Listen to 383 man...talk directly to a cam grinder and tell then all your motor specs and use and they will grind a cam just for your use... Tim at Bullet cams did mine and works perfectly for my 493...hyd roller is the way to go if it's not all out race..

I checked that link from Comp Cams. I was surprised to see that a wider LSA results in less detonation and lower cranking compression. It also shows it to raise the torque peak which I don't quite understand, but so be it.
I plan to make some calls next week. I like the idea of the MP 284/528 cam with my 1.6 rocker arms. It seems like from what I have read, it will be a tad milder than the MP 292/509 I had but with more lift. I don't have my mind totally made up on that cam, just leaning that way. While I appreciate the suggestion regarding a roller cam, I'm just not ready to spend that much right now. I usually subsidize my hobby by selling parts at swap meets but I've been unable to sell much so far this year due to working out of town.
I have had mixed luck talking with cam company reps. Some are hesitant to make a suggestion and others have made choices that seem off the mark. I'll try again on Monday or Tuesday. I have already spoken with Dwayne Porter and wasn't able to pin him down on a camshaft. I'll be speaking with a few reps from torque converter companies as well. Thanks for the help, Greg

You can not make generalizations about LSA, because everything is related. Don't listen to any generalization about LSAs because most are misleading.

Get a custom cam, or there will be another thread on here in six months asking what other cam you need. It costs like 30 dollars more.

I have received some info on torque converters this week and am getting close to picking one. Pat at SMR responded first:

Greg: Much better set-up with the new cam selection. With the stroke of your engine and the weight of your car and gearing, I recommend our 10 3/4" Pro Sportsman "Race tuff" converter. This converter will provide sufficient flash from a dead start to get you into your operating range by 600 rpm, while still being tight enough to cruise with the overdrive.
For full details, check out the Pro Sportsman "Race tuff" converter section of our website.

Your cost for this converter is $624.00 plus shipping

I talked with Lenny at Ultimate converter. He leans toward an 11" converter as well. He thought shipping to CA could be pricey so he refereed me to Chris at Continental Converters in SoCal. They were already gone for the day when I called.
I'm impressed though to get called back. So often, it seems that customer service isn't top priority with some people.

Thanks to all that responded.
After much consideration and after reading several articles, threads online and REreading Andy F's Big Block book, I settled on the Mopar 284/528 solid lifter cam. I'm impressed with what I have seen in regards to dyno sheets of engines built using this cam as it has an operating range exactly where I need. The 112 LSA will give a huge improvement in idle quality and vacuum. I use 1.6 rocker arms and intend to run the lash tighter than the .028 & .032 that is listed. This will put the net lift at around .543 to .550. I ordered another set of the Howards EDM lifters and a Howards billet timing set.
In addition to the cam, I called Lenny at Ultimate Converter Concepts. He is going to build an 11" TC and should have it ready within 2-3 weeks.
I will not miss the rough idle. I will not miss the loose feeling at cruise speeds. I am not driven by gas mileage, but the same engine with the 509 cam got almost 13 mpg at cruise. This Lunati got mid 10s. The 528 may allow me to get 15 or so. I like to drive the car a bunch and if I can get great street manners, tire frying torque and decent mpg, who could complain about that?

You make a good point. The MP engineers must have had a reason to set the lash specs where they did. It will not hurt to start there and see how I like it. Since my experience is limited, I try to rely on what I read from respectable sources. My Yuck responded in a few threads that he ran the lash at .020 & .022 and liked it better that way. Others also felt the wide lash was too much and they closed it up some. Maybe the MP guys were going with what the other cam companies did back before the current crop of "Tight lash solids" came along. I see NO cam specs for new stuff that go beyond .024 yet we hear of the classic 30/30 Duntov cam, etc. maybe the old style cams needed the increased lash for some reason that I'm unaware of.
Thanks, regardless. I will start at the suggested spec and take it from there. I may just leave it if the car feels right. I don't mind a bit of clacking if that is how it is. This move to the smaller cam is simply meant to make the car more fun for the type of driving that I want to do. I want to autocross the car, cruise on the freeway, drive curvy roads and drive it like a classic version of a newer car.

Cams are designed with a lash ramp or clearance ramp and the purpose of that ramp is only to take up the slack in the valve train and to allow the valves to to land softly and completely close. A start and finish line if you will.

After the lash is taken up, it moves to the opening ramp.

The problem that can arise with what you are considering is if you tighten the lash to where the lash ramp starts to open the valve, the lifter will see the opening ramp as a bump in the road so to speak which can shock load and de-stabilize the valve train when opening and potentially have the lifter lose contact and smack the heel on closing.

None of the above is conducive to to a happy engine or engine owner.

There is some tuning wiggle room on a "loose lash" cam but I think 010" would be excessive.

I found this web site that has a bunch of cam design stuff. All non traditional engines but I believe the principals apply to any engine.

http://www.tildentechnologies.com/index.html

Kevin

Thanks Twostick. I appreciate it.

I don't know the rest of your combo but I very happy with mine. Similar car I think but I have 4:10 gears and a 4 spd.
My engine is very snappy, and I pretty darn happy even though most would not recommend my mix of parts or even consider it mismatched.
470"
Mopar aluminum heads. Stage 6 but not the raised ports.
MP .590 cam
10.4/1 CR
HS 1.5 rockers
Timing is 20/35.

The biggest improvement I made was taking off the M1/950 combo and going to a performer RPM and a holley 1000 cfm annular booster. Noticeable low end and midrange increase. Top end seems the same. Very responsive.

What is the rest of your combo?

Hey Josh,

The engine is a '74 440 block .030 over.
4.15 stroke crank, 6.76 Manley rods. Ross flat tops with 6cc valve reliefs. Pistons sit .012 in the hole. Edelbrock heads ported and milled, 82cc chambers. .075 Cometic head gasket for a final CR or 10.07 to one.
Lunati solid flat tappet cam 261/271 @ .050 INT/EXH, .556/.578 lift INT/EX, 106 C/L advanced 4 degrees to 102. .020/.022 lash INT/EXH. Howards EDM lifters. Mancini Racing/Harland Sharp 1.6 rocker arm set, Smith Brothers pushrods.
Edelbrock Performer RPM intake, Demon 850 VS carb 83/92 jets with 3.5 PV. MP electronic distributor recurved: 17 initial, 34 total in by 2400. Chrome ECU, Taylor plug wires, NGK plugs gapped to .035
2" TTI headers, 3.5 collectors, 3" exhaust with X pipe and Dynomax Ultra Flo mufflers.
727 with shift kit, D & P 9 3/4" TC approx 3000 stall. Gear Vendors .78 overdrive
8 3/4" axle with '489 case, 3.91 gears with Power Lok Sure Grip. Moser Axles.

Yeah, That is rught. I should have stated that the cam is advanced 4 degrees forward of the cam card spec.

I've had a couple of people ask if I thought the new, smaller cam would increase my cylinder pressure back into a detonation zone again. While I obviously do not want that to happen, here is what I have in my favor:
The Lunati when installed at the 106 centerline as called for gave a 160 PSI cranking number. The car felt sluggish at low rpms so I advanced it another 4 degrees to 102. The cranking #s went to 165. Since I moved the cam 4 degrees forward, didn't I move the intake closing by 2 degrees? According to the online calculators I've used, they call for the intake closing plus 15 degrees. The Lunati at spec was 56.5, 71.5 with the additional 15 degrees. Advancing the cam made the intake open and close earlier, right?
The MP specs show an intake closing of 72 degrees.