What would an RV cam compare numerically to say something like Clifford's 260/264/etc? I've heard it's for low end torque and better fuel economy, is it a decent cam for a forced induction motor with stock internals and the four barrel TBI I've got on?

_________________
My car may be slow to sixty, but at least it's been reliably slow to sixty for more than thirty years.

"RV cam" doesn't refer to any specific camshaft. It's a term that's been used in the past to refer to a cam that's ground so as to promote low-end torque rather than high-RPM zoot. In general, that means short duration, medium lift and relatively low overlap, but most of the cams that have been on the market for the slant-6 have more overlap than you'd tend to want with forced induction. If I were running a supercharger or a turbocharger, I'd be mighty tempted to start out with the stock '60-'64 cam (232° intake, 228° exhaust, 0.365" lift and 8° overlap).

_________________
一期一会
Too many people who were born on third base actually believe they've hit a triple.

True - unless you know exactly what's going on in the motor, the stock cam is a safe choice and for street use not very much power from new cam that you can't get with boost.

_________________

Thanks Dan/Panic

_________________
My car may be slow to sixty, but at least it's been reliably slow to sixty for more than thirty years.