Performer 318/360 intake

[67FormulaS_273HiPo_4spd]

I remember reading in an old Mopar Muscle magazine some years ago, that a 318/360 Performer intake with a simple port match to 360 intake port size and a one (1) inch open spacer worked almost as well as a Performer AG intake on a standard stroke 360 combo (400-450HP) to 6,000RPM. Almost... I have a 318/360 Performer intake on my 273 Commando mill in a '67 Barracuda 4-speed car. Works great in this application, better than the original low-rise cast iron 4BBL single-plane intake.

 

[TT5.9mag]

I remember reading in an old Mopar Muscle magazine some years ago, that a 318/360 Performer intake with a simple port match to 360 intake port size and a one (1) inch open spacer worked almost as well as a Performer AG intake on a standard stroke 360 combo (400-450HP) to 6,000RPM. Almost... I have a 318/360 Performer intake on my 273 Commando mill in a '67 Barracuda 4-speed car. Works great in this application, better than the original low-rise cast iron 4BBL single-plane intake.

It would be great if you could find that article and post it.

 

[alpha13]

it running out of huff at 5K was probably the combination of parts: the 600, the cam and the manifold would all be done about then.

the new manifold and carb will allow you to stretch it's legs a little more-- at least until valve float-- but whether you actually make any more power would be hard to quantify without some type of testing.

I agree, that is why I wanted to "open it up" a little with the slightly bigger cam, carb, and manifold. It has Comp 901 springs. I am hoping to make a few more up top also. Revving out to 6k I think will help with my wide split 3 speed manual. Its an A230 so it winds up quick in first but then the shift into second drops the RPM a few hundred farther than I would like. I'm sure AJ could do the math. I am going by feel. with my current combination the torque is good but I just feel it has more left at the top. It's easy to wind it out with the manual transmission. So yes, I would have to do some real scientific testing but all I have is my butt dyno haha.

 

[67FormulaS_273HiPo_4spd]

It would be great if you could find that article and post it.

I'll look through the stash of magazines at home...

 

[junkyardhero]

I agree, that is why I wanted to "open it up" a little with the slightly bigger cam, carb, and manifold. It has Comp 901 springs. I am hoping to make a few more up top also. Revving out to 6k I think will help with my wide split 3 speed manual. Its an A230 so it winds up quick in first but then the shift into second drops the RPM a few hundred farther than I would like. I'm sure AJ could do the math. I am going by feel. with my current combination the torque is good but I just feel it has more left at the top. It's easy to wind it out with the manual transmission. So yes, I would have to do some real scientific testing but all I have is my butt dyno haha.

the 3spd is a real mood killer, that gap has bested many a man (myself included). go searching for more power up town and wind up sucking the bottom end out and all of a sudden that 1-2 shift leaves you flat footed at the other side of a wide intersection.

 

[PRH]

When I was a punk in HS with my rusty 70 Challenger 318/3speed………I thought it had plenty of power.
All stock except for dual exhaust with blown out glass packs……blat city!!
(Come to think of it, there were several 3 speed cars around at that time.
71 Challenger 318, 71 Demon 318, another 70 Challenger 318, and a 340 Duster)

I rebuilt a 340 in the mid-80’s that went into a 79 LRE truck.
I used a Performer on it, and I thought it was fine.

20-odd years later it ingested an air cleaner stud and needed some repairs.
The cam wasn’t nice enough to put back in so it got a Comp 268H……..and a trip to the dyno.
Made like 375tq and 345hp with a 650 Holley and 1-5/8” headers.

Still turned out to be a nice running combo in the truck.

 

[alpha13]

the 3spd is a real mood killer, that gap has bested many a man (myself included). go searching for more power up town and wind up sucking the bottom end out and all of a sudden that 1-2 shift leaves you flat footed at the other side of a wide intersection.

Yeah the A230 3 speed wasn't all that great. Good enough and basically indestructible, however the 1-2 shift wasn't great. 2nd gear pulls were pretty good. I didn't do alot of 1st gear driving anyway so it wasn't all that bad. That first gear though worked well enough for a highway gear and tall tire on take off. Basically what it was meant for. I did have a 727 behind it with the same combo in a 3800 pound truck and it got around pretty good. I understand worrying about the bottom end giving up a little torque. That's possible, I guess I'll find out later haha.

 

[alpha13]

When I was a punk in HS with my rusty 70 Challenger 318/3speed………I thought it had plenty of power.
All stock except for dual exhaust with blown out glass packs……blat city!!
(Come to think of it, there were several 3 speed cars around at that time.
71 Challenger 318, 71 Demon 318, another 70 Challenger 318, and a 340 Duster)

I rebuilt a 340 in the mid-80’s that went into a 79 LRE truck.
I used a Performer on it, and I thought it was fine.

20-odd years later it ingested an air cleaner stud and needed some repairs.
The cam wasn’t nice enough to put back in so it got a Comp 268H……..and a trip to the dyno.
Made like 375tq and 345hp with a 650 Holley and 1-5/8” headers.

Still turned out to be a nice running combo in the truck.

So that cam, was it the HE268 or the XE268. I'm not sure when the XE line became available. The two cams get tossed around with the same 268 without specifics.

 

[PRH]

The 268H…..number 20-212-2

The original cam was actually a Crower, which was a bit too big.
Since it was showing it’s age, it presented an opportunity to try something else.

On the dyno, an XE268 would have likely put up a bigger Hp number, but I’ve found the XE’s can be noisy sometimes, and I didn’t want to deal with that.

 

[toolmanmike]

On the dyno, an XE268 would have likely put up a bigger Hp number, but I’ve found the XE’s can be noisy sometimes, and I didn’t want to deal with that.

Fast ramps?

 

[Illahe]

The 268H…..number 20-212-2

The original cam was actually a Crower, which was a bit too big.
Since it was showing it’s age, it presented an opportunity to try something else.

On the dyno, an XE268 would have likely put up a bigger Hp number, but I’ve found the XE’s can be noisy sometimes, and I didn’t want to deal with that.

Is the noise relative to the lifter quality?

FWIW Ken @ Oregon Cam has the XE lobes patterns in his library. Look up comp$ pattern and then scan the master list you'll see them.

Camshaft Specifications

 

[PRH]

I’m sure the lifter bleed down rate comes into play, but the XE noise is well documented……..from long before there were many concerns with lifter quality.

 

[alpha13]

The 268H…..number 20-212-2

The original cam was actually a Crower, which was a bit too big.
Since it was showing it’s age, it presented an opportunity to try something else.

On the dyno, an XE268 would have likely put up a bigger Hp number, but I’ve found the XE’s can be noisy sometimes, and I didn’t want to deal with that.

Yeah absolutely. That has also been my concern about going to the XE line of cams is because of the valvetrain noise and stress. I dont know of any long term issues though. That would be my concern on a more daily driver sort of vehicle. I have the HE268. It ran well in a 360 the power was fairly good. Not alot to complain about. I might just stick with that cam the more I read this thread.

 

[crackedback]

Yeah absolutely. That has also been my concern about going to the XE line of cams is because of the valvetrain noise and stress. I dont know of any long term issues though. That would be my concern on a more daily driver sort of vehicle. I have the HE268. It ran well in a 360 the power was fairly good. Not alot to complain about. I might just stick with that cam the more I read this thread.

The voodoo cams from Lunati were more aggressive from what I recall and not noisy like the comp XE stuff. Lobe shape must be the answer.

I've used a bunch of comp XE stuff over the years

 

[Bewy]

Not all XE cams were noisy. Why was that? I believe it is valve springs. Stronger springs were recommended. They would bleed down the lifter faster & cause noise. Couple this with different lifter brands, rocker ratio etc, & you can see why some might be noisy, others not noisy.