roller and running bottomed out. For the cost of good lifters just run the solids. If you pick the right profile you wont have to run them so loose that they clatter obnoxiously. Then run a good thick valve cover to mask some clatter too.

Yep ! hence from what we've seen with BB Mopars on the Dyno with HR's, the best results being with most HR's running almost bottomed out ?  We tend to give the option of a small easy street profile Solid Roller ?
then,
if the Customer absolutely HAS TO HAVE his "HR" for whatever reason.... who are we to argue ? we give him what he wants, but we run them as described in BB Mopars, being damn near bottomed out which is still dead nuts quiet 99% of the time.

I GET what you are putting down though ? Like WTF is the diff ?

[c00nhunterjoe]

  When it comes to the hydraulic roller and running bottomed out. For the cost of good lifters just run the solids. If you pick the right profile you wont have to run them so loose that they clatter obnoxiously. Then run a good thick valve cover to mask some clatter too.

Yep ! hence from what we've seen with BB Mopars on the Dyno with HR's, the best results being with most HR's running almost bottomed out ?  We tend to give the option of a small easy street profile Solid Roller ?
then,
if the Customer absolutely HAS TO HAVE his "HR" for whatever reason.... who are we to argue ? we give him what he wants, but we run them as described in BB Mopars, being damn near bottomed out which is still dead nuts quiet 99% of the time.

I GET what you are putting down though ? Like WTF is the diff ?

Wasnt doubting what you were saying, just reiterating to paul the cost to put a hydraulic in and make it run like a solid vs just putting a solid in it.

[flyinlow]

Will bushing the lifter bores solve all the problems?

What holds the inserts in the block?

How do they wear ? Are they 100K. mile life on a street engine?

[Paul G]

So let me ask a stupid question. Am I just "following the crowd" going with a hydraulic roller cam? When I called the cam makers and explained my build, and my goals, they all go right to a hydraulic roller retrofit.

I really appreciate the time and patience you guys are giving me with this build.

Should I reconsider the hydraulic roller? I am not opposed to even a solid lifter, if it can meet my goals, not have the oiling issues, and cost less. Traditional hydraulic flat tappet cams, lifters, timing set, will cost less than half of a roller set up.

What are the real advantages of a roller retrofit? What are the disadvantages of traditional flat tappet? 

[c00nhunterjoe]

Bushing the lifter bores is roughly $1500 depending on your machine shop and area. Yes it fixes the oil issue but it is costly for a street engine. I have not personally put 100k on a bushed block but in race applications they hold up great and i have not had to replace a set and some of my spring pressures are over 1,000 lbs. 99% of the time hydraulic is reccomended over solid in either cam style due to popular myth that solids require tons of maintenance, and the fact that they are noiser then a hydraulic. Neither of those are something that weekend warrior bob can handle without wiping out a motor. Thus why most builders dont push for solids cause guess what happens when weekend warrior bob over tightens a rocker cause his brand new 440 is noisey? Boom, wiped cam and the builder is the bad guy and now his name is plastered all over the internet as crap. Spec for spec a solid will make more power across the entire curve. The rollers are less friction which equates to some power but the biggest push in recent years is the chinese junk lifters, cam material and zddp all equating to wiped cams- hydraulic roller is the industry bandaid. Not saying they are bad. But there are better ways to skin a cat if you are smart about it. Best way i can sum it up without having a 3 paragraph post discussing all of the inherent differences in 4 cam styles.

[Paul G]

99% of the time hydraulic is recommended over solid in either cam style due to popular myth that solids require tons of maintenance, and the fact that they are noisier then a hydraulic. Neither of those are something that weekend warrior bob can handle without wiping out a motor. Thus why most builders dont push for solids..... Spec for spec a solid will make more power across the entire curve. But there are better ways to skin a cat if you are smart about it. Best way i can sum it up without having a 3 paragraph post discussing all of the inherent differences in 4 cam styles.

In my situation I am giving up power for drivability due to the "want" of vacuum for power brakes and low rpm cruise for the overdrive. If I choose a solid lifter, and lets say a roller lifter since I have already somewhat accepted the $1000 additional cost for a roller cam, would that give back some of the lost power due to the mild cam I need to spec? 

[BSB67]

The 4 cam styles overlap in their strengths and weakness.  You can get mild and aggressive lobe styles in each and everything in between.   The HFT can overlap with HR, the HR with SFT, and SFT with a SR.  

The term mild and aggressive has nothing to do with cam size or duration.  It speaks to the rate the valve moves from the seat to full lift.  Aggressive is harder on valve train parts. But smaller aggressive lobes will idle smoother and make as much or more power than a bigger, less aggressive lobe that has larger duration.  You can get an aggressive, race style SR that will idle at 750 rpm with 14" of vacuum. You can get a slow, mild HFT lobe that won't idle and needs 4000 rpm converter.  This spans all 4 cam styles.

The weak link in HP applications for the hydraulic cam is the limitations of the hydraulic lifter.  Putting a roller on the bottom of it does not solve that inherent limitation.  Higher HR lifts, increased valve spring pressure, lighter weight oil, and a heavier lifter further hurt hydraulic lifter performance.  Many also believe that machining quality necessary for the extreme lifter tolerances are simply not available in the Mopar aftermarket.  The result is the Hydraulic lifter bleeds down as the rpm goes up, giving up performance.  This is why Bob recommends setting the lifter plunger near the bottom, so you limit the amount of lifter collapse.  The more aggressive the HR lobe, the sooner in the rpm range it will start collapsing.

That said, some have had good results with the hydraulic lifters, others have proven substantial power loss at 5200 rpm due to lifter collapse.  

SFT and SR simply eliminate this variable and risk.

Generally, SFT cannot achieve the lift available for some HR with the same rocker ratio, but are usually still quicker off the seat, meaning the power output is generally a wash between the two of similar size, assuming there is no hydraulic lifter issue.  The SFT down side is the risk of wiping a lobe.

The SR has the best of both.  But generally, they will need more spring pressure, and therefore a little harder on valve train parts.

Did you read what I poster regarding overlap?  This is your general measure of idle and low speed characteristics.

[c00nhunterjoe]

99% of the time hydraulic is recommended over solid in either cam style due to popular myth that solids require tons of maintenance, and the fact that they are noisier then a hydraulic. Neither of those are something that weekend warrior bob can handle without wiping out a motor. Thus why most builders dont push for solids..... Spec for spec a solid will make more power across the entire curve. But there are better ways to skin a cat if you are smart about it. Best way i can sum it up without having a 3 paragraph post discussing all of the inherent differences in 4 cam styles.

In my situation I am giving up power for drivability due to the "want" of vacuum for power brakes and low rpm cruise for the overdrive. If I choose a solid lifter, and lets say a roller lifter since I have already somewhat accepted the $1000 additional cost for a roller cam, would that give back some of the lost power due to the mild cam I need to spec? 

You are still thinking in the stereotype mentality. Russ's engine is more tame then you are debating building, runs exhaust manifolds, a stock torque converter, 3.23s, and still is in the 120mph and low 11 second range in a heavier car then yours. As his sits, it will hurt a hellcat chargers feelings. You dont have to give much of anything up if you plan it out before pulling the trigger. The most important thing you need to do on the solid roller is watch valve spring pressures and profiles on your cam chouce since its street driven, and put a good quality lifter in it.

[Brass]

The SFT down side is the risk of wiping a lobe.

Which can be mitigated somewhat by careful break-in, nitriding and using a good, EDM style lifter.  

[cdr]

Well I run a 518 trans in my car, 512 cid, 4050 lb with me, I drive my car almost every day, hydro roller 255,258 @ .050, 3.54 gear 4000k lock up converter, AC, can lock up the converter & be smooth @ 1800 rpm, it took a LOT of tuning to get it there, have not done any track tuning, 1 easy pass short shifting 1750 DA, 11.33 @ 121 on MT Drag Radials, car was as it is drivin on the street, full exhaust, air filter ect. car is a BLAST on the street.

[BSB67]

Well I run a 518 trans in my car, 512 cid, 4050 lb with me, I drive my car almost every day, hydro roller 255,258 @ .050, 3.54 gear 4000k lock up converter, AC, can lock up the converter & be smooth @ 1800 rpm, it took a LOT of tuning to get it there, have not done any track tuning, 1 easy pass short shifting 1750 DA, 11.33 @ 121 on MT Drag Radials, car was as it is drivin on the street, full exhaust, air filter ect. car is a BLAST on the street.

This is a great example of the HR working well.   What are the lobes or lobe specs?  What are you shifting at?  What is your idle rpm and vacuum. I would think the 255@0.050 would be have a bit of rumpity rump.