what cam do i have in my 327 62 fuelie
01-15-2015, 11:47 AM
#1
Cruising
Thread Starter
Member Since: Jun 2011
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
what cam do i have in my 327 62 fuelie
Have engine out of 62 fuelie, need to know what cam i have it has green paint on it with casting no. cmc 1579 d4 21 stamped on end is #930668. This in solid lifter and was adjusting at 12 intake 18 exhaust or 8 intake and 18 exhaust. called most cam makers no one knows what it is. I think it is a 097 remake ?. The cam performs ok however does not pull hard above 5500. Would like to go with a hyd cam maybe the 327/350. or the sold 30/30 or another 097 copy. I know i need about 12 inch vaccum. Any suggestions would be helpful. Mike 
01-15-2015, 06:28 PM
#3
Team Owner
Member Since: Mar 2003
Location: Greenville, Indiana
Posts: 26,118
Received 1,843 Likes
on
1,398 Posts
01-16-2015, 05:14 AM
#4
My suggestion FWIW, put the camshaft that's supposed to be in there from the factory.
01-16-2015, 05:56 AM
#5
Team Owner
Member Since: Mar 2003
Location: Greenville, Indiana
Posts: 26,118
Received 1,843 Likes
on
1,398 Posts
The 327/350 cam will quit at or before 6K, the 097 will go to 7K with a stock valve train. Both are good performers and durable.
01-16-2015, 02:25 PM
#6
Race Director
Member Since: May 2000
Location: Redondo Beach USA
Posts: 12,487
Received 1,974 Likes
on
1,188 Posts
...no need to call. Measure the heel to toe dimensions of the lobes with a caliper. That's from the top of the lobe to the opposite side, which will be on the base circle. The nominal dimensions for the Duntov are 1.33155", inlet and 1.32395" ,exhaust.
I recommend the LT-1 cam for all OE mechanical lifter 327s (same idle vacuum as the Duntov) along with better conn. rods, and massaged heads.
With careful setup of the OE second design valve springs it will approach 300 SAE corrected RWHP and make useable power to the valve float limiting speed of about 7200.
Search for threads started by Dave McDufford, ghostrider20, or posts by me with search words 327 LT-1 for all the system engineering info and dyno tests including all the naysayers.
...nothing more I can add.
Duke
I recommend the LT-1 cam for all OE mechanical lifter 327s (same idle vacuum as the Duntov) along with better conn. rods, and massaged heads.
With careful setup of the OE second design valve springs it will approach 300 SAE corrected RWHP and make useable power to the valve float limiting speed of about 7200.
Search for threads started by Dave McDufford, ghostrider20, or posts by me with search words 327 LT-1 for all the system engineering info and dyno tests including all the naysayers.
...nothing more I can add.
Duke
01-16-2015, 02:45 PM
#7
01-16-2015, 04:31 PM
#8
Are you sure that its the cam at fault; and not lousy valvesprings, heavy valves etc etc all piling up on you?
Im a sucker for the -097 in a 327; but the HYD 350hp cam is no fuss, no muss...just depends on how high you want it to spin.
Or you could step up your game and call Mike Jones of Jones Cam Design and get a modern cam to suit your driving style, and make more power.
Im a sucker for the -097 in a 327; but the HYD 350hp cam is no fuss, no muss...just depends on how high you want it to spin.
Or you could step up your game and call Mike Jones of Jones Cam Design and get a modern cam to suit your driving style, and make more power.
01-16-2015, 05:52 PM
#9
I like the 097 too and almost used one when I changed heads and cam on my carbed C4. I wanted a little more lift without going to 1.6 rockers so I checked with Isky and they have a solid cam with similar specs to the 097. It is their Z-20 cam, 228-228 @ 050, .448 lift on a 112 lsa with an advertised duration of 268 @ .017 lifter rise. I had them grind mine on a 108 lsa for better low and mid range with my 9.0 c.r. They probably could grind one on a 110 lsa too.
01-17-2015, 10:12 AM
#10
Safety Car
I like the 097 too and almost used one when I changed heads and cam on my carbed C4. I wanted a little more lift without going to 1.6 rockers so I checked with Isky and they have a solid cam with similar specs to the 097. It is their Z-20 cam, 228-228 @ 050, .448 lift on a 112 lsa with an advertised duration of 268 @ .017 lifter rise. I had them grind mine on a 108 lsa for better low and mid range with my 9.0 c.r. They probably could grind one on a 110 lsa too.
You can use this combo with standard GM valve springs, although it would be wise to use "142" springs if you're gonna rev the best past 6500 RPM. The extra lift might cause minor valve float or seat bounce.
Same characteristics with more lift. A necessary upgrade if using the 097 with 2.02/1.6 heads.
Mild port of those heads and you'll have yourself a great running engine. The 097 gives the necessary idle vacuum compatible with your fuel injection.
Last edited by 65tripleblack; 01-17-2015 at 12:30 PM.
01-17-2015, 03:18 PM
#11
Safety Car
I always liked solid lifter cams and used the LT-1 in my flat top piston .040 over 327. Perhaps the 097 cam would have served just as well. I liked the tighter 116 LSA of the LT-1 cam - not so much unburned fuel going out the exhaust during overlap period. Best MPG of 20 on the highway at 60-62 MPH (M20,3:08). . .. Engine will rev and has good low and mid range performance, IMO. Idle vacuum shows 13.5 on the gauge. I've been happy with it.
01-19-2015, 11:24 AM
#12
Cruising
Thread Starter
Member Since: Jun 2011
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
...no need to call. Measure the heel to toe dimensions of the lobes with a caliper. That's from the top of the lobe to the opposite side, which will be on the base circle. The nominal dimensions for the Duntov are 1.33155", inlet and 1.32395" ,exhaust.
I recommend the LT-1 cam for all OE mechanical lifter 327s (same idle vacuum as the Duntov) along with better conn. rods, and massaged heads.
With careful setup of the OE second design valve springs it will approach 300 SAE corrected RWHP and make useable power to the valve float limiting speed of about 7200.
Search for threads started by Dave McDufford, ghostrider20, or posts by me with search words 327 LT-1 for all the system engineering info and dyno tests including all the naysayers.
...nothing more I can add.
Duke
I recommend the LT-1 cam for all OE mechanical lifter 327s (same idle vacuum as the Duntov) along with better conn. rods, and massaged heads.
With careful setup of the OE second design valve springs it will approach 300 SAE corrected RWHP and make useable power to the valve float limiting speed of about 7200.
Search for threads started by Dave McDufford, ghostrider20, or posts by me with search words 327 LT-1 for all the system engineering info and dyno tests including all the naysayers.
...nothing more I can add.
Duke
01-20-2015, 11:51 AM
#13
Race Director
Member Since: May 2000
Location: Redondo Beach USA
Posts: 12,487
Received 1,974 Likes
on
1,188 Posts
Sorry, I made a mistake. The correct nominal blueprint heel-to-toe dimensions for the Duntov cam are as follows:
Inlet: 1.5678"
Exhaust: 1.5638"
The cam, lifters, and '67-up OE (3911068) replacement springs are available from Federal Mogul at most parts stores - CS1145R, AT992, and VS677.
Eagle SIR5700 rods are inexpensive, but durable replacements - about half the price of the Crowers - for the spindly, prone to break OE rods. They weren't available when the McDufford and Johnson engines were built.
Don't increase the valve size on 461X heads. There may not be enough material for larger valves and the necessary inlet side unshrouding cuts. Just hand bevel the sides of the chambers back to the cylinder walls.
To get maximum valve train limiting speed set up the spring installed heights as follows. The clearance ramp heights on the LT-1 cam are .012/.017" and the rocker ratio is about 1.37:1 at the lash point and 1.44:1 at peak lift. The VS677 spring coil bind height is 1.15" and you want at least .090/.100" margin. So:
Inlet: 1.15 + 1.44(.3057-.012) + .090/.100 = 1.663/1.773"
Exhaust: 1.15 + 1.44(.3234-.017) +.090/.100 = 1.681/1.691
If a lot of shims are required and the spring gets to near the top of the pocket, it's okay to use a shim under the retainer.
Cold valve lash should be clearance ramp height times lash point rocker ratio, which is .016/.023".
BTW the LT-1 cam uses the L-72 lobe (on a slightly smaller base circle) on the inlet side and the 30-30 lobe, indexed four degrees earlier on the exhaust side.
Your FI engine should make more peak power than the carbureted McDufford/Johnson engines because of the FI system's more efficient inlet manifold architecture.
Duke
Inlet: 1.5678"
Exhaust: 1.5638"
The cam, lifters, and '67-up OE (3911068) replacement springs are available from Federal Mogul at most parts stores - CS1145R, AT992, and VS677.
Eagle SIR5700 rods are inexpensive, but durable replacements - about half the price of the Crowers - for the spindly, prone to break OE rods. They weren't available when the McDufford and Johnson engines were built.
Don't increase the valve size on 461X heads. There may not be enough material for larger valves and the necessary inlet side unshrouding cuts. Just hand bevel the sides of the chambers back to the cylinder walls.
To get maximum valve train limiting speed set up the spring installed heights as follows. The clearance ramp heights on the LT-1 cam are .012/.017" and the rocker ratio is about 1.37:1 at the lash point and 1.44:1 at peak lift. The VS677 spring coil bind height is 1.15" and you want at least .090/.100" margin. So:
Inlet: 1.15 + 1.44(.3057-.012) + .090/.100 = 1.663/1.773"
Exhaust: 1.15 + 1.44(.3234-.017) +.090/.100 = 1.681/1.691
If a lot of shims are required and the spring gets to near the top of the pocket, it's okay to use a shim under the retainer.
Cold valve lash should be clearance ramp height times lash point rocker ratio, which is .016/.023".
BTW the LT-1 cam uses the L-72 lobe (on a slightly smaller base circle) on the inlet side and the 30-30 lobe, indexed four degrees earlier on the exhaust side.
Your FI engine should make more peak power than the carbureted McDufford/Johnson engines because of the FI system's more efficient inlet manifold architecture.
Duke
Last edited by SWCDuke; 01-20-2015 at 11:53 AM.
01-20-2015, 12:34 PM
#14
Melting Slicks
I never liked the LT-1 cam. It doesn't sound the same as the 097 and doesn't function the same.
GM went to the LT-1 cam to conform to emission standards for the 1970 model.
WOW, that oughta get a response from at least one poster here.
Last edited by Critter1; 01-20-2015 at 12:48 PM.
01-20-2015, 01:31 PM
#15
The 097 works great with 1.6 rockers.
You can use this combo with standard GM valve springs, although it would be wise to use "142" springs if you're gonna rev the best past 6500 RPM. The extra lift might cause minor valve float or seat bounce.
Same characteristics with more lift. A necessary upgrade if using the 097 with 2.02/1.6 heads.
Mild port of those heads and you'll have yourself a great running engine. The 097 gives the necessary idle vacuum compatible with your fuel injection.
You can use this combo with standard GM valve springs, although it would be wise to use "142" springs if you're gonna rev the best past 6500 RPM. The extra lift might cause minor valve float or seat bounce.
Same characteristics with more lift. A necessary upgrade if using the 097 with 2.02/1.6 heads.
Mild port of those heads and you'll have yourself a great running engine. The 097 gives the necessary idle vacuum compatible with your fuel injection.
01-20-2015, 03:02 PM
#16
Team Owner
Member Since: Mar 2003
Location: Greenville, Indiana
Posts: 26,118
Received 1,843 Likes
on
1,398 Posts
It sounds like you may have the correct original 097 cam. I would definitely use it if it is the 097.
I never liked the LT-1 cam. It doesn't sound the same as the 097 and doesn't function the same.
GM went to the LT-1 cam to conform to emission standards for the 1970 model.
WOW, that oughta get a response from at least one poster here.
I never liked the LT-1 cam. It doesn't sound the same as the 097 and doesn't function the same.
GM went to the LT-1 cam to conform to emission standards for the 1970 model.
WOW, that oughta get a response from at least one poster here.
