068 cam in 68 WS 400
 

I have never run this particular camshaft before and I was just wanting to see if anyone had any feedback on how it will perform in a stock rebuild for my 68 GTO? My engine will be a .030 WS 400 with flat top Speed Pro pistons, stock #16 heads, stock '68 intake with a stock '68 7028276 quadrajet. I will also be running stock ram air exhaust manifolds. The 068 cam specs are (212/225 .407 .407 116) My car will have a 4 speed and 3:55 gears. I just want a good running 400 that will have a lot of low end torque. I don't care about 1/4 mile times. I don't want it to be a dog either though. Will just a stock rebuild with the 068 cam do the job? Or should I look for a larger cam? Thanks for any recommendations.

For your goals sounds good to me IMHO

The 068 cam was used in 350, 389, 400, 421, 428, & 455 engines. All the long stroke engines were undercammed, with the 068, IMO.

If all you want is a smooth idle, lots of vac, and low rpm torque, it'll work. The Melling SPC-7 is said to be a near duplicate.

https://www.autozone.com/internal-en...07135_705947_0

The Summit 2801 is sort of a higher lift version of the 068, & is cheaper.

https://www.summitracing.com/parts/sum-2801

The 744 was used in the early '69 RA3 400 engine, and a few others. Had a slightly lumpier idle, less vac, & less torque at low rpm. Probably made more power above 4500 or so. It's been said that the Melling SPC-3 is not quite as radical as the original factory 744.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/Engine-Cams...wAAOSwyXFbl1bY

The Summit 2802 is sort of a higher lift version, & is cheaper.

https://www.summitracing.com/parts/s...RoCJdgQAvD_BwE

I assume that a Lunati 10510312 is somewhere between the Summit 2801 & 2802.

https://www.lunatipower.com/street-m...8-276-286.html

If you want to use a Lunati cam use their Voodoo lobes with similar duration.


.

Would a Voodoo increase the cyl pressure enuff to increase the chances of detonation, in a high CR pump gas engine, that may already be on the borderline ?

Or, are the Voodoo lobes so perfect they can increase pressure and yet not affect chance of detonation at all ? :confused:

https://www.summitracing.com/parts/l...w/make/pontiac

When I had high compression iron heads on my 400 (62's in my case), the 068 ran well and pretty much eliminated the denotation issue I had with the previous CC 280M cam.

The thing with the voodoo lobes from what I've been told is they like to be installed a bit more advanced than the cam card would indicate. Which usually ends up being 5-6 degrees. Not only do the lobes prefer it but the idea is to have the intake lobe higher than the exhaust lobe at TDC during overlap by about .035-.040" This keeps from sucking in more hot exhaust gasses when the piston goes back down before the compression stroke, and less likely to detonate as a result.

So the last few voodoo cam installs I've done, I follow this method and so far to date they have been very pump gas friendly on our 91 octane.

I put a Melling SPC-7 (068) cam in my YS 400. Still on the test stand but starts nice, idles nice, tons of vacuum, no valve train noise at all.

I hope that when you say you will be running the stock # 16 heads that does not also mean running the very much likely shot original valve springs?

The heads should in the least get new springs , new valves and have the guides cut for positve valve seals.

Milner, I asked about the best cam choice for a 400 similar to yours. The Comp 60243 was recommended and the Summit 2802 (which is very close to it...
OF course the 068 and the SPC-7 can use stock springs.

The 2801, 2802, and the 60243 will not work with stock springs.

The 068 and 041 may have been designed to help keep detonation at bay with the higher compression engines used back then. I wish MR. McKellar was still around, he might be able to answer that...

Not related to the subject, but since the name was mentioned. For interest....

The 041 was often touted in vintage sales literature as the division's first "computer-designed" camshaft. Of that, McKellar says, "That's somewhat true-but not totally. We used a computer to generate the blueprints, and computer technology was hot at that time, so advertising decided to incorporate that. The No. 041 was a great performer, but I feel the No. 10 was a little better. Its solid lifters allowed for more low-end and midrange power than the hydraulic 041."

" I wish we could have used roller technology back then. It would have cut friction and allowed us to improve performance and street manners, but it wasn't available at that time," says McKellar.




.

Thanks to everyone for the replies. It looks like the 068 might do the job for me. As for the heads, they are stock #16's that I will do a valve job on. I will set up new springs on them when I build them.

Steve,
What do you know about the #10 cam??? other than it's solid lifter???

To be honest I know nothing about factory cams, never paid much attention to the subject. If memory serves me right that quote by Mr. McKellar came from Rocky Rotella. I just found it of interest.


.

Bought a 69 GTO 15 yrs ago when I got back into muscle cars (had an old 442 when I was a kid). 400. 62 heads. 4speed car - I know wrong heads. Later I found it had an 068 cam.


Upon purchase, that GTO was in poor running condition w/ two blown head gaskets. When my local guy tuned it, diagnosed and changed head gaskets - he couldn't believe how well it would shred the stock sized tires. He took me out on some back roads to show me (guy raced circle track). He was stunned.

Yeah - its a good cam when applied right.

One of my Pontiac buddies uses an 068 for most motors unless he has a performance build." A little lope and bottom end scalds the tires".

You’ll be happy with the 068 cam.

The cars that came with that cam from the factory weren’t slouches.

Have previously personally used it in 350, 400, 455 and now a 421. It’s a good street cam for near stock or bone stock performance engines.

Although old technology, for a stock build you should be very pleased, it also responds very well should you want to give it a bit of pep later on.

I've used it in a 400 4spd. 3:55's, 68 Bird with the HSD 780 Holley and a set of long tube headers, my everyday work car, miles and miles of trouble free use.

Cruze around, maybe jump on it a bit in the evenings, on the weekends meet at the local spot, have some fun, drive it to work on Monday morning.

Edit: Check this thread if you haven't seen it, some good feedback.
http://forums.maxperformanceinc.com/...d.php?t=765522


Frank

John Milner - The 068 cam worked great in the factory stock 428 HO my brother Dan just recently dyno'd...432 hp and 502 lbft torque! Now, it did have 10.8 to 1 compression, but it was still very impressive for 'old' technology. The 068 is the cam that keeps on giving...55 years after it was designed! It would be a great cam for a 9.8 to 1 400 motor.

Dennis

Another plus with the 068 cam is that it doesn't need killer spring pressures to keep things in check. The ramps are relatively "soft" and low lift, so it isn't working the valve train hard either.

I've used a few here in pretty much "stock" 400 builds with high compression heads and zero issues on pump gas, so the long seat timing and wide LSA helps with that deal too. I also run stock springs on them, which were readily available over the counter for about $40 last time I bought a set. The came in Pioneer boxes of 4 nearly as I can remember.

I really nice upgrade for the 068 cam is the Crower 60916. It produces a little less vacuum at idle but will make about 40 more HP on the dyno in the same build. For 4 speed cars, or auto's with some gearing/converter I use the Crower 60243 cam. We helped a customer with an early FB set-up his 400 with that cam, and professionally ported #62 heads. With decent traction his car runs high 11's over 114MPH! It's nothing fancy either, stock iron intake, Q-jet, TH350, custom Continental converter, 3.73 gears and DOT tires........Cliff