Anyone using this cam in a 327? I've been through a thousand desktop dyno runs and i've been tryin to get my dynamic compression down to about 8. right now i have the Comp XE262 (http://www.compcams.com/catalog/056_057.html), in the engine but i've figure that it won't work nicely with the DCR @ 8.347 when it's installed straight up @ 110/110 and i've decided to switch to the Comp 270S (http://www.compcams.com/catalog/064_065.html) which will get me down to 8.097 when also installed straight up at 110/110. There's the graphs:
http://www.eden.rutgers.edu/~vath/327/270S.jpg
full desktodyno shot (http://www.eden.rutgers.edu/~vath/327/270Sfull.jpg)

Eric68, I know you don't approve 100% of me retarding the timing set 4 degrees, but this is the best I could come up with...
I'm impressed with the jump in torque and horsepower from switching to a soild. I guess I'll have to measure for correct pushrods again unless someone has this cam with matching 813 lifters and could give me a dimension from the bottom of the lifter to the top of a rod, cause I need that dimension to be 9.425" with a correct rod. I guess I need the plunger height of the lifter.

Any thoughts on this 270S in my 327? I think 3.55 gears will do me nice behind a M-20.

------------------
1968 Coupe (http://www.eden.rutgers.edu/~vath/Camaro/), 327/210hp project in process. PS/PB, Factory AC, adding camelhumps and a CompCam 270S<A HREF="http://www.eden.rutgers.edu/~vath/Stepside/" TARGET=_blank>
1986 Chevy Stepside</A>, dying 4.3L, TH-400, no A/C, 2wd, 1/4 million miles.

[This message has been edited by JIM68 (edited 01-19-2003).]

EA3.0 isn't anywhere as near as kind to your engine as DD2000. It predicts a peak of 350#ft at 4500 rpm and 330 hp @ 5500, with the low end power reduced considerably to 186 #ft @ 2000.

onovakind67,

try these numbers (http://www.eden.rutgers.edu/~vath/327/210.jpg). They are for the 327/210hp motor and DD2000 seems to be right on the money.



------------------
1968 Coupe (http://www.eden.rutgers.edu/~vath/Camaro/), 327/210hp project in process. PS/PB, Factory AC, adding camelhumps and a CompCam 270S1986 Chevy Stepside (http://www.eden.rutgers.edu/~vath/Stepside/), dying 4.3L, TH-400, no A/C, 2wd, 1/4 million miles.

I think a solid cam would be a very nice improvment. The DCR, for old heads is still too high unless you want to use some 100 octane. I think you would be better off with a dual pattern cam also. Try the comp extreme energy solids! I think the 327 was made for solid cam. Its like a bigger version of the 302 when you cam it right. Dont worry too much about low end TQ, it will never be as much as a 350 or 400. Worry about the mid range and top end horsepower with the 327. If you build a 327 for TQ imo I think you have built it the wrong way. Try for a modern L79 with a solid cam or a 365HP vette motor. Do you have a good set of camel humps? GM was pretty close with the vette versions of the 327 so not much has too be done for them to be an awesome engine in a little car. The 270S is a good solid cam but if your DCR on stock heads is over 7.8 or even 7.7 you could run the risk of detonation.

Remeber a solid cam is smaller than its numbers listed cause they dont include lash!!! You might want the 282S to keep that DCR streetable. The 282S with the lash out is only around 228 at .05 and around .475 lift. you could run it normal with the 4 degrees advance and be fine with pump gas. You dont want all that much TQ with a traction limited ride on the street anyway. Add in a manual tranny and TQ is your worst enemy on the street cause all you do is spin and it gets real frustrating. The strip is totally different though.........

[This message has been edited by MoeSS396 (edited 01-19-2003).]

i didn't know Comp made XE solids.... i'll check um out

I have an example 350-2bbl motor in the EA3.0 library, and I massaged it to be a 327 as you specified. I had to take off all the power accessories and mufflers to get to 314 #ft @ 2800 and 203 hp @ 4000.
The low end torque is impressive, 252 #ft @ 1200 rpm.

anybody have the valve timing specs for the extreme engery solid cams? ivo ivc evo evc
http://www.compcams.com/information/WhatsNew/Press/XTREME.PDF



------------------
1968 Coupe (http://www.eden.rutgers.edu/~vath/Camaro/), 327/210hp project in process. PS/PB, Factory AC, adding camelhumps and a CompCam 270S1986 Chevy Stepside (http://www.eden.rutgers.edu/~vath/Stepside/), dying 4.3L, TH-400, no A/C, 2wd, 1/4 million miles.

Jim, don't make any decisions based on whether I approve or not! http://www.camaros.net/forum/biggrin.gif You are the one that will either love it or hate it and have to live with it . . . http://www.camaros.net/forum/wink.gif

This is the challenge I see with your mill. Static compression at 10.2:1 (if you are certain that is correct) is difficult to make run with a small cam and pump gas. Especially with old style combustion chambers.

If you retard the cam to bring cranking compression down you WILL loose bottom end TQ --- even more TQ than you would if you went to a bigger cam and installed it with the recommended 4* advance! This is one thing I don't trust DD2k on . . . I've had too many very experienced machinists, builders and racers tell me not to retard or advance a cam to "make it work" on pump gas. The one thing they pounded into my head is that "if you HAVE TO retard or advance a cam to make it work you have the wrong cam."

So now back to your dilema . . . with a high static CR IMO you might as well go with a larger cam and gear it accordingly. While I really like your 270S choice, I still think you need a little more advertised duration and need the 4* advance that Comp grinds in.

Rather than run the 270S retarded you could run it with the lash tighter (like .018" instead of the .022 on the cam card) --- this will make the cam act a few degrees longer. OR better yet IMO you could go to the next size up 282S and run it a little loose.

But I do think a single pattern cam with "middle of the road lobes" (not too agressive or too gentle) is the way to go for your situation --- dual pattern will only extend the power band on the top end. An agressive dual pattern cam like the Comp XS series will give you a lot more duration at 050 than the Magnum series for a given advertised duration which will (with agressive lobes) move the RPM band up and maybe kill a little low end.

XS cams also create big net lift numbers . . . 274* advertised duration gets you a .500 lift cam! Your Camel Hump heads don't flow much better at lifts over .450 anyway so why would you hammer your valvetrain when you don't have to?

The best option IMO is to get maybe a custom grind. Travis got one from Isky for a VERY reasonable price. If you could get them to grind you a solid FT cam with 275* advertised duration on a 112 LSA, with about 225-230* @ 050 and approx .460 lift on a ***EDIT 108*** ICL you are SET!!! DCR and power band will work perfect for you in that case.

Sorry this is so long . . . I get carried away once in a while and write a book.

[This message has been edited by Eric68 (edited 01-19-2003).]

PS. Jim we're putting the Comp 282s in my friend's 327 with 10.3:1 compression and Dart Iron Eagles. Will let you know how it runs in the spring --- we're expecting it to pick up 2/10ths over his Comp XE 284 that was in there and run on pump gas.

. . . and don't forget that a solid cam usually "acts" about 6* shorter than a hydraulic with the same adv duration.

Have you tried the Isky Z20 and Z25 cams in your program? If I remember correctly, the Z25 DCRed at about 8.1 in a 10.3:1 CR 355. Might be worth looking into.

Eric, Comp can make me a solid with:

(CUSTUM) price=$190
.468" lift
270* duration
LCA 108*
IVO 27
IVC 63
EVO 63
EVC 27
valve overlap 54*

when installed straight up at 108 centers it has the same exact power and torque curves as the 270S when it is installed at 110 centers (using -4 keyway) which yields:

(270S) price=$117
.468" lift
270* duration
LCA 110*
IVO 25
IVC 65
EVO 65
EVC 25
valve overlap 50*

so I gain 4 degrees of overlap if I go custum, but lose 2 degrees at IVC

it might just be easier to take my cylinder heads off and get the chambers opened up to 63 or 64, because I never did get the short side radius by the intake valve opened up when i had the 2.02 valves put.
I wonder if they could do it with the intake valve installed.... geezzz i could do it myself and then i could cc the heads myself to be sure of the volume. that would solve all this compression mumbo jumbo
------------------
1968 Coupe (http://www.eden.rutgers.edu/~vath/Camaro/), 327/210hp project in process. PS/PB, Factory AC, adding camelhumps and a CompCam 270S1986 Chevy Stepside (http://www.eden.rutgers.edu/~vath/Stepside/), dying 4.3L, TH-400, no A/C, 2wd, 1/4 million miles.

[This message has been edited by JIM68 (edited 01-20-2003).]

Jim,

That's great, but going to a 108 ICL will raise your DCR if duration is left the same. IVC goes to 63* so DCR goes to 8.2:1 with the "new grind". If you can get comp to go wider with the LSA (like out to 114*) IVC goes to 65 and DCR drops to about 8.0:1 with 4* advance.

Or --- if they could grind one with a wider 112 LSA and add an extra 5 degress duration than you'd be set. Your IVC would change to 65.5 and DCR goes to 8.0:1.

If you go with the Comp 282s using the 4* advance ground in IVC is 67 which makes a DCR of 7.95:1. Perfect IMO, the car would probably idle at about 850 RPM in gear and would scream from 3000 to 6500 RPM.

Another option would be the little Duntov 30-30 cam. Its a little noisy compared to modern grinds but would add to the nostalgia. Specs for that cam have been stated all over the place but I believe it to be in the 280* range.

*** -097 specs ***

advertised duration varies from 272-287* depending on who you talk to.

duration @ 050 is 228/230

LSA is 110, ICL 108

Lift .395 / .401 (could use 1.6 rockers)

Makes a DCR of 8.1 using 272* advertised with factory lash settings. I think Crane makes a modern version of this puppy.

[This message has been edited by Eric68 (edited 01-20-2003).]

Eric, how would driving be with the 282S? I was hoping this would be a car that i could have fun with on the weekends and cruisin? 3.55 gears seem to sound like a good median

by the way i added to my last post...

i guess i'm just scared of going too big with the cam size, cause i just always thought that the big cams are for taking to the strip and track. I was also hoping to get my AC working, because it came from the factory with it and i like the stock look, that's why i'm keeping the exhaust manifolds. What gears would i run if i went with the 282s?

i've tried the 097(287duration) vs the 282s and the 282s beats it in DD2000, but i guess that's mostly from the .501" lift with 1.52 rockers.

it's practically impossible for me to decide cause i'm only 23 and have never drivin a big cam low geared muscle car...

one more thing... wouldn't the longer valve overlap help with the DCR? would it bleed some compression or would it just suck more from the intake into the cylinder creating a a highier DCR?


------------------
1968 Coupe (http://www.eden.rutgers.edu/~vath/Camaro/), 327/210hp project in process. PS/PB, Factory AC, adding camelhumps and a CompCam 270S1986 Chevy Stepside (http://www.eden.rutgers.edu/~vath/Stepside/), dying 4.3L, TH-400, no A/C, 2wd, 1/4 million miles.

[This message has been edited by JIM68 (edited 01-20-2003).]

Your 23 http://www.camaros.net/forum/eek.gif I had you pegged for a 40something software engineer LOL from all the cool pics and links you've done up on some of your posts! Funny how you get a mental picture of someone in your mind talking to them on the net . . .

Anyway. I ran the 282s in my 383 on the street and it was a torque BEAST with 3.55 gears and 3000 stall! It was too much TQ at the track to hook reliably --- when it did hook I had a few 60' times down in the low 1.6 sec range. Of course my 383 is bigger than your 327, but I don't think the 282s would be a slouch off the line in your 327 with the right stall. I ran the lash tight at .018" to make the cam act bigger too.

I think it would handle your AC OK as long as you get the correct solenoid to bump the idle up with the AC on (I'm not 100% sure on the AC thing). A good radiator and clutch fan would also be a must. The 282s was truly a weekend driver cam in my 383 --- very docile.

I currently drive my 383 with a Comp 294s around town cruising and although I had to add a vacuum can for the brakes it is pretty decent, maybe a bit rough --- idles at 900 RPM in gear. It is still a good cam for a weekend driver and this summer I will drive it across the state for the Woodward Dream cruise, the Camaro Superfest and some other long distance events.

I'd stay with the 282s, run it 4* advanced (use straight up dots on the TC gears), and run the lash at .022 - .024" hot. A vac secondary carb in the 600 - 670 cfm range on top of an Performer RPM manifold would be great too. Your Camel humps also have smaller intake runners than my TFS 23* heads so that will further enhance your low end TQ production.

BTW I really don't consider the Comp 282s as a "big cam". Its really a medium cam IMO. There are guys here in town that run cams with 050 numbers at 270* http://www.camaros.net/forum/biggrin.gif now thats a big cam!

I can't swear this is exactly what you are looking for, but as far as my tastes go I think it would be perfect for your combo.

Oh yeah. More overlap doesn't effect DCR at all. Intake closing point determines DCR.

When you tighten up the lobe separation angle you do two things - 1) open the intake sooner (creates more overlap) and 2) close the intake sooner.

When you widen LSA you open the intake later and close the intake later. This reduces overlap and lowers DCR.

That's why I suggested going to a wider LSA with the Comp 270S.

I've often wondered what the little -097 solid cam would run like with a set of 1.6 ratio rockers on it to up it's lift some???

And imho, the little sucker is a great LITTLE solid cam!!! I think the General made it about right for the little engines!!!

Of course, the next step up would be a CC 282S if you know what I mean...

Wish they made a high lift 278S solid cam off the shelf!!

I have chatted with UDHarold about this and he has several little solids that would probably do you great if you want to do a search under either of our names... He has mentioned three right off the top of his head...pdq67

Hey Jim,

I'm suprised to hear that you anticipated some compression problems when using the Comp. XE262 hyd. cam. with camelhump heads.

Maybe Eric68 or PDQ67 can set me straight if I'm wrong, but I'm wondering if going to a larger solid cam to get the correct DCR is going to cause drivability headaches due to the longer duration?


Mark P.




------------------
69 Camaro Coup-My Granny bought new in 1969!
Cortez Silver/drk blue interior
327/210hp
Dual exhaust with Turbo Muffs
Now with Pertronix Electronic ignition!
Powerglide trans.
Ugly & skinny tires!
-------------------------
Search TV Christian Ministry: www.searchtv.org (http://www.searchtv.org)

Mark, thanks for joining the insanity again!
the "problem" with my camelhumps are that i did not get the short side radius opened up when i had the new 2.02 valves installed, so now they have a volume of 61cc, which boosts my compressions to a highier than nominal valve for everyday pump gas. it's just one of the many lessons learned in this process...

Eric, I actually found a deal on the 282s and lifters for $186 (http://www.racenet.net/) with shipping so i ordered them and am beginning to realize that this will be an awesome engine that I will be able to add on to and really take advantage of the cam's potential. I truely appriciate you getting me through all this and for being patient with me. As Granny's 69 knows we started this journey to find a cam that would keep some torque for the "little 327 that could" yet another reason i was neglecting to go bigger with the cam. It's great having all the experience come together at this site. It really is priceless.

again, thanks everyone

------------------
1968 Coupe (http://www.eden.rutgers.edu/~vath/Camaro/), 327/210hp project in process. PS/PB, Factory AC, adding camelhumps and a CompCam Solid<A HREF="http://www.eden.rutgers.edu/~vath/Stepside/" TARGET=_blank>
1986 Chevy Stepside</A>, dying 4.3L, TH-400, no A/C, 2wd, 1/4 million miles. DCR calculator (http://www.eden.rutgers.edu/~vath/327/compression.xls)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by JIM68:
[B]Mark, thanks for joining the insanity again!
the "problem" with my camelhumps are that i did not get the short side radius opened up when i had the new 2.02 valves installed, so now they have a volume of 61cc"...................................... hey, just an fyi, no cam reccomendations, but the short side radius will have no effect on chamber volume, since its all behind the valve. perhaps what you mean is unshrouding the valve, by opening up the area adjacent to the valve in the chamber. just noticed that, which may be what you meant anyway. just thought i'd point that out. at any rate, good luck with your cam selection!

[This message has been edited by 68rs406 (edited 01-21-2003).]

I am going to throw out more for you. I have e-mailed UDHarold on Ultradyne's cam's and to be honest with a very similar 327 and DD2K, I really like the Crower cam. Check out the 00321 , 00320 , 00301, and the 00302. There may be more, just chech their web site. WWW.CROWER.com (http://WWW.CROWER.com)

------------------
69 Camaro Z28 "clone" - 327 AT
"461" camel back heads,
edelbrock , hooker, ultradyne cam, stewart,
TRW etc.
Vintage Air (not yet installed)
700R4 TPI transmission

68rs406, yup that's what i ment, unshrouding the valve... i didn't do either to my heads

TJS69, i checked on Crower00321, it does look like a good cam it even has the 67 degree IVC. But I can't use it because i have Competition Engineering valve springs(#98212) with a 425lb/in spring rate. The 00321 calls for 274lb/in. Thanks for the tip though. My #98212 springs match very nicely with CompsCams 981 springs. I think they are at 420lb/in or so.
------------------
1968 Coupe (http://www.eden.rutgers.edu/~vath/Camaro/), 327/210hp project in process. PS/PB, Factory AC, adding camelhumps and a CompCam Solid<A HREF="http://www.eden.rutgers.edu/~vath/Stepside/" TARGET=_blank>
1986 Chevy Stepside</A>, dying 4.3L, TH-400, no A/C, 2wd, 1/4 million miles. DCR calculator (http://www.eden.rutgers.edu/~vath/327/compression.xls)

[This message has been edited by JIM68 (edited 01-21-2003).]