Cam Recommendation - 340

I am planning a cam upgrade in my 340 Dart. Right now I run a Racer brown cam with .220 duration @ .050 and .460 lift. Jim from Racer Brown recommended this one because I was using stock manifolds (it was spot on by the way). I am now putting headers and a better exhaust so i want to step up my cam. Jim recommended one at .226 duration and .470 lift or maybe .232 duration if i wanted a bit more RPM. I would go with him but he is pretty backed up right now and I want to get this back together pretty soon.
Comp Cams recommends their Xtreme Energy cam with 274 degrees which is .230 degrees at .050.
Any other recommendations for a cam in this range?
FYI, auto trans with 23-2500 stall. 3.23 gear. approx 10.5 compression,stock heads, stock stroke. Edelbrock dual plane intake.

More's Law:

If some is good,
More's better, and
Too much is just right.

You seem to be following that to the letter. Back up, pilgrim! Before anyone can make a cam selection there needs to be some information shared. Such as,
Real compression ratio
Rear gear ratio
Converter stall speed, or 4-speed
Intake
Carb
Exhaust
Intended use for the car

Hughes Engines has five camshafts between 220 and 232 intake duration at 50 lift. The 220 cam has 0.503 lift compared to your 0.460 lift. It is possible that that cam would make more power than your cam with the same valve opening and closing points, simply because it gets the valve open quicker, longer.
I know this board loves Racer Brown, but he sold you a Chevy lobe. It does have one advantage, it is easier on the valvetrain because of its lazy lifter acceleration rates.

If you're going for a Comp 274, you get more from the XE275HL. Or comparable Lunati or Hughes cam.

But first what are the answers to the questions above?

R.

""Any other recommendations for a cam in this range?""

I would suggest emailing Scott Brown with your information. He designed my 226/238 (1.5 =.489"/.480" lifts) cam for my 340.

scotty.brown@ymail.com

If you have stock rockers, they are going to be another limiting factor. Start getting much over the .500 lift point and stamped pieces don't like the increased spring pressures.

Jim already did you right once. Why not use him. It will be worth the wait.

I am using stock rockers and plan on keeping them. I am looking for reliability and ease of use as much as a bump up in power.

I guess my question to this is, do the faster ramps that are quite popular now really show significant power bumps? I would be curious to hear any first hand feedback.

http://www.hotrod.com/articles/mopp-0201-cam-velocity-advantage-mopar/
This article is 15 years old. Hughes has an even hotter lobe set now.

For me, the ability to make the same power with a 10 degree smaller cam is very attractive. I like driveability.

Have you answered the questions yet? If not, we're still barking at the moon.

R.

I think with your lack of stall and gear, you might be better off sticking with the cam you have. Going much hotter than what you have risks taking as much from the bottom as it adds to the top. To me, the 274 XE sounds a little big for a 340 with 2500 stall. Now, if you were to put a looser converter in.... Also, some of the high velocity/ high rate of lift cams would make me a little nervous with the stock rockers. Have you had this car on the track? How does it run?

Thanks for the link, I will look it over.

If you look at my original post I answered the questions that you had asked.

My best time at the track is 13.7 @ 102 with my current set up. It has a pretty poor 60 ft time so I think it could be better for sure.

Pretty good for a mild 340. 102 with good launch should be 13.20s or so. Sounds like more converter and/or better hook would help a bunch. With your new headers and exhaust you might be in the 12s without touching the cam.

The cams NOT your issue,not enough gear AND converter are a problem if you want a quick street car.

Now that you posted your et/mph, most responses will now be about 60ft times and converter, gear and tires. So, the question to you is: Is it about et for you, or about making more power (i.e. et and mph)?

It is a personal choice. Personally, I prefer making more power. In your case, this would have an end result of 13.2 @ 106 mph, verses 13.2 @ 102 mph, as an example.

So if it is power you seek, I think you are probably going down the right path. I think it might be helpful for the smart cam guys on here to know what your current cranking cylinder pressure is.

Finally, I would recommend a small solid cam, but you will need adjustable rockers. I think there is an undesirable risk with a fast rate hydraulic for you as the valve train seems to start giving it up too early, especially for a small block. And the slower ramp cams will cause a noticeable deterioration of the low speed characteristics of your small block. A solid flat tappet is the best of both worlds.

Thanks for bringing that up. I considered reposting to get the focus back on making more power. My main goal was to add some more mid to high rpm power, not necessarily to maximize my ET. I am only on the track a vary rare occasions so that is not my top priority.
I am not sure what my cranking pressure is but I know it must be pretty high because it will have significant knock on 91 octane but using 94 seems to correct that. I have a feeling a little more cam would bleed off a little cylinder pressure as well.
Are there any decently priced adjustable rockers available if I went with a solid cam?

A solid made a huge difference in my 340 compared to the similar hydraulic it replaced, a bit more maintenance but was well worth it. Not sure what brand convertor your running but a good one will make a night and day difference also.

We did a pretty well controlled test with a small block E-Body in this same power/performance range. Low 13 at 103-ish full street trim car. We changed the hydraulic cam with a similar sized solid, and the car became better in virtually every meaningful way. Idle quality was much improved, low speed cruise was better, 60 ft was better, mph was better, and et was better.

I don't know what decent price means to you. In my opinion, low cost adjustable rockers are an unacceptable risk. And I think that most people would say that a good (not great) rocker is not inexpensive.

what about the 273 rocker assemblies? I could get a set of refurbished ones locally. Are these Ok to use?

273 rockers can work well. Try to get them set up with a jam nut.

the set i am looking at do not appear to have jam nuts, just the adjuster. How do they keep their position without the jam nut?

Interference thread. Adjusters with jam nuts are easy to come by - Crane and others make them. 273 rockers are great til you start needing wider springs, which is where the tend to rub, But with your goals I don't see that as a problem. Me personally, I'd go with the Comp XE268 for a hydraulic or the MP 284 528 solid.