[Tom Vaught]

Originally Posted by tooski

Tom, that's what I thought; but, in one of the RA-IV cam streetability threads I posted the same info and was told there was no comparison because a real RA-IV had quite a bit more overlap.

Steve25: "The amount of overlap shown in post 9 is that same amount as a factory RA4 cam."

Sometimes you have to just gather your information over time and let the lay on the side of the road (conversation).

I have owned 22 RA-IV camshafts in my life and a couple of the HO Racing similar designs. Several cams, I sent to Camshaft Machine Company and had them compared to their Master Camshaft info by Don Hubbard and Glenn Corwin. Don was VP of CMC and Glenn was Chief Engineer.

But the point is everyone has their opinion. Some have facts, some have a lot of facts because they MADE the stuff.

Tom V.

Where you install the camshaft (advanced, retarded, etc), can have a effect on how the camshaft sounds at the rear of the car.

[Formulajones]

Originally Posted by big matt

Most reading i have done on this cam indicates usage of rhoads lifters, to tame the idle quality, ect as rhoads lifters do. But everywhere i look, rhoads is way backordered. Out by months. So i am looking so see if anyone has run without them and how your car responded. Or if anyone has a new set of rhoads they would care to part with, i would be interested in that as well. Thank you

Matt,

I have never found a need for Rhoads on the RAIV style camshafts when placed in a 455.

As long as the cam is installed at a proper ICL and you have a decent distributor curve with enough initial timing, a standard lifter on that camshaft will idle really well and produce 12+ inches of vacuum easily.
Setup the same way with Rhoads lifters I can make that camshaft idle baby smooth in a 455 as if it doesn't have a big camshaft at all, great for a sleeper build if you want a smooth idle, but not really necessary for vacuum production in a street car.

Compression will play a roll in this, and the more you have the easier it is, but if setup properly it works well enough even in a low compression 455.

As an example I did a hydraulic roller 239/243 @ .050 cam in a 10:1 455 on a 112 LSA, with standard roller lifters. By most peoples standard on the forum you would be led to believe that would be way too radical for a street car. I'll tell you it's very tame and easily daily drivable.

Even up here at 5000 feet elevation where engines typically make 3-4 inches less vacuum, that engine still idled at 850 rpm making 12 inches of vacuum, and once installed in the car worked the power brakes and AC just fine. It just has a mild lope at idle. Down at sea level you'll see the vacuum increase to 15+ inches.

Here it is on the run stand with a vacuum reading

https://youtu.be/FIYRsDTD_90

Here it is in the car

https://youtu.be/AOqwz3QlO5k

[Stan Weiss]

Originally Posted by big matt

This is one i have found for the hc-02

Based on the one page I have from a catalog that is shown as the TC-03 / 041HL

Stan

[Tom Vaught]

Some say a flat tappet solid lifter camshaft will idle like a smaller camshaft vs a hydraulic camshaft. Maybe it is so. All I know is I ran a solid lifter 255/260 .540/.565 106 c/l cam on the street for many years and did not have drive-ability issues.
But the car did not have Power Vacuum Brakes. If I reinstalled that camshaft in another engine I would use the Hydraboost system to help with the brakes. All Mustangs from 1996 had that system as PRODUCTION on those applications. (as have many GM/Ford trucks).

More than one way to resolve vacuum issues with brakes and larger camshafts.

Tom V.

[Stan Weiss]

Originally Posted by tooski

In a 10.1 cr 400, KRE, HS 1.65's. This is the 'cam card' I got when I bought it in the middle 80's. I went with the recommended lifters and springs. I'm fairly certain the lifters are not Rhoads or bleed downs. 10.5 - 11" vac at 750 rpm. I'm finding it just a bit difficult to keep my foot out of it. I do have a vid of it idling, if you like.

Based on the one page I have from a catalog that is shown as the TC-02 / 744HL

Stan

[steve25]

So Tom, are you saying I am wrong?

[Stan Weiss]

Originally Posted by Tom Vaught

Some say a flat tappet solid lifter camshaft will idle like a smaller camshaft vs a hydraulic camshaft. Maybe it is so. All I know is I ran a solid lifter 255/260 .540/.565 106 c/l cam on the street for many years and did not have drive-ability issues.
But the car did not have Power Vacuum Brakes. If I reinstalled that camshaft in another engine I would use the Hydraboost system to help with the brakes. All Mustangs from 1996 had that system as PRODUCTION on those applications. (as have many GM/Ford trucks).

More than one way to resolve vacuum issues with brakes and larger camshafts.

Tom V.

Tom,
That is a proven fact that if both cams have the same 0.050" duration. Now that said how much different will depend on a number of factors. One of the major factors is the height of the lash ramp.

Stan

[big matt]

Alright. I ordered some hylift johnson lifters. We'll see how it goes. Thanks everyone

[Tom Vaught]

Thanks Stan.

Happy Holidays to you and Family.

Tom V.

[Stan Weiss]

Tom,
A Happy Holidays to you and your Family, and also everyone here on PY.

Not to take this thread off topic I have started a separate thread about cam 0.050" duration.

Stan

[KEN CROCIE]

The TC-03/041HL is a torque converter combo. we recommended the TC-03 with the 041HL The TC-03 was(is) a 10" converter based on the "SuperTorque" line of converters. CROCIE JR. still uses this line of converters . Low slip at cruse and appropriate stall for the cam involved, P/N 16020 from Art Carr-Cal. Performance Transmission.

[Stan Weiss]

Ken,
I have seen a few cam cards post over the years where there is a letter following the cam number. Like TC-01 TC-01A TC-01C and the number look different. Could explain this?

Thanks,
Stan

[KEN CROCIE]

Stan and others
The HC-01A, B, C. etc. were designations for the cams we had made from different grinders. They were all similar dur, & lift. Even back then, grinders ran out of cores .Unfortunately, the designations vs manufacturer vs specs are lost in history. After all, this was happening 30 years ago!

[Tom Vaught]

At the minimum, Ken, you probably would have had a Camshaft Machine Cam, A Universal Cams camshaft, a TRW Camshaft, possibly a Clay Smith Camshaft, with a lot of the cores supplied by CWC.

Just going from memory.

Tom V.