Cam recommendation for 327/300hp
06-04-2009, 10:56 AM
#21
Team Owner
Member Since: Mar 2003
Location: Greenville, Indiana
Posts: 26,118
Received 1,843 Likes
on
1,398 Posts
Here was the original posters question:
"I'm interested in getting more performance from the motor without having to do a complete rebuild (just want a noticeable increase). Cam selection seems to make the biggest difference. My motor is 10.5:1 compression while the 350hp L79 engines are 11:1. Would use of the L79 cam in my motor improve performance or lower it because of the compression difference?"
Changing the rear gear in that car will compliment the cam change I recommeneded. Besides, a Corvette should sound like a Corvette, not a motorboat!
As far as low end with the L-79 cam, I used to drag race with one in combination with a 3.08 axle and a wide ratio Muncie. 7" M/H. The car would run well into the 12's (this was in '66) and I don't recall anybody ever beating me through low gear.
The same engine with Rochester FI on it would pull down to 10 mph in high gear and 1-4 gear shifts were easy in city driving.
The only thing that L-79 cam lacks is it isn't installed in the original poster"s engine.
But, if you want to pull a 14" two bottom plow, use the 300 cam.
"I'm interested in getting more performance from the motor without having to do a complete rebuild (just want a noticeable increase). Cam selection seems to make the biggest difference. My motor is 10.5:1 compression while the 350hp L79 engines are 11:1. Would use of the L79 cam in my motor improve performance or lower it because of the compression difference?"
Changing the rear gear in that car will compliment the cam change I recommeneded. Besides, a Corvette should sound like a Corvette, not a motorboat!
As far as low end with the L-79 cam, I used to drag race with one in combination with a 3.08 axle and a wide ratio Muncie. 7" M/H. The car would run well into the 12's (this was in '66) and I don't recall anybody ever beating me through low gear.
The same engine with Rochester FI on it would pull down to 10 mph in high gear and 1-4 gear shifts were easy in city driving.
The only thing that L-79 cam lacks is it isn't installed in the original poster"s engine.
But, if you want to pull a 14" two bottom plow, use the 300 cam.
Last edited by MikeM; 06-04-2009 at 11:09 AM.
06-04-2009, 11:40 AM
#22
Le Mans Master
Here was the original posters question:
"I'm interested in getting more performance from the motor without having to do a complete rebuild (just want a noticeable increase). Cam selection seems to make the biggest difference. My motor is 10.5:1 compression while the 350hp L79 engines are 11:1. Would use of the L79 cam in my motor improve performance or lower it because of the compression difference?"
Changing the rear gear in that car will compliment the cam change I recommeneded. Besides, a Corvette should sound like a Corvette, not a motorboat!
As far as low end with the L-79 cam, I used to drag race with one in combination with a 3.08 axle and a wide ratio Muncie. 7" M/H. The car would run well into the 12's (this was in '66) and I don't recall anybody ever beating me through low gear.
The same engine with Rochester FI on it would pull down to 10 mph in high gear and 1-4 gear shifts were easy in city driving.
The only thing that L-79 cam lacks is it isn't installed in the original poster"s engine.
But, if you want to pull a 14" two bottom plow, use the 300 cam.
"I'm interested in getting more performance from the motor without having to do a complete rebuild (just want a noticeable increase). Cam selection seems to make the biggest difference. My motor is 10.5:1 compression while the 350hp L79 engines are 11:1. Would use of the L79 cam in my motor improve performance or lower it because of the compression difference?"
Changing the rear gear in that car will compliment the cam change I recommeneded. Besides, a Corvette should sound like a Corvette, not a motorboat!
As far as low end with the L-79 cam, I used to drag race with one in combination with a 3.08 axle and a wide ratio Muncie. 7" M/H. The car would run well into the 12's (this was in '66) and I don't recall anybody ever beating me through low gear.
The same engine with Rochester FI on it would pull down to 10 mph in high gear and 1-4 gear shifts were easy in city driving.
The only thing that L-79 cam lacks is it isn't installed in the original poster"s engine.
But, if you want to pull a 14" two bottom plow, use the 300 cam.
You drag race, I'll pull my plow.
06-04-2009, 12:44 PM
#24
Team Owner
Member Since: Mar 2003
Location: Greenville, Indiana
Posts: 26,118
Received 1,843 Likes
on
1,398 Posts
06-04-2009, 01:07 PM
#25
Drifting
i've tried 3 voodoo cams... 1 roller and 2 solid flats... both came directly from Harold Brookshires personal files.. Harold is the guy who designed the high energy cams for comp back in the day, and the guy who designed the voodoos.
they ran terrible in my L76, (roller) and the flat tappet in my Z was a joke.. when i had manifolds on... with headers is was a big improvement, but the 30-30 still pulled much harder on the top end, and it was more enjoyable to drive as the wide lobe seperation makes it more tame off idle.
i'm sure with a set of AFR 195s, and an Edelbrok Air Gap RPM intake, a good set of tuned headers.. it would have been great... but with mostly stock parts... a waste of money.
A
they ran terrible in my L76, (roller) and the flat tappet in my Z was a joke.. when i had manifolds on... with headers is was a big improvement, but the 30-30 still pulled much harder on the top end, and it was more enjoyable to drive as the wide lobe seperation makes it more tame off idle.
i'm sure with a set of AFR 195s, and an Edelbrok Air Gap RPM intake, a good set of tuned headers.. it would have been great... but with mostly stock parts... a waste of money.
A
06-04-2009, 01:09 PM
#26
Race Director
BUT, if u want to go 100,000+ miles, the lazy ramps on the 151 will make it maybe last longer w/ stock springs.
06-04-2009, 02:05 PM
#27
Advanced
Member Since: Nov 2006
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can someone post the cam specs of the 300hp and 350hp(L79) cams? I installed a Crane cam years back based on the tech guy suggestion at Summit Racing, and my car is a dog. To quote someone else, it will not spin the tires on ice. Secondly what are the part numbers to these to cams for the various cam manufactures?
Lowell
Lowell
06-04-2009, 02:08 PM
#28
Le Mans Master
Can someone post the cam specs of the 300hp and 350hp(L79) cams? I installed a Crane cam years back based on the tech guy suggestion at Summit Racing, and my car is a dog. To quote someone else, it will not spin the tires on ice. Secondly what are the part numbers to these to cams for the various cam manufactures?
Lowell
Lowell
06-04-2009, 02:37 PM
#29
Le Mans Master
Can someone post the cam specs of the 300hp and 350hp(L79) cams? I installed a Crane cam years back based on the tech guy suggestion at Summit Racing, and my car is a dog. To quote someone else, it will not spin the tires on ice. Secondly what are the part numbers to these to cams for the various cam manufactures?
Lowell
Lowell
http://www.geocities.com/MotorCity/D...00/cmspec.html
06-04-2009, 04:42 PM
#30
Pro
I like the idea of staying with the stock cam.......many years ago I rebuilt the 300HP 327 in a 62 I had. I wanted the sound and perceived performance of a more radical cam. I installed what was referred to as a full race cam (the most radical cam available from Iskendarian that ran stock valve train parts). I don't remember the specs. As a poor student I did not change the intake, carb, or exhaust.
It had a very rough idle (which I initally thought that I liked) and it would rev higher, but I lost some of that great low end torque and easy smooth driveability. If I had it to do over the stock cam would stay.
As others have mentioned driving around at 5,200 feet elevation probably doesn't help your performance.....how about a supercharger?
Good luck with your choice. Doug
It had a very rough idle (which I initally thought that I liked) and it would rev higher, but I lost some of that great low end torque and easy smooth driveability. If I had it to do over the stock cam would stay.
As others have mentioned driving around at 5,200 feet elevation probably doesn't help your performance.....how about a supercharger?
Good luck with your choice. Doug
06-04-2009, 05:32 PM
#31
Melting Slicks
I just rebuilt my motor and put on Edelbrock aluminum heads. I really wanted to step up a little on the cam and still keep my streetability. I chose the Comp Cams XE262H-10. It has a very nice power band and pulls like crazy all of the way. Plus the 110lsa has a great lope.
