Solid Roller Cam in a LA 360 and Edelbrock RPM Heads

-
A

AR_Tech

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 4, 2012
Messages
55
Reaction score
9
Location
America
I am looking at upgrading my engine for a little more power over a broader powerband. I am having a hard time time finding information on roller cams for 360 builds. It appears that most people just go with a hydraulic cam, but after entering information into camquest it looks like a solid roller would make 50 hp more than a hydraulic. I was told how a solid cam will act like it has 10° less duration than a hydraulic cam. What about a solid roller? With the 65cc heads, my new compression ratio is 10.39:1 with a .045" quench. I have 1.5 adjustable rocker arms. I have 3.23 gears with 245/45/17 tires (25.7", should be turning 2300-2400 rpm at 55), 2500 stall, low gear set 904, 3300 lbs Dart, RPM Airgap Intake, and 750 Double Pumper with proform main body. I currently have 2.02 J heads and the MP Performance solid cam 284/284, 241/241 @ .050, .528 Lift, .028/.032 Lash. With 3.91's and 26" QT Pros,the car ran a best of 7.79'. I am looking at these 4 cams. I don't really plan on going to the track regularly. I want a hot street car not a race car. The cams that I am looking at are below. The cams appear to be very similar to me besides the rpm range, but I figure that is just a generalization that they put on each cam. The Comp recommend spring 914-16 that is a 367 lb/in, and the Lunati recommend spring is a 550 lb/in spring. It seems like a big difference. I am thinking of using MRL Performance's Lifters unless swayed otherwise. I am pretty sure these cams will idle fairly smooth, but I am a little concerned if I will be able to run 91 octane without pinging. Using a dynamic compression calculator for the cams, I get a range from 8.66:1 to 8.27:1.
Any suggestions?

Comp XR268R
268/274 Duration
230/236 @ .050
.552/.056 Lift
110° Lobe Seperation
106° Intake Centerline
.016/.018 Lash
2000-6000 RPM

Comp XR274R
274/280 Duration
236/242 @ .050
.564/.0570 Lift
110° Lobe Seperation
106° Intake Centerline
.016/.018 Lash
2200-6300 RPM

Lunati 40200730
261/267 Duration
231/237 @ .050
.555/.0566 Lift
110° Lobe Seperation
106° Intake Centerline
.016/.016 Lash
2400-6400 RPM

Lunati 40200731
267/273 Duration
237/243 @ .050
.566/.0578 Lift
110° Lobe Seperation
106° Intake Centerline
.016/.016 Lash
2500-6600 RPM
 
Wow! Well, I'd like to say all the choices are pretty good and will perform in the area your looking at pretty well. I myself like to run a cam that can take advantage of the heads flow abilty. If possible, lifting the valve until the head stalls. The duration separation of 6*'s isn't a whole lot. There would be a slight difference to notice.

Of all 4, I think the smaller 2 would be the ones I'd look at for the performance parameters you have set. I own a 4spd manual. In this car, I cam a little heavy as compared to a automatic car.
 
AR_Tech said:
II was told how a solid cam will act like it has 10° duration than a hydraulic cam.
Click to expand...

No idea who told you this, but that's exactly opposite of how it is. When comparing solids to hydraulics, it is the hydraulic that will "act" 10* larger with similar duration specs. Always been that way.
 
RustyRatRod, yeah that was a typo. I forgot the less. The real question is duration on a hydraulic=hydraulic roller and solid=solid roller?
 
All I have ever seen or heard is when comparing similar solids to hydraulics you need to choose a solid that's about 10* larger than the hydraulic to be about the same. Say a hydraulic has 250* @ .050 the solid would need 260* .050 to be similar. Does that make sense?
 
Looks like you already have a nice hot street car combo. What I see is 4 cams of similar duration to what you already have but more lift, can your heads handle more air? The title of your thread mentions Edelbrock heads but nothing about them in your write up, do you plan to switch? If you do go to an aluminum head the 10.4:1 will be no prob on 91 octane, and very close on steel heads. Might need a bit of timing taken out.

If it were mine I'd tear it right down and stroke that baby! :D:D
Best of luck which ever way you go.
 
IMO you should avoid a solid roller. They are expensive high maintenance things. Figure on spending $600+ for good lifters, $300+ for the cam, $500 range for good springs that will need checked and replaced every so often (same goes for the lifters). Other things to consider are cromemoly pushrods $200+ range. Light weight valve train components such as titanium retainers $200+, titanium valves $100+ each, I even put titanium locks in my roller motor.
To run a solid roller and get the most out of it with reliability corners can't be cut. The valve train needs to be absolutely stable. No flexing, no floating. Valve train instability with a roller = parts death.
Some will say you don't need all this expensive stuff if you run a softer lobe profile. I say whats the point of running a roller if you can get similar valve action out of a .904 solid flat tappet lobe with a 1.6 rocker arm.
 
skrews said:
IMO you should avoid a solid roller. They are expensive high maintenance things. Figure on spending $600+ for good lifters, $300+ for the cam, $500 range for good springs that will need checked and replaced every so often (same goes for the lifters). Other things to consider are cromemoly pushrods $200+ range. Light weight valve train components such as titanium retainers $200+, titanium valves $100+ each, I even put titanium locks in my roller motor.
To run a solid roller and get the most out of it with reliability corners can't be cut. The valve train needs to be absolutely stable. No flexing, no floating. Valve train instability with a roller = parts death.
Some will say you don't need all this expensive stuff if you run a softer lobe profile. I say whats the point of running a roller if you can get similar valve action out of a .904 solid flat tappet lobe with a 1.6 rocker arm.
Click to expand...
i hear that!flat tappet solid setups are pretty bulletproof.and a whole bunch less dollars...
 
skrews said:
IMO you should avoid a solid roller. They are expensive high maintenance things. Figure on spending $600+ for good lifters, $300+ for the cam, $500 range for good springs that will need checked and replaced every so often (same goes for the lifters). Other things to consider are cromemoly pushrods $200+ range. Light weight valve train components such as titanium retainers $200+, titanium valves $100+ each, I even put titanium locks in my roller motor.
To run a solid roller and get the most out of it with reliability corners can't be cut. The valve train needs to be absolutely stable. No flexing, no floating. Valve train instability with a roller = parts death.
Some will say you don't need all this expensive stuff if you run a softer lobe profile. I say whats the point of running a roller if you can get similar valve action out of a .904 solid flat tappet lobe with a 1.6 rocker arm.
Click to expand...

and definitely a big yes to what he said, not cheap to do it right!
 
I'm actually a little curious what Mike (MRL) has to say about the prospect of running a solid roller on the street. I even thought of running the smaller BB grind from Lunati in my 383...but, based on what you're saying, I would need about $2500 worth of extra parts-just in the heads-to run this, as per Lunati:

"Solid roller, lopey idle. Good high performance street cam with good mid range torque and horsepower..."

That's the description for the smaller of the two Lunati Voodoo rollers he mentions above.

Maybe I'm missing something.
 
This is why they make "street rollers". They have a much less aggressive ramp profile that will allow less stress on valve train parts and still give the advantage of running a solid roller. Every part doesn't have to be race bred to run on the street.
 
Skrews a d Rusty make good valid points to put on the scale and weigh out. IMO, you could save a lot of money with a standard solid cam and use 1.6 rockers for an effective and slightly radical set up with those heads. (Edelbrock heads)

Factor in the valve lash a d double check the coil bind on the heads. The right set up can produce mid 11 et's without really hitting the hammer hard on the build. If you start in with head porting on the Edelbrock's for more lift as well, you can run another second off the ET easy if your willing to do the work and search for it.
 
I don't understand comps spring recommendation....they recommend the 914-16 for the cam I have as well. I run their XR286R solid roller with 939-16 springs set up at 1.85". That gives 185 lbs on the seat and about 465 lbs open. Their spring recommendation is a little light for my comfort level....sounds more like a flat tappet spring.
 
RustyRatRod said:
This is why they make "street rollers". They have a much less aggressive ramp profile that will allow less stress on valve train parts and still give the advantage of running a solid roller. Every part doesn't have to be race bred to run on the street.
Click to expand...


This was precisely the reason I made the statement I did. The smaller of the two Voodoo cams the OP mentioned is the same grind, only for a small block. Besides Mopars arguably have the best setup for valvetrain stability from the factory...and I would venture to say the OP is already using something that could handle it since he's running the .528" MP solid grind.

I won't argue that dropping the extra green for a set of Ti retainers would assist on the high rpm stability, but springing for titanium valves for a 267* street roller cam? just seemed a little excessive for an engine that won't live in the 7K range.
 
txstang84 said:
This was precisely the reason I made the statement I did. The smaller of the two Voodoo cams the OP mentioned is the same grind, only for a small block. Besides Mopars arguably have the best setup for valvetrain stability from the factory...and I would venture to say the OP is already using something that could handle it since he's running the .528" MP solid grind.

I won't argue that dropping the extra green for a set of Ti retainers would assist on the high rpm stability, but springing for titanium valves for a 267* street roller cam? just seemed a little excessive for an engine that won't live in the 7K range.
Click to expand...

I agree. I think the Mopar valve train is better than some give it credit for.
 
for a little bit bigger cam just put 1.6 rockers on it and see what the performance gain will be before you spend the money for a good cam and springs. You can probably find a good used set too save some money. JMO
 
Thanks for all the advise. The reason I am buying edelbrock heads is my J heads cracked. I really don't want to take the chance of picking up junkyard heads to only find more cracks. Won't 1.6:1 rockers move my rpm range up also by increasing duration at 0.050? I was wanting something that might be more modern/efficient from a lower rpm range, due to the swap to 3.23's, to something around 6000-6500 rpm. I was hoping to find someone that has experience with the "smaller roller cams". The few engines builds that I have found are 4" stroker motors, so it is hard to compare the two builds. The closest I have seen are hydraulic roller builds like below. The results look pretty awesome.

http://www.forabodiesonly.com/mopar/showthread.php?t=241854
 
The increase in duration is minimal with no real effect on raising the rpm range.
 
Yeah I think the change is less than 2*. It's so minimal you'll never know it.
 
If you want something more modern and efficient, ditch the designed in the 70's MP .528 cam for a .904 lobe profile cam.
Bullet
Hughes
Comp
Lunati
All have good .904 profiles in hyd or solid. Personally I like bullet, they have the best tech and will get you the right cam.
 
I've recently been in contact with a tech representative at comp cams and he recommended lobes from their FL series of solid flat tappet range for a street/strip mopar

They are designed as full race for a ford .875" lifter but are acceptable for an aggressive street strip cam on a mopar .904" lifter.

They seem to be superior to a lot of solid roller camshafts in their catalogue.

Like skrews said, what's the point of going solid roller if you can get more for less $$ in a solid flat tappet grind?

you could put the $600-800 difference into porting those heads and REALLY fly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top