new SFT for the 511

My combo: 511 12.5:1 with MW Edelbrock heads CNC ported flowing 350@.700. Indy 400-3 ported with and 1100 thumper Dominator. 8" vert 5400 stall, 4.10, 28" tire and 3380# foot brake. Current cam is a comp SFT 270/276 .645/.615 110. Ran a best od 10.06@134mph.
Looking at 2 different cams to go with 2 different cam matching theories.
First theory is that first 330ft at track are the most important, so I would think a torquer cam would be best, so here it is. Ultradyne 294/298 267/271 650/620 108 lash .016/.016(@.200 lift 185/188) my current cam is 180/186@.200
My second theory is why would low end grunt matter because the vert stalls at 5400 and never drops below 6000 going down the track. So, here's that cam, Comp 324/324 290/290 650/650 108 lash .028/.026 (@.200 lift 200/200). I was told this is an old HM cam. Street/strip deal.
The 290 sounds way over cammed with 12.5:1 . Jim who goes real fast on flat tappets says nothing over 270@50 or its over cammed with 12.5:1 and i'm sure he's correct in this. Just thought I might get a few opinions on this as i'm really sold on the NF904 cam.

Like the first one way better

Me too, just thought I would throw that huge one in there because I hear there are some 440 guys with 11:1 going fast with it.

Here is my cam for a very similar combo....

First is too small, second too big.......My [censored] box street car 470 runs a .680-.660 276-281 and is tame and street able as a kitten.......

I know at first glance the 267@50 looks small, but the at 50 is not the end of the story. You need to look at the @200 number. Tells what the cam is really doing. Tim said this one is as good or better than some roller cams and I’m using a 1.6 rocker on that too. I think I was over crammed at 270 with the lower compression, so want to be careful here. A genius cam designer once said its not the duration, but where it’s at that really matters. This 267 is 5* more at .200 than my previous 270 cam.

What is your compression?

you know its going to come down to testing and how your combination likes whichever cam .
I am at 272/272@0505 , .600 nett , 108 lobe separation .
I am a hair off where I thought I should be for my sixty , transbrake . But at around 400lbs heavier and 30"radial I feel mine is running fine .
You may even just need a bigger stall converter , mine is 6000 . It was speced as a 5700 by A1 when I had stock port heads and stalled right around that . TF270 heads , more power slightly bigger stall .


Tex

Dave are the lift numbers you posted with your 1.6 rockers?

1.6 / 1.5 combo. .016 lash puts intake at .633 actual and I think the exhaust was .615

If anyone wants to learn some interesting cam info, go over on speed talk and search UD Harold and read his post. You’ll find that picking a cam just by the @50 is not the way. You need to find the @200 as well and compare. I learned a bunch over there and still don’t know everything.

Safest way to be right on your cam is to call Dwayne with your combo and have him spec one.
Without trying to brag, my stuff has always ran how i expected it to right out of the gate, and not been underachieving, i don't think. . Dwayne has done/ specced all my cams. He is very smart. Really trust his judgement, and takes out the guesswork.
Cams are kinda mysterious. Its good having somebody that has it figured out
I remember yanking out a cam of his years ago, and replacing it with a cam a certain cam guru swore would pick up the combo. Slowed it down almost a tenth and a half.....learned then about avoiding a wide lsa cam in an NA deal with somewhat limited heads.. that was on a 112.

Yeah I had one of those Scott Brown cams too. It was a turd. Worst cam I ever had and I used to see a bunch of those for sale second hand. I currently have Dwaynes grind and it’s not a bad cam, but I think a little more aggressive and on a 108 is the answer. Mines on a 110.

Is there a reason you're not running more lift? My Indy headed small block is running .710/.719" at the retainers, 263/271 @ .050. I don't have the .200 numbers.

Hey Dave, what mufflers & type of exhaust are you running ? & have you uncapped it

Lol...
You knew who i was talking about. Too funny

I did too on my 408, but I had oil spray bars in the covers to make the springs live. That was a street/strip deal too and a roller. The lower lift is what was sped’d and I’m ok with it. I think going roller makes it easier to get big lift with duration. I assume yours is roller? If I do go roller and I will one day, I’m looking at 2 UD grinds that have .726” lift. Not really sure it’s needed to go fast thou as the guy that had these heads before me was going 9:80’s with a .620 roller.

Haha, yeah the 112 lobe sep being faster in a pump gas n/a deal was a joke. He should of put all his cams on a 110, would of been way more successful.

No mufflers at the track just 18” extensions.

Yeah, Tim was looking at bigger cams til I told him needs to work well with a tunnel ram. I have heard before you need to stay conservative in duration with a tunnel ram. Not sure it’s true, but looks like Tim thinks so.

Your cam might work real nice in my combo too. I figured it’s more affordable to experiment with a flat tappet for now and I don’t think I’m leaving a lot on the table. Rollers will be have to be later.

My old pump gas Duster (511 C .I.) had a Comp Cams solid roller ground for Benshoff (SP?) racing in WI, it was 260@.050 with .420 lobe lift on the intake and 266 @.050 on the exhaust with .409 lobe lift(EDITED ground on a 108 LSA in at 107 ILC)with 1.65 H.S. roller rocker, that cam pulled really hard up past 7800 RPM in second gear before I got scared and shifted it. I shifted it between 7000 and 7300 RPM all the time, it ran really good and was easy on parts That cam with the low deck six pack made peak torque at 4500 RPM and peak HP at 500 RPM but ran faster at the track shifting at or above 7000 RPM
290@.050 sounds like Pro Stock hemi cams

I agree, just want to throw that out there because they were so addiment it was a badass cam in just about anything. I just got out of that over cam issue and i'm not falling back in any time soon. If my 511 was 14:1 compression, I may have given it a try just for giggles. They claimed it is a Herb McCandless design. I don't think it takes a cam over 270@50 to make good power in a 511. Sure would like to know the magic number thou.

We never seem to hear of anyone using a Comp .650 ft, or anything like a (seemingly fairly comparable? Although I know Herb would vehemently disagree) old MP .620 in a 500+ ci combination with more modern heads.....but I'd like to.
Just to see what happens. Maybe that's an awful combination? As much as it'd be interesting to see, I'd never suggest someone else be the guinea pig.

Oddly though many folks with those sort of combinations seem to love the old MP .590 But that's almost a no brainer as it seems to fall right into the duration ballpark alot of us are thinking will definitely work.

Good luck in your quest. Dwayne won't steer you wrong and he is just cool to talk to.

We have a gentleman here going low 9's on a SFT cam. I ordered the Ultradyne NF904 cam 267/271 NF63 NF64 lobes. Gonna see what a smaller flat tappet can do. Its always better to err on the too small side vs the too big side. Its real easy to get caught up in that bigger is better fallacy. My next cam will more than likely be a roller and something in the 270@50 range. I really like the looks of Doms cam and I may have more compression when I get to that point to make that really work. Lunati spec'd me a 278/288@50 .726/.726 108 which may work with more compression as well, also on my list. What I have learnt about comparing cams is you have to look at the .200 lift duration and not stop at the @50 number. You miss the whole story if you do. Cabs cam 260/266 would probably work nice with what I have now at 12.5:1.

The old Comp 650 was designed by Herb for the cast iron heads that he was using back in the day. I seem to remember a long time ago that people tried using that cam when they switched to Indy heads and the results were not good. I ran into a little bit of the same issue with the Trick Flow heads on my 470 low deck. The TF heads flow so well at low lift that if you put too big of a cam in there it really kills the power. Dwayne and I talked that combo over a few times. I tried smaller cams and bigger cams in that engine and eventually we found the "just right" size. Too small worked better than too large for sure. Too large on the cam would kill the power down low but not add much up top. Too small added power down low but limited it up top. Just right would pull hard all the way.

The difference between too big and just right wasn't very much. The guy at Bullet was convinced that a 270 cam would work great in my 470 but it was a real dog. The cam that worked the best was 264/268 so not a lot of difference in numbers, but the difference on the dyno was very significant. The cam that was too small was 261. So it was just a few degrees difference plus the shape of the lobe. Dwayne figured out which was the best lobe shape for the TF heads. I roughly knew the correct duration but he figured out the lobe shape which was the key.

Interesting to read. Andy your 470 ran best with the 264/268, 4* difference in lobes. My 511 and the new 267/271 also 4* difference and a few degrees more and not out of line with the few extra cubes should really shine. Tim over at Bullet is not the designer of this cam, It is a Harold Brookshire design. Tim said it was an old xs series Winston cup cam. It should do well, but will see.

You are looking at specs that not everyone thinks about, and I agree. "(@.200 lift 185/188) my current cam is 180/186@.200"
Like I told you before, I like that Ultradyne for your application.
But ft you decide you want "Theory 2"; a better Comp Cam than that old 0.650"/0.650" is their more recent 0.650"/0.630" version:
Comp Cam link at Summit
Comp Cam link at Comp's web site
From my measurements, it is about 197/200 deg at 0.200" lobe lift. (for comparison)
But with 279/287 deg at 0.050"; I think that came needs more CR than you have for best results. I ran it with 13.5 CR back in the day.

The older 0.650/0.650 is about 200/200 at 0.200" lobe lift.

Thanks Jim. I think Andy mentioned that cam in his book as being a good cam too. Do you think it hurts it at all being on a 110?

IMO, once you get enough duration, like the MM 305S-10, the 110 LSA works fine.

Remember, the Ultradyne NF lobe profile will need good springs with 1.6 rockers (especially the heavier intake valve). I also like the solid lifters with the EDM oil hole when running stiffer springs and trying to go high 6000's rpm with flat tappets. (Durability).

Here’s my current springs I had Dwayne check out last winter. 135-137@1.900, 430@1.250, 453 rate and at 1.250 about .100 from coil bind. Tim thought I could use these same springs, but I was not 100% sure he was right. I’m also using titanium retainers with these springs. What do ya think?

And again I disagree about a 500+ci motor not needing more duration and although a Chevy my customers 11.7.1 comp. 572 pump gas Chevelle goes 8.40's n/a at 3450 lbs with a .750-.800 lift 282-293 cam. But this is how we ALL learn and maybe your motor doesn't want a bigger/more duration cam but I doubt it....

Yeah, all I can say is every combo is different. I know most of my bubbies have chevys and they just throw a big cam in and go fast. Wish I was that lucky. I still think these mw heads are making it more complicated than it needs to be to get the ideal cam. Something not right with the way they flow or the port shape, I don't get it. Normally I would throw a 275ish 680 0r 700 cam in it and be happy. My hunch is that the smaller @50 cam I ordered will work good with these heads as the added compression did. I will find out and have a better idea what size roller to throw in when the time comes.

And again, my crappy RPM's happily accept and fly imo with a .680.660 276-281 Solid Isky roller......

I agree Dom, your combo is a good one for sure. I think your standard port is the key. I bet the head has fantastic velocity, something my head don’t.

There is a fine line between velocity and volume so in my world and in your case I'd cam it up, loosen the vert and leave as high/hard as the tires will take......

With a few adjustments, I think it will go in the 9's as is and this is a full interior street car, carpet and all. As far as camshaft goes, It will get the new SLT first and then a larger solid roller and we will all see how it does. I am hoping to be pleasantly surprised with both.

Here's a little informative update to this older thread. ALWAYS verify your cam specs! i didn't and wasted 2 seasons of testing other areas in my pursuit of the 8's with a flat tappet and std port heads.

Out of 5 cams from 4 different companies, 2 were what they were supposed to be.....and not just a degree or so off. One was 8 degree's less on the intake lobe, the other 2 were around 5 degrees less on the intakes.

i sent one cam back and they said it checked correctly......and when "it" or a cam came back, it did. Guess it just needed a little travel time to stretch those lobes out.

This is in a block with corrected and bushed lifter bores, checked on multiple cylinders.

I ran the McAndless CC 290@.050 .650/.650 sft cam in my stock 9.5>9.7:1CR 440 6pk bottom end with around 260cfm 906's and it made 525+fwhp from weight/mph with a Team G, 850DP and 2" f/wells back in the day.... it ran real good, ticked over@900rpm etc. and pulled its heart out top end. So how much hp was I out do you guys think not being@ 13:1CR....just as a question to ask in this thread if you don't mind.

Maybe that 290 cam works better with standard port heads allowing more flow with all of that duration. Seems like 290 would be too much for a max wedge head.

Interesting and good to know. I recently decided on not trying the 267 sft cam. Its too close to what i currently have in it now. Dwayne's 270 cam has been a good one and i think hard to beat, so i have decided to move on to a solid roller of 269/275@50 with more lift and on a 108 lobe sep. The UltraDyne sft will be for sale soon.

I had one of them in my last engine (446) and that is one that I checked in my current block. it was actually 265* and 183* @ .200 vs. the 267* and 185* it was supposed to be. The cam I was using in my current 493 was supposed to be according to lobe listing on website 272* ,cam card said 270* and actual was 264* @ .050 and 180* @ .200 (no specs were given for .200).......so I had less cam in a 493 w/ 13.3-1 than my previous 440 w/ 11.8-1.

Might explain why my MPH pretty much sucked relative to what it should have been based on my 20+ years ago same car, 446- 10.8-1 with ported 452 heads and a recently verified 284*@.050 .570 lift catalog cam i picked years ago.

Between incorrect valve spring pressure advise from one cam grinder that had me chasing the wrong problem, and all over the place cam recommendations (from grinds that might work in a rock crawler to grinds good for a 5 speed 1500 lb. dragster) ..........To say I'm a little disgusted with "experts" would be an understatement.

After putting 5 cams through it........ you should have a handle on what that combo wants.

I've only had the one in the 493 so far. Had I tried all 5 with not knowing that 3 weren't all that close to what they were supposed to be, I would have had some really lousy data. I only have 2 that were for the 493....and both of those were not what the cam card said.

I was about to try the second one when the opening and closing figures weren't adding up and that led to further investigation. I just started pulling other cams off the shelf to both verify and check to see if I was my rocker and missing something or an unseen block problem.....not that checking .050 and .200 duration figures is all that difficult.
My thinking was that if every cam was consistently off, I wasn't measuring correctly.

When I'm done, I should have a pretty good idea of what works and what doesn't......that is actually the part I enjoy the most, I just didn't think i'd have to learn quite so much of what doesn't work or isn't manufactured correctly.

What you’ve figured out is....... you really should check em.

Yep......I guess that was my long-winded point to the previous discussion. lol

How did the 267 cam(265 actual) work out for you? Any faster/slower and was it hard on valve train? Just curious.

I didn't run it in the 493 just put it in to verify cam specs.
When in the 446, I didn't have any valve train problems. As far as performance, my testing at that time wasn't the most conclusive as that was the first cam choice after getting my car back out after 20+ years with lots of changes. I will say that the next two cams I tried in that engine, didn't make any significant improvement....were I to go back to that size engine, I'd likely use that grind(with accurate lobes) again.

I will add an observation if it matters to anyone, the Crower cam I checked was the most accurate.....both consistency comparing lifts lobe to lobe and duration figures were as close to perfect as my measuring abilities could measure. A Lunati was probably second best. Based on what I've learned through this little exercise, I'm changing directions as far as size goes and I have another Lunati and Comp coming, so we'll see how accurate they are.

Hopefully, after you’ve gleaned some info from your testing efforts, you start a thread about what you’ve found in terms of how the different cams affect the dyno and/or on track performance.

I will....and i'll try to put it in a more coherent format.

I had some setbacks (the valve spring pressure problem that your suggestions helped me out on) before that got me off track from what I thought I was learning. I should have a better handle on things this year. Car consistency has improved....the last 2 runs of the year were identical to the thousandth in 60ft.,1/8, 1/4 and mph was within 1/2 mph. I've pretty much got the converter/rear gear combo figured out at least if the powerband remains similar and even if i need an adjustment there, i'll likely have a converter available for that. Carb fuel curve and jetting are down to minor tweaks now.