Team Camaro Tech banner
Cancel
Create thread New Garage Forums

69 327 needs new cam

Jump to Latest
1 - 17 of 17 Posts
D

Dano383

· Registered
Joined
·
67 Posts
Discussion starter · #1 ·
Hey guys,

I bought a 69 Camaro that's been sitting for some time. It has 2 intake lobes (#6 & # 8) that are just starting to flatten on me.

Looking to put a mild perf. cam in it to replace it just so I can run it around town for the rest of this year before a full restoration. It has the 441 heads and stock springs. Stock pistons and convertor.

I just got off the phone w/ Comp and they recommend the extreme energy 12-234-2
212/218 @ 0.50 and .447/.454 lift w/ 1.5 rockers

http://www.compcams.com/Company/CC/cam-specs/Details.aspx?csid=84&sb=2

Anybody else think it's a good pick for this stock motor & stock convertor? If so, Comp said I'd probably have to use the 981-16 springs. I asked but the tech wasn't completely sure about cutting the pushrod slots longer on these heads, or having to do anything to the spring pockets. Anybody know?

Thanks,
Dan
 
#2 ·
If that is the stock 210 HP 327, even that cam is a little big. The problem is that the 210 hp 327 only had the small 1.72 intake valves in them. They can't flow enough for that cam.
I would go a little smaller with about 206/212 @ .050 duration.

http://www.summitracing.com/parts/CCA-CL12-230-2/
 
owns 1969 Chevrolet Camaro
View garage
Save
Reply Quote Like Like
#3 ·
Dan

With a couple lobes going flat I'd be concerned about bearings. All the metal being chewed off the lobes is getting fed to the bearings. :(

Mark
 
Discussion starter · #4 · (Edited)
I checked and the heads are the 441 castings. What size valves for sure?

I'm not worried about the bearings just yet. I'm still reading good pressure and I didn't see too much of that "metal dust" spread throughtout the places I can access w/o pulling the pan. I don't think they're hurt bad, however they could go on me at any moment, I know that. I don't flog this car at all, just like to putt around town in. I've got a big resto project underway w/ my 69 Chevelle, and didn't really want to tear into this Camaro until the Chevelle was done. So I'm hoping to just replace the cam and keep it on the road until next year or so when I plan to get my Chevelle wraped up. If the bearings decide to let go, when then I'll fix it or build a different motor. I'd feel much different if it were a rarer car but it's just your ordinary plain base Camaro.

anybody know about the 441 head valve sizes for sure? I'm going out on the net to hunt for that info.

Later,
Dan
 
#7 ·
The only 327 that was used in 1969 models was the 210 hp engine with a 2 barrel carburetor and 1.72/1.5 valves. If it is not, then someone changed the engine.

I can only find 68-69 210HP engines had 7293 heads. 1968-69 3917293 307,327 1.72 1.5

Here are different sources that say the 441's had 1.94 intake valves.

1969-72 3932441 327,350 1.94 1.5
1969-72 3932441 327,350 1.94 1.5
3932441....69-70...350..........76cc chambers
1968-72 3923441 350 1.94 1.5001
 
owns 1969 Chevrolet Camaro
View garage
Save
Reply Quote Like Like
#8 ·
My 327/210 had the dreaded 293's, they SUCKED.
I had a rebuild done with all new stuff, and decked the block, so the compression may have been up to 9:1 but I doubt it.
Mine had a cam with a little lump, I think a 114LSA and .450" lift(measured), pulled good until 5,500 and ran flawlessly for years.
I just glanced over those cam specs, but they don't look too big, got a little more on the exhaust to help the already terrible flow of those heads.
What do the castings look like on the front? 2 Humps with squared straight sides, unlike the smooth camel hump performance heads? Or is it kind of a square with a peck in the center? I've seen both on the 327/210's I think most ditch the 293's as I've only seen one set on another stock camaro.
I've still got the mystery cam that came out, still looks brand new, just can't bare to part with it since it ran so well, wish I had the correct specs.
 
#9 ·
Your bearings are probably ok.

Chevy engineers designed the oiling system so the oil goes from the pump thru the filter and then goes to the bearings.
 
Save
Reply Quote Like Like
#10 ·
dont worry about the bearings -i have changed hundreds of cams when i worked at dealer-never a problem tho i would change oil again after couple hundred miles and use zinc additive in oil after swap--the 441 are the good heads 1.94--i might even install the 268 comp or the one they stated and i would install new springs and they will fit the pockets without any cup shims -i like these heads -if i am not mistaken, they came on the sbc 400 too
 
Discussion starter · #11 ·
I'm gonna work on this thing tonight after work. I can't get a good look at the face of the heads until I get the A/C compressor out of the way. Hopefully can get a good picture or two. Then hopefully somebody out there can tell what size valves this thing has by the visuals w/o pulling the heads???

Gotta find my oil filter cutter and see what's inside. I'm sure I'll find shavings, but I really don't think I'll be opening the pan to try and look at the bearings. I'm concerned but not enough to remove the engine and clean it all out.

Thanks for all the help so far!
 
#12 ·
Dan,
One thing to think about before you decide on a cam is how much lift your valve springs are capable of without coil binding. If you dont know, I would stick with the same cam that is in the engine now, unless you are willing to change them. Most stock springs wont take much more than .430 lift without issues. The "Z-28" type springs will go to
.500"
 
#15 ·
If these are 1.72 intake valve heads, I would not even consider a split pattern cam (Thought I've built 'em like this in the past). Why would you want more exhaust duration when the intake is so restricted. Think single pattern - something around 260-266 deg adv, 210-215 deg @ 0.050, 108-110 LSA.

EDIT: I just saw these are 441s. 441s had 1.94 valves, 74-76cc chambers. Your actual CR is likely 8.5:1 or less if this is the case if it is, in fact, a 327. My recommendation still stands. A low CR engine will not need / want the earlier exhaust opening you'll see when using a cam with more exhaust duration.
 
Discussion starter · #17 ·
I've decided to just go ahead a pull the motor out. After I had everything up front off down to the timing cover, I just thought well, it's down this far and wouldn't take too much more to just get the motor out.

I'm heading off to GM Carslisle today so probably tomorrow I'll be able to get it pulled and on a stand where I can open up the pan. I'll probably disassemble everything and get it all cleaned. We shall see. I post up some pics later.

Thanks,
Dan
 
1 - 17 of 17 Posts
About this Discussion
16 Replies
10 Participants
Last post:
Dano383
Team Camaro Tech
posts
2.4M
members
90K
Since
1998
A forum community dedicated to 1st generation Chevy Camaros owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about performance, builds, restoration, modifications, classifieds, troubleshooting, reviews, and more!
Full Forum Listing
Explore Our Forums
Bench Racing Engine Body Shop Performance Brakes, Suspension & Steering