-
-
Re: 1962 Solid Lifter Cam
No need to be confused on the cam. Just put back in there what came out of it. The 097 and adjust the valves by the book. .012-.018. You won't be disappointed.
Crane, Melling, Federal Mogul and others make a replacement. -
Re: 1962 Solid Lifter Cam
Jeff, Refreshing question you asked. Here's what to use and there will be no excuses. Speed Pro CS113R Sealed Power by Federal Mogul. Used to be the old TRW TP113 cam. WE have been using it for ever. Even when the '097 was available from GM because it was 1/2 the price. My freshly rebuild 63 FI engine has it and it sounds good. Had the option of using a NOS or a Speed Pro cam. Idles at about 875-900 putting out good vacuum. 2000 RPM = 18-1/2", 1000 RPM = 14-1/2". Those numbers were taken when the engine was only run 1/2 hour. Later after it was tweaked it ran better and at a lower RPM.
I used the AT992 lifters from Sealed Power also. Ordered all of the above from my local Car Quest store. One of my customers last week said he ordered his from the NAPA dealer. Cheep also. About $150.00 for the works. IF you want to step up from this use a better lifter. Use the forged hi-dome pistons and you will have the old 60's sound. If you use the flat tops like we really should with the gas today the engine sounds different. Trust me I know that one for sure. Now I know you will get a flood of answers but I tell all the FI guys to use this cam and never got one negative feedback. Same as the original cam. GO to the archives and read up on the right oil to use or email me. JohnComment
-
Re: 1962 Solid Lifter Cam
Mike, I really like the Melling cam too. Hard to get around her though. Do you have the part number. I used to have it but lost it. Thanks, JohnComment
-
Call Bill at Performance Chevrolet at
602-254-9586 for a duplicate of the 097.Comment
-
Re: 1962 Solid Lifter Cam
The Duntov and LT-1 cams both have about the same effective overlap, and their idle characteristics and quality are indisguishable despite claims by some that they can tell the difference.
With massaged heads the LT-1 cam will make considerably more power (about 325 net @ 6500) than with a Duntov cam with about the same low end torque and usuable revs to about 7200, and you better replace those spindly connecting rods with something better like Crower Sportsmans.
Look back in July for a thread I started. I think it was titled "327 LT-1". This was the second 327 system engineering job I did; 80 percent torque bandwidth was 2100-6700, 90 percent 2450-6100. It started out as a 327/365 with a 30-30 cam, and the owner says the idle characteristics are indistinguishable from before the rebuild.
The first project yielded about 360 SAE gross HP on a lab dyno. I also have lab dyno data for a basic rebuilt 340 with no head work and the Duntov cam. It was about 300 gross @ 5500, which is about 270 net.
DukeComment
-
Re: 1962 Solid Lifter Cam
Jeff,
I agree, the correct original 3736097 cam, or an exact duplicate, would be the only way to go as far as I'm concerned. My personal preference is the direct replacement cam that Crane Cams sells but any of the other suppliers mentioned by others would work. I know exactly what you mean when you mention "the sound". That beat is unique to the 097.Comment
-
Re: Thanks for all of the info *NM*
Comment
Comment