I have a '84 D-100 I bought last month.

I use it for delivering parcels under 1000 lbs. in my side business. I would like to bring the fuel mileage up from 15.8 @65 mph to 20 mpg.

It has a single bbl, lean burn, A-904, lock-up?, 3.21 gears and 205 / 75 / 15 tires. The single exhaust under 2" and snakes around with constricting bends at greater than 90 degrees.

I am planning a conversion to HEI.

I need some help with dist. recurving.

I have an '82 head that has been shaved .100, has stainless oversised valves from Egge. It has been ported and bowl blended.

I am converting to Super Six with a new holley 2280 from Dan.

I want to consider upgrading the cam when I change the head.
I don't know what the original cam specs are for 1984. (anyone know?)

I have talked to Ken at Oregon Grinding. He has a grind with:

210 and 203 @ .050
260 and 252 adv. duration
.417 and .401 lift. enough?
lobe sep. @ 110 degrees.

Will this be enogh cam, or do I need to request a different grind.

Josh, I have tried to find the book you reccommended. Could refresh me as to the title and author. Thanx, Ray

Since this is an economy build with a stock torque converter I think that cam is a good choice. Do make sure that the duration is greater on the intake as you posted.

The book I recommended is Performance With Economy by David Vizard. http://www.amazon.com/Performance-Econo ... 0931472091

_________________
Joshua

thx, Josh. I ordered one on Ebay

When he gave me the numbers they were all in reverse order of what I listed. I cant imagine the exhaust geting all larger parameters than the intake.

Most dual-pattern cams have longer exhaust duration than intake duration. Do not let them grind your cam this way. Many engines benefit from the longer exhaust duration as the exhaust ports do not work as well as the intake ports. Slants have better exhaust ports. Tell Ken you want the longer duration on the intake side or you won't get it!

_________________
Joshua

I see you have a head shaved already for your build.When I asked about this sometime ago on my hydro slant I was advised that it wasn't all that simple because of rocker geo/push rod length.Question then how are you dealing with this issue? Inquiring minds yada yada..

_________________
83 B-150 slant 6,4 speed. 79 B-300 360 pathfinder 4x4. 74 W-300 318 4x4 git-r-done 80 B-100 sl6,4speed

I too am very interested in how performance cams can be adapted to the hydraulic slant since I plan on building a mild street performance hydraulic motor for my brother's Duster.

Oooh good piont. I guess I'll to get somme shorter push rods.

Hang on, Mopar offered performance hydraulic cams and I don't believe they required special lifters or other modifications to the valve train. I believe the most aggressive Mopar hydraulic cam had a lift of .420.

Can anyone confirm (a) the max lift and (b) that you could use the MP hydro cams with stock lifters and pushrods?

If you have the choice why wouldn't you put in a solid lifter cam? All things being equal they do make more power right?

_________________
NHRA V/SA Record holder 2009

Most people do put in solid lifter cams as most of us have solid lifter equipped engines. On the power issue I'd have to say it depends. You can easily grind a really mild solid that underperforms a hydraulic profile. Solids usually show gains at high RPM which isn't an advantage with most 225s. The problem with hydraulic cams in slants is not the cam itself, but the goofy non-adjustable valve gear and top-fed lifters. If we could use conventional side-fed hydraulic lifters and the adjustable valve train I think many folks would do so.

_________________
Joshua

I have been wondering about this too, I have an 87 D-150 and the 0.38 lift hydraulic cam dosen't scream performance at all, specially in a truck. Found Mancini Racing had a couple of used cams for cheap, but they were mechanical and I decided to just wait.

Eh? The top-fed lifters are pretty well unique to the Slant, but what problems have they caused for you? And why would you need (or want) adjustable rockers on a hydraulic-lifter engine? The point of hydraulic lifters is to eliminate the need for valve lash adjustment.

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

The adjustable valve train makes it much easier to accommodate head and/or block milling than valve gear that has only the small lifter plunger travel. It's much easier and less expensive to unwind an adjusting screw than to buy shorter pushrods or shim the rocker shaft.

_________________
Joshua

OK, yeah, I can see that, but it also complicates the (slant-6) lifter oiling path considerably. Relative to production, approximately nobody would ever even think of modifying the valvetrain, so providing means for doing so would have been needless expense for Chrysler, and very likely would've reduced the dependability of the valvetrain in stock operating conditions.

For those who want to run a hydraulic cam with very high lift, I can't see it being that big of a deal to go get special pushrods.

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

It is not just a head milling/cam problem. If the person doing the valve job does not do it exactly right, and get the valve stem hights all the same, you might need to use more then one pushrod length. An adjustable rocker can make up for this difference.

I have worked on two V-8 Mopars, this summer, with that problem. One was so bad, I told the customer to take the heads back to the machine shop, and get them redone. The valve stem hights were all over the place.

_________________
Charrlie_S
65 Valiant 100 2dr post 170 turbo
66 Valiant Signet 170 nitrous
64 Valiant Signet
64 Valiant 4dr 170
64 Valiant 4dr 225