the truth/opinions about cams

Because the old school lobes do almost everything everyone HATES.

Like big slow ramps, that have a long time for reversion at overlap AND intake closing.

Those slow lobes are dirty because of that reversion. Those long, slow lobes kill bottom end, the EXACT thing most "street" guys cry their eyes out about.

Those long, slow lobes kill idle vacuum, require a higher engine idle speed just to maintain an idle. All things the majority of the guys who post here snivel about the most!!!!!!

So they keep buying the junk, and then ***** because they didn't get what they want. They could have had a cleaner, slower idle speed, an idle that doesn't stink (that's also about your carb tune up as lobes but that would need to be another thread).

They could have had an engine that actually made power higher in the RPM band that what it does, but they decided that all cams are the same, all the numbers are the same. And they all ***** all the time.

That's what this thread is, and the OP is so SMART, he doesn't need to learn anything.

The Dunning-Kruger syndrome applies very well here.

Here is an example that explains in numbers why a quicker lobe, with the CORRECT EVENT TIMING will always be better (unless you like the above situations and love to *****).

My cam is 280 seat to seat and 255 at .050 on a 105 ICL. Those numbers didn't come out of a hat, or out of a catalog. It came about from several long phone conversations, my flow bench numbers and several more phone conversations.

Look through most any cam catalog look for cams with 255 at .050 and see what the seat timing is. You'll find most of those lobes will be around 300 seat to seat. That's 20 degrees SLOWER than the lobes I'm using, yet at .050, I'm caught up to the slower lobes, and I'd bet by .200 lift I'm quicker yet. That means that I can run enough cam to shift at 7000 with my heads and not lose the bottom end and make it sloppy and nasty to drive. That explains the 105 LSA. My heads need some help, and that 105 puts the middle RPM power where it needs to be. It makes more power in the gear change.

So there is a reason for the quicker lobes.

If that doesn't matter to someone, they should do what they want. But don't come on here and shoot off your mouth and tell everyone what you don't know is wrong.

Simply make a GOOD choice with either the old or new tech and the engine will perform fine. A 100% street driven engine does not NEED the modern grinds. Can it benefit? Of course. But who wants a noisy valve train all "that" can create? Some don't mind, but some do. I know I would had I chosen a hydraulic camshaft. Yes, there's a time and place for everything. I agree. The modern grinds surely have their place and work very well, but to make a blanket statement that ALL old school grinds cannot run well is plain stupid. Stop it.