[Formulajones]

Originally Posted by steve25

I will look to see if I still have the mag from the early 90s , but I think it was muscle car mag where they rebuilt to stock specs a RA4 400 and a RAIII 400 and did a 3 pull Dyno session with each motor through there stock exh manifolds and if I recall right they powered no alternator, but did drive the watter pump.
The result was that the both motors bested the factory ratings, the 4 Motor made 400 hp and the 3 motor made 370 hp , so not too shabby by any means!

I have that mag Steve. You are correct. Bone stock rebuilds with no porting anywhere, stock cams and manifolds, with just attention to detail on assembly like any good build should have. They were simply tweaked on the dyno for best power and both engines made great power. However the RAIV was the sleeper making 30 more HP than advertised, while the RAIII struggled to barely top it's advertised HP. They had to crank total timing up to the 38-40 degree mark to make those numbers if I recall. Also if I remember right they were dynoing these engines on pump gas, and may have tried a mix of race gas, and ran into detonation at some point. I'll have to dig that out and re-read it.

All things considered, it pointed out the obvious that we all know now. That being, although they were only advertised 4 HP apart back in the day, you got alot more than that for the money spent when upgrading to the RA IV.

Nowadays, the pure stock RA IV's, with an allowed 1.5 compression bump, and 2 1/2" exhaust upgrade allowed, they are putting down about 400 RWHP on the chassis dyno's through a 4speed. They are very healthy "stockers"

[nmoreilly]

What a great thread

[wovenweb]

Originally Posted by Formulajones

Nowadays, the pure stock RA IV's, with an allowed 1.5 compression bump, and 2 1/2" exhaust upgrade allowed, they are putting down about 400 RWHP on the chassis dyno's through a 4speed. They are very healthy "stockers"

Interesting, I don't recall seeing them in any of the results through 2011. Just the RA IIs. I wondered where they were.

[Formulajones]

The RAII's are also runners, basically the predecessor to the RAIV with the only real difference being a 1.5 ratio rocker in 1968. The iron intake is of the same design as the 69-70 aluminum RAIV piece. I also like the fact that 68 birds are the lightest of the bunch with a great engine package, better exhaust manifolds, cleaner ram air setup, so it's no surprise they are amoung the quicket pontiacs at the PS drags. They are an advantageous package, so more of them are popping up now. Mino was one who showed how potent they could be back in the 80's, the early days of stock "ish" muscle car drags (with a few rule changes nowadays).

There are a few RAIV packages running. 2 69 birds that I know of running low 12's, and at least 3 A-bodies (2 69's and a 70) that I've seen and all of them can dip into the mid 12's with ease. They all seem to trap in the 112-115 mph range.

Bruno is one that comes to mind. He's usually running at Tri-Power Nats, (or Pontiac Nationals they are now called) and he's been around running with that car for at least 7-8 years now that I can remember, maybe longer.

Here's some video of a few...

An old one of Bruno. I've always said if he'd get after the 4 speed a little more through the gears he'd find another tenth.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?featur...&v=JXerq-qZTPs

Here's a IV judge in PS form
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zMZu...yer_detailpage

Here's one for giggles. Bruno running an LS6 chevelle, Both qualified right on top of each other.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WKY-...yer_detailpage

The IV's run pretty good considering their cubic inch.

[b-man]

Dick Boneske (PY member and Tri-Power expert) bought this GTO new as a 4-speed 4-barrel car. It had a wide-ratio Muncie and 3.90 gears.

From Facebook: Best run with stock 389 after Tripower (a 1962 unit) was 13.29@109.75 mph. Only mods were 068 "Tripower" cam, Polylocks & 3-tube Doug's headers, airshocks w/100 psi right side, 30 psi left.

How many of us wish our street cars could trap at nearly 110 MPH in the 1/4? There's enough power in that little 389 with stock '64 GTO small-valve (1.92/1.66) 9770716 heads to run in the low 12s with good traction.

Those were the days, when you could buy gas at the pump all day long to satisfy a 10.75:1 compression iron-headed V8.

[77 TRASHCAN]

Let's say I want to install a Melling 068 copy in my 400, where do I need to install the cam, ICL wise. At the factory setting (which I do not have in front of me...) or @ 108...???

068 is a money saver also. Being an "old technology grind w/ slow ramps, and not a lot of lift. I've read here, one can use stock springs, rockers, and maybe even pushrods (if they measure up...). It may be old but can be forgiving, because of it's old technology...

[b-man]

Originally Posted by 77 TRASHCAN

Let's say I want to install a Melling 068 copy in my 400, where do I need to install the cam, ICL wise. At the factory setting (which I do not have in front of me...) or @ 108...???

068 is a money saver also. Being an "old technology grind w/ slow ramps, and not a lot of lift. I've read here, one can use stock springs, rockers, and maybe even pushrods (if they measure up...). It may be old but can be forgiving, because of it's old technology...

I'd be interested to know as well.

Currently have my '64 421 HO going together with a NOS 068 cam (the same one pictured earlier in this thread) and would like to help advise my friend who is doing the assembly where to degree it.

Previously just tossed them in straight up using a top-quality 3-keyway Cloyes timing set without any thought to degreeing, but this time everything is going to be checked.

I would advise buying a good set of new stock replacement springs at the very least, or a decent performance spring spec'd out for the factory installed height of 1.586" that was used on standard '65 and later heads.

My '64 heads have a short 1.53" installed height, will be using a new set of H-O Racing VS-11 springs that are made to accommodate 1.53", 1.56" and 1.59" installed heights.

[Ben M.]

Originally Posted by b-man

Previously just tossed them in straight up using a top-quality 3-keyway Cloyes timing set without any thought to degreeing, but this time everything is going to be checked.

That's exactly how I've done the last 2 SPC-7 cams and have no complaints. I am curious to know if it matters at all too...

[tjdjr]

Has anyone taken Suntuned up on his offer to compare a NOS cam vs aftermarket versions of the 068 ? Sure would be nice to know who makes the most accurate copy.

[242177P]

Originally Posted by TedRamAirII

Yes, there was a tab to limit throttle opening. Plus I think it was just a "inside rule" that stated "No engine will have more HP than the GTO", Just like Chevrolet's "No engine shall have more HP than the Corvette" ; )

GM corporate edict, ten pounds for every horsepower.
Consider the 69 Grand Prix (428HO) having 390 horse.
Want to take a crack at what it weighed?

[77 TRASHCAN]

Originally Posted by b-man

I'd be interested to know as well.

Currently have my '64 421 HO going together with a NOS 068 cam (the same one pictured earlier in this thread) and would like to help advise my friend who is doing the assembly where to degree it.

Previously just tossed them in straight up using a top-quality 3-keyway Cloyes timing set without any thought to degreeing, but this time everything is going to be checked.

I would advise buying a good set of new stock replacement springs at the very least, or a decent performance spring spec'd out for the factory installed height of 1.586" that was used on standard '65 and later heads.

My '64 heads have a short 1.53" installed height, will be using a new set of H-O Racing VS-11 springs that are made to accommodate 1.53", 1.56" and 1.59" installed heights.

Just bumping this along, now that I know how to log on again....
I plan to start a thread on cam phasing, still going over ideas, to put in print...

[77 TRASHCAN]

Originally Posted by b-man

I'd be interested to know as well.

Currently have my '64 421 HO going together with a NOS 068 cam (the same one pictured earlier in this thread) and would like to help advise my friend who is doing the assembly where to degree it.

Previously just tossed them in straight up using a top-quality 3-keyway Cloyes timing set without any thought to degreeing, but this time everything is going to be checked.

I would advise buying a good set of new stock replacement springs at the very least, or a decent performance spring spec'd out for the factory installed height of 1.586" that was used on standard '65 and later heads.

My '64 heads have a short 1.53" installed height, will be using a new set of H-O Racing VS-11 springs that are made to accommodate 1.53", 1.56" and 1.59" installed heights.

OK, the 068 w/ it's mega wide LSA, and the factory installed it at 113 ICL. All these engines w/ "advertised" comp ratios of 10.5:1, 10.75:1. Lets just say they are around 10:1.

Weren't these all premium fuel engines??? The awesome Pontiac engineers must have been super cautious w/ these spec's. As stated before They did their home work to allow pretty stink'n good performance and octane tolerance together.

Many here recommend installing the 041 @ a 108 ICL. It has similar "tamed" characteristcis, though more radical.

Does the 068 need to be installed @ 108, 109 ICL also???
Do various comp ratios need different ICL's???

[rtanner]

i install my 068s straight up, no additional advance, i have never needed any additional lowend w either a 400 or 455 either one. my rear ratio always hover around 3.08-3,23

[straycat]

Back when I was racing my 68 I tried many versions of the 068 and nothing topped the original cam installed straight up. Only one I never tried was the H/O hi lift version.

[wovenweb]

Old thread, but I did get to listen to my new engine with it's 068 cam over the weekend. I was surprised at how mellow it sounded at idle.

The engine is a 400 bored 0.030 over, flat top pistons, '68 #16 heads mildly ported(approx. 240 on the intake side), 1.65 rockers, stock intake that has been gasket matched. A code correct carburetor was rebuilt by a local guy who frequents the Buick boards. The code correct distributor has been converted to Pertronix. Exhaust are RARE Long Branch manifolds with X-pipe and the mufflers are Spin Techs. Compression ratio= 9.98 I'm running a TH400 with a 10" Continental torque convertor and a 3.36 posi. This is all in a '68 Firebird convertible with an aftermarket cross brace and sub-frame connectors. The car was meant to just have fun with.

[72LuxuryLeMansLa.]

Originally Posted by wovenweb

Old thread, but I did get to listen to my new engine with it's 068 cam over the weekend. I was surprised at how mellow it sounded at idle.

The engine is a 400 bored 0.030 over, flat top pistons, '68 #16 heads mildly ported(approx. 240 on the intake side), 1.65 rockers, stock intake that has been gasket matched. A code correct carburetor was rebuilt by a local guy who frequents the Buick boards. The code correct distributor has been converted to Pertronix. Exhaust are RARE Long Branch manifolds with X-pipe and the mufflers are Spin Techs. Compression ratio= 9.98 I'm running a TH400 with a 10" Continental torque convertor and a 3.36 posi. This is all in a '68 Firebird convertible with an aftermarket cross brace and sub-frame connectors. The car was meant to just have fun with.

Why be surprised that a Factory cam sounds mellow? Cams like this were used to be mellow!

[wovenweb]

Well, they were the cam for the HO and Ram Air auto cars.

[Cliff R]

The engineers that designed these cams had to make sure they covered a broad scope of requirements for the engine and the cam.

It had to be easy on the valve train, so it didn't kill the springs or chew up the lifters early in the life of the engine.

It had to idle well, and produce a broad/flat torque curve. Customers didn't want a crappy idle and hard brake pedal at idle and low engine speeds.

The engine had to manage fuel quality of the era, even at high compression ratios, so the long duration and late closing intake really helped that deal out.

These days it seems like cam companies are more about "bling" than making the best power in the loaded rpm range. There is more emphasis on "attitude" at idle speed and throwing power at you quick and early, than there is producing a strong/broad/flat torque curve.

So you are going to typically see tighter LSA offerings, increased overlap, and more "attitude" at idle speed. The problem with this trend is that it will RAISE octane requirements at any given SCR, as cylinder filling is improved at lower rpm's, which raises peak torque numbers at lower rpms, narrows up the power curve (torque), and increases octane requirements at the same time.

The 068 cam was, and is a decent choice for many of these engines due to it's design, and the resulting decent idle quality and strong/broad/flat torque curve that it produces. As good as it is, I avoid it for big CID engines, but have used them on occasion in relatively "mild" or near stock 400 builds. Never once have we been disappointed in them nor has the end user.

Even with that said, for the folks who are wanting optimum power on pump fuel, and much better street and track performance, we go a completely different direction with compression and cam choice......Cliff

[Blued and Painted]

Originally Posted by Cliff R

There is more emphasis on "attitude" at idle speed ......Cliff

So true. The performance cam companies post pages of sound clips of there cams at idle but not so many of dyno pulls. Then when you talk with Mr average consumer with limited automotive knowledge, the FIRST thing out of there mouth is "I want a cam that sounds good".

[eaglesan13]

I just bought the Melling 068 cam for my 70 Formula 400. It is a base 400, 4 speed with RA III exhaust manifolds and I will be using a later factory HEI. Any recommendations on spark plugs and gap?