Cam looked like a really good call
With the limited head flow (340 isn't lot for ~540 cubes) you know it's gonna be RPM limited, that's why I was thinking a 2" x 3 1/2" (like a Pro-parts vs the fenderwell) header might be a great call for an A body. The extra 10 degrees and lobe spread (compared to what you might see in a similar 500" motor) helps pull the power peak higher with the limited head flow. But I think a set of 360-ish ported -1's (with their extra cfm, a bit more port volume AND the better exhaust) would be awesome for this motor, just think, you could run a 337 intake and have a 700+ Hp streetable motor that would fit under the hood. But as Dwayne said, these were the parts Mark had and I totally understand the economics of it. And in an A body I'm not sure you'd have the chassis clearence to run a raised Ex port -1 on an RB block, I know it works with a B block though. But I'm thinking this basic recipie could be a perfect fit for lots of B's and E' that could run a raised port 2" tube header set, or make it a low deck (at least close on the cubes) and run an "off the shelf" 2" header. I certainly understand the appeal of the EZ/EZ-1 with the easier chassis/header fitment, the std rocker offests and conventional oiling though.

As for the torque, Jim I agree but if you consider roll-on power and street "efficiency" for 'real world' driving, that obvious boatload of extra torque below 4000 could still run very decent times even with a much tighter converter and make for a more satifying dual purpose car. The thing I still see time and time again (including several guys on this board who PM me) is guys wanting a 'dual purpose 'car but wind up jumping in the max HP derby, they up the Torque peak RPM and get a vert to match and then the car sits and sits in the garage because it's just not as much fun to drive (again 'real world') as they thought it would be.

Great Thread, need to go in the Archives!!