RE: [Chrysler300] Uplifting Cam Questions

I agree with Steve and George C. I cannot believe that comp cam is “too High”, given .018 difference ; but respect George R statement—but that clearance is easily checked at installation. ; I did find George R was a real stickler for originality , on any question you asked him directly, (=What I called “Chevy casting serial number match” mentality, with original battery acid) right down to crummy hinged power steering pump design of F that never worked after 20k miles . I made a kit in early 70’s for my F’s to make that pump solid = end the belt misery and the obviously tilted and rattling PS pump pulley. =Bad design, even if on a 300.

I have to laugh , as when it came to his J, all ideas of “stock “ are/were off. = You keep yours stock to MOPAR spec, or I’ll kill you, ---but mine is hot rodded to the max, but I’ll deny that. Smile .Love George R, wish he could join this posting.

As far as degreeing in cams, this is a general thing that moves torque output around a little vs. RPM , and might be changed by Chrysler to optimize cam torque output to best complement the fixed vs. RPM torque boost provided by ram, ----not by influencing ram action , (set by time between successive valve motions, and length of tube ) but by moving the inherent cam torque profile to better compliment , either smooth out or make more peaky, overall torque boost . Probably smooth it out, vs. . RPM. I did notice Tru Roller cam chains sold by HH for 392 has three keyway grooves for this, you need cam degree wheel to do it right.

My .02.

Still no info on ID’ing these cams sitting on a bench. We have now looked at three 392 cams 2 of which are supposed to be D cams and the 3 digit numbers vary, although one J-Y looked at matched the last 3 digits on mopar part number—for a NY er 392. Mystery remains.

I did find that comp cams offers a two level service to put any cam on a machine and plot lobe, give you results, probably they know by looking solid or hydraulic; first level adequate, upper one is to .00001 or something, big $ ; maybe we should do this for each letter cam, then we know exactly the lift profile. But for a B block, today’s over the counter hydraulics are better than original for performance, with no real drawback . The technology has advanced , for same or near same duration. What I would do on a wedge for sure, (match duration within 5 degrees) and on a hemi if I had that choice at 270 degrees ; 280 may be too much with today’s grinds , do not want stalling and low mpg. Note that you want and can have MOPAR only curves which are better than generic Chevy; Chevy/Ford are limited by ~.870 lifter OD, all mopar are over .900, allows for better profiles. But many cam suppliers just put Chevy patterns on mopar cores. Comp does make this distinction, if you talk to them.

From: Chrysler300@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:Chrysler300@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Anna F Noia
Sent: Thursday, January 09, 2014 10:18 AM
To: News4ge@xxxxxxx; c300@xxxxxxx; Chrysler300@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [Chrysler300] Uplifting Cam Questions

George

I too want to know what your cam specs are. I just completed a rebuild to use the short long ram. I had the cam specs for mine (and still do somewhere) but cannot find them. I will locate them and compare to all these recommendations. One point not really discussed or even mentioned, is that the cam timing to the crank must be retarded 2 degrees at the timing chain gears. This is suppose to aid in the "sonic ram effect" or something to gain even more horse power and response. Most (or some) timing gear sets have multiple key locations on he small gear to advance or retard the cam timing to the crank. This point is significant and seems lost amoung all the other cam details being discussed. IMHO.

Best Regards,
Stephen A. Noia
1-408-210-4736 cell

From: "News4ge@xxxxxxx" <News4ge@xxxxxxx>
To: c300@xxxxxxx; Chrysler300@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Wednesday, January 8, 2014 6:40 PM
Subject: Re: [Chrysler300] Uplifting Cam Questions

Hi Rich,

When I saw that you're still searching for the right cam, I went thru my stuff again and checked the notes I made during one of my many conversations with George Riehl regarding ram K cam selection. I also had found the cam you're talking about at Comp Cams and asked George about it. He said the lift is TOO HIGH. The one he recommended is the special grind that I bought and like. I sent you the specs on it some time ago. I still think you can't go wrong on this one.

George Clineman

-----Original Message-----From: Rich Barber <c300@xxxxxxx>To: 'C Bilter' <cbilter@xxxxxxxxx>; Chrysler300 <Chrysler300@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; 'John Grady' <jkg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>Cc: Chris Pinder <kmaniak@xxxxxxx>; Don Cole <mr300k@xxxxxxxxx>Sent: Tue, Jan 7, 2014 2:18 amSubject: [Chrysler300] Uplifting Cam Questions

I continue seeking guidance on a replacement camshaft and related items in our ’64 300K ram engine. The existing camshaft had a lot of pitting on the lobes. I want to retain the solid tappets and adjustable rockers and find a cam that will provide operation and performance similar to the original. I want decent idle, good vacuum and good drivability.. I found the below-referenced pages on the club website to be very thorough and helpful and went back to looking at the multitude of cams available. I found the Comp Cam at this website to come closest to the original specifications of lift and duration: http://www.compcams.com/Company/CC/cam-specs/Details.aspx?csid=725&sb=0

This is what COMP says about it: Solid-Good with stock converter & comp. Near smooth idle in 440. Works good with 650-750 CFM carb. Excellent torque.

Specifications (Intake/Exhaust):

Comp Stock-AMA Spec’s Stock-Factory Drawing

Duration 270/270 268/268 268/268

Lift .468”/.468” .445”/.452” .444”/.450”

I claim no experience or insight on camshaft selection and did not find any other mechanical-lifter cam with anything closer. Everything else had higher lift which I guess might produce more horsepower, less vacuum and rougher idle.

So, I ask:

· Does anyone have actual good or otherwise experience with the referenced COMP cam or any other replacement camshaft for a ’63-’64 ram engine?

· Does the slightly higher lift put valve interference with piston tops at risk? I did note a few nicks in the piston tops of the ’64 300K engine from the parts car I bought.

· Any experience issues with COMP cams in general?

· Since I have a factory drawing for the cam, is there any interest in having some precise replacement cams ground? The factory drawing has lift to five decimal points at one-degree increments.

· The 300K Supplemental Service Manual shows valve and valve spring specifications http://www.summitracing.com/parts/cca-k21-246-4/overview/ I found the comparison of valve spring loads between the hydraulic-tappet Firepower 360 and the mechanical –tappet Firepower 390 engines and the with the same indicated 0.430” compression to be interesting and am wondering if ram-spec valve springs are available or particularly necessary? AMA specs and factory supplemental manual specs differ slightly, possibly due to typo(s).

· And, are the spiral-type surge dampers that fit inside the valve springs common items and readily available?

Summit carries this cam with optional lifters and valve train items: http://www.summitracing.com/parts/cca-k21-246-4/overview/

Thanks and best wishes for a Happy, Healthy, Prosperous and thoroughly C-300-K’ly New Year!

Rich Barber

Brentwood, CA (Convertible weather here)

From: Chrysler300@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:Chrysler300@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx?] On Behalf Of C Bilter
Sent: Monday, January 06, 2014 9:41 AM
To: Chrysler300@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; John Grady
Subject: Re: [Chrysler300] Cam specs different years.

John and all-

The attached from the club website is an old article but might be helpful in addressing some of your questions re. the original cam specs. http://www.chrysler300club.com/tech/cam/gk.html And, yes, you would be correct that the J cam would have been a little “hotter” than the F (375 hp hydraulic) cam as far as lift but same duration and less overlap. The J was faster in high speed acceleration (for example 0 to 100 mph) perhaps more likely due to lighter weight than the F and especially with the use of short rams with exhaust headers (vs. long rams and log exhaust manifolds) and perhaps the slightly larger exhaust valve size and larger 2.5 in exhaust system, and certainly the solid lifter/cam setup allowed for higher rpms as well and the setup was tuned to a 3600 rpm torque peak with the short rams vs. 2800 rpm for long rams. The F Special (400 hp solid cam) was clearly more aggressive (ie. tuned for high rpm power and less low end torque) than the J/ram K cam. The F Special was intended for high speed racing, not regular road use; whereas the J is perfectly suitable for the road.

Carl Bilter

Cub J consultant

From: John Grady

Sent: Monday, January 06, 2014 10:05 AM

To: Chrysler300@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Cc: 'Jean-Yves'

Subject: [Chrysler300] Cam specs different years.

I have run into some issues trying to identify 300 C or D cam specs, I have 2 what are claimed to be 300D cams, but have no ID beyond 3 numbers stamped poorly, near gear , in rough part of cam casting..sound right? Any one have a C or D cam they know is real , with description? I do not have those stamped numbers handy.

This brings up looking in aftermarket; only 392 “in production” “listings” seem to be Comp Thumper series, but those are hydraulic for 392. In looking more, hot heads has a 280 cam , solid and hydraulic, from which info I ordered a hydraulic for a non 300 392, and it turns out to be an Isky cam; Might be too much for a letter car. One person in their parts lists had a 270 Isky mega cam, both seem in right area, but was unsure what original MOPAR duration was.(for 375/380 HP cam) ; I did buy that 270 cam, price was right . That started me thinking about hi po hemi cam specs ,355 hp 354 and 390 HP 392. How hot did Chrysler go on cams? Having been young once , I also made the mistake of overcamming. Much over 280 is asking for it , especially with old Torque flight converter. (stall when you push D)

Without taking sides, a modern hydraulic is probably better than a 50’s solid; for one thing you should pick up lift due to lack of running gap, for same lift spec, and under 6K modern hydraulics do not cause problems ; and adjustment of solids, esp with adj pushrods, goes away, along with a big oil soaked messy hassle.....in going through all this also found out solid lifter push rods for C D ,probably all solid A block hemi, have 3/8 balls on both ends, hydraulics 5/16 ; on my supposedly “D” engine someone used 5/16 push rods, 5/16 hydraulic lifters with D rockers and supposedly D cam, all wrong . But Hot Heads makes 3/8 by 5/16 pushrods ( might be adjustable but lock them) so you could run hydraulic cam and lifters with D adjustable rockers , using Chevy approach of one turn tight beyond clearance click. But that means set up hot and oily. Not good.

This brings up more generally ram cam specs , long ram, and J cam specs. I had a J , much more cam in it than F , or so it seemed ; ----and what was in 400 HP F?-

While a lot to ask, it strikes me someone in club has all this at finger tips , maybe a list? Note also that difference in duration between advertised lift and lift at .050 duration in this range is about 50 degrees ; so a 280 is about 230 at .05.

Comments welcome ; it would be good for all of us to know this data; and then comes how to tell what cam is what. .

Also does anyone know a simple way to tell hydraulic from solid grinds? I know it can be done at cam manufacturer by some kind of cam plotter they have , which would show accell ramps on solids before main lift event . Maybe dial indicator on lifter in partially assembled engine, and plot it ? This problem will get worse, due to parts hoards with no real history, and now they are very old piles indeed.

Thank you,--as I say comments welcome.

John Grady