[Jay S]

Originally Posted by ponchjoe

Thanks Jay.
I wish the 703 was available (well, Edelbrock says they can grind one still) I thought it was perfect. The Crower 60916 may be a thought too.
INT/EXH - Dur @ .050” Lift: 221°/229° RR: 1.5/1.5 Gross Lift: .455”/.470” LSA: 112° RPM: 2000 to 4800 Redline: 5300

The specs for the 702 Voodoo are misleading, it is ground a lot different than a Crower. The 60916 isn’t any bigger than the 702 (which you already have). If your looking at Crower HFT cams the 60243 what I would do with a 4” crank.

[Jay S]

I think a Summit 2802 would be better than a 60916 with 670 heads and a 4” crank. The 60916 would have been a good choice if you had a later open chamber head, 3.75 crank, or less compression with the 4”.

[ponchjoe]

Originally Posted by Jay S

I think a Summit 2802 would be better than a 60916 with 670 heads and a 4” crank. The 60916 would have been a good choice if you had a later open chamber head, 3.75 crank, or less compression with the 4”.

Cliff agreed with this also. Is the a HR similar to this in Howard’s?

[Jay S]

Originally Posted by ponchjoe

Cliff agreed with this also. Is the a HR similar to this in Howard’s?

Yes

[ponchjoe]

Originally Posted by Jay S

Yes

Is it the Saturday night special you posted earlier?

[Jay S]

Originally Posted by ponchjoe

Is it the Saturday night special you posted earlier?

Yep. That is it. Howard’s also has that 2 profiles with less lift in a custom grinds. They have less lift and duration over the nose, seat timing and .050” timing are the same.

[ponchjoe]

Any thoughts on this cam and Powell Machine in general? Anyone use one? Will it work in my combo?
Thanks

https://www.powellmachineinc.com/pro...lic-roller-cam

[steve25]

It’s too much cam for 3:55 rear gears and once again that over .500” lift needs the valve train to be set up for it.
In any 400 motor that Pontiac placed the RA IV cam in your where mandated to also have 3:90 rear gears and NO ac.

Your 428 is only 8% larger then a 400 so you would still want to have 3:73 rear gears to run that cam.

Do as you will, I myself am tired of trying to guide you.

[ponchjoe]

Originally Posted by steve25

It’s too much cam for 3:55 rear gears and once again that over .500” lift needs the valve train to be set up for it.
In any 400 motor that Pontiac placed the RA IV cam in your where mandated to also have 3:90 rear gears and NO ac.

Your 428 is only 8% larger then a 400 so you would still want to have 3:73 rear gears to run that cam.

Do as you will, I myself am tired of trying to guide you.

Thanks Steve, I was really wondering if anyone has ever even seen or used this cam, I’ve never heard of Powell. I have two people that have suggested a RA4 cam for my combo which this roller is based on so I just thought I’d ask.
No need to reply if you are “tired of trying to guide me,” then. I’ll figure it out with plenty of others input. PY is a great source information (but not the only) and just like the cam companies I’ve contracted I’ve gotten a range of information to choose from. Peace out man, unsubscribe.

[Jay S]

You would have to talk to Powell and ask him about that cam. It might be a good choice, but there is not enough specs shown to really say if it would work well without talking to him. The stock converter you want to run would likely not be very ideal with that cam, but the extra low first gear in that 4 speed auto would help. Powell has tons of YouTube videos with pretty down to earth cam tech.

[ponchjoe]

Originally Posted by Jay S

You would have to talk to Powell and ask him about that cam. It might be a good choice, but there is not enough specs shown to really say if it would work well without talking to him. The stock converter you want to run would likely not be very ideal with that cam, but the extra low first gear in that 4 speed auto would help. Powell has tons of YouTube videos with pretty down to earth cam tech.

Thanks Jay. I have never heard of them and they only make this one version but he says to call him. I knew it looked large but you are correct, need a cam card to understand it.
Making a cam decision for someone that only builds a motor every 5-10 yrs is hard. I want it to sound as good as it can too and the RA4 sound is hard to beat. I’m thinking something more like the RA 3 cam fits better though. I get confused with the differences in HR and HFT numbers

[67Lemons]

Powell has a ton of content on YouTube, he’s done a lot of videos on HFT lifters when he was resurfacing them. He’s moved away from that service according to his videos but seems very knowledgeable so I would call him as well to get his input.

[Jay S]

Most roller cam profiles have more area at higher lifts where the piston speed is higher. You can run a bigger cam compared to a HFT and still have the similar idle with more power.

[jamaca85]

I ran an old comp 268h cam in my firebird back in the late 80s with 670 heads and 410 gears. it was a daily driver with an old q jet on it ran 13.70s at the track. just don't over think it....

[Jay S]

The Powell cam is not by any means large. It is not much different than that Howard’s HR cam I suggested. But you would need to call him, I am guessing if you asked him he would suggest a slightly smaller cam than that.

[ponchjoe]

Thanks guys, decisions decisions…

[Skip Fix]

Have Bullet grind a Ultradyne 280/288 HFT on a 112 or a 288/296 on a 112.

[Stan Weiss]

Powell Cams Pontiac RamAir IV Hyd Roller

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WG1lRN27WWk

Stan

[steve25]

All I am
Saying Joe as others are alluding to here is that even with a 5 speed if a mistake has to endured, cam wise it’s better to have a smaller one then too big, especially if your shelling out the bucks for a hydro roller.

[tom s]

230-240 on a 113 would not scare me at all in a 428.Tom