Cams
Thread Starter
Instructor
Joined: Apr 2021
Posts: 133
Likes: 5
Cams
I have a 383 stroker engine here is my setup
-10:1 compression
-all forged internals and bored .40 over
-Brodix IK200 200cc,64cc.
-1.52 ratio ultra pro magnum Roller rockers
-edelbrock performer intake
-Quick fuel 650 double pumper
-m20 wide ratio trans and 3:08 rear end
I want to be in the 450hp range and I’m having trouble deciding what hydraulic roller cam I want. I’m between comp cams 12-423-8 and 12-432-8. The thing is I want to be able to have my headlights pop up and my power brakes to still work. That’s why I’m nervous the 12-432-8 is going to be to big of a cam which would not give me enough vaccum. But I’m nervous the 12-423-8 won’t get me in the power range I want. Somone help me out here Any suggestions????
-10:1 compression
-all forged internals and bored .40 over
-Brodix IK200 200cc,64cc.
-1.52 ratio ultra pro magnum Roller rockers
-edelbrock performer intake
-Quick fuel 650 double pumper
-m20 wide ratio trans and 3:08 rear end
I want to be in the 450hp range and I’m having trouble deciding what hydraulic roller cam I want. I’m between comp cams 12-423-8 and 12-432-8. The thing is I want to be able to have my headlights pop up and my power brakes to still work. That’s why I’m nervous the 12-432-8 is going to be to big of a cam which would not give me enough vaccum. But I’m nervous the 12-423-8 won’t get me in the power range I want. Somone help me out here Any suggestions????
Is my vette stock?? HAHA
Joined: Oct 2015
Posts: 20,236
Likes: 9,376
From: Im not allowed to tell you
2020 C3 of the Year Finalist - Modified
2020 Corvette of the Year Finalist (performance mods)
2019 C3 of Year Winner (performance mods)
2016 C3 of Year Finalist
Add a small rotary vane vacuum pump with some one way valves. It will do everything you want
Le Mans Master
Joined: Aug 2017
Posts: 8,336
Likes: 2,810
From: Cool Northern Michigan
Your cam is not the problem here.
Its the 3.08 rear that will kill any low end torque from a new cam.
You want more get-up & go ditch those gears. They are just a couple notches above Salt Flat gears.
Its the 3.08 rear that will kill any low end torque from a new cam.
You want more get-up & go ditch those gears. They are just a couple notches above Salt Flat gears.
Le Mans Master
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 6,284
Likes: 1,171
From: Hermosa
I believe the performer intake and the carb both present a restriction with either cam at the higher rpm ranges.
with the 3.08 rear and wide ratio trans you’re gonna be happier with the smaller cam. The intake and the carb are not going to allow sufficient airflow at higher rpm’s in any case, so real reason to go there. It would be a mismatch of components leading to suboptimal performance.
if the rear diff is change to 3.55 or better and the intake is an rpm version or the current one is ported for greater flow and the carb is changed to a 750 CFM then the larger cam would do well. Better yet is a close ratio trans as well, but just changing the rear would do wonders.
Just uncorking the intake side without changing the rear gear would help a lot. It’d be a bit weak down low but recover above peak torque rpm and give a higher peak rpm for making HP.
the spec’d rpm ranges for those cams is for a 350. With a 383 you could expect too come in sooner and rpm out sooner.
And since this is a hydraulic roller cam get the lifts up. Put in some 1.6 rr’s.
In fact putting in the 1.6 with the smaller cam and the current drive train may be a pretty good combo without shelling out $$$ for different gearing. Got to remove the intake side restrictions though.
with the 3.08 rear and wide ratio trans you’re gonna be happier with the smaller cam. The intake and the carb are not going to allow sufficient airflow at higher rpm’s in any case, so real reason to go there. It would be a mismatch of components leading to suboptimal performance.
if the rear diff is change to 3.55 or better and the intake is an rpm version or the current one is ported for greater flow and the carb is changed to a 750 CFM then the larger cam would do well. Better yet is a close ratio trans as well, but just changing the rear would do wonders.
Just uncorking the intake side without changing the rear gear would help a lot. It’d be a bit weak down low but recover above peak torque rpm and give a higher peak rpm for making HP.
the spec’d rpm ranges for those cams is for a 350. With a 383 you could expect too come in sooner and rpm out sooner.
And since this is a hydraulic roller cam get the lifts up. Put in some 1.6 rr’s.
In fact putting in the 1.6 with the smaller cam and the current drive train may be a pretty good combo without shelling out $$$ for different gearing. Got to remove the intake side restrictions though.
Last edited by REELAV8R; May 25, 2022 at 12:22 PM.
Thread Starter
Instructor
Joined: Apr 2021
Posts: 133
Likes: 5
I believe the performer intake and the carb both present a restriction with either cam at the higher rpm ranges.
with the 3.08 rear and wide ratio trans you’re gonna be happier with the smaller cam. The intake and the carb are not going to allow sufficient airflow at higher rpm’s in any case, so real reason to go there. It would be a mismatch of components leading to suboptimal performance.
if the rear diff is change to 3.55 or better and the intake is an rpm version or the current one is ported for greater flow and the carb is changed to a 750 CFM then the larger cam would do well. Better yet is a close ratio trans as well, but just changing the rear would do wonders.
Just uncorking the intake side without changing the rear gear would help a lot. It’d be a bit weak down low but recover above peak torque rpm and give a higher peak rpm for making HP.
the spec’d rpm ranges for those cams is for a 350. With a 383 you could expect too come in sooner and rpm out sooner.
And since this is a hydraulic roller cam get the lifts up. Put in some 1.6 rr’s.
In fact putting in the 1.6 with the smaller cam and the current drive train may be a pretty good combo without shelling out $$$ for different gearing. Got to remove the intake side restrictions though.
with the 3.08 rear and wide ratio trans you’re gonna be happier with the smaller cam. The intake and the carb are not going to allow sufficient airflow at higher rpm’s in any case, so real reason to go there. It would be a mismatch of components leading to suboptimal performance.
if the rear diff is change to 3.55 or better and the intake is an rpm version or the current one is ported for greater flow and the carb is changed to a 750 CFM then the larger cam would do well. Better yet is a close ratio trans as well, but just changing the rear would do wonders.
Just uncorking the intake side without changing the rear gear would help a lot. It’d be a bit weak down low but recover above peak torque rpm and give a higher peak rpm for making HP.
the spec’d rpm ranges for those cams is for a 350. With a 383 you could expect too come in sooner and rpm out sooner.
And since this is a hydraulic roller cam get the lifts up. Put in some 1.6 rr’s.
In fact putting in the 1.6 with the smaller cam and the current drive train may be a pretty good combo without shelling out $$$ for different gearing. Got to remove the intake side restrictions though.
Thread Starter
Instructor
Joined: Apr 2021
Posts: 133
Likes: 5
- I know😭 but I really don’t have the money at the moment to switch them out, Mabye in the future.
Thread Starter
Instructor
Joined: Apr 2021
Posts: 133
Likes: 5
-if I went with the small cam(12-423-8) I looked around and saw posts about how the 650 double pumper would run better and have more torque. I also did like a equation based on the displacement and rpm and it said I need a 670cfm. So I figured a 650 was fine. I don’t know Mabye I’m totally wrong.
Corvette Stories
The Best of Corvette for Corvette Enthusiasts
Every 2027 Corvette Engine Explained
Joe Kucinski
Designer Imagines A Corvette That Looks More Like a Corvette Than the Corvette
Verdad Gallardo
10 Ugly Corvettes That We Still Kinda Love
Joe Kucinski
Top 10 Most Expensive Corvettes Ever Sold on Bring A Trailer
Brett Foote
10 Things Every Corvette Owner Needs (2026 Edition)
Michael S. Palmer
8 Most "Only Corvette Owners Understand" Quirks and Problems
Pouria Savadkouei
10 Reasons the C6 Z06 is Still A Performance Benchmark After 20 Years
Joe Kucinski
How Much Horsepower Every Corvette Engine "LOST" in 1972
Joe Kucinski
Top 10 DOs and DON'Ts for Protecting Your Convertible Top!
Michael S. Palmer
Le Mans Master
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 6,284
Likes: 1,171
From: Hermosa
The "edelbrock performer intake" as stated in the first post would be an intake restriction for any reasonable 383. The RPM edelbrock performer intake will likely not.
Using a 650 CFM carb on an engine that demands more than 650 CFM will limit the top end performance. That is an intake restriction. You'd be better off with a 750 carb. Better yet the original Q-jet. it's rated @ 750 and properly tuned will outperform any after market 650 you're likely to put on it. Is that carb still around?
It would be a bigger deal with the smaller cam vs the larger cam. It just depends on what you are willing to give up with each component choice. Your choices add up for the end product and it's performance.
Lifting the valve higher effectively makes for a longer duration cam. It allows a greater area for the intake charge to get into the combustion chamber. Each degree of rotation of the crankshaft lifts the valve higher. That means for each degree of rotation on the intake stroke more area is available for flow into the chamber and that the valve will have greater area open for intake charge over the opening and closing cycle of the valve. More charge into the chamber produces more torque and thereby more HP at every RPM. Not just Max HP or max torque that everyone wants to focus on.
Using a 650 CFM carb on an engine that demands more than 650 CFM will limit the top end performance. That is an intake restriction. You'd be better off with a 750 carb. Better yet the original Q-jet. it's rated @ 750 and properly tuned will outperform any after market 650 you're likely to put on it. Is that carb still around?
I have already bought the 1.52 rockers because that’s the size stud in my heads is it really that big of a deal even if I go with the smaller cam?
Lifting the valve higher effectively makes for a longer duration cam. It allows a greater area for the intake charge to get into the combustion chamber. Each degree of rotation of the crankshaft lifts the valve higher. That means for each degree of rotation on the intake stroke more area is available for flow into the chamber and that the valve will have greater area open for intake charge over the opening and closing cycle of the valve. More charge into the chamber produces more torque and thereby more HP at every RPM. Not just Max HP or max torque that everyone wants to focus on.
Last edited by REELAV8R; May 25, 2022 at 04:33 PM.
Team Owner
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 81,241
Likes: 3,063
From: altered state
St. Jude Donor '05
Agree with Jebby....those cams already have a quick ramp, wouldnt add 1.6 rockers
If you have to you always have the option of a vacuum reservoir. Can put them anywhere and they are cheap
I use one wtih factory power brakes a cam that makes 7 or 8 inches at idle on a good day and the pedal is perfect.
Id get it running, perfect the tune and drive it for awhile before buying any more parts.
If you have to you always have the option of a vacuum reservoir. Can put them anywhere and they are cheap
I use one wtih factory power brakes a cam that makes 7 or 8 inches at idle on a good day and the pedal is perfect.
Id get it running, perfect the tune and drive it for awhile before buying any more parts.
Thread Starter
Instructor
Joined: Apr 2021
Posts: 133
Likes: 5
Agree with Jebby....those cams already have a quick ramp, wouldnt add 1.6 rockers
If you have to you always have the option of a vacuum reservoir. Can put them anywhere and they are cheap
I use one wtih factory power brakes a cam that makes 7 or 8 inches at idle on a good day and the pedal is perfect.
Id get it running, perfect the tune and drive it for awhile before buying any more parts.
If you have to you always have the option of a vacuum reservoir. Can put them anywhere and they are cheap
I use one wtih factory power brakes a cam that makes 7 or 8 inches at idle on a good day and the pedal is perfect.
Id get it running, perfect the tune and drive it for awhile before buying any more parts.
-so you wouldn’t suggest putting 1.6 rocker on instead of the 1.52? How come?
Thread Starter
Instructor
Joined: Apr 2021
Posts: 133
Likes: 5
The "edelbrock performer intake" as stated in the first post would be an intake restriction for any reasonable 383. The RPM edelbrock performer intake will likely not.
Using a 650 CFM carb on an engine that demands more than 650 CFM will limit the top end performance. That is an intake restriction. You'd be better off with a 750 carb. Better yet the original Q-jet. it's rated @ 750 and properly tuned will outperform any after market 650 you're likely to put on it. Is that carb still around?
It would be a bigger deal with the smaller cam vs the larger cam. It just depends on what you are willing to give up with each component choice. Your choices add up for the end product and it's performance.
Lifting the valve higher effectively makes for a longer duration cam. It allows a greater area for the intake charge to get into the combustion chamber. Each degree of rotation of the crankshaft lifts the valve higher. That means for each degree of rotation on the intake stroke more area is available for flow into the chamber and that the valve will have greater area open for intake charge over the opening and closing cycle of the valve. More charge into the chamber produces more torque and thereby more HP at every RPM. Not just Max HP or max torque that everyone wants to focus on.
Using a 650 CFM carb on an engine that demands more than 650 CFM will limit the top end performance. That is an intake restriction. You'd be better off with a 750 carb. Better yet the original Q-jet. it's rated @ 750 and properly tuned will outperform any after market 650 you're likely to put on it. Is that carb still around?
It would be a bigger deal with the smaller cam vs the larger cam. It just depends on what you are willing to give up with each component choice. Your choices add up for the end product and it's performance.
Lifting the valve higher effectively makes for a longer duration cam. It allows a greater area for the intake charge to get into the combustion chamber. Each degree of rotation of the crankshaft lifts the valve higher. That means for each degree of rotation on the intake stroke more area is available for flow into the chamber and that the valve will have greater area open for intake charge over the opening and closing cycle of the valve. More charge into the chamber produces more torque and thereby more HP at every RPM. Not just Max HP or max torque that everyone wants to focus on.
