Tweet
I would like to know the factory camshaft P/N for my 1969 L46 (350ci/350hp) and if they are still available. If not, can anyone recommend a replacement close to stock? THANKS
-
-
Re: camshaft
3896962 should be the number you need, I think they are still available for GM, but I'm not sure, if not, they are generally available from TRW, Mellings and other sources. -
Re: camshaft
the speed pro #CS1095R for the cam.Comment
-
Re: camshaft
Mike----
I agree with Bill; GM #3896962 is the part which you seek. It's still available from GM for a current GM list price of $168.40. You should be able to buy it for less than that, though, from competitive GM dealers. I'd say about $125.
Replacements for this cam are also available from many other manufacturers, as Bill and motorman mentionedIn Appreciation of John HinckleyComment
-
962 a very good cam
The 962 in a 350 cu in small block is an excellent choice of cam for the street. It's got a strong bottom end yet performs well and isn't bad on gas. An all-around good compromise of goals by GM engineering.
Varooom!Comment
-
962 vs 151
Whats the difference between the 962 (350/350) cam and the 151 (327/350) cam?
BrandonComment
-
Re: 962 vs 151 cams
Brandon --- Here's the data from a typed sheet given to me by a Chevrolet parts man, back in the mid-70's.
# 3896962: Lift (zero lash) inlet = 0.450" exh. = 0.460". inlet duration = 346° exhaust duration = 340°, overlap = 114°
# 3863151: Lift (zero lash) inlet = 0.447" exh = 0.447", inlet duration = 342° exhaust duration = 342°, overlap 114°
Hope that's the sort of "difference" you were looking for.Comment
-
Re: 962 vs 151
962-.450/.460 lift,224/224 degrees at .050,60 degrees overlap. 151-.461/.461 lift,232/232 degrees at.050,70 degrees overlap.Comment
-
Re: 962 vs 151
add to above both cams have 114 lobe centersComment
-
Re: 962 vs 151 cams
Real differences are in where the intake valve opens and closes in the cycle. Same goes for the exhaust valve. The 151 cam was the basis for a new company that has gone far, Competition Cams. They cut the pattern on 110 degree lobe centers and cloned a series of varying durations for a product line. The rest is history. Tight lobe centers, although wasteful, provide a lot of bottom end torque.
Just because the 962 is a 350 inch cam it dosen't mean that a 151 won't out-do it in a 350 inch engine. Don't forget, it's the COMBINATION of components, heads, intake, exhaust, etc., that make up the performance profile in any application.
Varooom!Comment
-
Re: 151 specs
The 151 cam is .447 inch lift and 222 degree duration at .050. The cam is an older style symetrical design. These spec's are widely published. Blue printed versions are also available from cam grinders.Comment
-
Re: 151 specs
So the 962 cam was stock in my '69 L46 and the 151 was stock in '68 and earlier L79's ? Thanks for all the input guys.Comment
-
Correct
Because the 350 has a longer stroke than a 327 it can take a little more duration without killing the low end torque. All other things equal for either displacement the 151 should provide a bit more low end torque and the 962 should make a bit more top end power. Gene talked about the 151 being symetrical. Haven't studied the hydraulics, but the LT-1 cam is decidedly not symetrical unlike the Duntov. The closing portion of the lobe is stretched out a good 10 to 20 degrees to reduce acceleration as the valve is bought back to the seat. This helps prevent valve bounce at high revs, which can occur with a typical symetrical lobe. Chevrolet learned about valve bounce with the Optron in the early to mid sixties and incorporated the lessons in the new design for the LT-1. Not sure about the 962, but I suspect the lessons are there to, but it would take and accurate and comprehensive lift/crankangle diagram of both cams to compare the lobes and find out for sure.Comment
-
Re: Correct
there was a article in some magazine about how much better modern after market cams are over the 151, and i will see if i have it filed somewhere. the later cams make a lot more power with less driveablity problems.Comment
-
Re: Correct
I'm sure Mike was referring to "dual pattern" rather than "symetrical pattern" and meant that the intake and exhaust lobes were the same rather than the opening and closing ramps/faces.
VarooomComment
Comment