Thoughts on cam?

-
Saetun

Saetun

Sinister Swinger
Joined
Nov 7, 2010
Messages
1,467
Reaction score
86
Location
Pittsburg, CA
I have been putting together a few pieces to get the old 318 moving a lil better. currently have performer intake with holley 600 and was looking to match a cam down the road to it. Many have recommended the 340 cam and I like the idea. I came across a very decent deal for this crane cam which seems comparable. Before i make a bad purchase I wanted to get some opinions. My end goal is about 300 hp for a weekend spirited driving. other than the above bolt ons the only other plans I have include headers & a little head porting. I appreciate your opinions.

Crane cams # 150052

http://www.summitracing.com/parts/CRN-150052/
 
Thx Kim...

Isn't the duration on MP 340 cam 268/276? I'm sorry I'm new to speccing cams.
 
My cousin had that exact cam in his 72 dart,all stock rebuilt 318 .030 (8.5 compression,no head porting)performer intake,600 holley headers and 3.23s.He had a 2k stall,904 trans w/mild kit and recurved stock points dist.,the cam sounded great and ran great,he got 12 mpg and ran 14.70 at 95 mph with stock tires and a terrible 2.10 60 ft.I think its a great cam if your combo matches,not real radical but a good lope and great throttle response.Heres his engine.
 

Attachments

  • P6240143.jpg
    111.6 KB · Views: 143
Where should my stall speed be for a cam like like this & would that also hold true for the MP 340 cam? Also, what is the stock stall on the 904?

Specs looked really close to the 340 cam specs & if its similar performance I think I'd be pleased. Plus I cant beat the price with a bat. But again, if its a terrible fit without upgrading my converter I may just let it go. Thx again. I'm trying hard to reduce my learning curve.
 
Saetun said:
Thx Kim...

Isn't the duration on MP 340 cam 268/276? I'm sorry I'm new to speccing cams.
Click to expand...

I agree with oldkimmer. that Crane grind is not even close in comparison. Don't see how you could say that. Look at the lobe separation. The 340 cam has 114* lobe separation VS the Crane's 110*. Big difference. Want a good Crane grind? Here:

http://www.summitracing.com/parts/CRN-693802/

Either that or use the 340 cam. It's a good one.
 
StrokerScamp said:
I agree with oldkimmer. that Crane grind is not even close in comparison. Don't see how you could say that. Look at the lobe separation. The 340 cam has 114* lobe separation VS the Crane's 110*. Big difference. Want a good Crane grind? Here:

http://www.summitracing.com/parts/CRN-693802/

Either that or use the 340 cam. It's a good one.
Click to expand...


The book I could write with all my mistakes would be epic. I'm glad I can get honest feedback from you guys. Thank you.
 
You can do a lot with lobe separation. I prefer a wide one with low compression because rather than a peaky engine you have an engine with a very wide and flat torque curve and more bottom end than with a tight lobe separation. You can also get by with much more duration @.050" with wide lobe separation and still have good idle and manifold vacuum to run accessories. Chrysler knew this. That's why all their hot camshafts were ground with wide lobe separations. They work best in a street car with 9.1 or lower compression.
 
I like that Crane myself. Add a little convertor (like the factory 340 stall) and it will rip. I had the same one in my '74 318 in an Ebody stick, 3.23 gears. I even passed emissions twice with it back when we had to.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top