068 or 2801 question
 

Guys like the 068 and 1.65 rockers is the 2801 the same as doing that?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

What CID motor are we making comparisons with here?

With stock D port springs and the installed height you can just get away with running 1.65 rockers, with the 2801 cam and its resultant. .488” / .514” lift your in trouble.

Performance wise the 2801 with 1.65 rockers will be closer to the factory 744 cam then the 068, but make more torque.

This is the intake valve lift curve.
Green line 2801 using 1.65:1
Red line 068 using 1.65:1
Blue line 2801 using 1.5:1

Stan

I don't think he's looking for big lift.
068 with 1.65s, or 2801 without. HTH.

Yes I was just comparing the 2 to me I would think install the 2801 cam instead of high ratio rockers is better the only thing that stands out is the 112 bs 113 center line but I’m still learning


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

does the 068 and the 2801 have the same power band like 1500-5000 rpm?

Here is the power curve on a small valve 400 (406 @ .030 over) with 9.94 to 1 compression, no porting and with log exhaust manifolds, iron intake manifold & Q-jet carb. The 2801 has a little more area under the curve and is a high lift 068 essentially. It's a great budget cam in a 400 with at least 9.0 to 1 compression. I shift this at 5600 rpm (where the TH400 shifts automatically). I bought (on sale) RPM 4340 I-beam rods bushed for full floating Icon forged pistons. The rods I don't believe available any longer, but we use Eagle H-beams a lot too.

Dennis

This may warrant a new thread but whats the deal the 067 cam? It does not seem widely used, is it sort an in between cam to the 066 & 068? Was it special for the 670 heads?

Both the 068 and 2801 with 1.5:1 rockers.

Stan

Most of the time the 068 will clear the intake pushrods with 1.65 rockers. It is close, and it needs checked, but usually will clear. The 2801 will probably need to have the intake pushrod hole on the head machined some to clear with 1.65s.

If the engine wants a little more cam, the 1.65s would help with either of those cams.

The 067 has never been reproduced. Most rebuilders use the 066 cam in 067 applications because of this. Too bad because the 067 is a great street cam for those building near stock engines.

It was used in numerous medium to high performance applications from 1965 on up to around 1974. The 009 cam used in 1964 GTO 389s and other early performance 389 and 421 engines had an identical profile to the 067.

So it was very widely used, usually if the manual transmission application called for the 068 the automatic transmission engine would use the 067. Sometimes the manual would use the 067 and 066 automatic.

Tons of non-HO GTO and Firebird engines both automatic and stick came with the 067, I had a standard 335 hp 400 4-speed ‘69 Firebird that came with the 067 for example.

So 670 heads or not isn’t relevant to the 067 cam usage.

Interesting, I had found a Summit 2800 during the Great Cam Shortage and it looks to be between the 066 & the 068 but not quite an 067.

Bart,
Butler just (last year) released a line of cams. I believe the 067, 068, 744 and 041 in flat tappet and HR versions. I'm guessing these grinds are still for sale???

2801 - 204/214 degrees at .050 with .422/.443” lift IIRC.

067 - 197/213 degrees at .050 with .407” lift.

So the 2800 is actually a little bit bigger than the 067.

I haven’t kept up with the current camshaft offerings from Butler, hopefully they’re accurate copies of the factory cams. The last time I was looking for a 067 cam I placed a want ad here and found a NOS 067, have since moved it onto another member who needed it.

I almost used that 067 in my 421 but my builder talked me out of it and I used a NOS 068 cam instead (which I’m sure he also thought was too small ;)).

The OEM 068 camshaft has long seat timing, wide LSA, gentle ramps and pretty easy on the lobes/lifters. They are NOT the same lobe placement as the Summit 2801 cam, wider LSA, and longer actual seat timing although pretty close @ .050" tappet lift.

I've always liked the 068 cam but never all that fond of the 744. The 744 was just trying to do too much while keeping the stock .406" lift....IMHO. I built two engines with the 744 cam early in this deal (not overly impressed with the results) then switched to HO racing cams, briefly to the ill fated Ultradyne line, then ended up going to Crower when HO closed up and Ultradyne never really got off the ground.

The HO racing cams made the grade and like the 2801 had the lift already built in. They were also long seat timing and most were wide LSA. My favorite in the bunch for mild 400 builds was the HC-01A. It would idle better than a factory 744 topped with 1.65 rockers and make more power everyplace.. Didn't need a butt-ton of spring pressure either.

Back to the 068 cam. It's easy on the valve train and does NOT require a lot of spring pressure or running room with the springs. This makes it a great choice for warmed over "stock" type builds where the heads haven't been and don't need "modified" for a lot of lift. Even with high ratio rockers you can maintain the stock 1.586" (1.6") height and be fine with it.

I really don't consider the 068 the best choice for a moderate compression 455 build, but for a 400 street engine with 9.5 to 10 to 1 compression it works very well. I haven't been able to get one to ping on pump gas with close control of the timing/fuel curves, and they idle with good vacuum and strong power to at least 5000rpm's without any porting anyplace. The last 400 I did with that cam was a 1967 with 670 heads, stock compression, tight squish and zero issues anyplace other that you couldn't even dream about holding it (4 speed car) on street tires thru first and most of the way thru 2nd gear!.......

How much hp is gained when one adds 1.65 rockers to an 068 ? On a 400 engine


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

1.65 rockers are not a huge game changer in top HP gains whats good about them is the torque bump they do provide throughout the entire power band soon after idle

only down side is pushrod to head , keeper to seal clearance, spring stack must be verified

Not many people like the cam I'm running ,but here it goes. I have a 406 with 6X4 heads. It has Doug's headers and 2.5 inch mandrel bent exhaust. Compression is 9.45 to 1 and 1.5 to 1 ratio roller tip rockers. Has Eagle H-beam rods and the red headed step-child cam from Comp. The XE274H-10 is in it. I know BOO HISS. I have to say I'm really satified with it. The engine was originally built by Len Williams with the 2801 cam in the early 2000's. I wanted a little more and put in the BOO HISS cam during 2011. Can't say enough about it, since it has treated me well. HP is 380 and torque is 420. Has a Holley street avenger 670 carb on the performer intake. Transmission is a TCI 700R4 and running 3.73 in the rear. It is a very satisfying ride while not being over done.

I posted the build Sheet in another post, but here it is with the cam card.

Runs really well and no problems with cooling. Here is a video of the sound the cam gives the car.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oP91rZkA84Y

Just putting the idea out there. Not telling you to use this cam.

Jim



I

I had the XE274 in my Red TA and never regretted it. At Butler's recommendation, I did have it ground on a 112* LSA and Nitrided. With Johnson lifters and good valvesprings, it was very quiet. It was in a .030 over 455 with forged H-Beams and flat-tops .005 down in the hole with E-Heads and Dougs Headers. Had an RPM Intake, box-stock Holley 750HP and DUI HEI. Car performed really, really well. I know a longer seat timing cam would have made more power up top, but for a weekend cruiser that never saw the high side of 5,000 rpms, that car was a lot of fun to drive. It was a 4-speed car.