Question about lunati voodoo roller cam for 440?

[1st_charger]

Any one running this cam?
Brand:Lunati
Manufacturer's Part Number:20230710
Part Type:Camshafts
Product Line:Lunati Voodoo Camshafts
Summit Racing Part Number:LUN-20230710

UPC:788120718875
Cam Style:Hydraulic roller tappet
Basic Operating RPM Range:1,400-5,400
Intake Duration at 050 inch Lift:211
Exhaust Duration at 050 inch Lift:219
Duration at 050 inch Lift:211 int./219 exh.
Advertised Intake Duration:262
Advertised Exhaust Duration:270
Advertised Duration:262 int./270 exh.
Intake Valve Lift with Factory Rocker Arm Ratio:0.507 in.
Exhaust Valve Lift with Factory Rocker Arm Ratio:0.515 in.
Valve Lift with Factory Rocker Arm Ratio:0.507 int./0.515 exh.
Lobe Separation (degrees):112

I working on a 440 rebuild and planning on going with trick flow heads and full roller it will be for a street car with powerboats and possibly a/c in the future. I was also looking at some of the comp cams but they only have a lobe separation of 110 not sure how that would effect the vacuum. Also running an automatic overdrive transmission. Thanks for any input!

[c00nhunterjoe]

My 1st concern is a hydraulic roller in a vintage mopar block. It was not designed for a lifter like that. Even new it would not support a hydraulic roller let alone 50 years of lifter bore wear. If you want a roller, go mechanical.

[Mike DC]

          

My 1st concern is a hydraulic roller in a vintage mopar block. It was not designed for a lifter like that. Even new it would not support a hydraulic roller let alone 50 years of lifter bore wear. If you want a roller, go mechanical.

Oiling concerns?  

[c00nhunterjoe]

         

My 1st concern is a hydraulic roller in a vintage mopar block. It was not designed for a lifter like that. Even new it would not support a hydraulic roller let alone 50 years of lifter bore wear. If you want a roller, go mechanical.

Oiling concerns?  

Yes. Lifter stability with a hydraulic roller is poor in these blocks. Aside from the wear over the years, the bores are too short. If you are going to do it- bush the block. But by then just go mechanical. More power across the board in every scenario against the hydraulic.

[1st_charger]

Thank you for you input im thinking of heading back to the drawing board with my build plan.

[c00nhunterjoe]

What do you have already done?

[Calif240]

I'm running a hydraulic roller with no issues on a 440 ('67 block from a Chrysler).

I have Comp roller rockers, scorpion lifters, and comp cam. No issue and it revs nicely. I know this isn't your cam, but if you have any questions or want more info on my specs, let me know.

Thanks,
Terry

[Calif240]

One further point... Coonhunter knows more in his pinky than I do in my entire head when it comes to Mopar. While my setup runs nicely and I'm happy, I haven't heard of the issues he's speaking of. That doesn't mean that tomorrow I don't post that my block exploded because of faulty lifter oiling

[1st_charger]

What do you have already done?

At this point right now I have my hp block cleaned and bored 60 over new speedpro flat top pistons with valve reliefs on reconditioned LY rods. Forged crank turned 10 / 10 and balanced. I'm not looking for huge power its just for a good street car. Originally the idea of going roller was appealing due to the worries of flat tappet cam failure. And also just to do something different. Ive been looking thru the proven builds and think I have found something that fits. Sorry dont know how to link to it. Now thinking of the lunati 703 is the last 3 digits in the part number, specs are Cam and Lifters, Hydraulic Flat Tappet, Advertised Duration 268/276, Lift .494/.513, Mopar, Big Block, Kit but still go with the trick flow heads and possibly the comp cams pro comp shaft mount roller rockers unless there is something better roller rocker? Thanks for any input and guidance!

[c00nhunterjoe]

What part number are the pistons? Was the block decked and if so, how much? What heads?

[1st_charger]

Pistons are # L-2355F 60, the block was not decked, and I think the trick flow heads i was looking at are the 240s

[1st_charger]

?

[INTMD8]

Whatever type you decide, that cam is tiny for a 440.

LSA is not a number to be concerned about. Many factors to consider that can alter overall driveability and if you're worried about too much overlap, you need to look at overlap and not LSA.

(as overlap will increase with duration as LSA remains the same)

[Challenger340]

I'm running a hydraulic roller with no issues on a 440 ('67 block from a Chrysler).

I have Comp roller rockers, scorpion lifters, and comp cam. No issue and it revs nicely. I know this isn't your cam, but if you have any questions or want more info on my specs, let me know.

Thanks,
Terry

Glad to hear yours functions properly in your estimation.... was the Engine ever run on an Engine Dyno ?
just say'in....
some DO seem to run just fine to their owners if the Lifter Bores are in decent shape.... hard to 'feel' anything amiss even at rpm ?
nonetheless,
the 'parts' used will have no bearing when/if it doesn't.... and Oil pressure leakage in the Lifter Bores begins to manifest lack of Cam profile stability.

[Calif240]

Not on an engine dyno, but ran on a full dyno (just under 400 at the rear wheels). It has a built 727 from A&A. it was ran at a professional speed shop here in Indianapolis.

Only issue I ever had was with the head manufacture using the wrong size keepers on the push rods iirc. The heads are aluminum racing Edelbrock Style from NC... I forget the name but I'll look up if interested.

Terry

[INTMD8]

Wrong valve locks? ^

[Calif240]

Wrong valve locks? ^

Yes... I'll try to make this long story short... and explain as best I can.

Originally had iron heads on the 440. I was new to a lot of this (still am in a lot of ways compared to a lot of guys on here). I went ahead and switched out the cam, and upper valvetrain because I had an issue with a rocker on the iron heads. When the iron heads were replaced about 9 months later with new aluminum, I sent the top valvetrain to the guy doing the heads. He was recommended on here. However, the valve locks were the old valve locks and he missed changing those over to the new size based on the updated spec. It was only like 1/64" off or something, so it would run fine up to about 4,500 RPM... then I'd get a pushrod that walked off. About $3,000 later, the mechanic finally figured out that nothing was wrong with valve-train other than the head-manufacturer installing the old keepers, instead of validating spec and installing new. Switched to the proper size keeper and engines ran great ever since.

Terry

[BSB67]

Whatever type you decide, that cam is tiny for a 440.

LSA is not a number to be concerned about. Many factors to consider that can alter overall driveability and if you're worried about too much overlap, you need to look at overlap and not LSA.

(as overlap will increase with duration as LSA remains the same)

This.

I find it interesting how in the last 10 years or so, a cam's overlap seems to have fallen completely out of any cam related discussion these days.  Particularly considering how often idle quality is an important consideration.

You're pretty savey on new tech HP stuff.  How far are some of the VVT performance engines retarding the valve timing at rpm?

[INTMD8]

This is a 2017 LT1 Corvette. If I zero out the phaser and make a dyno run it does lose a ton of power up top so it does help to broaden the power curve.

Only problem is, on the newer stuff the phaser is rather weak so can't run dual valvesprings without locking it out (or it completely loses high rpm control).  Can make it work with larger cams and a conical spring but still gets -some- high rpm phaser error at times.

I think the dohc engines that can independently alter cam timing would benefit even more but I've not spent much time with them.

[c00nhunterjoe]

I havnt spent alot of time with phasers and aftermarket cams but i have a buddy with a 3v 4.6 that we have been messing with. For the same reasons listed above we had to lock out the phasers. On stock cams i would say the vvt is a benefit due to keeping a smooth idle but broad powerband. but when you change cams, it is not needed. This particular 3 valve is spinning to 8,000 rpm and still making power. We shut it down there based on the stock bottom end.