[brewcitybirs]

I'm looking to build a .035 or .040 455 for my 1975 Grand Prix. I'm looking for a hydraulic flat tappet or solid cam recomendation. I know these days a hydraulic roller is usually the way to go but trying to keep cost down. Just want a fun street motor as the 180hp stock 400 isn't cutting it. I built a pretty stout 351W based motor for my 59 F100 with a nice hydraulic roller and aftermarket heads so don't want this car to be all that radical.

While this is my first Pontiac I have several friends that are Pontiac guys and want to use what they have laying around where I can.

The car is obviously pretty heavy, I believe they tipped the scales at just over 4,000lbs. I have a 3.42 rear for it a plan on running a TCI Street Fighter 2800 stall a friend has.

As far as the engine I was able to score a 1972 4 bolt 455 that a local machine had sitting on the shelf. It was brought in by a customer years ago but they lost interest in the car and sold it as a roller. The machine shop is closing so they are just trying to clear stuff out. The block is .030 already so will need to be bored to .035 or .040.

The other pieces I have are the orginal old style Edelbrock circa 2001 6057 87cc heads, that I got from a friend that were on a 1970 Judge he bought, but he put the orginal heads back on. Plan on running a 4781 850 Holley as I have a new one on the shelf I didn't use on a past build. I also have a DUI HEI distributor. I plan on running the Ram Air restorations manifolds as they seem easier in this chassis. Plus nobody seems to make a round port header for a 75 Grand Prix unless anyone knows if the Dougs 70-81 Firebird headers would fit, but still kind of like the idea of the ram air manifolds. As far as an intake was thinking a Torker II as a friend has one of those sitting on the shelf. I would be open to a Performer RPM but the Torker seems more appealing right now as its cheap. Lastly the heads came with 1.65 Crower rockers.

The only cam anyone has laying around is a Crower 60213 but that seems like a bad fit with ram air manifolds being a 108LSA.

The 2 cams I was mostly looking at were the Crower 60919 RAIV replacement or the Crower 60311 solid. Both are ground on a 112LSA so I figured they would be better with the manifolds. The spring specs aren't that far apart between the 2 so I'm thinking I could run either. The springs in the heads happen to fall right in between the 2 specs. I like solid due to the simplicity but the 60919 is in stock on the shelf.

From some dyno results i've read on here both of these cams seem to perform well coming in right about 500hp and 550 ft lbs tq.

I don't really want to go with a Comp XE grind as I've seen to many of those lose lobes. The Lunati Voodoo may be ok but not real familiar with them. Most of the Pontiac builds I've been involved with have been Crowers as most of the cams my friends ran were spec'd out by Dan Whitmore and Crower was his cam grinder of choice. I know a hydraulic roller would be better but don't really want to cough up $1400 for cam, lifters and new springs.

Sorry for my long winded rambling, anybodys thoughts on this would be appreciated.

Thanks, Jay

[mgarblik]

I would call Bullet cams and ask to talk to Tim Goolsby. Based on what you posted they have a 276/284 that you could have ground on a 112-114 even that would be an excellent choice for what you are doing. Decent idle and about 50 HP up from the 067 cam the engine probably has in it. $130-140 for the cam custom ground.

[brewcitybirs]

Originally Posted by mgarblik

I would call Bullet cams and ask to talk to Tim Goolsby. Based on what you posted they have a 276/284 that you could have ground on a 112-114 even that would be an excellent choice for what you are doing. Decent idle and about 50 HP up from the 067 cam the engine probably has in it. $130-140 for the cam custom ground.

Thanks I will check them out. I’m familiar with Ultradyne/Bullet from back in my dirt late model pit crew days.

I guess I should clarify, I only have the disassembled 72 H.O. short block. Didn’t have a cam with it. I was leaning towards the 041 grind as that is what the Edelbrock cam is based off of.

[mgarblik]

I re-read your first post and you will probably want a little more camshaft than the one I mentioned. I didn't catch you had E-heads. The 276-284 cam made 435 HP in my 421 with closed chamber 093 heads which are pretty bad. I would still talk to Tim though. Good luck with the build.

[PDC]

If I already had 87cc E-Heads and Crower 1.65 Rockers for a 455 build, it would be hard to talk me into something other than the 60919/RA-IV cam. Especially at .040 over with the 87cc heads, you may not need to run Rhodes lifters.

[Half-Inch Stud]

12.2 ET Signature cam is about the largest to go for Street. 6* less on Int/Exh would be as fun with good cold-start. I would welcome a lower LSA toward 108.

[Jay S]

If your up for a SFT cam, I would go that direction. Get face oiling on the lifter, and have the cam sent off and nitrided.

The summit 2821 is the same cam, in a different box, ground by the same company (CMC) as the RA4 Edelbrock performer RPM cam, and the Melling SPC-8, and Lunati’s RA 4 grind.

IMHO, the Crane regrind of the RA4 cam was the best of the RA4 regrinds, they are Assymetrical, the other regrind’s like the summit are closer to symmetrical. The cranes occasionally come up for sale here on the performance parts section.

The 60919 Crower is not ground like a RA4 cam anymore. It has less seat timing (more aggressive profile), it has the LSA narrowed up to 112 from 113.5. Does not need Rhoads lifter’s in a 455 anymore to idle nice.
The older 60919’s (about 12 to 15 years ago)are ground ground more like a RA4.

[Jay S]

I will take a custom Bullet cam over those other cams mentions every day of the week….like Mike said..talk to Tim.

[brewcitybirs]

Originally Posted by Jay S

If your up for a SFT cam, I would go that direction. Get face oiling on the lifter, and have the cam sent off and nitrided.

The summit 2821 is the same cam, in a different box, ground by the same company (CMC) as the RA4 Edelbrock performer RPM cam, and the Melling SPC-8, and Lunati’s RA 4 grind.

IMHO, the Crane regrind of the RA4 cam was the best of the RA4 regrinds, they are Assymetrical, the other regrind’s like the summit are closer to symmetrical. The cranes occasionally come up for sale here on the performance parts section.

The 60919 Crower is not ground like a RA4 cam anymore. It has less seat timing (more aggressive profile), it has the LSA narrowed up to 112 from 113.5. Does not need Rhoads lifter’s in a 455 anymore to idle nice.
The older 60919’s (about 12 to 15 years ago)are ground ground more like a RA4.

I wonder how the new 60919 stacks up against the old version as far as horsepower and torque? From what i've read the old profile worked really well with the Edelbrock heads.

Was the Crane RAIV you're speaking of the Blueprint version? Or the 284281 split lift which was Cranes kind of RAIV replacement? There were 2 versions of that one, both seemed to work well with manifolds. One friend ran it in his 68 GTO with a 455 and unported 6X heads another in a 69 Lemans post car with a 428. Both had cast iron intake and ram air manifolds and both ran 12.90's.

[Jay S]

I was referring to the crane RA4 replacement versus the other 041 replacements like the Melling SPC-8, summit 2821. The way it is ground it looks too me like it has the most potential top end power of the 041 type grinds. I have ran the others, but have not ran the crane 041 duplicate. I am going by the Cam DR files I have seen, versus what I have seen on the other grinds.

I think the crane 284281 had a broader more powerful mid range than Crane 041 replacement, or the other 041 grinds. If your familar with the 284281, I think it would be fairly comparable to a current Crower 60919. From what I recall the duration at .050” that the 284281 has over the 041s (and 60919 )it looses over the nose of the cam for high speed stability. The 284281 was a CCH2 high speed profile that didn’t need much spring pressure and was pretty easy on the valve terrain. Similar to a 60919 in that regard. It seemed to be done by 5000 in most 455s, probably a bit higher on an e head combo. It would be somewhat of a closer in comparison to what Crower sells right now as the 60919, but the Crower has a little smoother idle and not quite as big of a mid range push as the Crane.. They both top out at about the same RPM’s. You can take them past 5000 but they are pretty much done by 5. The SPC-8 has a few hundred more RPMs of power band, rougher idle, and not as much midrange power.

The old 60919 had more seat timing (as near as I can tell 297*int and 308* exh @.006” tappet, (versus 286*in297*exh on the current 60919), and had the LSA widened to 113 instead of the current 112. It was similar to a SPC-8, but a slightly rougher idle. The old 60919 idles rougher, liked Roads lifters, and probably at least 10 more HP on the top end on some combos with the current version 60919, but the newer version I think has more average power thru the mid range.

My favorite HFT profile are Cranes HMV’s and Bullet’s 48* and 50* intensity HFT profiles (those Bullet’s are a little older versions of a Lunati Voodoo). You can go quite a bit bigger on durations at .050”, and not loose vacuum or much rougher idle, run big rocker ratios and have more top end power with a broader power band. I have have been more impressed with the quality of cams from Bullet than Crower. I have had to return Crower’s because they were out of spec.

[Cliff R]

I built the original 455 engine that KRE dyno'd then made available before they came out with their aluminum "D" port heads. It was a 455 build based on the 4.21 stroke crank with 6.625" rods and Ross pistons. It was topped with out of the box Edebrock round port heads with the old "bathtub" chambers in them. They were 94cc not 87cc so I milled them down to get the chambers to 87cc. I used the Crower 60919 cam. At that time (early 2000's) the cam card with the cam listed the cam as having 304/316 advertised duration, 231/240 @ .050" and 113LSA with .470" lift on both lobes with 1.5 rocker arms.

The engine made 505hp/551tq on the dyno and pushed a 3900' 1971 FB to 11.50's at 118mph with DOT tires. It was NOT a race car just a street driven tires with good traction.

Back then the Crower cam was most likely a re-boxed RAIV cam from CMC, as most of those cams are.

As well as that engine performed on the dyno and at the track, plus good street manners the engine wanted more cam in it. It was done making power a tad early and not utilizing the excellent head flow from the early Edelbrock round port heads. IMHO the old Wolverine 5059 or Crane 234/244/112 cam would have worked better in that engine with good street manners and made another 20-30HP and pushed peak power to at least 5500rpm's.......

[Jay S]

I agree with Cliff the old Wolverine 5059 (Crane HP series 234,244) is a more powerful cam than the 041 grinds, and also more powerful than the Crane 284281.

I know if a 10:1 455, with the current version of the 60919 and 1.5 rocker arms, with stock 87cc round port E heads, RA manifolds, qjet, HO intake, 2.5” exh…I think going off of weight and ET at the track it is right around 450HP at the flywheel.

FWIW, Cliff could be correct and the old 60919 cams were all CMC grinds. I think Crower ground them though, and had their own version, but it was pretty close to the same as the CMC version anyway, so it really does not matter much. Shane, one of the cam designers at Crower, said the Master for the old version of Crower 60919 read 304* at .005”. IRC…He said it could vary from 301 to 308 at .005” tappet from coming off the cam grinder. It was never rated at .006” tappet like most cams. The new 112 LSA version of the 60919s seem to have quite a bit less seat timing, closer to a 60243 Crower with a longer exh profile. It is also ground of a different cam core than the CMC versions, it has a little narrower lobes.

[Stan Weiss]

Interesting info. If anyone wants to see a Crane card.

https://forums.maxperformanceinc.com...d.php?t=728453

5059 cam info
https://forums.maxperformanceinc.com....php?p=2382741

Stan

[Steve C.]

4.185 x 4.25"/ 467 cubic inches
Reported to me by the owner as unported KRE D-port heads with Crower 60919 cam. With link to dyno sheet.

502.4 hp at 5300 rpm

https://pontiacstreetperformance.com...d455MikeG.html



.

[Steve C.]

455 build from 21 years ago by my previous engine builder....

4.250" stroke / 6.8" rods / SRP pistons
Cleaned up Edelbrock heads, about 288 cfm at .600" and 10.3 compression.
Performer RPM intake with a Holley Vac Sec 750 carb.
1-7/8" headers.
Crower 60211 HFT cam (236@.050") with 1.6 rocker arms.

Depending on the pull, 509-513 hp at 5200-5300 rpm

( As with my previous post this is not specific cam recommendation, both for conversation only )

Previously stated... "I would call Bullet cams and ask to talk to Tim Goolsby"

X2 ( Tim's extentson is 102 )


.

[Formula8]

Originally Posted by Jay S

If your up for a SFT cam, I would go that direction. Get face oiling on the lifter, and have the cam sent off and nitrided.

^^This^^. I ran the 60310 in my KRE headed 463 and absolutely loved it. I am actually considering pulling my OF and getting Nitrided 60310 to replace it in my 433. Cool thing about solid flat tappets are that you will see/hear the lash start to open up if you are running into an issue while a HFT will just continue to grind itself away giving you little warning something bad is happening.

[Tandyman]

This is the cam card from my version of the crane 284281 cam.
I always suspected it was could be a reboxed 5059 . I certainly wouldn't expect
much difference in performance between the 2 .
I used it in a shade tree rebuild of a 455 (rings ,bearings emery clothe and one of those
3 finger hones ) with 96 heads . That motor in my 69 firebird with 3.36 gears, 350 tranny,with B&M holeshot convertor ran 12.7s and 12.80's at 106 mph. When the turbo 350 blew up and took the 336's with it I put in a turbo 400 and a 3.08 rear end and it ran in the 13.0 and 13.10 range .

Glenn

[brewcitybirs]

Originally Posted by Cliff R

I built the original 455 engine that KRE dyno'd then made available before they came out with their aluminum "D" port heads. It was a 455 build based on the 4.21 stroke crank with 6.625" rods and Ross pistons. It was topped with out of the box Edebrock round port heads with the old "bathtub" chambers in them. They were 94cc not 87cc so I milled them down to get the chambers to 87cc. I used the Crower 60919 cam. At that time (early 2000's) the cam card with the cam listed the cam as having 304/316 advertised duration, 231/240 @ .050" and 113LSA with .470" lift on both lobes with 1.5 rocker arms.

The engine made 505hp/551tq on the dyno and pushed a 3900' 1971 FB to 11.50's at 118mph with DOT tires. It was NOT a race car just a street driven tires with good traction.

Back then the Crower cam was most likely a re-boxed RAIV cam from CMC, as most of those cams are.

As well as that engine performed on the dyno and at the track, plus good street manners the engine wanted more cam in it. It was done making power a tad early and not utilizing the excellent head flow from the early Edelbrock round port heads. IMHO the old Wolverine 5059 or Crane 234/244/112 cam would have worked better in that engine with good street manners and made another 20-30HP and pushed peak power to at least 5500rpm's.......

Hi Cliff, Most of the reason I was leaning towards the 60919 was reading your posts on here about that combo it is very impressive! Another thing I want to add was reading your comments on the 60213. We expierenced the same thing in my buddies GTO. Car would not run faster than 12.21 no matter what we tried. Ended up switching to a custom Crower SFT 264/272 560/579 108 and went from Whitmore's stage 2 to stage 3 porting which wasn't much different. Car runs 11.71 at 116 with this setup.

Originally Posted by Jay S

I agree with Cliff the old Wolverine 5059 (Crane HP series 234,244) is a more powerful cam than the 041 grinds, and also more powerful than the Crane 284281.

I know if a 10:1 455, with the current version of the 60919 and 1.5 rocker arms, with stock 87cc round port E heads, RA manifolds, qjet, HO intake, 2.5” exh…I think going off of weight and ET at the track it is right around 450HP at the flywheel.

FWIW, Cliff could be correct and the old 60919 cams were all CMC grinds. I think Crower ground them though, and had their own version, but it was pretty close to the same as the CMC version anyway, so it really does not matter much. Shane, one of the cam designers at Crower, said the Master for the old version of Crower 60919 read 304* at .005”. IRC…He said it could vary from 301 to 308 at .005” tappet from coming off the cam grinder. It was never rated at .006” tappet like most cams. The new 112 LSA version of the 60919s seem to have quite a bit less seat timing, closer to a 60243 Crower with a longer exh profile. It is also ground of a different cam core than the CMC versions, it has a little narrower lobes.

Sucks to hear that the Crower stuff is inconsistent these days. That was all Whitmore ran in his builds back in the day.

Originally Posted by Stan Weiss

Interesting info. If anyone wants to see a Crane card.

https://forums.maxperformanceinc.com...d.php?t=728453

5059 cam info
https://forums.maxperformanceinc.com....php?p=2382741

Stan

Interesting info, it would appear the orginal version like pre 1995 284281 was the Crane version of the 5059. I added the cam cards for both versions below.

Originally Posted by Formula8

^^This^^. I ran the 60310 in my KRE headed 463 and absolutely loved it. I am actually considering pulling my OF and getting Nitrided 60310 to replace it in my 433. Cool thing about solid flat tappets are that you will see/hear the lash start to open up if you are running into an issue while a HFT will just continue to grind itself away giving you little warning something bad is happening.

Formula what amount of vacumn did this cam pull at idle?


Looks likes I'll be calling Bullet for a cam whatever way I go. 2 other questions for everyone, since i'm going to get a cam ground do you think going to a 114LSA would be better with the RA manifolds? Also what is everyones thoughts on the Torker II vs the RPM on this setup? I will be running a Holley 850 because I have it. Looks like Cliffs dyno pulls with the 60919 made more power with the Toker II but curious as to what everyones thoughts are what would work best with 5059 type cam?

Thanks, Jay

[Jay S]

The wolverine, crane 284281, and the Crane cam Stan listed the link for are all three different cams.

The Wolverine cam used the same profiles that are on the popular summit 2800, 2801, and 2802 grinds. The exhaust profile in the summit 2802 is the intake profile on the wolverine 5059. You can find it in a crane cams master profile catalog in the HV section of cam profiles. It has more seat timing then the 284281 or the older crane. By probably 10* at .006” tappet.

The crane cam Stan listed was a different cam than either of those cams. I think known as a fireball series? It was more aggressive than the others. It is aggressive off the seat, more so than the 284281. You can see on the cam card it is rated 290* at .0029” tappet lift, at .006” tappet it is going to be in the low 280* range. If you look at the cam card, it’s assymetric’s that show up in the cam card also. The .050” degree numbers are advanced 4* compared to the seat timings. You can see the same thing on the 284281 cam card. Only it is rated at a larger lift (.0054” tappet).

The wolverine is not as Assymetrical as the other cams, was not originally design by someone a Crane ( I think General Kenetics designed it ?).. It has a few more degrees of duration at .200” lift and more seat timing than the 284281 or the fireball.

[400 Lemans]

https://www.summitracing.com/parts/s...make/chevrolet I emailed SUMMIT a couple of years back trying to get these chevy lobes over on a pontiac core. Told them there would be alot of interest. You think that would be a simple request from them to there cam supplier.They sent back a recommedation of a similar comp cam on a 110. Oh well i tried.