416 Longblock built-need help deciding on camshaft-SR or Ft?

[RAMM]

Figured I'd tap into the FABO brain trust on this one. I have a nice 416 (360) stroker built that just needs a camshaft.A hydraulic roller is out of the question on this one.

Specs: 4.06" x 4" Scat cast (internal balance) , Scat I-beams, Mahle -18cc Dish forgings
10.5 comp, EQ heads ported (300+cfm) 2.08"/1.6" T&D shaft rockers, Eddy 7576 RPM etc..
I need a cam for this to finish it up. This engine is not spoken for yet and I want to cam it for an imaginary end user. This engine has what I would call serious power potential (530-590 hp)

Do I cam it for maximum reliability and let the chips fall where they may with a stout hydraulic flat tappet?
Or do I put a solid roller in it because I already have a set of nice Scorpion solid rollers and everyone seems to think a solid roller is the answer to all of their problems.

Solid rollers are great and all but they won't last thousands of miles and require someone dedicated to checking things like lash and such. This end user has to be vigilant and "on top of things" so to speak.

A stout hydraulic flat tappet will leave power on the table but with the right oil will live just about forever and is a "set it and forget it" kind of deal for a user that doesn't want to be under the hood very often.

A stout flat tappet is not out of the question either but with the lash and maintenance requirement you are half way there in the hassle department of the solid roller.

Here's my conundrum--I have a set of Scorpion solid rollers but no camshaft. Same thing with hydraulic lifters-no cam that's suitable either.

Basically what would you choose if this was going to be your engine? Feel free to add your thoughts on expected idle quality, driveability, intended usage and overall expectations. J.Rob

 

[RAMM]

The short block in question. J.Rob

 

[67autocross]

I assume that it will run on bad Canadian pump gas before I pick the cam....

 

[RAMM]

I assume that it will run on bad Canadian pump gas before I pick the cam....

Yes I figured that was implied with the 10.5 comp static. I should have specified. J.Rob

 

[67autocross]

I asked because I have a 340 with 9.6 that is not great with pump gas, 15 years ago it was good....today not so much with the changes in fuel.
I would go with the hydraulic cam in the 416 if it is a pump gas engine, if it makes 525hp and you could drive it all season without touching it I think you would have more people interested in purchasing it.

While we are talking are you the Canadian dealer for EQ heads?

 

[RAMM]

I asked because I have a 340 with 9.6 that is not great with pump gas, 15 years ago it was good....today not so much with the changes in fuel.
I would go with the hydraulic cam in the 416 if it is a pump gas engine, if it makes 525hp and you could drive it all season without touching it I think you would have more people interested in purchasing it.

While we are talking are you the Canadian dealer for EQ heads?

This engine has closed chamber heads with tight quench and a dished piston. It should be fine on 91 from either Esso or Shell.
What idle characteristics would you expect out of a 525 hp HFT ?

I don't have access to EQ heads that make any economic sense any more-sadly my warehouse dropped the EQ line for some mysterious reason. J.Rob

 

[Max1196]

Are you an ERI member?

 

[jbc426]

Don't take this the wrong way, but no quench, 10.5 to 1, and a cast crank for over 500 hp?? Not what I thought someone would build with all the knowledge and experience available about running pump gas these days.

If you swap in step pistons to build in quench and drop the compression to 10 or 10.2 to 1, and had a forged crank for the power levels your heads are ported for; I'd say solid roller. I hope the Scat cast cranks are strong enough for 590 hp as I have one in my 510hp 408" Magnum, but have heard I am at the top end of the safe limit.

Since you have gone down this path, a custom hydraulic roller that will bleed off a lot of compression might make it run on pump swirl.

 

[RAMM]

Don't take this the wrong way, but no quench, 10.5 to 1, and a cast crank for over 500 hp?? Not what I thought someone would build with all the knowledge and experience available about running pump gas these days.

I don't want this to degenerate into a "How to build a stroker thread" It has quench, I have used SCAT cast cranks into the 649HP range @ 11.8 comp. No issue at the 500+HP level--besides what would you build a stroker for? 400 hp?

If you swap in step pistons to build in quench and drop the compression to 10 or 10.2 to 1, and had a forged crank for the power levels your heads are ported for; I'd say solid roller. I hope the Scat cast cranks are strong enough for 590 hp as I have one in my 510hp 408" Magnum, but have heard I am at the top end of the safe limit.

Since you have gone down this path, a custom hydraulic roller that will bleed off a lot of compression might make it run on pump swirl.

I said no hydraulic roller. Thanks for your thoughts. J.Rob

 

[SSG_Karg]

The type of guy that wants 590hp in their hotrod is USUALLY the type that doesn't mind checking lash now and then and can do the maintenance. I'd go SR and not worry about wiping a lobe during break in.

 

[n.y.340 dart]

410 stroker solid roller ported w2 10-4 cp forged steel crank so far no problems with pump gas.

 

[67autocross]

For a 525 hp small block if it was around 900 rpm l would be good with it, but I would not be daily driving it.
I asked about the EQ heads as I just picked up a 360 magnum last weekend to build....

 

[nm9stheham]

IMHO, the 'imaginary end user' is the problem. You don't know who is going to show up waving a wad of cash to buy it, and it could be someone who couldn't adjust lash if their life depended on it.... or who would give a flip. (I suspect you know the type, and they will want to blame you, the engine builder, for anything and everything.)

If I HAD to choose the cam right now and based on that unknown, I would go for the reliability and leave the HP on the table, to make it a little less likely to be torn apart, and more idiot-proof. But ideally, you would wait for that imaginary end user to walk in the door and evaluate them and their use and THAN recommend the best cam.

(BTW, I run business designing and installing engineered systems and often make choices like this, taking into account that fact that some customers just can't appreciate, or won't care about, the 'finer' points; you have to make it more idiot-proof sometimes.)

Just curious and forgive my ignorance.... why would a solid roller not last thousands of miles? Axle wear?

 

[RAMM]

IMHO, the 'imaginary end user' is the problem. You don't know who is going to show up waving a wad of cash to buy it, and it could be someone who couldn't adjust lash if their life depended on it.... or who would give a flip. (I suspect you know the type, and they will want to blame you, the engine builder, for anything and everything.)

If I HAD to choose the cam right now and based on that unknown, I would go for the reliability and leave the HP on the table, to make it a little less likely to be torn apart, and more idiot-proof. But ideally, you would wait for that imaginary end user to walk in the door and evaluate them and their use and THAN recommend the best cam.

(BTW, I run business designing and installing engineered systems and often make choices like this, taking into account that fact that some customers just can't appreciate, or won't care about, the 'finer' points; you have to make it more idiot-proof sometimes.)

Just curious and forgive my ignorance.... why would a solid roller not last thousands of miles? Axle wear?

I agree with everything you've said. I am leaning this way already, just trying to get a feel for the popular opinion.

Forgot to address your solid roller question. I don't trust a solid roller in true high mileage street use. They all fail and I believe its because the lash beats a flat on the needles and then its all over. J.Rob

 

[jbc426]

This engine has closed chamber heads with tight quench and a dished piston...

I missed this part, but how is a dish piston going to be able to provide quench?

I'm in the process of lowering the compression in my 493" RB from 12 to 1 to 10.2 to 1. With a .040" thick head gasket, and a 75cc heart shaped chamber. I still have to run a zero deck step piston with something like a 23cc dish just under the valves leaving over 2/3rds of the piston a flat top at zero deck.

I don't understand how those dished pistons with just a ledge around the perimeter will provide any quench. Please clarify if you would.

 

[RAMM]

I missed this part, but how is a dish piston going to be able to provide quench?

I'm in the process of lowering the compression in my 493" RB from 12 to 1 to 10.2 to 1. With a .040" thick head gasket, and a 75cc heart shaped chamber. I still have to run a zero deck step piston with something like a 23cc dish just under the valves leaving over 2/3rds of the piston a flat top at zero deck.

I don't understand how those dished pistons with just a ledge around the perimeter will provide any quench. Please clarify if you would.

I will measure the width of that ledge and let you know just how much area it covers but experience tells me it still provides a significant amount of charge motion.

The step pistons you are referring to in your 493 sound like an Icon piston which is basically 2/3rds of a piston with a much lower compression height and they don't offer much quench at all. J.Rob

 

[MOPAROFFICIAL]

Figured I'd tap into the FABO brain trust on this one. I have a nice 416 (360) stroker built that just needs a camshaft.A hydraulic roller is out of the question on this one.

Specs: 4.06" x 4" Scat cast (internal balance) , Scat I-beams, Mahle -18cc Dish forgings
10.5 comp, EQ heads ported (300+cfm) 2.08"/1.6" T&D shaft rockers, Eddy 7576 RPM etc..
I need a cam for this to finish it up. This engine is not spoken for yet and I want to cam it for an imaginary end user. This engine has what I would call serious power potential (530-590 hp)

Do I cam it for maximum reliability and let the chips fall where they may with a stout hydraulic flat tappet?
Or do I put a solid roller in it because I already have a set of nice Scorpion solid rollers and everyone seems to think a solid roller is the answer to all of their problems.

Solid rollers are great and all but they won't last thousands of miles and require someone dedicated to checking things like lash and such. This end user has to be vigilant and "on top of things" so to speak.

A stout hydraulic flat tappet will leave power on the table but with the right oil will live just about forever and is a "set it and forget it" kind of deal for a user that doesn't want to be under the hood very often.

A stout flat tappet is not out of the question either but with the lash and maintenance requirement you are half way there in the hassle department of the solid roller.

Here's my conundrum--I have a set of Scorpion solid rollers but no camshaft. Same thing with hydraulic lifters-no cam that's suitable either.

Basically what would you choose if this was going to be your engine? Feel free to add your thoughts on expected idle quality, driveability, intended usage and overall expectations. J.Rob

May we see the flow chart as to decide the cam?

 

[evil66]

Solid flat tappet every time. Of all the small blocks i have had over the years i have had the most luck with solids over hydraulics,i prefer a bit extra noise over a potentially noisy hydraulic lifter and dont mind setting lash every now and then.
With this type of horsepower they arent very often a daily driver so lash adjustment wont be that frequent and i like the ability to rev them reliably to 7000rpm with no issues,even though it may make peak power well before that.

 

[kielbasa]

hmmm, when i look at those pistons, i think no quench.......

 

[RAMM]

May we see the flow chart as to decide the cam?

I can post it on Monday. J.Rob

 

[RAMM]

Solid flat tappet every time. Of all the small blocks i have had over the years i have had the most luck with solids over hydraulics,i prefer a bit extra noise over a potentially noisy hydraulic lifter and dont mind setting lash every now and then.
With this type of horsepower they arent very often a daily driver so lash adjustment wont be that frequent and i like the ability to rev them reliably to 7000rpm with no issues,even though it may make peak power well before that.

Couldn't agree with you more! If it were a build for myself-No brainer. I'd pick a solid flatty every time-they work and kick ***. J.Rob

 

[RAMM]

hmmm, when i look at those pistons, i think no quench.......

Wish I had never posted pic of shortblock--I was hoping to get some opinions on cams. J.Rob

 

[MichaelB.]

Okay. Stout Flat Hydraulic.

I finished off my 408 (Eagle) with Hughes ported Magnum Eddies, 11.0 KB's, 850 dominator, 1&7/8 TTi's in my street/strip 2950lb Dart with a stout Howards flat hyd. That is putting my money where my mouth is.

 

[RAMM]

Okay. Stout Flat Hydraulic.

I finished off my 408 (Eagle) with Hughes ported Magnum Eddies, 11.0 KB's, 850 dominator, 1&7/8 TTi's in my street/strip 2950lb Dart with a stout Howards flat hyd. That is putting my money where my mouth is.

I appreciate the input. How does it run? Idle,part throttle, etc...? J.Rob

 

[MichaelB.]

I will be doing a series of chassis dyno runs shortly (to tune) and will keep you in the loop 100% once the snow here melts. Trying to tune it to 500-510 @ the wheels. Then I am spraying it with a small shot.