Quote:

---

go with #2, use comp #911 springs

---

You won't be sorry.

Quote:

---

I can't speak for the .050 duration, but cam #1 is pretty close to the non-HP 440 cam, which is comparable to a 383-2 cam back when I researched a cam for my 440.


FWIW, I read a BUNCH of 440 cam threads, then chose one of the conservative ones that was discussed. And it was the 60302. (Haven't installed it yet, though).

---

Quote:

---

I realize the specs on cam 1 (Lunati 60301) are similar to stock. supposedly it revs to 5500 w/ power though and the HP and torque curves are "better" than stock (haven't seen these myself anywhere).

To me this suggests that the less tangible aspects of the cam (beyond duration and valve lift) must be coming into play. Presumably this relates to the lobes assymetries, greater opening rates, etc... that have advanced a lot since the MOPAR cams were developed decades ago.

Don't know what that in fact is worth. Guess you would actually need to see the torque HP curves to know for sure or ET's pre and post.

Initially, was planning on #1 as Lunati recommended that one, but after seeing some of these posts am now leaning more towards the 60302. That's why i asked here although there are 1000 other "what cam" posts. When I asked Lunati why not the 60302 my desire to use the stamped unadjustable rockers seemed to be the clincher. from what I have heard here the stock stamped rockers should not be an issue. I plan on upgrading the springs to the Comp Cams 911 or the Lunati model they recommend.

Waiting to hear back, but I believe there are no issues to worry about with either spring as far as coil bind etc.... in such a small lift cam.

also on a side not if the power range for this is 1400-5800 rpm do people really spin their 440's up that high on an otherwise stock engine? that was the other thing that kept me considering the 60301 (1000-5500 rpm range)

Thanks!

---

Quote:

---

With the 60302 cam and Comp 911 springs
1) coil bind is a non-issue right? since the lift is below 0.5"
2) for such a small cam shimming the springs is also is not an issue right? just pop in and run?

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

I realize the specs on cam 1 (Lunati 60301) are similar to stock. supposedly it revs to 5500 w/ power though and the HP and torque curves are "better" than stock (haven't seen these myself anywhere).

To me this suggests that the less tangible aspects of the cam (beyond duration and valve lift) must be coming into play. Presumably this relates to the lobes assymetries, greater opening rates, etc... that have advanced a lot since the MOPAR cams were developed decades ago.

Don't know what that in fact is worth. Guess you would actually need to see the torque HP curves to know for sure or ET's pre and post.

Initially, was planning on #1 as Lunati recommended that one, but after seeing some of these posts am now leaning more towards the 60302. That's why i asked here although there are 1000 other "what cam" posts. When I asked Lunati why not the 60302 my desire to use the stamped unadjustable rockers seemed to be the clincher. from what I have heard here the stock stamped rockers should not be an issue. I plan on upgrading the springs to the Comp Cams 911 or the Lunati model they recommend.

Waiting to hear back, but I believe there are no issues to worry about with either spring as far as coil bind etc.... in such a small lift cam.

also on a side not if the power range for this is 1400-5800 rpm do people really spin their 440's up that high on an otherwise stock engine? that was the other thing that kept me considering the 60301 (1000-5500 rpm range)

Thanks!

---

the 302 in my 383 has power from the 1,400 to about 5400 or so, it makes most of the power at least in my engine between 2200 and 5K i think the power dropping off at 5,400 has more to do with the stock small AVS and stock intake,

---

More of a carb issue than the intake.

Quote:

---

60301 would be my choice for a nice street car.........don't concern youreself with .050" #s , look & seat duration as this is what determines street manners.

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

60301 would be my choice for a nice street car.........don't concern youreself with .050" #s , look & seat duration as this is what determines street manners.

---

Exactly, and the 302 has shorter seat timing than the factory hp cam. It only have 41 degrees overlap verses the factory 46.

---

..................& 35* O/L for the 301.

Quote:

---

Would the 60302 be friendly in a LOW compression '78 model 440? I'm wanting to slap something into a low-mileage '78 RV mill (now in a '70 Bee)to cruise around with while I build a more serious mill. The engine is bone stock right now...I'm just doing cam, intake, carb, headers, and a good tuning (MP electronic ignition, etc.)

Basically, I need to make sure the voodoos will work with the low compression the later models B/RBs have.

---

Quote:

---

Would the 60302 be friendly in a LOW compression '78 model 440? I'm wanting to slap something into a low-mileage '78 RV mill (now in a '70 Bee)to cruise around with while I build a more serious mill. The engine is bone stock right now...I'm just doing cam, intake, carb, headers, and a good tuning (MP electronic ignition, etc.)

Basically, I need to make sure the voodoos will work with the low compression the later models B/RBs have.

---

78' 440's have LOW compression. Pistons do sit back a bit in the bore! Need a cam to pump up the low-midrange power. Bees' are usually around 3700-
3900 lbs, depending on options. Low and midrange power works for this scenario. Do the homework on cams for your ride and be REALISTIC about your engine rpm. With bone stock heads, 4500 rpm, maybe 4800 rpm as a ABSOLUTE and power takes a NOSE DIVE,
with the parts you have on it now!! And yes, the 302 would be friendly. Better mileage or equal to the Magnum cam, but with a bit more snap from idle with these heads. FYI, always buy a complete cam kit.