Summit Cam Recommendation

-

DusterDaddy

sledgehammer mechanic
FABO Gold Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2011
Messages
2,567
Reaction score
1,786
Location
Holmdel, NJ
My son is doing a very budget conscious 318 for his 74 Swinger.
He just bought a 73 318 with a new rings, bearings, freeze plugs.

We have a friend who is selling a set of 302 heads an Eddy 650 carb and Weiand ( I think Speed Warrior ) intake that we can get for a nice price.

Planning on running 360 exhaust manifolds and the Mopar stock highstall converter in the 904 with a shift kit.

Looking for recommendations for Summit Racing branded cams due to hearing they offer good value for price.

Thanks!

ateen.jpg
 
My son is doing a very budget conscious 318 for his 74 Swinger.
He just bought a 73 318 with a new rings, bearings, freeze plugs.

We have a friend who is selling a set of 302 heads an Eddy 650 carb and Weiand ( I think Speed Warrior ) intake that we can get for a nice price.

Planning on running 360 exhaust manifolds and the Mopar stock highstall converter in the 904 with a shift kit.

Looking for recommendations for Summit Racing branded cams due to hearing they offer good value for price.

Thanks!

View attachment 1715164092
#sum k6900 or sum k6901 cam + lifter kit $117.97
 
SUM-K6901 is a good one. Have used several in 318 builds. Put one very similar though it came from Jegs in my 273 Valiant.
 
The split pattern is supposed to be better with manifolds, the "straight" pattern best with headers.
 
From what I have seen, Summit cams have fairly slow clearance ramps. Meaning they perhaps need a bit more compression than another brands same size cam. And that loss of compression will cost you money at the pumps every time you fill up.
I have a 1973 low-compression engine, and there is no way I would put much of a cam in it........ but it doesn't have 302 heads on it.lol.
Perhaps it would be prudent to work backwards from a measured compression ratio, and a known TC stall, and known rear gears
 
I know you can do the math , but that looks like 74 degree ramps, compared to 44/46 on a Comp/Hughes/most everybody else,etc
That's about 15* more at each end!
On the Wallace , that is worth about 21psi and very substantial difference in low-rpm torque/power, not to mention the potential loss in fuel economy due to the about 18* less power-extraction.
I know the 4.10s are gonna make up most of that low-rpm torque loss, but do you realize that your compression plus power duration (209*) is about the same as the 292/292/108 cam (212*)? And we know how poor the fuel economy is with that cam.
I also know that once your revs are up around 2000/2200, that part of the cam don't account for much anymore, but that short extraction is still gonna be a bit of a problem. I'm thinking 6000 miles with a faster cam will pay for the difference in fuel savings alone, if the shorter ramped cam gets just 10% better fuel economy, due to the nearly 20% better cylinder pressure..
Unless maybe the advertised duration is at some other tappet lift than .006, where most every body else measures from. Summit doesn't say. But even if the measured from .002, I can't see more than 2 to 4* per end difference from .002 to .006, so IMO in an 8/1 Scr DD, that cam is trouble.

I wonder if the factory 360-2bbl cam wouldn't be a better selection. You must have a good used one kicking around with a little life left in it, Hey? Hyup it must be close to 204/214(.050) without the long ramp penalty. I think it was advertised at 252/260/112.. I put one of those into a low-C teener with a 2800TC and 3.23s, and she boogied pretty good, even without headers. I could probably scare one up around here but with shipping and border crossing and new lifters down there,even if I gave it to you,it would probably be more than new ,lol.
 
Either one is fine. I put 302 heads (65cc) on a 67 318, .050 in the hole pistons, 6900 cam and it runs great.
 
Call Howard's....not my first choice but they have a large selection of lobes that don't show up online and they may have one that fills the bill.
 
Call Howard's....not my first choice but they have a large selection of lobes that don't show up online and they may have one that fills the bill.
The 204 /214 @ .050 fifty cam ,works very well in low compression engine.. (K6900 kit..) it smogged in a 8.8 to one Ford 302.. ..
I would pay attention more to accelerator pump, and ignition timng (12-16 initial,32 -34 total at 2800 -3000.
 
Am I the only one who hears Charlie Brown's teacher talking when everyone discusses cams?
I really need to learn more about cams......

Jeff
 
Either one is fine. I put 302 heads (65cc) on a 67 318, .050 in the hole pistons, 6900 cam and it runs great.

'67 318 has advertised 9.2:1 comp versus the 8.x of the 1970- mid 80's 318.

Those 302 heads were probably also off of a 9.2:1 mid 80's- '91 318.

Did you measure/calculate your actual ratio?

Very curious.

Also curious about how it affected MPG.
 
I have the Summit K50052 cam in my 318. When i bought it (2 years ago??) it was 109.00 with lifters delivered to my door, now I see it's 157.00. '76 motor with 120,*** miles on 42 year old factory assembled short block. I home ported the heads for 20 bucks and lapped the valves. Threw on a cast intake (TQ style) and pieced together a 670 street avenger holley. I spent a total of 497 bucks with new timing chain, gaskets, head work, valve springs, new exhaust valves, cam kit, carb & intake. No headers, 2.76 gears, stock converter, and it runs better than a factory '73 340 Duster with 3.21 gears.

You can have a ton of fun with a 318 on an extreme low dollar budget. :)
 
I have the Summit K50052 cam in my 318. When i bought it (2 years ago??) it was 109.00 with lifters delivered to my door, now I see it's 157.00. '76 motor with 120,*** miles on 42 year old factory assembled short block. I home ported the heads for 20 bucks and lapped the valves. Threw on a cast intake (TQ style) and pieced together a 670 street avenger holley. I spent a total of 497 bucks with new timing chain, gaskets, head work, valve springs, new exhaust valves, cam kit, carb & intake. No headers, 2.76 gears, stock converter, and it runs better than a factory '73 340 Duster with 3.21 gears.

You can have a ton of fun with a 318 on an extreme low dollar budget. :)
Thanks! You're preaching to the choir!
FullSizeRender.jpg
 
How about the Comp XE 256?

IIRC the literature says it can actually improve MPG

...and it is also a .04-ish lift improvement over the stock .400, like the summit cams.
 
Keep in mind that at 90* ABDC the piston is half away up the bore, and moving at about maximum speed, preparing to slow down and stop when it approaches TDC again. The 6900 has a closing point at about 70*. That is a very long time after BDC, and well suited to a high rpm engine.
Calculated at .050, the ICA is 34*ABDC
So from 34 after to 70 after, At idle, what is the piston doing? You guessed it pushing the intake charge back up the cylinder, past the slightly open intake valve, and up into the intake manifold (reducing the idle vacuum),until the piston is nearly half way up the bore and approaching it's maximum speed. Remember the piston had to stop at the bottom, turn around and is now heading back up to the top. This works well in a higher rpm engine. Not so much in a DD.
But then a 4.10 equipped A-body, doesn't much sound like a DD.
But then again, with a same 204cam with faster ramps, it wouldn't need the 4.10s.
On the flip side, with a 70* ICA, you could have a fast-rate cam in there about one or perhaps two sizes bigger, with little or no loss in bottom end performance, and pick up maybe 15/20 hp at peak.

To be fair, the long intake period begins to work in the 318s favor, some time after about 2200 rpm,whenever the intake vacuum peaks. So if you never run at an rpm lower than that, then the design is ramming AF charge in as may be normal on a 204 cam.
But do yourself a favor; take your car for a ride around town in your typical driving style, and see how much time your tach spends above 2200 versus how much time below. Remember all the time below 2200, the cam is operating in an in-efficient manner, messing up the AFR, costing you money at the pump; and the closer to idle, the worse it is.
Peak efficiency might not occur until after 3400, maybe 3600. This is where a 4.10 will make the difference. First it gets you up past 2200 very early,about 17 mph. Secondly, 32mph in second gear is about 2500 rpm, and 60 in third could be 3060 at zero-slip.
But with say 2.76s,then 2200 might not occur until about 25mph, if you hold it in first. If you let it shift automatically,and loafing,it will already be in third gear doing say 860 rpm (zero-slip).
Ok but, you say you have 3.55s. Aha! Then 2200 might occur at 19mph if you hold it in gear. Letting it shift automatically, the Rs might be closer to, say 860rpm, again zero slip.
But you say; how is 860=860 possible, with both gears? hang on; it occurs 28% sooner with the 3.55s, 19 mph versus 25.
Now shifting into second at say 2500, the Rs will fall to 1500 loafing (zero-slip) to whatever your stall speed is, if harder into it. So again, below 2200. In fact; loafing, the Rs in second might not get to 2200 again until 35 mph in first @3730rpm.
So, like I say, take it for a normal ride and judge for yourself.

Otherwise; a 204 cam in a 9.2 318 is a lot of fun. I'd just rather have one with waaay faster ramps. In a nominal 8.0, it just wants more gear or more stall or both,lol, cuz the cylinder pressure is way down.
 
Last edited:
Put that 204 214 cam in my friend 4x4 with perfomer intake and eddy 600 had more power everywhere even off idle. Can spin the rear tire now.
 
Keep in mind, slow ramps=reliability and ease on the valve train. No noisy ticking from the rockers and pushrods being beat to death trying to open the valves faster than any other cam on the planet. There are compromises in everything. Were I building something to drive everyday, no way in hell would I put some kinda lightning fast rate of lift cam in it. I think the Summit cams will do just fine.

From those two, pick the 6900 if you want a smooth stock idle and the 6901 if you want a little bit of a bump. I've run both in projects for other people and they have plenty of bottom end torque. Smiles per gallon as our friend waggin would say.
 
Call comp cams and they will take all your info. and they will recommend a cam.
 
'67 318 has advertised 9.2:1 comp versus the 8.x of the 1970- mid 80's 318.

Those 302 heads were probably also off of a 9.2:1 mid 80's- '91 318.

Did you measure/calculate your actual ratio?

Very curious.

Also curious about how it affected MPG.
Stock bore, 4 small valve relief flat top .050 down, Mr G thin head gasket, just under 9:1 runs 87 piss water. 18 mpg 3.31 gear 70mph, 74 duster 4 speed OD, 215/70/14 tire, Eddy 600 carb OOTB.
 
-
Back
Top