Moparchat - Home of MOPAR enthusiasts worldwide!



Go Back   Moparchat - Home of MOPAR enthusiasts worldwide! > Technical Forums > Performance Talk

Click here to search for Mopar cars and parts for sale.


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 07-25-2000, 07:34 PM
Hugh Hugh is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: georgia
Age: 56
Posts: 46
Question

I would like to thank "rat roaster" and "timty2" for your help with the voltage reg conversion. My next question is about cams. My 68 charger is all stock 440 4-speed with 3:55 gears (NON R/T) I will not race it, but I want The motor to lope. I was thinking of the 509 cam, Will it work OK with my combo Or should I go with something elese. I have had many Mopars, and dragraced them some. I have used this cam in a 74 RR with a lot of mods, but I don't know how it would work in a basicaly stock (rebuilt) 440. Any help or advice would be great. I just found this site a few nights ago, and it is great. Finaly people I can talk too and relate to.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 07-25-2000, 08:45 PM
ChristianCuda ChristianCuda is offline
Moparchat Barracuda Owner
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Edinburg, TX 78539
Age: 49
Posts: 784
Post

I would not go with the 509 I think it would bleed off too much compression. It would lope but your power would be so far down it will be better off with either a factory 440 Magnum cam or one step up is the 480 cam and the next step up is the 484 cam. The 509 is the next step but like I said unless you have 10:1 compression right now or greater the performance with that cam will degrade too much for you to be happy with.

I could be wrong so if anybody else feels differently or has tried this combo let us know.

I have the 509 right now in my 383 but it has a true compression of 11:1 actual with that cam is around 10:1. I can barely get by with pump gas.

Christian

------------------
68 'Cuda 383 Formula S recreation
Working on adding EFI
69 'Cuda Race Parts Car
76 Duster 273 recent transplant
95 Neon 2.0 SOHC best of 16.96
84 Dodge Ram D50 transplanting 360
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 07-26-2000, 03:06 AM
440 Jim's Avatar
440 Jim 440 Jim is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Lexington Park Maryland
Posts: 323
Post

I have had more than one guy at the track tell me they have "stock low compression" short blocks with the MP 292/0.509 cam. When asked they said around 9 to 1 CR. They were running between 11.5 and 11.99 secs, A-body, with open headers, M1 single plane, 4.10+ gears, 3500+ stall converters, pump gas.

IMHO, the 0.509 cam will work OK with a real 9.0 to 1 CR (505HP, 500 CID crate motor), but it will like 10 or 11 to 1 better. My Lunati cam which is between the MP 484 and 509 recommends 10 to 1 and 3.91 gears.

Christian, good to hear you can run premium pump with 11 to 1 and the 0.509. What total timing do you run? Any ignition curve data?
Aluminum or iron heads? Flat top or quench?


[This message has been edited by 440 Jim (edited July 25, 2000).]
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 07-26-2000, 02:00 PM
kamstra kamstra is offline
Inactive User
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: ON, Canada
Posts: 293
Post

I have a MP 509 in my 440 in a 72 Cuda. It has stock MP cast pistons and 915 heads. With a single plane intake and an eldebroke 750 Carb, it seems to run well. I just need some tuning.

I have no idea what my compression is? CAN ANYONE HELP HERE.

The engine sounds nice with the lumpy idle. I often times think that I may have been happier with a less agressive cam or better yet, a newer style cam from Hughes or Lunati or even Crane Cams. (BUT I had the cam already.)
You may wish to use a cam with less duration than the MP 509 which is 292.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 07-27-2000, 01:35 AM
440 Jim's Avatar
440 Jim 440 Jim is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Lexington Park Maryland
Posts: 323
Post

Your 440 is not the original motor for your 1972 'Cuda right? If your motor is a stock 1972 440, 4 barrel, then the factory claimed compression was 8.2, if it is a six pack engine, then 10.3.

The '72 heads were casting 346 which are typically 88cc, while the 915 heads you are using are typically 78cc. That swap will increase the compression about 0.6, so 8.2+0.6 equals 8.8. However, the claimed 8.2 was really lower I have been told, so I guess around 8.0 using a steel shim (0.020 thick) head gasket. If you used a composition type like FelPro permatorque, they are about 0.040 thick and will add about 5cc over the steel shim; reducing compression.

Now you mentioned MP cast pistons. If you are using P4529430 (+0.030), they claim 9.0, most likely with 88cc heads? Make the same adjustment as above for cc and gaskets.

Of course, this is an estimate since the engine was not measured when it was assembled.
------------------
440 Jim
E-Body Fish

[This message has been edited by 440 Jim (edited July 26, 2000).]
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 07-27-2000, 04:03 AM
Hugh Hugh is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: georgia
Age: 56
Posts: 46
Biggrin

Thanks for all your help in the cam choice. I have decided to go with comp cams 280H. I feel this is the cam for my setup. Mp has a lot of good cams, but this one falls in between some of the ones they offer. Again thanks for your help, I am sure some other problem will arise that only this board can answer.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Comp Cams Extreme Energy Hi-Lift (.904) Hyd. Cams CudaMike Performance Talk 4 09-16-2002 10:27 PM
Cams chris1070 Dakota Truck Forum 7 07-29-2001 03:51 PM
Comp Cams Xtreme Energy cams morrisbrw Performance Talk 2 04-25-2001 06:34 PM
Cams for 4.0 Jeeper4lfe Jeep Chat (Wrangler, Cherokee, etc...) 0 01-12-2000 05:36 AM
Cams WASFORD Jeep Chat (Wrangler, Cherokee, etc...) 5 09-24-1999 07:23 PM




All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:05 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
. . . . .