DZ302 + roller cam/lifters + AFR 210's [Archive] - Team Camaro Tech

: DZ302 + roller cam/lifters + AFR 210's


SooperDave
Apr 1st, 05, 01:44 PM
My friend had his DZ302 set up with the "140" cam, 64 cc fuelie heads and with the aftermarket pistons .060 that we believe netted to 12.5:1 CR. That combo put down just over 300 RWHP on a dynojet last spring. Trap speeds at E-town, NJ were in the 102-103 mph range with 4.56 gears and an M21.

We were talking to a very convincing Scott Shafiroff and my friend was sold on a Crane solid roller cam setup with 76 cc aluminum AFR 210 heads. Since I'm not sure about the dome size on that piston I can't determine the expected CR but I'm thinking low to mid 10's.

All you SB and 302 guru's out there please pony up some insight on expected CR and whether the reduction will negatively impact the ability to rev this motor. Shafiroff disagreed and thinks we should observe net gains of 100+ FWHP. We'd be happy with gains of 50-75 RWHP.

Sorry I don't have the cam specs on hand.

Neil B
Apr 1st, 05, 02:57 PM
The 210's are huge for a 302. What rpm do you want to turn it? Do you want to cut compression to run pump gas or was that the recommendation given?

x22d80ragtop
Apr 1st, 05, 06:38 PM
I have AFR 195's on my 302 with a .580 lift roler cam. My set-up required +.100 pushrods. I had to, with AFR's help, re shape the combustion chambers in order to use the factory pistons. Mine came out 10:1 on the nose with a .045 (i think) head gasket. I have a Holley z/28 style intake (coming OFF!!!). It chokes it to death compared to my old offy crossram. I am switchign to a 1" tall victor Jr. And gonna play with the carbs. I have a 770 holley on it now. Runs great! But gonna try an old three barrel 950 for kicks. The car right now is absolutely balls to the wall past 3200. It's unreal. But that's with an M20 and 4:10 rear. It's a screamer, and gets awesome traction. I estimate the HP to be around a solid 450.00, give ot take a little. It's fun!

pdq67
Apr 2nd, 05, 06:26 AM
Please come back and tell us how you like the 3-barrel b/c I would like one for my 496.

I know motor size enters in here so just your opinion is fine for me now...

pdq67

SooperDave
Apr 4th, 05, 07:24 AM
The 210's are huge for a 302. What rpm do you want to turn it? Do you want to cut compression to run pump gas or was that the recommendation given?

he still wants to rev the snot out of this 302 but i'm sure he'd be content if the power is there and only revs to 6500-6800.

we asked shafiroff about a good 302 combo and this head/roller cam combo was suggested for some big power gains. he shrugged off the reduced CR as a non-issue.

Neil B
Apr 4th, 05, 08:28 AM
I would ask the engine builder at what rpm range his recommendation will work best at. AFR 210's on a 302 sounds like a full race motor to me. Ask him for the cam specs too. IMO, a big intake port, big cammed motor with 10:1 compression would be a dog at low rpm.

SooperDave
Apr 8th, 05, 06:16 AM
I would ask the engine builder at what rpm range his recommendation will work best at. AFR 210's on a 302 sounds like a full race motor to me. Ask him for the cam specs too. IMO, a big intake port, big cammed motor with 10:1 compression would be a dog at low rpm.

recommended rpm range is 3500-8500. the previous setup was already a dog at low rpm just like a stock 302.

SooperDave
Apr 11th, 05, 04:31 AM
Here are the Comp Cam specs,

#12-770-8
gross lift 564/570
duration at 015 tappet lift is 274/280
duration at 050 is 236/242
lobe lift at 050 is 377/381
lobe separation is 110*

Another question relates to the Demon 750 carb that he has. The car is running very rich. I checked his jets and they are 78 primaries and 87 secondaries. The secondary PV is a 15 but there's no # on the primary PV. Both squirters are 28's. How much should we jet down?

Neil B
Apr 11th, 05, 09:33 PM
The Comp 12-770-8 has a 2,200-6,200rpm powerband according to the Comp catalog. Looks like a nice cam for a 10:1 302. You'll have a ton more low end power than you have with the -140 cam. The AFR210's are bigger than what most people would recommend for the rest of the combo. I'm curious why the builder is recommending these heads over the 195's.

For what it's worth, I like your current 'old school' combo. 300+ hp at the tires is a good number for what you've got.

68rs406
Apr 11th, 05, 10:58 PM
not much of a small cube guy, but i like the look of the cam package. and, while the heads seem big, remember even a small cube motor is moving some serious air at 8500. my moneys on shafiroff, the guy KNOWS how to build wicked street/race motors, and if you explained your needs, i would trust his opinion and never look back. i doubt you'll be disappointed, your not talking joes speedy engine build, this is scott shafiroff, the name speaks for itself.
as smokey yunick once said "build horsepower and gear accordingly". a 302 fits this to a tee.
my buddy pieced togethor a 406 from reccomendations solely from shafiroff over the phone, and it made over 700 horse n/a, with 23* standard runner heads. he was extremely helpful, and made little money on the deal, just as an indication of the type of guy he is.
i say go for, it sounds like a blast!

SooperDave
Apr 12th, 05, 06:03 AM
The Comp 12-770-8 has a 2,200-6,200rpm powerband according to the Comp catalog. Looks like a nice cam for a 10:1 302. You'll have a ton more low end power than you have with the -140 cam. The AFR210's are bigger than what most people would recommend for the rest of the combo. I'm curious why the builder is recommending these heads over the 195's.

For what it's worth, I like your current 'old school' combo. 300+ hp at the tires is a good number for what you've got.

Shafiroff probably needed to move the 210's off his shelf, LOL. Just to be clear, 300 rwhp was with the old combo. The new combo is out and running as of Friday. Feels really strong. Running way rich and we've got some oil leaks to figure out. The Demon carb is off (see jetting info above 78 primaries and 87 secondaries) and we will jet down to lean it out a bit. We'll be taking the car to a dynojet hopefully this Saturday 4/16.

I know the car really well although I've never driven it. What I notice is the power builds up quicker than the old setup, I feel pushed back harder in my seat and the most noticeable difference is that the car literally jumps when he shifts...I mean this car really bangs into the next gear really hard not like before where it seemed the RPMs needed to spool up before you felt anything.

Any advice on timing it's around 18-20* initial advance and a total advance of around 36-38* and I believe all in by 3000 RPM? What about the jet sizes? Thanks again.

Neil B
Apr 12th, 05, 09:02 AM
Shafiroff probably needed to move the 210's off his shelf, LOL. Just to be clear, 300 rwhp was with the old combo. The new combo is out and running as of Friday. Feels really strong. Running way rich and we've got some oil leaks to figure out. The Demon carb is off (see jetting info above 78 primaries and 87 secondaries) and we will jet down to lean it out a bit. We'll be taking the car to a dynojet hopefully this Saturday 4/16.

I know the car really well although I've never driven it. What I notice is the power builds up quicker than the old setup, I feel pushed back harder in my seat and the most noticeable difference is that the car literally jumps when he shifts...I mean this car really bangs into the next gear really hard not like before where it seemed the RPMs needed to spool up before you felt anything.

Any advice on timing it's around 18-20* initial advance and a total advance of around 36-38* and I believe all in by 3000 RPM? What about the jet sizes? Thanks again.

You're probably making a bunch more low end torque with the new cam which is why it feels stronger. The timing looks about right to me. What power valve is in the carb? I'm not sure what a '15' power valve is. Make sure the PV's aren't opening at idle - this would cause a rich condition. Get the PV's right by checking idle vacuum and then installing the correct PV's. After the PV's are correct, you can jet the primaries by reducing the jetting until it starts to hesitate/stumble under normal light-throttle driving (and then jet up until the problem goes away). My suggestion would be to re-jet the secondaries to factory jetting and then tune the car on the dyno. I'm very interested to see the new numbers from the dyno.

Neil B
Apr 12th, 05, 09:13 AM
Just out of curiosity, what headers did you use with the 210's? Any clearance issues? They have a raised exhaust port which is why I didn't use them on my project.

SooperDave
Apr 12th, 05, 09:34 AM
What power valve is in the carb? I'm not sure what a '15' power valve is.

The carb is a Demon 750...there was no # on the primary PV and the secondary PV had what looks like a 1 and a 5 but maybe it was a 7 and a 5. So maybe the seconday PV is a 7.5??

Just out of curiosity, what headers did you use with the 210's? Any clearance issues?

We re-used his Hooker SC's and there are no clearance problems.

Neil B
Apr 12th, 05, 09:40 AM
The carb is a Demon 750...there was no # on the primary PV and the secondary PV had what looks like a 1 and a 5 but maybe it was a 7 and a 5. So maybe the seconday PV is a 7.5??



We re-used his Hooker SC's and there are no clearance problems.

With the new cam, you're probably making around 10" vacuum. So if you have a 7.5 PV you're probably ok.

I would love to see a pic of your Hooker SC clearance at the bottom of the steering box. My Hooker's are right up against the pitman arm nut with stock port location heads.

Tonyx33
Apr 12th, 05, 09:52 AM
Don't mean to sound dumb but who is Shafiroff?

SooperDave
Apr 12th, 05, 11:29 AM
Don't mean to sound dumb but who is Shafiroff?

a local engine builder who primarily does big blocks. my other buddy is ordering a 540 inch big block for his 55 chevy and we were there talking to scott shafiroff. he happens to have built a few 302's in his day and he convinced us to go with this combo. here's a link to his site,

http://www.shafiroff.com/

SooperDave
Apr 12th, 05, 11:32 AM
With the new cam, you're probably making around 10" vacuum. So if you have a 7.5 PV you're probably ok.

I would love to see a pic of your Hooker SC clearance at the bottom of the steering box. My Hooker's are right up against the pitman arm nut with stock port location heads.

we didn't have to hammer the pipes at all. we'll be working on it later today so if I remember I'll take some photos for you. this site won't allow attachments though, right?

SooperDave
Apr 13th, 05, 07:57 AM
I would love to see a pic of your Hooker SC clearance at the bottom of the steering box. My Hooker's are right up against the pitman arm nut with stock port location heads.

Neil, tool a closer look yesterday. Totally clear on the driver side but the pass side header has almost no clearance with the steering linkage.

Neil B
Apr 13th, 05, 12:00 PM
Neil, tool a closer look yesterday. Totally clear on the driver side but the pass side header has almost no clearance with the steering linkage.

Take a look at the pic below. This is GMJim's car, but my car has the same header placement. At the top left corner, you can you see how close the primary comes to the pitman arm nut on the steering box. Your Super Comps did not hit the steering box at this location with the AFR's? AFR told me the exhaust ports were raised .300-.400".

http://hobbystage.net/camaro/gmjim/1043628163-001417.jpg

SooperDave
Apr 18th, 05, 07:22 AM
Well, we finally strapped the 69 Z/28 to a chassis dyno. But we had the Demon tune all **** up to say the least. The idle mixture was way rich and the jets were way lean. Last year with 64CC fuelie heads the peak power was 290 rwhp on the same dynojet (the 300 # I stated above was a different chassis dyno).

The 1st pull on Saturday it made 293 rwhp with a 72/76 jet combo but the A/F graph was embarrassing. Between 2500 and 4500 the ratio was way lean (over 17) and ended at around 14.x at 6500. The motor was still pulling hard at 6500.

It was late in the day and we had to run back to my house to get jets so we only made a second pull to see what would happen and then do some more street tuning. We jetted up to a 74/78 combo and the A/F was not much better on the lower end. At peak power the A/F was around 13.6 or so. However that 2nd pull made 312 rwhp (+19). And this with completely fouled plugs (we checked all plugs after that 2nd pull and they were ALL black and sooted). The car ran like crap the entire way home. So, we called it a day.

On Sunday we used the vacuum guage and found the idle mixture was way rich so we re-set them. We also cleaned all the plugs and changed the jets to a 78/82 combo. Since there was a major hesitation when accelerating hard we swapped out the pink accelerator pump cams to orange ones. Then we went for a road test. No more hesitation. No more smoke. Much more torque than my 302 combo and the car pulls strong at the top and bangs the gears hard. I only wish we had the car on the dyno. We're shooting for 340 to 350 rwhp.

My question. We had 312 rwhp with fouled plugs and jets that were too small. That one jet changed netted us 19 rwhp. How much more rwhp can be found with tuning this carb?? Is 340-350 too lofty a goal?

onovakind67
Apr 18th, 05, 07:47 AM
Your power peak should be well above 6500 rpm, maybe as high as 7500. We have a 331" SBC with a similar cam, 240/240/110, and our power peak on the Dynojet is 7100 rpm. 350 rwhp shouldn't be real difficult, I tested our 331 at 417 rwhp yesterday.

SooperDave
Apr 18th, 05, 09:01 AM
Your power peak should be well above 6500 rpm, maybe as high as 7500. We have a 331" SBC with a similar cam, 240/240/110, and our power peak on the Dynojet is 7100 rpm. 350 rwhp shouldn't be real difficult, I tested our 331 at 417 rwhp yesterday.

that motor sounds like a monster...if we could net 1.25 rwhp per cubic inch we'd be right around 380-385 and he'd be happy with that. thanks for the reply, we told the tech who ran the dynojet to back off at 6500 because we wanted to be on the safe side. i don't have the graph in front of me but the power curve didn't seem to level off yet at 6500. i'll review the graph again when i get home. i'm hoping with some cleaned off plugs, the right jetting and some more rpm we'll get much closer to our original goals.

Neil B
Apr 18th, 05, 11:34 AM
What intake are you running with the new combo?

How does the torque curve compare with the old combo?

Thanks. -Neil

Eric68
Apr 18th, 05, 12:49 PM
AFR 210's are too big unless you plan on 8000+ RPM.

An AFR 195 head has a minimum port cross-section of 1.93 sq in which doesn't start to become a restriction on a 302 until over about 7800 RPM. You will do nothing but give up mid-range with a huge port on a 302.

SooperDave
Apr 18th, 05, 01:08 PM
What intake are you running with the new combo?

How does the torque curve compare with the old combo?

Thanks. -Neil

It's a single plane manifold but can't remember which one he has.

I'll try and get print outs of all his TQ/PWR A/R graphs this week.

SooperDave
Apr 18th, 05, 01:19 PM
What intake are you running with the new combo?
just remembered...Edelbrock Victor Jr. single plane intake manifold

AFR 210's are too big unless you plan on 8000+ RPM.

An AFR 195 head has a minimum port cross-section of 1.93 sq in which doesn't start to become a restriction on a 302 until over about 7800 RPM. You will do nothing but give up mid-range with a huge port on a 302.

If that turns out to be the case then Scott Shafiroff the great engine builder's name will be mud. He said these would be the ideal cyl head and along with it sold my buddy the crane roller cam touting it as a custom grind for a 302 to go with this Edelbrock Victor Jr. single plane intake manifold. He also sold my buddy on this combo saying that lower compression won't be an issue. Promised an increase of 100-125 fwhp...not even close just yet.

Eric68
Apr 18th, 05, 01:39 PM
Weell if you are after a big HP number then go for the 210's . . . if you want any kind of throttle response then I'll stick to my statement that they are too big.

Big name or not, I think the smaller head is better. You're just not going to create enough velocity through the big port with only a 302 to make it worth your while.

Neil B
Apr 18th, 05, 01:48 PM
It's a single plane manifold but can't remember which one he has.

I'll try and get print outs of all his TQ/PWR A/R graphs this week.


I'm curious at what rpm the horsepower peak occurs. The Comp 12-770-8 has a 2,200-6,200rpm powerband according to the Comp catalog. You're going to have to really spin the motor (well into the 7K range) to fully utilize the port volume of those AFR210's.

SooperDave
Apr 19th, 05, 08:09 AM
I'm curious at what rpm the horsepower peak occurs. The Comp 12-770-8 has a 2,200-6,200rpm powerband according to the Comp catalog. You're going to have to really spin the motor (well into the 7K range) to fully utilize the port volume of those AFR210's.

The chart shows peak around 6200 or so, we only spun it to 6500.

I spoke with Comp Cams today and it looks like the better cam for what we wanted to do is 12-772-8, Duration 248/254, Lift 576/582, Lobe separation 110*...he said peak power with this cam would be close to 7500.

Maybe Shaffi ordered the wrong cam for us? It is only off by one digit. I know he said we could spin this combo to 8000+.

We are very unhappy about this...

onovakind67
Apr 19th, 05, 09:13 AM
that motor sounds like a monster...if we could net 1.25 rwhp per cubic inch we'd be right around 380-385 and he'd be happy with that.


It's actually pretty tame - idles at 1000 rpm so's we can keep the oil pressure up and the water circulating. It can cruise at 2000 rpm with no problems. We run a 9# aluminum flywheel, and have no problems at all getting the car going. We have full mufflers on the car, so the loudest thing is the whirring of the valvetrain.

SooperDave
Apr 21st, 05, 08:50 AM
Here's the latest on the cam. You guys are right this cam peaks at 6200 rpm so it looks like Shafi ordered us the wrong one. What good is this cam when we have 210cc heads and a short stroke motor than can spin to 8000? My buddy spoke to Shafi and he's not being very accomodating so far. He said "there are 100 things that could be wrong." Yeah it's possible our tune is off and timing might not be perfect but regardless this combo will not spin past 6500. All the guys at Comp Cams said even if we increase the valve lash this cam would only get us to 6400-6500 max. Shafi said he would call his buddy Skippy (owner) at Comp Cams and then get right back to him. No call back just yet...

pdq67
Apr 21st, 05, 04:49 PM
Decrease the valve lash...

Heck, if the old -097 cam I ran in my junk 301 would go to 7,000+ easy, I figure no more than a good old-fashioned, Z-30 Isky solid will do 8,000 rpm!!

May not make alotta power up there but should go up there easy if you have good valve springs...

AND I really hope you get her figured out too!!!! IMHO, there's nothing like these little motors up top!!

pdq67

SooperDave
Aug 5th, 05, 01:34 PM
To put this story to rest. My friend got to mad about the shafiroff b.s. that he yanked the heads (sold them) and pulled out the cam. We put a set of fuelie heads back on with the 140 cam and correct Z manifold. That combo dynoed at between 245-250 rwhp at between 5900-6k. He's keeping this stock setup and starting to collect the necessary parts for a 383 build this fall. :beers: