now 280 xfi in my 383, 10.7-1, afr street super ram non ported.

17k miles or so, i think I got valve float on my afr 8019 springs now that someone is posting about it.

I want to increase gas mileage, have longer lasting springs, and bring the power band to match the super ram, so ramp rates should be less aggressive?

any personal experiences would be appreciated.

brands? custom grind?

the tech at comp says use this ...

http://www.compcams.com/Company/CC/c...?csid=203&sb=2

 

Sounds like we both have valve float. However, if you got 17k miles out of your springs with the cam without float or even 10k miles that is pretty good from what I hear.

 

Your heads have good Exh flows so you could run a single pattern cam

ZZ409 ?
224/224 .520/.520 (w/1.5s) 112
Has more lift than the marine cam you link above with similar duration

Very expensive new from TPiS but you might find a off the shelf cam of similar spec
or get a custom grind

 

yes just got off the phone with Jeremy at AFR, he says the same thing, single pattern cam, cause the exhaust gas are shoved out already and who cares about the 3 cats downstream...

and says the 8019 springs will fatigue up to a certain point ( to the upper performance end of the 8017 springs)but still be perfectly able to handle the right cam,

have to take the advertised and at .50 and anything in the 55 range is going to be less agreesive than the 51 I am at now for ramp-up rates

more research on the zz409...thanks

 

Interesting...With an infinite choice of pics for an Avatar, you chose the same one as our primary moderator HP Bushrod. Why?

On the cam thing, you have many of the same considerations I did. And, I'll throw in one more.

I worked with someone who owns EAPro. He ran lots of quick and dirty simulations for me. And, he ran several in-depth simulations as well. In both case, he loaded the detailed specs for the AFR195. Min x-section, flows, etc... contribute to an accurate predictor of results using that software. Because of his prior simulation/building/business experience, he can predict results within 1 or 2 tenths (in the 1/4 mile).

What it showed me is how impressive smaller cams perform with the AFR195's. I'd go so far as to say the introduction of that head bring a whole new set of head/cam combos into consideration. That's because it takes less cam to acheive the same flow numbers as other, bigger heads. The benefit, IMO, is increasing low-end TQ for quicker throttle response and better MPG. Since, the 195s already have good low-lift flow, you can get great DD performance. Since the 195's have superb mid-range flow, that's why you don't need a ton of lift. That's point one.

Cam opening/closing rates also have an affect. Jake tried to start a thread on this once but it didn't get much following. More aggressive ramps can get more power -- but the downside is increasing difficulty to control the valves. It sounds like you might was to stay (at least somewhat) away from the more aggressive lobes -- since your goal is spring longevity. That was a goal of mine as well. My research led me to believe your target should be in the .520-.550 lift range. I chose a .520" (w 1.5rr) for my application. But, I installed 1.6rr and it was a 214 single-pattern cam. With the 195's, I expected this cam to perform better than a Lingenfelter SR cam (219/219 .560/.560) with ported 113's. Simulations agree. Simulations also showed increasing duration beyond 220 ends up raising peak HP beyond the 6k rpm range. Since the SR flow peaks more in the 5.5k range, I considered a 224/224 cam too big (but not by much). The end result would create 5-10 more HP up top in exchange for a slight low-end performance and MPG loss.

One thing I didn't consider/expect is what a single-pattern cam sounds like. It's more docile. Why? I guess the duration is so factory-like, I didn't get extra exh valve time -- and the associated increase in gurgle. My friend's 218/228 hotcam sounds "better" than mine (though I can run circles around his car). For pure sound quality, idle, and milde lobes, don't rule out the hotcam. As alluded to in the paragraph above, the less aggressive ramps of the hotcam will bleed more compression. Your springs will last forever, but you'll sacrifice a measure of power AND torque. With your automatic, I seriously doubt you'd need the extra torque. But a single pattern 218/218 custom cam might get you another mpg. Maybe not. (BTW: Comp can make any custom cam for slightly less than a Lingenfelter cam. Bullet can too. Turn-around times will be less for Bullet but not very long for either option.)

None of this means the TPIS 224/224 cam is a bad choice. Even with it's lower lift, the extra 10-deg duration would slightly outperform the cam I chose. FWIW, I get 14-15mpg city and 27mpg hwy. (Maybe more, but I still have my ZF with it's 6th gear. I also activated hwy mode and set it to 15.2:1 AFR above 50mph) My vacuum is 18" with my 214/214 .544"/.544" 108ICL 112LSA cam. I'm running the 155# AFR springs with it and hope they'll last 50-75k miles before replacement. If I swapped to 1.5rr, I would expect near hotcam (lifetime) spring use -- especially with the 155# springs.

If longevity is your primary concern, I'd pick between the hotcam or one of the TPIS ZZ cams. If TQ and/or MPG is your primary concern, I'd consider less duration and/or the single-pattern option. If gurgle is important to you, I have to wonder if a single-pattern cam will make you happy. (Based on sound alone, I'd seriously consider trading for a hotcam -- just to get the sportier idle sound. Maybe more duration will do that by itself.)

One last consideration is what Cuisinart already told you last year. You COULD even consider more duration on the intake side than the exhaust side. For example, a 224/218 custom cam would keep your top-end up but provide a bit more TQ and MPG thru exh reduction. Again, the AFRs flow so well out the exhaust, you'd never know it -- except for the sound.

No one can tell you the "right" answer. You'll need to pick between ramp ramps, duration, split, and lift vs longevity. Again, I really think you should consider the hotcam. If you want a bit more power, the TPIS cam mentioned by Rodj is a good choice. Your original link isn't bad either.

The end result is this...10-deg increase peak by about 500rpms (or vice-versa). The result is 10-15hp difference (up top). I can't prove it, but I think the change from .500" lift to .550" lift is only about 10hp. When you consider how much better AFR195s perform in all ranges, you can choose a modest cam and end up where other heads land. But, you can gain longevity and MPG against the competition.

You choose. Power, MPG, sound, or TQ. You can't get them all.

 

I have a very close set up to yours ( 383 - 10.6 compression, AFR 195 heads, Hedman headers, Super Ram w/ 58 mm throttle body and 32 lb. Bosche type III flow matched by John at FIC. 3.75 rear gear and Nitto street radials.

I am using the Comp's Cam 8-305-8 grind number 276-hr14 and I am very happy with it's performance as well as street manners. This is an hydraulic roller cam with spec's: 220-230 @ 50, 510 -510 114 LSA. My 1.6 to 1 Crane roller rockers probably give it a bit more lift. The valve springs were chosen by AFR when I told them my spec's. It idles very nicely with just a hint of lope, and response is instantaneous. It pulls hard all the way to about 5500, (I shift there, but it will still pull to 5800) and I couldn't be happier with the selection.

We are still in the tuning stages by running it on the street with the lap top and tuner in the passenger seat. I did run it on the 1/8 strip Saturday nite for the first time and my best of 4 runs turned an 8.012 e.t. at 88 mph with a 60 ft. of .190. (my tuner says he can get a couple of tenths lower with some tweaking and I have got to get out of the hole better to lower the 60ft. times. I will be experimenting with tire pressure next time out. Once we get it fully tuned I'll be heading for the 1/4 mile track at West Palm Beach. (formerly Moroso)

Best of all, was the fact that I turned a lot of heads that night, and ate 2 Mustangs and a Camaro big time!

 

IMO your motor is a little overcammed for that intake (not the ci), when its really starting to show its oats the intake is starting to wheeze some, being as you have an auto now a better cam could give favorable results (smaller) in all areas.

Sometimes a smaller cammed motor will run harder than a larger one meaning actually being quicker.

 

Thanks gents for all the comments, there is some disseminating of it I have to do, to appreciate what was told.

Lurking on Craig's 396 build by Jim, solidified my agreement to being over cammed, heck haste make waste, fast forward 2 and a half years to fess up to the infraction. That said, it ripped and still does up to my fuel cutoff set a 6300. It is not at all scientific but, it didn't seem to know it was a Super ram.

cam selection is too much fun, almost like exhaust selections, both can cause someone to say I told you so....

 

OK, This is what I know on this subject. I had a 406 Superram engine with really good heads and a ported intake, it ran very well with the ZZ-409 cam which is 226/226 on a 112 LSA installed at a 108 ICL with .520 lift with 1.5 rocker (I ran 1.6 rockers). I am still running this combination on a a 355 superram engine and it runs very well (370 RWHP and low 12's in the 1/4 in a 6-speed Firebird). I then switched cams on the 406 Superram engine to the ZZ-X cam which is 240/240 on a 112 LSA installed on a 108 ICL with .555 lift with 1.5 rockers (I stilll ran the 1.6 rockers). This cam idled rougher but and made 35 more RWHP with the exact same engine combination and pulled much harder throughout the power band. With the superram and this combination it made good power past 6000 RPM.

I guess what I am saying is I do not know if you should be spending money on a cam change since the cam change will not produce significant differences in the engine operation. My opinion is leave the cam alone and buy some good springs unless you are dissatisified with the idle qualities of the current cam. If you want something that is a little milder then go for it but don't expect huge changes and you will still have to change the springs.

 

Were you able to get the 406 with the ZZ 409 cam to run before you had the motor tuned?

 

How about trying 1.5 rockers with your current cam?

 

not to nit pick.. I hope that was taking it mild in the 1/8 On a 383 build

 

I am sure it will run but you will need to tune it to make it work well.

 

Brian's post is typically what forums run back at you. Bigger does make more power. The difference between my cam and Slick's should be up to 750 rpms difference in "prime operating range". If you're off by that much on an intake (power range), should you consider it "huge"?

I also spent quite a bit of time trying to determine how to figure out what type of lobes would require spring replacement and when. I'm not sure I'd expect a hotcam to require spring replacement -- especially if you use the next step stronger spring than recommended. And, what's recommended is very light.

One feedback I got (from my builder) was a solid-roller guy still using the original springs after 70k miles. His lift was suppposed to be in the .580 range -- though his duration was bigger. That could mean his lobes are less aggressive than the OPs. Lloyd Eliott also said he thought .544" lift cams could make it over 50k miles with good springs. But, maybe they'll need replacing once. Shouldn't need it after 17k miles though. (Slick, have you confirmed valve float?)

While I've seen specific or anecdotal feedback on lift and duration, I don't see comments on MPG vs (lift and duration). But, I guess that's not what we're here to do, is it?

 

did not confirm float just a hunch, not as rev happy as before, chokes a little up top.

sevie1dr's cam looks good, I missed that one when comps suggested a marine cam as per my link and AFR suggested Comp's Magnum, the difference between advertised and the at .5 duration is at around 60, which as Jeremy at AFR puts it not as steep to paraphrase.

"the Comp's Cam 8-305-8 grind number 276-hr14 and I am very happy with it's performance as well as street manners. This is an hydraulic roller cam with spec's: 220-230 @ 50, 510 -510 114 LSA. "

my own experience is the is no 5700 ceiling on the SR with my cam it revs and pulls past it, never dyno'd it so I may be hallucinating it.

why don't i just port the SR silly and bring power everywhere forget Rhoads, forget smaller cam. raise the rev capacity of the SR and get some new springs, I will have to pay someone to take them out to check a few though.

the car idles with a nice chop and has no problems doing it and slow speeds around town is like driving a regular car, but with alot of, forged piston, roller rocker, exhaust sounds, intake etc, really mean sounding.

 

your build was pretty close to my old HSR build CC 306 .510 / .540 with 1.6 rockers
final .540 / .570 your heads are better... mine close my Compression a lil higher 11.3ish
I had ISKY 6105 springs

seems to me almost everyone is having horrific valve Issues on XFI cams
you should not have float with those springs... What RPM????

I was on a T5 3:73 getting <> great mileage 27mpg pushing in the 450+ WRHP

what gears and trans are you running.. What INJ # Stock pump???

 

Do a scan. Make sure you're not going lean. It happens to me if my gas tank is too low. Fuel pump problem with all OEM units.

Edit: Or, you might have broken inner spring (of your double springs).

What did you do for insurance against valve float above 6k rpms? 7/16 studs? rev kit? stud girdle?

 

Id do a little smaller cam and the porting. That 220ish figure on the intake looks nice. Can you locate that cam that was ground for yours by chance?

Any cam that has real short seat timing/quick ramps will be hard on springs especially larger ones at high rpmworks the dickens out of them.
THey do work but theres a tradeoff. Picking cams are like crack

 

If it is a LT...
http://www.compcams.com/Company/CC/c...csid=1112&sb=0
If it is a L-98
http://www.compcams.com/Company/CC/c...?csid=210&sb=0

 

He has to pass smog with it