What's he rest of your combination?
Are Hughes cams that good?!!!
- Thread starter Valkman
- Start date
-
moper
Well-Known Member
^ true 'dat.
I've never lost a cam lobe. I've usually bought MP cams. I have a crane now in one of my dusters. I'll be breaking in a summit in my 318.
MrJLR, use your cam break-in oil provided, and then use Lucas engine break-in oil additive with the motor oil of your choice, I prefer 10w-30 for weight. After your 20 minutes session, use either a additive (like ZZDP Maxx), or an oil like VR-1 Valvoline for example. You'll be just fine.
I haven't either. The key is engine RPM. I always err on the high side. 2500-4000 and vary it. That makes sure to sling oil everywhere. If somethin's gonna go wrong, low RPM ain't gonna stop it from happenin.
famous bob
mopar misfit
I always go roller, no problems.
jbc426
Well-Known Member
Hughes cams are well made parts. There are lots of other well made cams out there too. The trick with Hughes, is that they can guide you in selecting a cam that will closely match your combination and use. Using the right combination of parts is the key when selecting any cam. If you have the wrong engine components, gears, tires or torque converter stall; you are leaving a lot more performance on the table than you may think, no matter which cam you select.
abodyjoe
Well-Known Member
had a friend switch to one of their cams.. slowed his car down. they had him change all kinds of stuff saying it wasn't matched properly. he put his old cam iin and the car picked right up again. they apparently offered a partial refund then backed off on that. he proceeded to bash them on numerous mopar boards. after theat they got a hold of him and refunded what they previously agreed on and begged him to stop saying the bad things about them on the internet...
Since you ask:
I have a 360 block with 2.02 J heads with 904 trans, and I'm looking into options. Because I want to drive my car (not race it) it needs to be a manageable daily driver and I still would like to have good power without giving up too much low end response. Right now I have 340 with J heads and a too wild solid lift cam. It came with the car and I don't know much about it, but I don't like it. It only pulls above 3000 rpm's and with the high stall converter it feels like my wife's Murano (with a CVT) driving around town. This motor would be a good bracket race motor, but that's not what I'm looking for.
What I want:
I don't want headers- I have Magnum manifolds on it now.
Good idle - some lump is ok
Mid range power and torque - 1200-6000rpm (I'm not concerned about E.T.'s)
A stock convertor - 2000-2500 stall max
3.55 rear - so I can drive on the highway
Good power - 400-450hp
Bag for the buck - I'm cheap!
My car is a stock 65 Barracuda Manual brakes and steering and no AC.
nm9stheham
Well-Known Member
IMHO..... most of the use descriptions provided by cam manufacturer's are overly generous to the cams' real performance; they tend to overpromise on idle and low RPM torque as well on top end RPM. The only use descriptions that I count on are those in the Crane catalogs; if you compare them, then Crane is consistently conservative versus the other manufacturer's descriptions. If you can find a grind that is very close in the Crane specs, then I'd set my expectations by the Crane description. The uppper RPM range on Crane's descriptions will look low, but that seems to be due to their basing it on stock engine parts. Form my experience, if you open the engine breathing, then the Crane's top RPM's will move right on up.... like any engine should do.
I like the potential results of a high rate lift cam, with the better potential to preserve low RPM torque while still breathing OK, but don't like the contact pressures on the lobes and lifters that go with it. I tend to go with lesser rate lifts for reliability. And with the high rates, you will have more of a tendency to float the valves; I see the Hughes springs for the cam originally mentioned are a bit on the heavier side probably due to that factor. That is just more problem potential if you don't need it.
IMHO, the OP's use description points to a lower lift and duration and he can get by with a less aggressive ramp for not racing. For his use, it looks like keeping overlap down for the low RPM torque is very important. Something in the 256/262 advertised duration range with 112 LSA seems better.
BTW, OP, what pistons are you using? This effects CR and thus influences cam choice.
BTW#2, my son and I used the Crane Z-268-2 hydraulic in his 340. More conservative ramps and less .050" duration that the equivalent 268-ish Voodoo or XE cam, so the ramps are more conservative and it is more like a Voodoo 262 in some ways. We put in 1.6 ratio rockers to get some lift back. (Yeah I know... that kinda moves the ramp rates back towards a Voodoo or XE.) With Edelbrock heads and decent flowing parts, the predicted HP is right at 400 HP. With your light early A body, 350-375 HP will be like 425-450 HP in a later, heavier A body. Since you really don't seem to like the lack of low RPM torque and want good operation at well under 3000 RPM, then you should be shading your duration to the low side IMO.
I like the potential results of a high rate lift cam, with the better potential to preserve low RPM torque while still breathing OK, but don't like the contact pressures on the lobes and lifters that go with it. I tend to go with lesser rate lifts for reliability. And with the high rates, you will have more of a tendency to float the valves; I see the Hughes springs for the cam originally mentioned are a bit on the heavier side probably due to that factor. That is just more problem potential if you don't need it.
IMHO, the OP's use description points to a lower lift and duration and he can get by with a less aggressive ramp for not racing. For his use, it looks like keeping overlap down for the low RPM torque is very important. Something in the 256/262 advertised duration range with 112 LSA seems better.
BTW, OP, what pistons are you using? This effects CR and thus influences cam choice.
BTW#2, my son and I used the Crane Z-268-2 hydraulic in his 340. More conservative ramps and less .050" duration that the equivalent 268-ish Voodoo or XE cam, so the ramps are more conservative and it is more like a Voodoo 262 in some ways. We put in 1.6 ratio rockers to get some lift back. (Yeah I know... that kinda moves the ramp rates back towards a Voodoo or XE.) With Edelbrock heads and decent flowing parts, the predicted HP is right at 400 HP. With your light early A body, 350-375 HP will be like 425-450 HP in a later, heavier A body. Since you really don't seem to like the lack of low RPM torque and want good operation at well under 3000 RPM, then you should be shading your duration to the low side IMO.
Yeah well some of us ain't got a silver spoon. lol I wouldn't mind havin one. Just once.
I am going to just throw this out and walk away.
Look at the Comp 275DEH. Thank you drive through.
Look at the Comp 275DEH. Thank you drive through.
yellow rose
Overnight Sensation
I was going to say the OP needs the ISKY 260 Mega cam, and if you are feeling a bit groggy, you can use the 270 Mega. I have used a bunch of them, all the way up to the 305. You don't need a custom cam for what you want.
RRR is probably close, I just hate comp bad enough I would pay for a cam from some one else than run a free comp.
Either the comp or Isky will be what you want.
EDIT: Isky has added part numbers that I didn't have. I can never see a reason to run a LSA of over 108 on p-car heads. There are some new Mega grinds on a 112 LSA and I consider those worthless. Evidently, Isky drank the marketing koolaid.
Part number 160164 is the 264 Mega and part number 160171 is the 270 Mega. Both are on a 108 LSA.
RRR is probably close, I just hate comp bad enough I would pay for a cam from some one else than run a free comp.
Either the comp or Isky will be what you want.
EDIT: Isky has added part numbers that I didn't have. I can never see a reason to run a LSA of over 108 on p-car heads. There are some new Mega grinds on a 112 LSA and I consider those worthless. Evidently, Isky drank the marketing koolaid.
Part number 160164 is the 264 Mega and part number 160171 is the 270 Mega. Both are on a 108 LSA.
Lustle
Well-Known Member
400 horse is doable with your requirments. 450 might be a stretch. You might have to sacrifice somewhat (headers for example). Depending on how good your heads are of course. And lets not forget that its torque that starts the car. I think it a street car you'd be more interested in low end torque for street fun.
As for the hughes cam you mention. I don't see you need a .530 lift cam when you've as much as said you aren't concerned about E.Ts or racing. A street motor would be very happy with under .500 lift. This will also save on things like idle quality and chance of wiping the cam, worrying about springs, etc. I'm not familar with hughes. I've never run one. I don't think anyone I know has. So I can't speak as to how good they are.
A common and well known cam is the XE268H from comp. I know lots of guys who have run these in 360s and love the very nice idle along with the stump pulling torque right off idle. It won't quite run up to 6000, but really you might have a hard time finding a cam with a range of 1200-6000. In a motor with good compression and heads. The right intake. And even exhaust manifolds. I'd be very surprised if you didn't make 400 horse with that cam. And loads of bottom end torque for nice big burnouts.
Thank you all!
I started this thread because it seemed like Hughes was claim that they had about their cam with .530 lift could run with a stock converter, and 3.55 gear, that would have more to it. It's doesn't apear to be magic source one performance they claim it to be. I'm not knocking it , they might just be over selling just a bit?
I started this thread because it seemed like Hughes was claim that they had about their cam with .530 lift could run with a stock converter, and 3.55 gear, that would have more to it. It's doesn't apear to be magic source one performance they claim it to be. I'm not knocking it , they might just be over selling just a bit?
aaronk785
Well-Known Member
That 270 mega cam is a killer street cam. Has some lope and killer torque. Ran that cam in a 318 with 360 heads car ran strong with 3.55 gears. Ran 14 flat with stock converter and open rear. Babied it out the hole. 60 ft. was like 2.2 Isky is top notch quality.
No way you get to 400 with a stock set of J heads and manifolds unless the cam is real aggressive. The 268 lunati and comp cams won't get close unless the heads have some serious porting done to them.
You'll be in the 330-350 range at best with either of those cams.
You'll be in the 330-350 range at best with either of those cams.
I never been a big fan of Comp either. But it's what everybody stocks and they are pretty cheap.
I cannot STAND that they grind everything on a 110. Cookie cutter stuff. But it is what it is. I preferred old school, pre S&S Cycles Crane stuff, but those days are gone.
I have since discovered Oregon Cam Grinders and I will pretty much use them for my stuff from here on out. However long that is.
I cannot STAND that they grind everything on a 110. Cookie cutter stuff. But it is what it is. I preferred old school, pre S&S Cycles Crane stuff, but those days are gone.
I have since discovered Oregon Cam Grinders and I will pretty much use them for my stuff from here on out. However long that is.
Agreed. I would shoot for 400 LB Ft instead. That's a much more realistic goal. While you may not even do that, building for torque is what you do for a street engine.
What if I bump it up to a 408?
Then you will need better heads. It is a domino effect.
moper
Well-Known Member
Hughes (or Indy) overselling? What ever do you mean???!!!
Historically I've run Crane about 40% of the time, Comp 50%, and Wolverine, Engle, and others the final 10%. Like nm9s I specify .875" lifter (Ford...gasp) lobes on most of my custom cam grinds because they need less spring and are more stable, and I can make the power with them and not worry about the lifter/lobe wear. I don't run higher ratio rockers - I'll change the lobes first but that's just me. There are lots of ways to skin the same cat here. This stuff is 50years old. There's nobody here that's going to try something never tried.
nm9stheham
Well-Known Member
That is the way I read all of the cam descriptions (with the possible exception of Crane IMHO). Hughes is no exception. Cams is cams, and it is all in the specs and general principles of operation. Rollers have been the next big step forward, in allowing faster profiles without the failure risks.
nm9stheham
Well-Known Member
CB's point is that you need better breathing. Putting more cubes behind not-large-enough ports will not give you higher HP; it might (or might not) be better for low RPM torque, but will not doubt be choked off at the higher RPM's as you try to pull more air to feed the additional cubes through the same ports and valves.
Just as a reference point, look at the Edelbrock heads flow numbers on the spec sheet on their website. Those are the approximate flow numbers needed to reach to to the 400 HP level. Then you can go on to the Hughes website and look at their comparative flow numbers for various heads (ported or not) and see where various heads' flows are.
But as has been said, you look to going down the garden path to focus on HP numbers. If this is a street motor only with a low stall TC, good low RPM and a wide torque band is more important BY FAR than raw peak HP numbers. I can't overemphasize this point: my funnest street engine was a SB torque engine with 375+ ft lbs of torque and 325+ HP; the wide torque band with decent breathing made it run hard from <2000 RPM to 6500 RPM. Stock 440's never beat it on the street. And with your light car, a good torque, wide RPM engine will take of at all speeds and starting RPM's.
-
