Author Topic: 340 cam pick, again...  (Read 10692 times)

Offline 72bluNblu

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1836
340 cam pick, again...
« on: October 09, 2008 - 02:39:31 AM »
Ok, so I know this has been covered before, but picking a cam depends a lot on set up so I thought I'd post it up again  :grinyes:.

I'm rebuilding a 340 for my '72 challenger. Currently I plan on running this set up: '68 340, .060 over with the stock forged crank and stock rods w/ ARP bolts, KB 243 series 10.2:1 pistons and edelbrock heads (looking at going with the hughes prepped versions, but at least out of the box eddy's).  I've already got an Edelbrock RPM airgap manifold, Holley 770 cfm street avenger, Hooker super comp 1 3/4" headers into a 2.5" crossover exhaust (likely side exit), and an A833 OD trans with a 3:55 posi all ready to go in with the new engine. No tire specs yet, and I still need to get rockers. I've got power disk brakes, but the stock A/C and power steering are going away. I'm looking for a pretty lopey cam, and want to be around 400 hp with the engine. The car is going to see mostly street use and some "just for fun strip" time, and while this is my driver (my only car actually) I'm just fine with it not having perfect street manners, in fact, I'd prefer to have to work a little at driving it (got to keep it fun!).  :burnout:

I've seen CP recommend the Lunati 60403 before, and I think Lunati is probably the way to go, but was also wondering about the 60404 (276/284  .513/.533)- will I still have enough vacuum to run the brakes? How about the Mopar performance 4120233 (292/292 .508/.508 )? Or the edelbrock performer plus 7177 (308/318 .488/.510)?

Thanks!  :2thumbs:




Offline Chryco Psycho

  • Administrator
  • C-C.com Guru
  • *****
  • Posts: 36620
  • 70 Challenger R/T SE 70 tube Chassis Cuda now sold
Re: 340 cam pick, again...
« Reply #1 on: October 09, 2008 - 03:16:54 AM »
Well Lunati VooDoo or the Engle K56/58 split would work well , even going 1 step up to the k58/60 or the 60404 Voodoo
both of the other choices you listed run more duration with less lift , no advantage to that as it will idle worst , cause more probs with power brakes etc
 working to keep a car running on the street gets old fast , stalling at lights or having to side step the gas while on the brakes to keep it runnign or having 1300+ idle speed gets old
 Trust me you have have a Ton of power without the hassles

Challenger - You`ll wish You Hadn`t

Offline moper

  • Resident
  • *****
  • Posts: 2368
Re: 340 cam pick, again...
« Reply #2 on: October 09, 2008 - 12:59:15 PM »
I think if you plan to run those heads, you can go at least 1/2 pt of compression more and be fine. The carb is a little large for a 3.31 stroke. It equates to and 830cfm dry flow old school holley... which is what Lunati's reccomendation is based on (They say 700cfm...dry flowed) The 670 Avenger is a much better choice if you havent bought it already. Also, I dont think any of those choices will be enough for power brakes to work with a sane idle.

Offline 72bluNblu

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1836
Re: 340 cam pick, again...
« Reply #3 on: October 09, 2008 - 01:30:40 PM »
At the moment I'm leaning to the 60404, although I was curious about the edelbrock cam simply because I'm running the RPM heads and intake and would like the cam to be well matched to those obviously. I'm no cam guru though, so I really don't know if the edelbrock rpm cam is a better match than the lunati. As far as the 770, when Mopar Muscle did a stock 340 build up they put a 800cfm thunder AVS on an otherwise stock 340 and gained 35 hp and 22 ft lbs of torque, with the carb just out of the box; the edelbrock heads will flow better than the stock X's and any of the cams I'm looking at will be more radical than the stocker, so thats how I based my decision for the carb. Lunati recommends a 750 cfm for the 60404 and a 700 for the 60403.

As far as the power brakes go, they're on the car now, but if it doesn't work out I'd much rather convert to manual than short my engine. I've driven manual brakes before, so thats no big deal. I really do like my vehicles to be no frills cars that take more than a little driving skill to handle. In the past I've driven a '56 Austin Healey roadster, set up for vintage racing with its original 1956 162 ci 4 banger putting out over 150 hp, year round on the street (for about 5 years), as well as a '56 ford pickup with a 3 on the tree that I drove in LA for a year (talk about a left leg workout!). The challenger already keeps my dry when it rains, and I doubt the clutch effort will be anywhere near the old ford, so if the idle is on the rough side and I need to heel-toe a little its fine by me, I just want that 340 to be wicked...

Offline moper

  • Resident
  • *****
  • Posts: 2368
Re: 340 cam pick, again...
« Reply #4 on: October 09, 2008 - 03:35:55 PM »
As I said, lunati's using dry flow cfm ratings which was industry standard for many years. Avengers are wet flowed, as are BG's Demons. Which means they are rated with fluid going thru them. It takes up some volume. A dry flowed carb is flow 750cfm of air alone. A wet flowed carb is flowing fuel, plus air, and rated together. Take the fuel away, and the carb flows a lot more air. The difference is about 12% more air when a wet flowed carb has the fuel taken out. The 770 Avenger is 850ish cfm when compared apples to apples 4150. 3310, RPM series'.   
With a set of 3.55s, I think the smaller cams are the better choice even with the stick. You can go much bigger, but honestly, the drivability of the car will suffer in the ranges you spend most time in.

Offline quagmire

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 567
  • Traction Impaired......
Re: 340 cam pick, again...
« Reply #5 on: October 09, 2008 - 03:59:04 PM »
I wouldn't run the Eddy Performer RPM cam, I have it in my 408 with the same heads and intake as you.  I think it runs a little too much duration and way too little lift.  Idle is a bit choppy, and considering the specs it shouldn't be all that bad.  It would be much worse in a 340.  I also bought the whole deal like 6 or so years ago when I didn't know any better.  The package deal thing is a joke, the heads and intake work well together but that cam is as generic as they come in my opinion.  Depending on what I find when I pull the intake on mine, I may be switching to an Engle or Lunati cam with a whole lot more lift and slightly less duration.

Offline 72bluNblu

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1836
Re: 340 cam pick, again...
« Reply #6 on: October 09, 2008 - 07:21:55 PM »
Thanks for the info quagmire, that helps a bunch! I was wondering if anyone had run either the eddy or mopar cams, I know the lunati is pretty popular around here.  Looks like the Lunati is the way to go though...

Offline 71chally416

  • Resident
  • *****
  • Posts: 3170
    • The Streetwalker
Re: 340 cam pick, again...
« Reply #7 on: October 09, 2008 - 09:16:12 PM »
I kinda have a strange setup in my 416. I had a .538" lift MP solid cam on the shelf that was already broke in, so I used that. It has over .600" lift with the rockers I'm using. It's very tough to hook the car up before 3rd gear and it just keeps pulling up to where I shift it at 6,500. It idles real nice and doesn't sound that radical. It seems to be a good combo with the parts I'm using. I'll try to make a wave file of it idling this weekend.   
Once we had Ronald Reagan, Bob Hope & Johnny Cash. Now we have Obama, No Hope and No Cash!

Offline 72bluNblu

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1836
Re: 340 cam pick, again...
« Reply #8 on: October 09, 2008 - 09:23:19 PM »
I kinda have a strange setup in my 416. I had a .538" lift MP solid cam on the shelf that was already broke in, so I used that. It has over .600" lift with the rockers I'm using. It's very tough to hook the car up before 3rd gear and it just keeps pulling up to where I shift it at 6,500. It idles real nice and doesn't sound that radical. It seems to be a good combo with the parts I'm using. I'll try to make a wave file of it idling this weekend.   

That would be awesome! I've seen a .528 mechanical flat tappet cam by MP, looks like a better cam than the .508 MP offers, more lift and less duration...

Offline 71chally416

  • Resident
  • *****
  • Posts: 3170
    • The Streetwalker
Re: 340 cam pick, again...
« Reply #9 on: October 09, 2008 - 09:31:52 PM »
That's the one I have. I just wanted a break in cam in there that wouldn't be shedding metal on the new crank that still had all the lobes left.  :lol:  I didn't really expect it to work as good as it does. I'm not really looking to change it anytime soon. Maybe if I ever get it to hook  up?  :clueless:
Once we had Ronald Reagan, Bob Hope & Johnny Cash. Now we have Obama, No Hope and No Cash!

Offline bigfoot

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 14
Re: 340 cam pick, again...
« Reply #10 on: October 09, 2008 - 09:53:11 PM »
Has anyone run any solid rollers in their 340's?  I'm planning my 340.  11 to 1 compression, fully ported edelbrock rpm's and looking hard at the comp xr286r solid roller 248/254 576/582 106 centerline and 110 LSA.  Anyone have any experience with a this or a similar combo?  Will be in a 4 speed 73 cuda.

Offline Chryco Psycho

  • Administrator
  • C-C.com Guru
  • *****
  • Posts: 36620
  • 70 Challenger R/T SE 70 tube Chassis Cuda now sold
Re: 340 cam pick, again...
« Reply #11 on: October 10, 2008 - 12:15:13 AM »
the 528 is a great cam , I usually use 1.6 rockers with it
 the last solid roller i used in a small block the link bar broke & the lifter ate the cam in about 30 seconds

Challenger - You`ll wish You Hadn`t

Offline moper

  • Resident
  • *****
  • Posts: 2368
Re: 340 cam pick, again...
« Reply #12 on: October 10, 2008 - 11:20:56 AM »
bigfoot, I've run them. I won't run them without bushing the lifter bores. But no major issues there. That cam in a  340 is large. Very large for a street car. I would push your static up to 11.8and run a tight quench. It'll sound gnarly...

Offline bigfoot

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 14
Re: 340 cam pick, again...
« Reply #13 on: October 15, 2008 - 11:34:09 PM »
Moper, what do you think for quench? .040?  I would prefer pump gas, do you think at 11.8 to 1 there would any prayer of keeping it on pump gas?

Offline 72bluNblu

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1836
Re: 340 cam pick, again...
« Reply #14 on: October 16, 2008 - 01:30:55 AM »
11.8:1 on pump gas? I doubt it,most of the general estimates I've seen are around 10:1 with iron heads, 11:1 with aluminum for pump gas...