Article where they ran all the MP cams in the same car

Posted By: shoebox

Article where they ran all the MP cams in the same car - 01/09/13 12:01 AM

Im looking for the story about MP testing all the bb cams in the ssme
Car... Changed nothing but the cams and lifters and went faster every
Cam? Upto the 590? Where can i see it? Thanks!

Posted By: Sport440

Re: Article where they ran all the MP cams in the same car - 01/09/13 12:19 AM

You can see it the Mopar Engine manuel. You can get the manuel from mancini.

Posted By: Sixpak

Re: Article where they ran all the MP cams in the same car - 01/09/13 12:58 AM

agreed, should be in the MP Engine manuals. IIRC, Larry Shepard took a box stock 400 block and stuffed each one of the 'new' MP BB solids in a Duster. Early 80's Cars Illustrated Magazine, if I remember right..

Posted By: BSB67

Re: Article where they ran all the MP cams in the same car - 01/09/13 01:00 AM

Did the hydraulics too.

Posted By: maximum entropy

Re: Article where they ran all the MP cams in the same car - 01/09/13 01:50 AM

yep, in the engine manual. it was an 8.5:1 400, or something like that. super low compression, and they said it went faster the bigger the cam, but we know that's always been true.

Posted By: Chris2581

Re: Article where they ran all the MP cams in the same car - 01/09/13 01:52 AM

2 versions of that test..one with the 400 at 8.5 compression and also at 10.0.

Posted By: DrCharles

Re: Article where they ran all the MP cams in the same car - 01/09/13 03:26 AM

My 1982 Direct Connection "B-RB Engine Racing Manual" shows just the 8.5:1 400 in a 3200# (less driver) Duster with 4.30 gears:

Stock Hyd 12.35 @ 110.27
Street Hemi 12.17 @ 112.60
.484 11.91 @ 115.30
.509 11.82 @ 116.61

but then later on they show the .509 as "baseline" with the same setup but .05 faster and 2 mph slower (11.77 @ 114.80), then:

.528 11.69 @ 115.90
.557 11.55 @ 117.05
.590 11.45 @ 118.00

So it did keep going quicker if not always faster

It would have been interesting if they'd kept going beyond anything "reasonable" for an 8.5:1 smogger right up to the .620 (and even the mushroom .654, which is only 4 deg more advertised duration, 316 vs. 312, but .034 more lift)...

Posted By: Sport440

Re: Article where they ran all the MP cams in the same car - 01/09/13 05:07 AM

Quote:

My 1982 Direct Connection "B-RB Engine Racing Manual" shows just the 8.5:1 400 in a 3200# (less driver) Duster with 4.30 gears:

Stock Hyd 12.35 @ 110.27
Street Hemi 12.17 @ 112.60
.484 11.91 @ 115.30
.509 11.82 @ 116.61

but then later on they show the .509 as "baseline" with the same setup but .05 faster and 2 mph slower (11.77 @ 114.80), then:

.528 11.69 @ 115.90
.557 11.55 @ 117.05
.590 11.45 @ 118.00

So it did keep going quicker if not always faster

It would have been interesting if they'd kept going beyond anything "reasonable" for an 8.5:1 smogger right up to the .620 (and even the mushroom .654, which is only 4 deg more advertised duration, 316 vs. 312, but .034 more lift)...

Good job, as these are the same numbers I have also. It should be noted that all ET numbers were with a 400 motor.

As a update, my 440 @ 10.5 comp and 3000# went 10.40,s with the 509 cam.

Another member had his 451 @ 11.1 comp and 3110# went 9.8?,s and better with the 590 cam.

The old MP cams can run the ET, the newer cams can too, but they can be a little more street friendly while running the same et. But a little les friendly on the valvetrain. Only difference IMO

Posted By: cudadoug

Re: Article where they ran all the MP cams in the same car - 01/09/13 06:01 PM

My 1982 Direct Connection "B-RB Engine Racing Manual" shows just the 8.5:1 400 in a 3200# (less driver) Duster with 4.30 gears:

Stock Hyd 12.35 @ 110.27
Street Hemi 12.17 @ 112.60
.484 11.91 @ 115.30
.509 11.82 @ 116.61

Oh yea, I do reacll those articles. I know we're talking a back door factory built car (aka "a ringer"), but that is a HEALTHY 400!

Especially considering that I recall as it having a OE iron intake and a Thermo-slob carb.

Posted By: slantzilla

Re: Article where they ran all the MP cams in the same car - 01/09/13 06:55 PM

Quote:

Oh yea, I do recall those articles. I know we're talking a back door factory built car (aka "a ringer"), but that is a HEALTHY 400!

Especially considering that I recall as it having a OE iron intake and a Thermo-slob carb.

No, it's a box stock 400 out of a Fury....

Posted By: BradH

Re: Article where they ran all the MP cams in the same car - 01/09/13 08:49 PM

Quote:

My 1982 Direct Connection "B-RB Engine Racing Manual" shows just the 8.5:1 400 in a 3200# (less driver) Duster with 4.30 gears:

Stock Hyd 12.35 @ 110.27
Street Hemi 12.17 @ 112.60
.484 11.91 @ 115.30
.509 11.82 @ 116.61

They published that stuff right about the time I was building a new 383 for my '69 Super Bee. Based on all their data, I figured with the .484" cam, a fresh engine and 4.10s that the car would pick up big time from 14.4s @ 99 MPH w/ 3.23s and a seriously little cam. After all the "good stuff, it only ran 14.0s @ 101 MPH... guess it wasn't the cam.

Posted By: Streetwize

Re: Article where they ran all the MP cams in the same car - 01/09/13 09:52 PM

I believe that 72 duster is the same car that Bill Bagshaw put the Famous 511 horse Car Craft 440 in. That car was basically a backed halfed (or severely narrowed) well-sorted race car.....no wonder it hooked and ran the ET'd it did

Posted By: Dean_Kuzluzski

Re: Article where they ran all the MP cams in the same car - 01/09/13 10:30 PM

Quote:

After all the "good stuff, it only ran 14.0s @ 101 MPH... guess it wasn't the cam.

My 69 RR ran low 13's at 105mph with a 284/484 MP hyd. cam. This was with 4.30 gears, slicks, 3600 lbs (with me in it

) and a TM6 single-plane intake.

I remember that article well about the Bill Bagshaw Duster. It was actually the 73/74 bodystyle and it made over 500 hp with big valve ironheads. It ran 10.80's with a 509 cam'd 440 if memory serves me right. They had a pic of him actually unloading groceries from a cart into the Duster in that article. It was in Hot Rod or PHR.

Posted By: shoebox

Re: Article where they ran all the MP cams in the same car - 01/09/13 11:08 PM

Its kiNda funny... The 590 has 106 lobe seperation ---"tighter"
Lsa's make more cyl pressure all else being equal----that 8.5cr motor
On paper is a terrible match up... But it Worked !

25 yrs ago or so when i built my first car ( chebby) i put a 292/108
Isky hyd cam in a 8.2 cr 350. It ran like a bat outta hell when it
Shouldnt have...no stall no gear. That 400 combo reminded me
Of when i was a kid!

Posted By: Thumperdart

Re: Article where they ran all the MP cams in the same car - 01/10/13 03:30 AM

Quote:

I believe that 72 duster is the same car that Bill Bagshaw put the Famous 511 horse Car Craft 440 in. That car was basically a backed halfed (or severely narrowed) well-sorted race car.....no wonder it hooked and ran the ET'd it did

Thank you.......

Makes a difference for sure.

Posted By: Sport440

Re: Article where they ran all the MP cams in the same car - 01/10/13 06:03 AM

Quote:

Quote:

I believe that 72 duster is the same car that Bill Bagshaw put the Famous 511 horse Car Craft 440 in. That car was basically a backed halfed (or severely narrowed) well-sorted race car.....no wonder it hooked and ran the ET'd it did

Thank you....... Makes a difference for sure.

Bagshaws car was a 74 Duster. The DC car and MP car was a 75 or so the article states.

There were indeed two different combos from the DC tests and the Mopar engine manuel tests.

DC tests installed the cams straight up and the MP tests installed every cam 2* advanced. The slick size also was different, one a 9" slick the other a 10" One had stock steel heads the other stage 4,s One weighed 3200# the other 3050#

These two cars both used a 8.25 rear end, and I doubt they were backhalved with that axel.

Bagshaws car did use 32" slicks so it was semi backhalfed or so I would assume. Bagshaws car weighed 3100# with the 440ci 509/511 HP tests, 10.82 ET.

With Editorial typos, Bagshaw could of ended up with the DC/MP car. The original DC car used a production vert, and I think Bagshaw used a 4500 vert.

Posted By: joes68340s

Re: Article where they ran all the MP cams in the same car - 01/10/13 03:49 PM

That article inspired me to try a low comp 440 build street and bracket pump gas car. 71 challenger Stock bore low comp with mp hyd 484 cam street dominator intake TQ carb auto trans 3.91 gears. ran 11.90s at 115mph. It was so simple and fun. Wish I never sold that car.

Posted By: 67Satty

Re: Article where they ran all the MP cams in the same car - 01/10/13 05:18 PM

Kind of goes against the conventional wisdom you see online all the time about not putting too big a cam in your motor or else you will turn it into a dog.

Makes my want to try the MP 557 cam some day. Do the old MP grinds make less valve train racket than the newer more aggressive profiles?

Posted By: RobX4406

Re: Article where they ran all the MP cams in the same car - 01/10/13 06:56 PM

And if they wound them forward more than 2 degrees, I'd bet most would ET even better!

Posted By: HotRodDave

Re: Article where they ran all the MP cams in the same car - 01/10/13 07:06 PM

That deal can be very deceiving, that 400 would be a total dog except it had the high stall converter and 4.30 gears to make up for the complete lack of bottom end power. In my opinion neither of those things should be considered street friendly. Put a more street friendly 2000 stall 3.23 gear in it and as proven by the low compression 440 example running low 14s it would not be near that quick. That is where the modern cams have a huge advantage, they can make a low compression motor build enough cylinder pressure and still flow enough air past the valve to make it street friendly AND fast.

Posted By: SG duster

Re: Article where they ran all the MP cams in the same car - 01/11/13 09:56 PM

from memory I was of the understandig Bill Bagshaw used a 3800 J converter, it was the hot ticket of the times

Posted By: 451Mopar

Re: Article where they ran all the MP cams in the same car - 01/12/13 09:29 AM

A friend ran a low compression 400 with a fairly large cam, and it ran good. The car also had an 8" converter, and 4.88:1 gears, so it's not a dog when operating at 4,000+ RPM

Reminds me of Mopar Muscles' 400 HP 318 with no dyno numbers below 3,000 RPM, but at 3,000 RPM torque was 332, and jumped 44 ft/lbs to 376 @ 3,500 RPM?

Posted By: 446acuda

Re: Article where they ran all the MP cams in the same car - 02/09/13 07:30 PM

Here is the article from Hi Performance Cars magazine published some time in '78. If these aren't clear enough then I will scan it and repost. The right mouse key isn't working here at the library so I can't rotate the pictures.

Attached picture 7581547-DSC04922.JPG

Posted By: 446acuda

Re: Article where they ran all the MP cams in the same car - 02/09/13 07:33 PM

Posted By: 446acuda

Re: Article where they ran all the MP cams in the same car - 02/09/13 07:33 PM

Posted By: 446acuda

Re: Article where they ran all the MP cams in the same car - 02/09/13 07:34 PM

Posted By: earthmover

Re: Article where they ran all the MP cams in the same car - 02/13/13 01:11 AM

nice read..

Posted By: radar

Re: Article where they ran all the MP cams in the same car - 02/13/13 05:36 PM

Haven't read about 50' times too much lately! When did the 60' become the standard measure of launch quickness?

Good read but is this the article the OP was talking about? I was hoping to see the .557 cam but the spring pack they used couldn't handle it.

Posted By: 446acuda

Re: Article where they ran all the MP cams in the same car - 02/26/13 11:29 PM

Here is a scanned version for easier reading (even though it is the wrong article

)

Attached File

7604542-DCduster.PDF (294 downloads)

Posted By: RUNCHARGER

Re: Article where they ran all the MP cams in the same car - 02/27/13 01:04 AM

I took those articles as gospel in the day. Today, not so much.

Sheldon

Posted By: maximum entropy

Re: Article where they ran all the MP cams in the same car - 02/28/13 11:27 PM

Quote:

Makes my want to try the MP 557 cam some day. Do the old MP grinds make less valve train racket than the newer more aggressive profiles?

i had a 557 in my scamp for a while. the clatter was UNBELIEVABLE. it didn't matter how tight i ran it. i put a 509 in, and the car is way lopier, quieter, and faster.

Posted By: Dean_Kuzluzski

Re: Article where they ran all the MP cams in the same car - 03/01/13 11:42 PM

446acuda,

THANKS so much for scanning that article. It made it much easier for me to read!

That is such a cool combo. You can really tell where the aftermarket parts were directed to at that time. Lots of production/used parts that were readily available on a budget got into the mix. An 8&1/4 rearend with an 11 sec motor!! Cast iron intake, factory converter, a TQ, and the old garden variety (used to hold up your tomato plant) MP 484 and 509 bumpsticks!!

Doesn't seem like anyone would dare to leave home with a set-up like that today!

Got a similar pkg to pull together for a J-body here at the moment.

Posted By: WO23Coronet

Re: Article where they ran all the MP cams in the same car - 03/02/13 05:17 AM

This is the direction I'm going with my 67 Coronet: smog 400, ported stock heads heavily milled for some compression, 509 cam, M1 single plane, 4.10 gears and a hi stall. Cheap way to get a decently quick car