honest opinions needed here

roccodart440 said
Yes, I have . We put the mother thumper in my fathers current truck. It's a 10.5:1 454 with AFR heads. It's awful in every way.

Sure it sounds cool, try to idle around town or in traffic with it. Try running power brakes (even with a booster) and for as radical as the cam sounds it made 503hp. Whoopty do....
Torque came in late, hp ran out early.

Albeit he doesn't have enough convertor in the car. The carb is a Quickfuel and is set perfectly and the timing is spot on as well. Engine was dyno tuned and then idle reset in the car.

basically it's the same specs as my cam as far as lift and duration, same specs my engine for that matter (his heads are better)and makes pretty much the same HP. Mine idles like a kitten. I run a 950 proform. Dialed in by the same builder. 17/35 for timing

Respectfully, the thumpr and the mutha thumpr are completely different grinds, a truck is not an A-body and a 454 chev is not a 360 chrysler and having "not enough converter" is usually pretty awful no matter what bumpstick you're running. (awfulness depends on how "not enough" we're talking)

I understand you were disappointed with the results of the combination, but I think the assumption that the entire blame for that disappointment lies in the camshaft alone and that as an extension of that, the entire range of thumpr camshafts are inherently "awful" is rather short sighted.

Especially when your basis of comparison is an entirely different brand of motor with nothing alike (your 440) and the only similarity being overall displacement.

Now on the other hand, if you have changed out the mutha thumpr on the old man's truck and done a comparative dyno comparison and/or quarter mile pass with a similarly priced flat tappet hydraulic cam that showed that the awfulness had gone and the power had (mostly) stayed or even improved, that would warrant your seemingly bad attitude towards that particular camshaft.

I've been disappointed before too and it definitely leaves a person bitter. That's pretty natural. but I try to avoid giving advice/opinions like "it's awful" unless I'm absolutely sure the product is flawed or unreliable in some nonredeemable way.

Maybe I'm just too hesitant to blatantly bad-mouth one specific part based on one bad result for which it may or may not be partially or completely responsible?