| Slant Six Forum https://slantsix.org/forum/ |
|
| More cam checking... Clifford 276.....280? https://slantsix.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=44303 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | drgonzo [ Fri Apr 01, 2011 1:51 pm ] |
| Post subject: | More cam checking... Clifford 276.....280? |
OK...on the end of my cam is Clifford 276. I need to see what other numbers might be there since I just noticed on their website that they list a 276 mechanical cam and a 280, both with the 95-1182 part number. Plus they list different lash settings. 276 .024/.026 280 .016/.018 WTF..LOL? Could they be more vague and confusing? I realized quickly that I was VERY rusty on cam-checking but I am starting to get my my brain wrapped around it again. So far- IN / EX Dur @.050: 235/237 Lobe lift: .297"/.295" Taken off the pushrods. measured @ .050 lift- IN OPN@ 18 BTDC IN CLS@ 37 ABDC Intake C/L as installed ("Straight UP" dot to dot) 98.5 Cam is ground +4 advanced per Clifford. (All the info I could get from them) Do these look like realistic numbers? I will do more checking tonight. |
|
| Author: | ceej [ Fri Apr 01, 2011 5:07 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
They look realistic. .024 intake, .026 Exhaust to match your numbers. CJ |
|
| Author: | hantayo13 [ Fri Apr 01, 2011 6:54 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
my question why the bigger gap on the 276 over stock setting?????it doesn't make any sence to me to put bigger lift in and then increase valve gap/????WHY???? please explain sorry for the hyjack keep on roddin' Indian |
|
| Author: | DusterIdiot [ Fri Apr 01, 2011 7:19 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Ramp profile |
Quote: increase valve gap/????WHY????
This is usually based on the cam base circle along with how radical the lobe ramp is cut...(and a bit from lifter diameter or type)-D.Idiot |
|
| Author: | slantzilla [ Fri Apr 01, 2011 8:09 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Closing the lash up is a cheap way to get a little more duration. |
|
| Author: | drgonzo [ Fri Apr 01, 2011 8:21 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
OK, here are my numbers after much gnashing of teeth. Intake Opens 10.5 BTDC Closes 45.0 ABDC Max lobe lift .298" @ 99 (.298 X 1.5 = .447) Exhaust Opens 47 BBDC Closes 8 ATDC Max lob lift .295 @ 111 (.295 X 1.5 = .443) LSA 105 Do these look like reasonable findings? |
|
| Author: | drgonzo [ Fri Apr 01, 2011 8:31 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Based on the above numbers I will need a 36cc chamber to achieve approx. 10:1 static compression ratio with an 8.3:1 dynamic compression ratio. I plan to use pump gas. Can I achieve this small chamber size and not have to disassemble my short block for decking? Using a cut of .066/cc I would need to mill the head .158" assuming a starting chamber size of 60cc. Is it OK to flat cut the head that much? |
|
| Author: | 66aCUDA [ Sat Apr 02, 2011 5:10 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
You can cut the head that much. I have a head that is 36 cc with Ford 1.78/ 1.50 valves in it. The only draw back is that the head cant be used for any other purpose. If you move it to another block and that block has been decked or you want boost, tough luck. I now cut most of the millage off the block and just clean up the head real good. Were it my engine I would take the .100 off the deck and .058 off the head.  Frank |
|
| Author: | Dart270 [ Sat Apr 02, 2011 5:38 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Looks like a great cam. Personally, I would probably leave the centerline right where it is. Have you measured your piston-deck ht at TDC yet? 30cc's sounds a bit small for 10:1. Lou |
|
| Author: | drgonzo [ Sat Apr 02, 2011 7:11 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Lou....my pistons average .183" down in the hole. Using the DCR caluculator 36cc is what I came up with. |
|
| Author: | ceej [ Sat Apr 02, 2011 8:27 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Bite the bullet. Deck it. :shrug: CJ |
|
| Author: | sandy in BC [ Sat Apr 02, 2011 11:23 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I would deck the block. Its a cheap way to keep your valves further from the deck. Its easier to sweep the chamber than to notch the block when adding bigger valves. milling 160 got me 9.25:1 |
|
| Author: | Dart270 [ Sat Apr 02, 2011 12:35 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I guess I'm more of a head mill guy if the short block is all together and does not need to be disassembled. I have done 2 heads with 0.100" on the manifold side and 0.200" on the plug side and both were around 34 cc's with SB Chev valves. This closes up the chamber quite a bit on an early head, and probably would on a '67-up head too. IMHO, it doesn't matter much which way you do it. My engines run this way with 0.170" deck ht. have made 240-260 crank HP (mid 14s in the 1/4) and pulled mid 20s mileage on the hwy in my '64 Dart (TBI and 5spd). Lou |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC-08:00 |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited https://www.phpbb.com/ |
|