[gtorich]

Had this cam in my 455 since 2010 when motor was done, im having some issues with the present motor using oil and leaking at the rear main...........had this rebuilt twice since i owned it.............and seems the same issues over and over.

So im thinking of starting from scratch with a block from Butlers and hoping for the best.

Was thinking of going to the stump puller cam, nothing wrong with the of cam, just seems to work much better at higher rpm...........im kind of a 0-50 play around guy, the of seems a little soft on takeoff, i have a 3.542 rear.........

Good choice or im not gonna see real difference one way or the other.

Rich

[Tom Vaught]

Post up specs of both cams.
Been a while since I discussed the numbers on each one.

Tom V.

[mchell]

Originally Posted by gtorich

Had this cam in my 455 since 2010 when motor was done, im having some issues with the present motor using oil and leaking at the rear main...........had this rebuilt twice since i owned it.............and seems the same issues over and over.

So im thinking of starting from scratch with a block from Butlers and hoping for the best.

Was thinking of going to the stump puller cam, nothing wrong with the of cam, just seems to work much better at higher rpm...........im kind of a 0-50 play around guy, the of seems a little soft on takeoff, i have a 3.542 rear.........

Good choice or im not gonna see real difference one way or the other.

Rich

Doubt you’ll notice much between the two grinds…..I’m running the “road paver” , which is a healthy step up from either of those grinds and I don’t see that it’s wanting RPM to come alive at all. I’m running a decent stall converter tho…

You might want to examine your stall more carefully and stay with the cam….or maybe you’ve got other mismatches somewhere?

[gtorich]

Tom, i think the specs on the stump puller are 230/236 and the old faithful is 236/242, dont have the numbers in front of me right now, but pretty sure these are right.

[gtorich]

Originally Posted by mchell

Doubt you’ll notice much between the two grinds…..I’m running the “road paver” , which is a healthy step up from either of those grinds and I don’t see that it’s wanting RPM to come alive at all. I’m running a decent stall converter tho…

You might want to examine your stall more carefully and stay with the cam….or maybe you’ve got other mismatches somewhere?

71 GTO, 463, KRE 295 cfm heads ported by SD Performance, RPM intake, Qjet, Dougs Headers, Comp cams HR 246/252 ...11 to 1 , 3.55 cogs, 3985lbs.....day three- 11.04 at 120mph ....1.53 60', 6.98 1/8 mile

Mchell, impressive numbers, i have the same 463 with the KRE 295 heads from SD, dougs headers, OF cam, but with a 66 tri power manifold, 3.42 rear...........im sure im not running the numbers you are.............i never been to the track, but im sure im not even near 11.04.....Rich

[gtorich]

Forget to mention, the car is a 4 speed, but i have a 5 speed tkx sitting in the basement ready to throw in.

Rich

[tom s]

What is the first gear on you 4 speed and what will be the first gear on your 5 speed?Tom

[mchell]

Originally Posted by gtorich

Forget to mention, the car is a 4 speed, but i have a 5 speed tkx sitting in the basement ready to throw in.

Rich

Well that negates the stall factor…. Lol

Something seems amiss…..you shouldn’t even notice that cam.

What kind of compression you running?

[gtorich]

Tom, the M-20 1st gear is 2.5 something..........1st gear in the tkx is 2.87.........went with this thinking i might go different with the 3.42 to say 3.73 ish...........

Mchell, Dave Hillard did the motor in 2010 he said 10.6 comp with the srp pistons............just thinking the car should run better than it does........

[25stevem]

Excuse the slight rant here please folks, and thanks in advance!

Your 100% right, it could be running better numbers but for the 290 cfm heads being put into idle mode by a tripower that at best flows 230 cfm!!

Also the larger area in head ports are not active enough with air flow velocity because of the simple fact that there passing far less air then there port area was opened up to handle.
This is killing your mid range torque that the motor could have!

And now the common response is, but the tripower looks cool!

Ok, that’s fine but then don’t complain that you feel the motor is not performing like it should!

[tom s]

The car will like the 3.73 with the 5 speed!World of diff in performance!Tom

[tom s]

You have a 8.61 first gear multiple now,with 3.73 and 2.87 you will have 10.70.The cam will like it MUCH better IMHO!Tom

[i82much]

OF 1.0 is just about perfect in my 505, rpm, holley 850 with a muncie ultra wide (2.98 first), 3.54 gears and 28 inch tires. i do run a fairly high idle speed, 1150 rpm or so.

keeping the idle mixture a tad rich and using the factory idle feed and iab sizes really makes it docile, trying to lean it out made it get a little balky at light throttle. i figure it makes more sense to change the oil frequently instead of dorking around with the carb to run leaner.

[Dick Boneske]

We have a 467 (455 block) with a mild Lunati Voodoo HR. KRE 315 CFM heads with '66 Tri-Power. The manifold is ported to match the head intake ports.

This is in a '68 Firebird with TH400, 3500 stall converter, 4.11 gears. Doug's 1 7/8" headers, MSD. It has frame stiffeners and traction bars.

This combo runs like no Pontiac I've driven. The throttle response and torque are awesome. When the trans is in first or second gear, mashing the throttle puts the car sideways very quickly.

The anti-Tri-Power crowd should try one sometime. I remember Dan Whitmore's '65 GTO ran 10.40's with a '66 Tri-Power. This was with iron RAIV 722 heads.

[gtorich]

Tom, unless im doing the math wrong, wouldnt i have 9.81 with 3.42 X 2.87............i knowing not the best, but can go higher if need be.

[gtorich]

We have a 467 (455 block) with a mild Lunati Voodoo HR. KRE 315 CFM heads with '66 Tri-Power. The manifold is ported to match the head intake ports.

Hey Dick, you have a # on that voodoo cam.............interested

[GTOLou]

I've got the original OF cam and it makes plenty of off-idle torque. Now mind you, my timing gearset - at "0" was 2 degree's retarted. I put it in advance 4 degree's by the timing gearset and that measured 2degree's advanced.

Car is a 76 TA w/ 3.23 gears, 27" tires - stock ST10 tranny (cannot remember 1st gear ratio).

If you OF cam is a slouch off the line - something is wrong..(too retarded?)..

[gtorich]

Originally Posted by 25stevem

Excuse the slight rant here please folks, and thanks in advance!

Your 100% right, it could be running better numbers but for the 290 cfm heads being put into idle mode by a tripower that at best flows 230 cfm!!

Also the larger area in head ports are not active enough with air flow velocity because of the simple fact that there passing far less air then there port area was opened up to handle.
This is killing your mid range torque that the motor could have!

And now the common response is, but the tripower looks cool!

Ok, that’s fine but then don’t complain that you feel the motor is not performing like it should!

Steve, you bring up alot of good points, the manifold was at SD im assuming they made things right..............hopefully they are are at the 295 cmf they are suppose to be at...........im thinking they are better than the 230 you stated, maybe not, who knows..........any other info would be great.

[tom s]

Your right,9.8154.Fat fingered something.Still damn close to 10 instead of 8.6!You will notice the diff in the ass dyno.The engine will come on the cam quicker.Tom

[tom s]

The 10.71 was with 3.73s which is what you want with a OD trans!Tom