509 cam
#473070
09/20/09 06:29 AM
09/20/09 06:29 AM
|
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 115 Sydney, Australia
tuff440
OP
member
|
OP
member
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 115
Sydney, Australia
|
I'm considering running the 509 cam in my 440 and wanted to know if anyone has experience with both 509 cams, the improved streetability version and the original. What sort of differences were there in street driving. Things like fuel consumption, throttle response, idle, brake vacumm etc. My 440 is 30 over, cast crank, ly rods, l2355 trw pistons with the block machined for zero deck height. Heads are ported 452's with 2.19 valves, torker manifold and I will probably use either a 750 or 800cfm edelbrock carb. Car is going to be mainly a street car but I want a tuff sounding 440 that runs well on the street. Anyone with experience with either of these two cams or any other recommended hydraulic, feel free to give your opinions
|
|
|
Re: 509 cam
[Re: 68roadrunner]
#473073
09/20/09 09:16 AM
09/20/09 09:16 AM
|
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 3,152 Central NC
gch
master
|
master
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 3,152
Central NC
|
You will get everybody and their brother saying don't use this cam. There are newer designs that make more power and more importantly more low speed torque and vacuum. That being said I still like this cam with the proper equipment around it.It likes 4.10 gears(to cover up the nonexistent torque below 3000rpm),a 4 speed or 3500 stall,and I would run it with an rpm(dual plane) intake.I would lose the torker intake on this one. The cam is old school and can be bettered but it does work if you match the componets to it's intended rpm range(3000-6200) edit:I have no experience with the wider lsa version.The original will drink gas and not be happy below 3000rpm.
Last edited by gch; 09/20/09 09:17 AM.
|
|
|
Post deleted by Defbob
[Re: SILVER67]
#473076
09/20/09 11:00 AM
09/20/09 11:00 AM
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
|
|
Re: 509 cam
[Re: Defbob]
#473077
09/20/09 11:27 AM
09/20/09 11:27 AM
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 6,570 Downtown Roebuck Ont
Twostick
Still wishing...
|
Still wishing...
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 6,570
Downtown Roebuck Ont
|
I have the old one (108 lsa) in my 9:1 493. E-heads M1 Holley throttle body EFI. It made over 500 ft/lbs from 2000 to 5000 rpm. Idles at 1100 with 8-10" vac in gear and sounds tough as all get out . In my 4800 lb New Yorker it ran a traction limited 13.92 at 100.66 thru the muffs with an off the shelf 3000 stall TA conv and a 2.76 gear. That's the good such as it is. The EFI is not happy with it at all below 2500 +/-. With 76 deg of overlap there is so much exhaust reversion it never sees the same a/f twice in a row at part throttle. I believe the wider 112 lsa would solve a lot of that. All that being said your combo is 50+ cubes short of mine so it will just make all that low speed stuff worse unless you are willing to go with 3.91 or deeper gears and a big converter. Just for a comparison a buddy of mine has a 74 Challenger with a 452 headed 440 with the 484 cam and it runs 12.90's with a 3.23 gear and it has that "tough" sounding idle too. Kevin
|
|
|
Re: 509 cam
[Re: tuff440]
#473078
09/20/09 12:02 PM
09/20/09 12:02 PM
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 871 WA 98043
thecarfarmer
super stock
|
super stock
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 871
WA 98043
|
Pros: nasty sounding idle, good power at mid-high speeds, works with all stock valvetrain components (if you use Hemi springs); will clear most pistons if the engine doesn't have a lot of milling. Cons: narrow power band; requires more stall speed than other cams which will run as hard. I'd run one in an engine I didn't have an investment in, if I already had it; I wouldn't spend money to get one. The cam is dollar-for-dollar the most significant piece which determines how your existing set of parts will run. I wouldn't try to save $50-100 on the cam after buying pistons, machine work, etc. -Bill
Seduce the attractive, and charm the rest.
******
489 C.I.D., roller cam, aftermarket heads, tunnel ram, stock '54 Dodge rear axle assembly: which of these doesn't belong?
|
|
|
Re: 509 cam
[Re: tuff440]
#473079
09/20/09 12:11 PM
09/20/09 12:11 PM
|
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 11,686 W. Kentucky
justinp61
I Live Here
|
I Live Here
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 11,686
W. Kentucky
|
Quote:
Car is going to be mainly a street car but I want a tuff sounding 440 that runs well on the street. Anyone with experience with either of these two cams or any other recommended hydraulic, feel free to give your opinions
I had the old one in a 440 in my old Road Runner years ago and didn't care for it. Call Hughes Engines and talk to them. I'd look into EDM lifters too. www.hughesengines.com
|
|
|
Re: 509 cam
[Re: Dodgem]
#473083
09/20/09 06:16 PM
09/20/09 06:16 PM
|
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 2,475 Sydney,Australia
tex013
top fuel
|
top fuel
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 2,475
Sydney,Australia
|
as said above there will be power brake vacuum problems with the original tight lobe cam. they do make great power.my satellite has run as quick as 11.35@119.01.my car is a daily driver,i run a vacuum pump for the brakes,it idles at about 800 rpm in gear.it likes a good converter,32/3500+,3.9+ gears.yes it is soft under about 2800rpm but that is good as i run a 235/75/15 street tyre. fuel consumptiom - pffft - you've got 440ci what do you want ? you sound like a hotrodder Tex
New best ET 10.259@129.65 . New best MPH 130.32 Finally fitted a solid cam, stepped it up a bit more 3690lbs through the mufflers New World block 3780lbs 10.278@130.80 . Wowser 10.253@130.24 footbraking from 1500rpm Power by Tex's Automotive
|
|
|
Re: 509 cam
[Re: 383man]
#473087
09/20/09 09:22 PM
09/20/09 09:22 PM
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 2,327 Glendale, AZ
69L78Nova
Banned. Forever.
|
Banned. Forever.
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 2,327
Glendale, AZ
|
So it likes to be installed at 102 or 104? How much of a difference will that make compared to 108? How much does it depend on the combination?
1969 Nova 454/M21/3.31 Mild mid-11 second weekend cruiser
1994 F150 XLT Super Cab 2WD 5.0/4R70W/3.55 (Daily driver)
|
|
|
|
|