You can type here any text you want

204/214 cam works good think I'll try a 221/230 cam

Welcome!

By registering with us, you'll be able to discuss, share and private message with other members of our community.

SignUp Now!
R

REDS HOT AIR

Buick Tweaker
Joined
May 24, 2001
Messages
3,433
been looking at alot of cam profiles and looking at this one pretty hard

anyone running anything like this?

I rember when I started talking about the 204/214 I got hammered by people saying it wont work right but obiously it works pretty good but I'm at the point I need to shift my power level up to get more power up in the higher rpm range

I'm looking to get the motor to pull strong all the way to the factory ecm's highest rev limiter at 6375 rpm

its .485 lift both intake and exaust and is cut on 110 lobe spread

looking for thoughts on this cam profile good or bad you wont hurt my feelings any

:)

major changes coming..... need to know the fastest a stock block has been so I'll have a goal ;)
 
Reds,
It certainly will be interesting. Is this cam low buck like the other?
 
REDs who makes this one? That might work well!! I would of thought the lift might have been a bit bigger though with that duration??? :cool: Frank
 
Cam choice...

Sounds like a lot of cam. But I guess anything is possible.

...I think for the power level you're at I would be looking at roller cams. Although not needed, with the rpms you want to turn, you are going to have to run some crazy seat pressure on those valve springs to insure the valves are not floating. With a flat tappet and high seat pressure valve springs(say 130's atleast) you will be looking to round off the cam rather quickly if the car sees much if any street driving. With a roller, you can run big seat pressure on the valve springs(140's or more) and not sweat it. Ofcourse you will pay more for the roller, but you will have piece of mind. I know for a fact Roy Garcia(9.90@136, steel heads) is running a roller.

Just some food for thought...
 
I think it will work great but 1.6 rockers wil help a bunch IMO. The only downside is that you will have to run more stall in the converter. All other things being right and if the car is operated in the cams RPM range the big cam will make more power. With my old M&A head motor I had a 248/248 .670 lift solid roller on 112. I did shift it at 7700 rpm BUT This cam went 139 MPH with 19 PSI from a 70 turbo (4 bolt) so it will hard to convince me that big cams don't work.
Mike
 
Mike,

Was that in a 3.8 or a 4.1 Stage motor?

Red,

I had a custom Billet roller made for my stock block project.
It has 230/224 and lift in the 600 plus range. It works great with
an art carr 16930. The motor is in IDAHO GN's car and will be at Turbo Thunder this weeked.
 
I'm looking at it more as with the lower lift and the longer duration it shouldnt be rear hard on the valve train since the ramps dont have to be real steep

If you want bigger they have a 517/541 lift thats 231/239 at .050 but its ground on a 108 spread


The 221/230 cam is listed as power range from 1500-6000

check out www.ultradyne.com

as far as roller ... thats way outta my budget :D

from the flow #'s I've seen posted with Iron heads they all seem to start leveling off after .400 lift and are definatly leveling off by .500 lift so I'm not seeing the added stress on valvetrain to lift the valve up more for a cfm or 2

mine are sitting by the flow bench now and I'll be seeing soon where the flow starts leveling off on mine

I'm finally stepping up to 1.77 valves .. ye haw .. lol
 
Isn't 110 a pretty tight centerline for that much duration? Won't you get a lot more overlap than with the 204-214? If so you will give up some bottom end for sure, and maybe some spoolup too. Maybe a little smaller cam but with less overlap would be better (but that's just my guesses).
 
cams

Red, don/t know how you feel about computer programs for eng. building. I know I was very leary. Once I started using the so called reverse pattern cams, ( For my 3.8 and 4.1 production eng. ) I was sold. I wanted to go to a reverse pattern roller for my stage block. One of my best friends suggested we plug some info into his program. We took a Com catalog, and with highly ported iron heads, putting in 3.8 and 4.1 #, the best cam was their 218--224 with .504 and .520 lift. To hell with what lots of people say, this cam WORKS. BTW-110 lobe center More duration than 224 hurt HP #. This may or may not help---Lee
 
Mike, whats up with that 224-224 you sell? that has 110 degree seperation? may work well in Reds app.
 
NICE LITTLE HYDRAULIC SCHNEIDER

#05006 290-0H Hydraulic Lifter Camshaft <----(non-roller)

290/300 advertised duration

224/230@.50

.512”/512” lift

112 overlap

110# springs

HTH :)
 
Hey from what i have seen you don`t need a big cam to get the job done. I know more cars running fast with smaller cams on a 231. I know Roy`s car ran 10.00s @134 at renolds and it had a 218 hyd and the turbo was shot it had atleast a 1/4 inch of gap around the wheel to the housing and stock headers that were leaking so the new cam really did not make a big difference we could have gone 9s easily back then . Reds you are running a lockup torque convertor so be conservative. Small cams are not as affected by backpressure as the bigger cams are, why do think bigger exhaust housings make more power .
 
Reds,
I would love to see a dyno graph of your combo and see your TQ and HP numbers. More importantly, where your HP and TQ peaks are with the 204/214.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

TurboTGuy
This was a fun weekend. (kind of a long read, sorry.)
2
24
3K
TurboTGuy
TurboTGuy
E
Turbo Buick ROOKIE here, need some help/advice
19
3K
fast86gn
F
M
Parts advice for engine rebuild
2
31
7K
Mikko R
M
Wrath
87 Grand National, First car
2
38
9K
Ttype6
T
G
1987' GN , new engine , will trade !
18
3K
NilesMike
N

Online statistics

Members online
2
Guests online
1,345
Total visitors
1,347
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Newest members

Stay Connected

Back
Top