Stroker specific cams?

-
I'm not getting into proprietary parts just for the sake of more power. ??
everything you are doing is proprietary
not talking about power the way most on this board do- i'm looking for best torque= best area under the curve with that 6000 rpm cap
Use the Oe rollers
I'd still use a jones cam much shorter seat to seat with more at .200
As far as the rockers, B3GREAT CHoice do what b3 says about adjusters and pushrods
might as well go to the most ratio you can get and shorten the cam seat to seat
you are not going to be able to get to the higher lifts shown in your report
so you need to get as much as you can for as long as you can given seat to seat

discussion been going on a long time
Mopar stroker cam selection? Please help! - Don Terrill’s Speed-Talk
my kind of build
 
Last edited:
Yeah, I'm not getting the proprietary lifter thing either.

I won't lie when I say I'm not sure what's out there for a HR lifter any more, as I won't use them. Ever. I'm not sure Mike Jones has an IR roller lobe for a HR lifter, because how in the world would the hydraulics handle that?

BTW, the ONLY IR lobe roller cam I'd buy is from Jones. PERIOD. He is the ONLY grinder I know who uses a 5 inch wheel (or some damn small size I know it ain't very big and IIRC that's what he uses) and you can't get a real IR lobe with a big grinding wheel.

There may be an issue with using a .750 wheel with an IR lobe but what little testing I did on IR lobe stuff was in 87-88ish with Crane lobes and that thing was a spring eating nightmare and RPM made it worse. So I'm not sure for the RPM range the OP is taking about would need an .810 wheel. I mean, I never like to use a small GM sized wheel (all the bigger you can get in a .842 lifter bore so they've been seeking GM junk to Chrysler guys for decades and not giving a crap) but with a HR lobe you may not need the bigger wheel.

Like I said, I'll never use a HR on anything again. I would use a HR lobe with solid lifters on it, but no HR lifters for me. Even at the OP's RPM range.
 
What Wyrmrider isn’t getting (as ususal) is the approach he wants to take without a huge fan far of a long list of items listed as he “Must do” in order to do it right in your eyes. It is over complicating things.

He just wants a simple plan of bolt in and go with a cam he picks.

(Also - OMG, a thread from when Harold was still alive. Nice, LMAO!)
 
you can use other lifters with Jones or other cams- He's eliminating the junk

Our Hydraulic Roller profiles are designed for the ultimate in street performance. Using our proprietary Inverse Radius technology, these profiles offer more area over the nose with less overlap, resulting in more horsepower and torque without sacrificing idle-smoothness and reliability. These profiles are for use with Hydraulic Roller tappets with a .750″ diameter wheel. These Hydraulic Roller profiles are for use in both street and racing applications, and require the use of our hydraulic roller lifters.

other lobes not in the online catalog
the "less overlap" is due to the shorter seat timing possibilities available with his IR

DO it fast do it wrong do it over
 
key thing true previous to the last decade and still true today

The Mopar VooDoos are true Chrysler profiles, designed for the .904" tappets.
That 213/.454" profile is about 5 or 6 degrees fatter at .200 than the Chevrolet one.

UDHarold


similar differences between flat flank and IR rollers
 
key thing true previous to the last decade and still true today

The Mopar VooDoos are true Chrysler profiles, designed for the .904" tappets.
That 213/.454" profile is about 5 or 6 degrees fatter at .200 than the Chevrolet one.

UDHarold

similar differences between flat flank and IR rollers

Just getting back to see this, I thought actually working on my car today would be a little more productive. Anyway, if what you are saying about the Voodoo cam is still correct, why wouldn't I just buy one of those and be done with it? There is a point where 10-15 more horsepower does not mean anything to me. I do appreciate to effort and information though.
 
Because Wyrmrider is right and that makes you wrong and you’ll be doing it over and over again because you have no idea what your doing because it isn’t done his way which is the allllllmighty right way and the only way!

Haven’t you been paying attention????
LMAO!!!!!
Just getting back to see this, I thought actually working on my car today would be a little more productive. Anyway, if what you are saying about the Voodoo cam is still correct, why wouldn't I just buy one of those and be done with it? There is a point where 10-15 more horsepower does not mean anything to me. I do appreciate to effort and information though.
 
For you it's not the additional hp
it's being able to run one size shorter cam and still have a little more hp while really picking of the get away experience
 
Just getting back to see this, I thought actually working on my car today would be a little more productive. Anyway, if what you are saying about the Voodoo cam is still correct, why wouldn't I just buy one of those and be done with it? There is a point where 10-15 more horsepower does not mean anything to me. I do appreciate to effort and information though.


I wouldn't care so much about the power. I wouldn't overlook it either.

What I would care about is idle quality, power under the curve, how clean the engine is at idle and things like that. The added power would be a bonus.

Like I've said many times before, I'm running 255 at .050 on 340 inches and it will idle clean at 750 RPM. I don't let it idle that slow because it is a fast ramp (dang close to a Comp MM lobe) and a slow idle speed doesn't get as much lube on the cam and the slow idle speed makes the lifter turn slower.

If you consider things like that, you can use a lobe like that on the street and have it live. If you need an idle speed that slow, then maybe that lobe isn't for you (and I'm not suggesting you'd use that same lobe, but maybe a lobe that is for a .904 lifter and you'd still have some safety margin and not be living on the edge).

My idle speed is 1000 and it's not uncomfortable.

I say this just to point out its not always about power (but everyone knows I HATE leaving power on the table) but it's about other things that affect driveability and tuning.
 
`Following up on UDHarolds observation that the Mopar series gives more duration (flow) at .200 and my observation that I shorter seat may be utilized on builds that do not have compression maxed out
Lunati 260 260/260 210/210 441"/.441" typical of universal grinds
one size shorter seat Voodoo but more at .050 and more lift
60401 256/262 213/220 .454'/.475"
two sizes shorter seat Voodoo still more lift this is still a fatter lobe than the universal
60400 250/256@ seat 208/[email protected] .454"/.454" valve lift,
but would build more cylinder pressure- would close the intake about 5 degrees earlier than the universal

As has been said you could use a 260 voodoo and get more horsepower
but this version of optimization gives a fatter torque curve
the 60400 and 60401 Voodoos were selected by Harold and his designs

You can do the same drill with IR vs Flat flank rollers
 
OK Hyd rollers
Lets assume that careful analysis indicates that a 270 @ .006 duration is optimal
I'm going to pick the lobe- the more radical may not be street, they may take more and more often spring changes

First 3 Ultrdyne lobes
Ultradyne UD Harold Lobes 1.5 rocker
HR5 270 206 111 0.401
HR27 271 217 138 0.516
HR23 272 218 141 0.530

Then 4 bullet lobes
Bullet lobes lobe
HR270/330 270 218 138 .3300 .000 CTS
HR270/313 270 218 132 .3130 .000 CRA
HR270/3175 270 212 130 .3175 .000 CTA
HR270/2775 270 214 119 .2775 .000 CRA

and some Inverse radius lobes- 3 268 lobes to compare with the flat flank 270 lobes if you wanted more Horsepower and then one size shorter seat and two sizes shorter seat
ERH Series
268 222 143 .340 .510
264 218 149 .340 .510
260 211 126 .316 .474


HR series

268 218 136 .325 .487
268 210 126 .312 .469
264 212 128 .310 .465
260 210 132 .313 .469
260 208 128 .327 .490

note how well the .200 can hold up with the shorter seat durations
If you get a custom cam from anyone be sure to get the optimum radicaliness for your use
do not buy from the bottom of the catalog- but you already have that figured out
 
Last edited:
what say you AJ
I like your thinking
It took me a few seconds to figure out your data , but I get it.

What I like about this kindof stuff is that a guy can better match the power requirement to the idle quality and the Scr can be sacrificed in favor of extraction..... cuz the pressure can be better manipulated with the earlier Ica. This makes for a more enjoyable streeter with better manners and the potential for better fuel economy.
The fuel-economy thing is gonna get more important into the future as the cost of gasoline keeps going up.

Consider the old 292/292/114Mopar cam, in at 110 the numbers look like;
292/292/114+4/64 overlap(56 effective)/104 compression,96 extraction
With just 96* extraction, this cam leaves a lot of energy in the exhaust, instead of putting it into the driveshaft. Plus to get any pressure from the measly 104 compression degrees, the Scr has to be punched up as high as possible, which for a streeter with iron heads, is not nearly enough, so even less energy is being put into the crank, in the name of using pumpgas.
And for what? hyup the 248* @.050, that gives you a wicked idle..... with a soft bottom end that you gotta bandaid up with a big TC and big rear gears and while that takes the fun factor to a new level,it takes the street right out of the streeter.
And the worst part is that the intake valve doesn't actually close at the mathematically derived 76* Ica, nor the exhaust at the mathematically derived numbers. So what you get is a lousy street engine at the typically chosen 9.5 Scr, that comes with the added expense of TC and gears and rotten hiway economy. What a mess.
But if a guy could get a cam with the same .200 duration, with a way smaller .008 number, and a tightened up for street LSA, that would be the cat's meow.
Looking at your examples of similarly advertised cams, I see .200 durations varying from a low of 111, to a high of 149 degrees. That is a flipping huge range.

I took the liberty of re-arranging your data into two groups of similar durations at .050 to see how this would wash out, here it is;
Group I ......................................... Group II
268/222-143 ...............................270/214-119
264/218-149 .............................272/212-130
272/218-141 ............................... 264/212-128
270/218-138 ................................260/211-126
268/218-136 ..............................260/210-132
270/217-138 ................................268/210-126
....................................................260/208-128

Lets look at Group I.
Overlooking that the advertised numbers might not all sync from the same base point (for this discussion it doesn't matter);
Look at the .050 numbers; a range of 217 to 222 or very close to a difference of one cam size
Next; the .200 numbers; a range from 136 to 149, or about 2 cam sizes!
Finally, the Advertiseds range from 264 to 272, also about one cam size.
So if yur shopping by .050s, yur gonna run into a chitload of WTH, unless you got yur eyes peeled on the .200s
And I gotta wonder; How many times, have the "tiny" 264/218-149 and the 260/210-132 been overlooked .....Get a load of this baby;264/218-149. In it's group it is the smallest at advertised and, just 1* from the smallest at .050 yet, nearly a full cam size bigger at .200, than the next nearest listed!
Makes me want to rip the front of my engine off and measure my old Hughes HE3037AL; maybe it really is a hi-intensity........ that might explain my 93 mph Eighth.
But one thing that might throw a monkey wrench into the mix for some guys, is the idle rumble; like of the old factory 340 cam. Some guys just gotta have that. Not me. I'd give it up in a heartbeat for a streetable "hi-intensity" cam.

With what you have shown us now, we need a Group III with 228 to [email protected].....
cuz honestly, I had a
270/276/110 that was 223/[email protected], and I currently have a
276/286/110 that is 230/[email protected]; both very streetable.
But lessee, if I could get 10 to 15 more psi from a similar .200 spec cam; I almost wouldn't care about any other spec,lol. And I absolutely don't care about a loss of idle lope. But I could sure use some more extraction degrees; this 230 cam sux gas real good..
Cuz that's one of the things I'm seeing here; one cam size, per the advertised spec, for my engine is is about 9psi pressure. So if I retard, the faster to .200 new cam, to maintain the 180 psi, then I could trade away some compression degrees, to get some more extraction degrees.
Here's how that might work out; first the current combo, then the new one, then compare to the 292Mopar. (#4 is transferred in from further in the conversation)
1)276/286/110+4/61overlap(58Effective)/116compression/103 extraction/Ica 64/[email protected]/unknown .200
2)268/272/106+1/58overlap(58Effective)/121compression/117 extraction/Ica 59/don't [email protected]/ same .200 as #1
3)292/292/114+4/64overlap(56Effective)/104 compression/ 96 extraction/Ica 76*/ [email protected]/unknown .200
4)272/278/108+1/59overlap(58Effective)/117compression/112 extraction/Ica 63/~234or [email protected]/more .200/and back to 180psi
Getaload of that 117*extraction. I bet I can get that into or near 30 mpg in point to point. Pounds the crap outta 103*.Ica moved from 64* to 59* so a higher-vacuum, cleaner-idle, as well. And good news! with the same Scr before and after, the extra 5 degrees of compression should be good for 6 more psi. What the heck am I gonna do with 186 psi. The car already has too much..I know, I'll increase the Intake duration and trade away some pressure for some top-end rush! Lessee; how about
272/278/108+1/59 overlap(58E)/117comp/112extr/Ica63/[email protected] or more/more .200/back to 180psi; there yago; (Added it to the list.)
Or maybe I'll swap out the 3.55s for 3.23s.... naw!
But wait, I could give up a few more psi; lessee, suppose I hadn't decked my block and left the pistons .007 in the holes...... oh if I had only had these options in 1998 when I was dreaming. Oh wait, I couldda built one of my 340s, instead of a 360 with a gas-swilling 292cam...............
Nothing but wins for me.
Am I on track?
Wyrmrider; thanks for enduring the insults, and bringing it!
 
Last edited:
Evidently not !!! :rofl:

I cant seem to PM you but try it to PM me later. I do work for Crower but I am very busy most of the time so getting a hold of me at work is hard. PM me here so I can do it while I have a frosty beverage and my feet up at home.
 
Thanks Aj
I would have sorted by .200 as .050 is mostly only good for degreeing in a cam (that's :)
and as I said the bigger .200's may or may not be street friendly
I looks at the spring requirements once I get a sort list of candidates with the seat duration the customer required (your kind of analysis is helpful)
and I have no Idea if 270 is the magic number for Dr.s build- just an example-I'd have to re-read the thread
and
cam makes more difference than one size more rocker ratio- 1.5-1.6 changing rockers is expensive when you add in B3's fine and( imho necessary) kits now if I could go from 1.5 to 1.8...
Well I run 1.75 Earson iron rockers on my 440...
Iron rockers work for most poster's on this boards builds

all the cams I showed were .006 advertised, we could have also looked at Comp, Lunati, Howards and other .006 grinders and still have apples to apples

Dart19666 chimed in- will be interesting to hear what he has to add

always better to have a Mopar enthuiast contributing
Another thing- it is just as easy to build a more mopar optimized combo
Aj- you know what it's like to stick a 340 cam or a 204-214 cam in a low compression Mopar
share the word
 
260 @.006 class
bhr 260 207 123 .300 .450 Howard BHR StandardRampHydraulicRoller
bhr 262 209 127 .310 .465 Howard BHR StandardRampHydraulicRoller
EHR 260 211 126 .316 .474 Jones Inverse Radius
HR 260 208 128 .327 .490 Jones Inverse Radius
HR 260 210 132 .313 .469 Jones Inverse Radius
BHR 266 213 133 .323 .485 Howard BHR StandardRampHydraulicRoller


.006 is comparable to Ultradyne and Bullet above
Howard and Bullet have shorter lobes as necessary
I try and look at the .200 and not chase the last few thou of lift
which is more of a "mine is bigger than yours"
and may require more spring

270 @.006 class
bhr 268 215 132 .313 .470 Howard BHR StandardRampHydraulicRoller
bhr 268 215 132 .333 .500 Howard BHR StandardRampHydraulicRoller
bhr 270 217 133 .310 .465 Howard BHR StandardRampHydraulicRoller
bhr 270 217 136 .323 .485 Howard BHR StandardRampHydraulicRoller
bhr 270 217 137 .330 .495 Howard BHR StandardRampHydraulicRoller

HR 268 210 126 .312 .469 Jones Inverse Radius
HR 268 218 136 .325 .487 Jones Inverse Radius
ERH 268 222 143 .340 .510 Jones Inverse Radius

AHR 269 219 143 .353 .5294 Howard AHR AggresiveRampHydraulicRoller

no one is suggesting an aggressive ramp for a heavy valve conservative street build
At least Howard breaks out their agrgessive ramp series
 
Aj- you know what it's like to stick a 340 cam or a 204-214 cam in a low compression Mopar
share the word
Already have several times and been shot down for it.

I wouldn't be scared of an aggressive lobe, on account of the fun factor to me is worth it. I'd be willing to change cams every winter, no problem.But I'd invest in some specialty reusable solid lifters,lol. And I'd be willing to readjust my rev-limiter if I had to.
But to tell the truth, that little Hughes HE2430Al was a hoot, 270/276/110/(223 and [email protected]), and my engine combo liked it at straight up. I guess it was pretty tame, on account of it happily went 7200. It liked everything I threw at it. It wasn't trackfast,(12.9@106) but it was the most fun combo I ever had.
 
Last edited:
Already have several times and been shot down for it.

I wouldn't be scared of an aggressive lobe, on account of the fun factor to me is worth it. I'd be willing to change cams every winter, no problem.But I'd invest in some specialty reusable solid lifters,lol.
Been doing this for years. It was the inky way to learn. Get it, install it, drive it.
Schubach (sp?) lifters?
Those Composite solid lifters. Are those the ones you’re thinking about?
 
You should put some of these (wormrider and aj?) On mute as they are full of crap and
very little else. Get with folks that do this to build real engines that race for more than internet speculation.


Rather than say something snotty why not post up where they are wrong? You could point out their "speculation" and correct their errors.

That would be the adult thing to do.

FWIW, I know many engine builders who can't degree a cam or even use a timing light. Just because you build something and get paid for it doesn't mean you know your *** from a connecting rod.
 
Last edited:
Perhaps an internship at Lunati or a 20 mile trip to Bullet
or just call comp tech support at random
 
So I just got done reading 8 pages of this thread wondering what was going to be the final outcome and here I am at a dead end that is 7 months old.
@DrEamer , My build is almost identical to yours, and it sounds like my goals are very similar (like what @nm9stheham described). I filled a request to Hughes, got a short answer, and to Lunati, but so far crickets. Have you made a final choice? Running anything yet?
 
-
Back
Top