hughes or comp camshaft

-
TheDeputy

TheDeputy

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2008
Messages
227
Reaction score
4
Maybe it's good to mention the engine is going into a stock 1970 challenger with a four speed, 3.23 rear and 255/60/15 tires.
The plan is to build a moderate street engine. No strip!
It has to be a reliable, good running, high torque street engine with decent fuel economy. No high power high revving strip motor.

crank is a cast eagle unit with I-beam rods and KB356 pistons

Thanks

Antoon
 
You can go to Comp cams website and download a free copy of cam quest.
 
Hi Antoon,

after comparing a lot of engine combinations i ended up with the comp cams xr286hr hydraulic roller cam (my block is oem roller block). Specs are 236/242° @ .050" / .544" Lift. For future upgrade i wanna use 1.6 Rockers, heads are good to .600" Lift. Engine is not in the car, i expect it to pull to 5000 rpm with viery good street manners. I can tell you in about 8 weeks....:D

Never thought about the solid lifter cams like you, before i found the roller cam block i thought about the xe295hl cam. Check out this build, then you will have an idea about the powerband:

http://www.carcraft.com/techarticles/ccrp_1006_small_block_mopar_stroker_dyno_test/index.html

Michael
 
TheDeputy said:
Maybe it's good to mention the engine is going into a stock 1970 challenger with a four speed, 3.23 rear and 255/60/15 tires.
The plan is to build a moderate street engine. No strip!
It has to be a reliable, good running, high torque street engine with decent fuel economy. No high power high revving strip motor.

crank is a cast eagle unit with I-beam rods and KB356 pistons

Thanks

Antoon
Click to expand...

Sounds like mine.

360 .040
iron crank
h beam rods
KB 356 quench dome hyper pistons
10.1 comp
ported & milled J heads
LD340 Intake
750 holley
3.73 gears
4spd trans
I ran a solid cm spec'd .573 lift 252*@.050 284*adv 110*cl
Had great torque off idle and rev'd to 6600
idled nice really, just a lil chop.

speaking from experience ;)
 
Steve, autoxcuda, built a stroker with the 274S in it. He likes it and it seems to run pretty well. There's a video of it running in the following link.

http://www.forabodiesonly.com/mopar/showthread.php?t=137765&highlight=stroker

I'm with Justin here, strokers eat up duration. That 274s will idle real smooth and have good vacuum in a stroker. If you've heard a 360 with a 282s, it won't sound or run the same in a 400+" engine. Sound much more docile. With a 4 speed car, I'd tend to go a bit larger than smaller.

Take whatever the recommendations that comp has for RPM range and pull about 500-600 off it for a stroker. A 282s will make good power with peak about 5600-5700 is my guess in a stroker engine. the 274s would work well for you too. Can't really go wrong with any of the choices that you or Justin came up with.
 
I just recently built a mild 408 with street driving and some resemblance of fuel mileage as the main concern. The cam is a solid lifter Racer Brown and with 1.6 rockers it measured 240 degrees at .050 and .505 lift. Haven't had it on a dyno but seat of the pants tells me it peaks at approx. 5200-5300 rpm but will easily pull to 5800+ and man what a torque monster. I love it. It's got a decent chop at idle so you know it's there and gets half way decent mileage considering it's 408 cid with 3.55 gears an has no problem blazing the drag radials at anything under 30 mph, even when left in 2nd gear. I agree with the guys that strokers eat up cam duration so the comp 274 is actually really small for a 4" arm. The Hughes you listed is the smallest I'd go with as it'll probably peak in the low 5000 rpm range. If fuel mileage is a really big concern it'll work well but if you want just a little more perf. go up one step to the Hughes 4248 or the Comp Justin suggested. JMHO
 
Hughes all the way I ran that exact cam in my 384/318 x 4" stroker power from 1200 to 6500 awesome cam, but run superlube lifters





69 Dart 384" stroker solid flattappet Indy LAX heads 2.02 1.60 full port &polish PRW rockers 4spd 391w/powerlock 8.75 412hp 441tq @wheels
 
And how about durability of both cams?
Hughes claim they make "real" chrysler parts with a "real" chrysler lobe, and that their cams are therefore faster of the ramp, and higher lift than the competition giving a hughes cam with the roughlly the same duration act like a bigger cam than one off the competition.
The hughes cam is also twice as expensive, and I've set myself a budget.

Thanks for the responses,

Antoon
 
I dont like either cam grinder. Hughes IMO are too fast rates of lift for some things. There IS such a thing as too fast a rat of lift. If I was building something as you describe to drive everyday and be extremely reliable, I wouldn't even be building a stroker. Not that it cannot be done.....but it's almost like you're wasting a stroker motor. A good hot stock stroke 360 could do what you're motor is gonna do. To me, building a stroker means an all out plethora of badassary. Just doesn't make sense to me any other way.
 
I did a 422 (340 bored .060 over rather than .030) with iron heads I ported. I used the tried and true H-302-2 from Crane. It's a full hydraulic, with similar specs as the Comp XS274S but a little larger at .050. That engine runs pump 89, gets over 17mpg, and runs 108mph in a '72 Challenger with and auto, 2200 convertor, and 3.23s. If you have heads that flow in the 245-255 range at .500, I think either cam will work, but the Hughes is always more money. I'd use the Comp. From the sound of it, it will not run out of steam before you run out of willingness to hold your foot down.
 
StrokerScamp said:
I dont like either cam grinder. Hughes IMO are too fast rates of lift for some things. There IS such a thing as too fast a rat of lift. If I was building something as you describe to drive everyday and be extremely reliable, I wouldn't even be building a stroker. Not that it cannot be done.....but it's almost like you're wasting a stroker motor. A good hot stock stroke 360 could do what you're motor is gonna do. To me, building a stroker means an all out plethora of badassary. Just doesn't make sense to me any other way.
Click to expand...

Somebody been watching 'the 3 amigo's'?:happy1:
 
1wild&crazyguy said:
Somebody been watching 'the 3 amigo's'?:happy1:
Click to expand...

LOL. Naw. I can't say I ever saw it all the way through. I think that comp and hughes represent the extreme opposites of camshaft grinds. Comp has pansy *** chebbie lobes and Hughes, while Chrysler specific ain't the end all be all. To me, there are just some cases wher ethe fastest rate of lift ain't needed. Just beats the snot outta the valve train. What's reliable about that? Then of course with Comp, it's slam the other way around.....unless you get a specialty grind then you pay through the ***.
 
so u must not like roller cams..lol

the hughes/fast lobe comps slam them open, but close them softly, not as harsh as a roller even.

but right on..i know ur old school.lol
 
1wild&crazyguy said:
so u must not like roller cams..lol

the hughes/fast lobe comps slam them open, but close them softly, not as harsh as a roller even.

but right on..i know ur old school.lol
Click to expand...

You hush up. lol
 
StrokerScamp said:
LOL. Naw. I think that comp and hughes represent the extreme opposites of camshaft grinds. Comp has pansy *** chebbie lobes and Hughes, while Chrysler specific ain't the end all be all.
Click to expand...

sigh... yet anoter member of the "chevy lobe" flock...

BTW, when i spec custom cams, I usually use lobes that are designed for the .875 Ford lifter...lol. Same reasons - Too fast for a street car sometimes is just too fast. The last "Ford cam" I ordered made just shy of 600hp in a 512" RB and idles quietly at 900rpm. And it was ground by Engle.
 
1wild&crazyguy said:
Somebody been watching 'the 3 amigo's'?:happy1:
Click to expand...

The 3 Amigo's is one of my favorite comedy's, it is STUPID Funny.

I like the part when the Mexican guy says, "Lets go get some more Tequila" and smashes a 3/4 Full Bottle against the rocks. That is some funny stuff right there!
 
Some rag (Mopar Muscle?) did a Comp "904" profile and put 1.6's on after a few pulls and they went DOWN on power. Seems the motor didnt like the extreme lobe rate (even more than a roller at this point) of the 904 and the 1.6 rockers. So lift rate is not all knowing... I like the Howard recommendation. I ran a Herbert (Anaheim,CA not FL) in a 318 years ago, like a "stage 2" and it was a great cam in a stocker, and was cheap too, bought it right off the grinder, almost. Wrote this post and realized I was talking Herbert, not Howard..oops!
 
I've sent Howards an email, and see what they've got.
I didn't mention the heads I'm going to use, and they are 587's with 2.02 valves that I'm going to port myself.

What's wrong with building a high torque, not so high revving stroker? Isn't the longer crank made to make lots of torque? It's the torque that gets the tires chirping:cheers:

Antoon
 
What brand did you run? Does it have good vacuum for the power brakes?

Antoon
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top