Ram Air 4 clone cam favorite
 

Any favorites of the various manufacturers versions of this cam. Melling, Comp or? Motor 455, 10:1, 6x4 heads 247cfm/180 @ .500, Modified 66 tripower, 4speed, 3.42, oversized RA exhaust manifolds. Don't want roller cam just a good HFT. Street driven 65 with occasional trips to track. Seen a lot of mention for Crower 60919.

I am using the 60919 with Crower Cam Saver lifters and its all you need for the street in my opinion. My engine is kinda similar to yours.

Melling SPC-8 is the real deal. Overlap sammy!

I too have similar combo, but I dont like the cam I have. Does this combo buck and chug in 25 mph zones in first?

No not at all. I have the TKO600 and it will pull 5th at 40 mph with no buck

One of the gents on here has mentioned that the Crower 60919’s that he has seen recently aren’t necessarily ground correctly, maybe he can clarify?
https://forums.maxperformanceinc.com...ighlight=60919

I used the Crane muscle car series 041 ...but that's been a LONG time ago.

seems I recall reading a thread that it was stated all 041 cams are pretty much the same, most made by CMC. blue ta

The Melling SPC-8 is suppose to be an OE replacement. Probably gets my vote if you want a RA 4 cam. Side by side comparison the SPC-8 I have had used a different cam core with a wider lobe. It’d been 6 years though, I don’t know if that is still the case. CMC grinds the Melling, Compcams, Edelbrock, Lunati and Summit 041 grinds. Specs are the same as the Melling, but I think those others that are not OE replacements use the normal narrow lobe core.

The Crane and a Crower 60919 both are different than the Melling. Crower is more aggressive, Crane is less aggressive.

I prefer the Crane "Blueprinted" version

X2. I agree, I think it is top dog of the RA4 grinds. Sucks that Crane is no longer around.

I was just going to say the same thing, I know a lot of folks recommend the Crane version but they haven’t been available for a few years, I wonder if you could have one custom ground but then I question what makes this version so much better than all of the other 041 choices like the Melling, Crower, etc

The Crane version has a bunch of assymetric’s in the design, and shuts the valves a lot more gentle. The way it is ground it should have the broadest power band of those grinds.

The others are more symmetrical designs. Opening and closing ramps are the same.

Wondering out loud here but could Bullet or any custom cam grinder ground those same characteristics in one of their cams or is it in the lobe that Crane used?

I used the Crane blueprint version about 20 years ago and it is still running very well.

Compcams might have the master for it someplace.

It would take some effort to copy it, probably more effort than most cam grinders would be interested in.

There are also a few old grinds that a core does not exist anymore either. The Crane 041 is odd enough that could be an issue too. Wolverine had a pretty renowned flat tappet cam a little bigger than the RA4 grind that people have wanted to copy but as I recall John Partridge at Bullet said there is not a core available to replicate it.

Jay,
Is this the Wolverine Cam?

Stan

Identical to the Crane HIT 284281 "High Intensity Series" and later "PowerMax".



https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/2...923/9DNB3x.jpg

Yep. That’s the one. There are a couple cams that are close in specs, but don’t appear to be exactly the same. That 294B Crane could be the same. It does look close.

Two profiles in HP series sure looked close too. I think I remember being told they were different.

Well, I looked it up and CMC only lists one flat tappet cam core for a Pontiac now. So I assume the Melling SPC-8 core is the same as all of the flat tappets now. So if you end up going with a white box RA4 cam ground at CMC, just probably makes sense to find the cheapest one, because they are all going to be the same.

Too bad, I have a Melling SPC-8 in my cart right now, maybe I’ll post a want add for the Crane version before I pull the trigger

Last two SPC-8 from rockauto this year were CWC cores. Figured more information is always helpful.

Great info Jay S

CWC Textron makes the cam cores.

https://www.kautex.com/en/mobility/cwc-textron-castings

CMC (Camshaft Machine Company) grinds camshafts.

Two different companies.

BTW CMC is one of at least ten camshaft grinders in the US 2024.

https://cylinderheadmfg.com/camshaft-manufacturers-usa/

You can check and see if what you have is a standard CMC Proferall cam core. My last SPC-8 that was a different core was in 2018. If you measure across the very top of the point of the lobe where it is machined, it will measure .56” on a standard CMC core (118600)that CMC currently sells.

All the cam cores say CWC on them. CWC cast them and CMC or EPC rough finish’s them. I think EPC has a wider variety of core offerings, I think they have a standard that is the same a CMC Proferall, and a better HC for Pontiac’s. They have P55’s also for other brands, but I have not heard of a P55 used for a Pontiac. I wouldn’t think CMC would source cores from EPC, but these days you never know.

From what I understand even off shore cores can have the CWC logo cast into them.

Thanks Jay. Interesting information. Measured a newer SPC-8 as 0.48" on the nose and 0.53 on the base circle. The old Comp cams cam I have came out at 0.51" on the nose and 0.56" on the base circle.

I have to ask, are the lobes tapered slimmer towards the lobe nose? Because the comp has more lift.

Merry Christmas guys, I always like reading your posts!

not good at doing pictures...argh

Merry Chistmas Kenth,

Do you know if there has always been the same core from CWC? Both the old cam I have with the wider lobes and the recent SPC-8 cam with the narrower lobes are CWC cores. Thinking about where the lifter rides on only one side of the the taper, I am not sure it would matter if the width was reduced slightly on the back side. Maybe the change was to save money?

This is the cam that Jim Hand had in his 455. Likely still in the engine. Seemed like Bullit made it for him.
Is Bullit still in business?

Thanks, All, for this thread.

I bought one of the Crane 041 cams, years ago, from Paul K, Hope I still have it (long story)

https://bulletcams.com/

Ask for Tim Goolsby.

Merry Christmas!

I think I remember Jim Hand tried to have Bullet copy the Wolverine cam and there was something about it that they could not copy. I mentioned it in that other post. That cam was something they came up with at Bullet that was fairly close to the Wolverine. (Insert Paul K’s comment what is a few thousandths and a couple of degree among friends here) :) IRC, that person behind that cam may have been John Partidge. I think Jeff is correct, it is still in the car.

Stan or one of the other guys likely knows more on core specs than me. But I think the .56” core width listed for CMC cores for Pontiac, IRC..is the width at the base circle where the cam core was roughed in at. It varies and is hard to measure. Whatever the width the core was over the nose will be the same no matter what the lift is. The base circle can get wider with a higher lift profile. If the core was from EPC the cam will have EP1 cast into it, along with CWC. EP1 will be cast into the opposite side as CWC. CMC core only have CWC cast into them, the cams from comp could be EP1’s. Comp uses a lot of EPC cores.

I think one of the SPC-8 cams I had that had the wider lobes is at a friends shop. I might be able to get some measurements off of it, I recall it had .560” width over the nose. If you compare that, with just rough numbers to a cam has .48” over the nose the narrower lobe is loosing about 20% of the contact area. If that is a general trend for cores right now, it makes a person wonder if that is another part of the issue with cams going flat these days.

I know of a Compcams 041 that went flat during the break in a few weeks ago. I”ll have to check with him and see if I can get him to measure the lobe width. I bet it is those narrow lobes. It had HLJ lifters, but got broke in with the single springs that come with flat tappet E heads and 1.65 rockers. Which was close to 280 lbs over the nose, 30 years ago the probably would have been fine.

Well that’s disappointing to hear, I was wondering about the Comp Cams version since Butler uses them for everything now. Wasn’t there a few complaints in the past about the Summit 2801 having skinny lobes vs other cams? Pretty sure that I read that here? I would think skinny lobes would bring the lifter face towards the end of the lobe due to tolerances stacking up in these 50 year old blocks, sounds like a recipe for disaster to me.

Also, while a PITA it seems like using an older set of springs with 1.5 rockers for break in is a good way to add some extra insurance?

At some point real soon I need to commit to one of these HFT 041 grinds for the 455 build I’ll be doing this winter, if only spending all the money for a roller was a guarantee of success I’d just do it so my analysis paralysis will finally end!

I did some digging. Somewhere, here, someone mentioned Summit's 041 cam (their branding) part number 2821. It's a 041 copy, also.
I'm not sure how long it's been out. It's considerably cheaper than the Melling SPC-8, they have for $272.99, the 2821 is less than $200.00 dollars. Likely the exact same cam.

The Melling version is $185 on Rock Auto vs $272 on Summit. Summit has the Crower 60919 for $310 & cam saver lifters for $157, the Howard’s version is $373 with Howard’s lifters. I really should just buy one of these already but can’t decide which.

This is the GM (Chevrolet) Performance Pontiac RAIV camshaft #12364044. Last time i checked it was the Crane "blueprint" series camshaft stamped "968".

https://www.jegs.com/i/Chevrolet-Per...64044/10002/-1

There is also a GM (Chevrolet) Performance Pontiac H.O. 068 cam #12364043. Crane "blueprint" stamped "878".

https://www.jegs.com/i/Chevrolet-Per...64043/10002/-1

This is the first I’ve heard of this version, wonder if it’s still the same core & lobes as the “blueprint” version?

Here is the Summit RAIV camshaft:

https://www.summitracing.com/parts/sum-2821#overview

Crane supplied the "GM Performance" camshafts. One popped up here recently in the classifieds section

It's been a while since I bought a RAIV but I went through
Auto Zone and then it was only around $125.00. Don't remember
how long it's been though. Try them and see. It was a melling cam.

GT

Price at AZ has doubled.....
 

Just checked at AutoZone. SPC-8 is $295. Ouch.

Anyone ever run the Edelbrock 7157 041 cam? I was pleasantly surprised to find one of these with some parts that I bought a few years ago.

That cam was in my engine when i got the car over 10 years ago. It vent flat abot 2 years ago, and i pulled the engine an added a topend kit and converted to rollerc am with same specs. I have no other flat tappet to compare it against, but for me it ran ok, and hard a bit of a lope to it, ok vakuum.

Darn I forgot the cam that originally came in the 400 engine that was in my 65 was a Edelbrock 7157. Been sitting in that motor for 20 years now on a stand. Former owner ran best 13.07 /10? as I recall before spun bearing number 2 rod with 6X8 heads. I'm going to try a Comp HR that came available with lifters that came available locally at a drastically reduced price. NIB. Card says GrindP8 3016B/3038B HR112.0. Too good to refuse. Still love an 041 with Rhoads combo in my 68 that been there for at least 20 years. Thanks for the discussion on 041s.

I’m probably gonna. Need to knock on some wood here but I’ve had tons of solid flat tappers and hydraulics in a lot of different engines. Even turbo engines with high spring pressures. Many of these engines sat for long durations over winters with Nothing special on start up no pre prime anything. I’ve never wiped out a lobe on a cam and I started in 1987. Idk if I’m doing something right or everyone else is doing something wrong

I don’t even run special oils. I do throw some zddp in on occasion but I buy cheaper Napa brand oils. Nothing super special of it’s not that I use rottella that I have here from my diesel or occasionally some aeroshell from
My airplane.
I Used to put well over 100 track passes a year on my engjnes usually in the 140 passes a year range
s. Running multiple classes a weekend. For a long time I launched that car at 6400 rpms. I’ve burned pistons , I’ve broken driveline parts , banana’d rears even split a cylinder once , never wiped a lobe.

Of course my brand new RAIV rebuild will be the one now that I said that. But it’s always boggled my mind why so many had this issue .because I don’t do anything special. None of my buddies I race with have wiped a love either w other makes.
Maybe the winter here cryos our cams. iDK.
I have pretty much every cam
I ever raced still here in a box somewhere all are usable still. I usually go new because I want to try something but not because they are failing

That used to be the cam supplied in their RPM "top end" kit when you bought the whole package (cylinder heads, intake, camshaft) and they would advertise something like 450hp and 500 ft lbs. on a 455 combo.

I remember people in the late 90's buying that package and using it with decent running cars for the time. Not even sure Edelbrock still sells that as a package deal or not.

The 7157 seems to have close to the same specs as the other 041’s but you never see much mentioned about them. Maybe it’s because of the higher price tag than the other offerings? ��

Edit: Looks like the cam is still available. And now on sale since I checked the other day.. https://www.summitracing.com/parts/edl-7157

That Edelbrock cam is going to be pretty much the same cam with identical performance as an Melling, Summit, Comp, Lunati and probably a couple others. I don’t know if CMC grinds it, it could be ground in house at Comp on a standard EPC core. You can look and see what you have if you want, find where the cam has CWC cast into the core, roll it over to the other side and see if it says “EP”. If it says EP it was either ground at comp or at EPC instead of CMC. If it says nothing there, it is likely a RA4 cam from CMC, and is ground on the same machine as the Melling and Summit cams.


Often all flat tappets are grouped together for failures, they really shouldn’t be. Mechanical flat tappets don’t have the problems that HFT cams have. They are ground on better cores, with better material. At least they have been, I don’t know what the future looks like. I think when the lash is taken up it promotes lifter spinning also. They are just plain more rugged(unless you go nuts with an aggressive profile).

Here is a photo of a Bullet SFT and a current melling SPC-8 I checked in my friend shop (2018 SPC-8) which is the same as the current CMC cams, .477” was the nose width of the lobe on the SPC-8. Which isn’t bad, I have seen some Pontiac HFT cams that had .455” width lobes. The Bullet UD grind has .564” width over the nose, and the base circle is over .625”. Mild SFT’s are pretty rugged, especially with face oiling.

A gentlemen on another forum just measured his SPC-8 from 2022 he thinks, it’s a CWC core & he came up with .460 lobe width at the peak. Maybe this helps clear up the approximate date on when they switched cam cores on the SPC-8.

When talking about Performance cams, what (in your opinion) constitutes "mild" or "aggressive" ? Is it a certain lift, duration or a combination of the two? Numbers please.

The question I had earlier was would a narrower lobe matter if it was trimmed off the rear portion of the lobe?

I might be not thinking of this correctly but if the lobe was 0.70", it would not change the lobe/lifter face contact area one bit. More contact area would be properties of lobe taper and lifter crown machining would it not?

Might be chasing waterfalls here...