It has Begun
Thread Starter
Instructor
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 201
Likes: 0
From: Little Torch Key FL
It has Begun
Started the teardown today. Hoping to have it up and running by the end of July. Getting a set of Victor Jr. Heads(the plan now, might change to a set of Dart Iron Eagles), XE 274, Scorpion 1.6 Roller rockers, Air Gap Intake, Holley 750, 2500 stall, and a nice shift kit. Should be a fun ride when its done 
Safety Car
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 4,004
Likes: 2
From: Severna Park Md
Re: It has Begun (Pettee17)
Whats yur displacement, 350? Stock bottom end? Whats the rpm range of the 274? Its a lot of cam for a 350, especially with the 1.6 rockers. If yur dead set on the 274 and you want a good launch, I would suggest at least a 3000 stall speed. The 274 along with a 750 carb would be capable of spinning the rpms beyond what a stock bottom end could handle on a regular basis. Its your choice but beware that you may wind up sacrificing decent bottom end power for top end power thats beyond the safe usable limit for stock bottom end engine.
I ran the XE268 in my 350 and it didnt begin to develope good power untill about 3000rpm. It wiped a lobe and I went down to the XE262. I like the 262 much better and with no other changes the car actually ran better ET's with the smaller cam. The 268 was sluggish enough on the bottom end it would hardly spin wheels. The 262 will do it much easier. The 268 was very rough and lopey idling in gear even with a stall. The 262 is comfortable enough to leave in gear at a stoplight. These are my "real world" expierences. The cam manufacturers often understate the negitive effects of thier high po cams.
If yur willing to go with at least 3000 stall and rev it to 6500+ and deal with a significantly rough idle, then the 274 might be a good choice. Otherwise you might loose good usable bottom end for unusable top end. The net effect could be negitive overall.
I ran the XE268 in my 350 and it didnt begin to develope good power untill about 3000rpm. It wiped a lobe and I went down to the XE262. I like the 262 much better and with no other changes the car actually ran better ET's with the smaller cam. The 268 was sluggish enough on the bottom end it would hardly spin wheels. The 262 will do it much easier. The 268 was very rough and lopey idling in gear even with a stall. The 262 is comfortable enough to leave in gear at a stoplight. These are my "real world" expierences. The cam manufacturers often understate the negitive effects of thier high po cams.
If yur willing to go with at least 3000 stall and rev it to 6500+ and deal with a significantly rough idle, then the 274 might be a good choice. Otherwise you might loose good usable bottom end for unusable top end. The net effect could be negitive overall.
Race Director
Joined: Dec 1999
Posts: 19,610
Likes: 778
From: Forked River NJ
Re: It has Begun (Jvette73)
Way more head and cam than a stock bottom end can handle. The 262 cam or 268 would be much better. You will have to get a lot of rpm to get it moving. To much cylinder head also. The car will be very doggy from idle to about 3000 rpm.
Thread Starter
Instructor
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 201
Likes: 0
From: Little Torch Key FL
Re: It has Begun (Gordonm)
The bottom end is your basic .030 over rebuild with about 12,000 miles on it. I chose the heads due to future plans with the bottom end. Looking to go 406 in the future, and did not want to have to purhcase different heads. The Iron Eagle heads might be a better choice anyway, as i have seen people in the 10s with them, and i do not even want to go that fast. Plus the $600 price difference is always nice. The Cam i chose based of questions asked on here, most reccomende the 268, but i couldnt bring myself to go that small. I do not really care about how rough the idle is, as the car sees the road fo rmaybe 15 miles a week on a good week. Any other suggestions are welcome as well! Thanks
