[bobzdar]

Getting ready to reassemble the original 400 for my '67, so has 670 heads and stock valvetrain with 067 cam. It ran perfectly, just pulled it apart to clean and reseal. Car has original dealer installed ra pans (original owner wanted ac and ram air so the dealer threw pans on a 400 a/c car since that combo wasn't available). It's a th400 3.36 posi car. I'm adding ra manifolds and swapping to an m22, so want a cam to match. I had great success with a wolverine wg1028 in a similar build 15 or so years ago, so would like a similar style cam to that as I believe wolverine are no longer around or got absorbed by another company. I know the melling spc-3 is out there (and various sources say it's the same as the wg1028 while others say it's not), but are there other options that wouldn't also require a new valvetrain? Has stock intake and qjet, but I plan to go with the holley spread bore injection kit if it'll fit the ra pan.

[ponyakr]

"...stock valvetrain with 067 cam..."

Next step up would be the Melling SPC-7, which is supposed to be close to the 068 Pontiac.

If you wanna stay with near .400 lift, the Melling SPC-3 is said to be similar to the 744 Pontiac cam, but tamer. That #1028 cam looks to have the same specs as the SPC-3. This list has some good cam specs.

http://www.pontiacpower.org/PontiacCams.htm

If .454 lift is not more than you want, the Lunati 10510312 might work for you.

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

Then if you don't mind changing to stronger springs, there are lots of higher lift choices.

[steve25]

You have made no mention in your plans for installing new valve springs, valve stem O ring seals and timing chain, all of which need to be done!

In fact since the heads need to come apart to do that I would get the guides cut for positive type valve seals and dispense with the stem O rings.

If you want to stick with factory spec parts, and seing that you only have 3.36 rear gears I would not Cam duration wise with anything bigger then the 068 Cam and I would advance that 2 degrees just to compensate for normal chain stretch and top that off with 1.65 rockers if your budget permits.

Here's a helpful chart for you.

[TedRamAirII]

I would want a M-20 for first gear! its going to be soggy!

[bobzdar]

Originally Posted by TedRamAirII

I would want a M-20 for first gear! its going to be soggy!

Is your raII soggy? That looks to have an almost identical setup unless you swapped out gear set? I've had a 400 st-10/3.23 car and it was fine - 2.43 1st with 3.23's and 255/60 15 tires will be very similar to a 2.20 1st with 3.36s and shorter 14" tires in this. I couldn't hook up a full throttle launch on that car with street tires so figure an even deeper 1st on this car, which will likely have less tire under it, will have even more trouble.

[Will]

Crower 60916 cam with Crower 68404-16 springs. As others mentioned, get the guides cut for positive seals and ditch the o-rings and metal spring shields. They will fail if used on aftermarket springs. Upgrade the pushrods (definitely!) and rocker studs and run poly-locks. You can still run stock rockers if you don't want to spend any more, but a set of Harland Sharp rockers would be a good finishing touch.

This cam works great with high compression 400s and will be a blast with your 4-speed.

If you don't want to do all that, get an 068 clone and be happy.

[gto19]

What about the comp cams xe268h

[Will]

Originally Posted by gto19

What about the comp cams xe268h

Not a good choice for a high compression engine, IMO. Short seat-seat timing, advanced ICL, and borderline narrow LSA makes for a lot of cylinder pressure lower in the RPM range where you don't want it with such an engine.

[gto19]

Originally Posted by Will

Not a good choice for a high compression engine, IMO. Short seat-seat timing, advanced ICL, and borderline narrow LSA makes for a lot of cylinder pressure lower in the RPM range where you don't want it with such an engine.

Interesting info . I’m running it in my 67 gto and the car runs like a raped ape ��

Btw I’m no cam expert at all

[Will]

Originally Posted by gto19

Interesting info . I’m running it in my 67 gto and the car runs like a raped ape 🦧

Well, just goes to show the real world often differs from theory and how not all combinations are the same. Is your engine all stock? What octane gas do you have available?

[TedRamAirII]

I had a HE268 in a 67 400 GTO. Pulled hard, until 5K rpm, then its done.

[gto19]

Originally Posted by TedRamAirII

I had a HE268 in a 67 400 GTO. Pulled hard, until 5K rpm, then its done.

Did you mean XE 268 ?

[TedRamAirII]

Originally Posted by gto19

Did you mean XE 268 ?

High Energy 268. I think it was a .450 lift? this was 35 years ago.

[bobzdar]

Originally Posted by Will

Crower 60916 cam with Crower 68404-16 springs. As others mentioned, get the guides cut for positive seals and ditch the o-rings and metal spring shields. They will fail if used on aftermarket springs. Upgrade the pushrods (definitely!) and rocker studs and run poly-locks. You can still run stock rockers if you don't want to spend any more, but a set of Harland Sharp rockers would be a good finishing touch.

This cam works great with high compression 400s and will be a blast with your 4-speed.

If you don't want to do all that, get an 068 clone and be happy.

I had thought about the crower 60916 but it seems like it's not much different from the 744/spc-3 except for the additional lift - little less duration but little tighter lsa so maybe a little peakier at a few hundred less rpm? Is doing all that work worth it to get some extra lift? How about the 60919 with rhoads lifters, as if I go through the heads it seems like it'd open up more options cam wise.

The 068 seems like the right call for an auto but not a close ratio 4 speed - pontiac went a little bigger for the ra1 and ra3 4 speed when they had the additional exhaust flow vs the non ra cars. I was just hoping things had advanced some in the last 10-15 years but appears it's the usual suspects unless you start dabling with higher flowing heads, forged rods and the like, but that's beyond what I want to do with this car. I still have a few weeks to mull it over before I need to order.

[Will]

Honestly I didn't even think of the 744. Seems that people who've used it report it's a bit soggy down low. The 60916 will have better bottom end and a very strong midrange punch.

I threw the 068 out simply because it will work with a completely stock valve train. It wouldn't be my first choice. My experience with it in a friend's '70 RAIII 4 speed Formula was that it was very mild, smooth idle and didn't pull much beyond 4800 RPM, though it was very strong from 2000-4000.

I have heard that the spc7 is not an exact copy of the 744, that the lobes are less aggressive. I don't know how true that is, but if so maybe it'll have a little better bottom end. You could always put Rhoads lifters on it.

The 60919 with Rhoads would also be a great choice but will have a lot more top end than the others. Since the engine is all stock, not sure you want to go there? The 60916 will maximize your midrange power while not needing to rev to uncomfortably high RPMs for a stock bottom end.

If you really want to keep the be valvetrain stock, you're going to be limited in your cam selection. My understanding is that the 744 equipped cars used a significantly stiffer spring and not sure you can get an equivalent these days. The 68404 springs are a great choice since they install at stock height and have enough pressure and clearance for cams up to ~.500 lift. Getting the guides cut for viton seals isn't that big of a deal, and the price difference between some beefier pushrods (don't need anything really strong) and stock ones isn't much.

[bobzdar]

Thanks for the info, I'll mull it over a bit.

[Cliff R]

WAY back when the XE cams first came out I used an XE268 in 400 build with well prepared #16 heads. It ran like an ape that got raped 4 or 5 times and left on the side of the road for dead....LOL

Seriously it idled smooth with a "deep-heavy" sound, thru some power at you quick and early, then DONE by 4800rpms or so. NOT very impressive at all compared to the Crower 60916 and 60243 cams I use in those builds right up until I got out of the engine building business a few years ago.

One of our "little" 400's topped with ported #62's pushes an early FIrebird solidly into the 11's in full street trim on DOT's.

IF you are looking at XE cams for a 400 go to the larger ones, they start to have enough seat timing to make power in one of these engines, but the fast ramps still have me staying away from them as they need a LOT of valve spring to keep thing in check at higher RPM's. It's not something discussed all that often on here but personally I do NOT use a lot of valve spring pressure on my engines and avoid camshafts that recommend a lot of spring pressure. I've also never once had any lobe or lifter failures either, which we read about way too often on the Boards........Cliff

[pastry_chef]

Some dyno information.

406 Pontiac by Tin Indian.
stock rebuild using Seal Power pistons, RPM rods
crower 60916 cam, re-done 6x heads, Performer manifold and 750 Q jet carb.
351 horse and 430 ft lbs of torque
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B9H3nWRBEFg

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

400 with XE262 dyno image (member silverbullet07).
Exact CR unknown, possibly high 9 range - cranking PSI was 190 to 200.
445 ft lbs @3400
361 hp @5100.
long branch manifolds on but no exhaust. Timing was 32


My pick would be an Ultradyne or Voodoo.

[Cliff R]

406 cid, very well prepared #16 heads, Crower 60916 cam, high ratio rockers, 419hp/453tq.

The larger 60243 cam made 424hp/465tq.

The Crower 60916 cam would be a very poor choice for a 400 street build with 6x heads on it, not nearly enough compression....IMHO and FWIW.

For 400 builds with 6X heads I use and prefer the Crower 60240 camshaft. 210/222/112 LSA. It's the biggest cam I'd recommend in one with the compression that low.......

[77 TRASHCAN]

Originally Posted by TedRamAirII

High Energy 268. I think it was a .450 lift? this was 35 years ago.

35 years ago cam selection for a street car were thin. Compression ratios had been low since 71 and got ridiculous low in the mid 70's and on. Comp came out with their High Energy cams some time in the 80's (I believe....).

Their High Energy cams became a hit with street driven vehicles, making a huge difference in performance. I sold a few Chevy versions and some Pontiac's as well. Everyone enjoyed how they performed.

My buddy had a 66 Chevy C 10 pickup. Our mutual friend engine builder built a 400 small block for him. Had a 268H cam, early performer intake, 3310 Holley 750 carb. Slightly modified stock 441 iron Chevy heads (I say slightly, the builder was serious about where to grind and where NOT to grind. Grind in one wrong spot, and you've just screwed everything up...), 1-1/2 O.D. headers (sounds small LOL). A 3.42 posi rear end from a later Chevy 4X4 pickup, and a Muncie M20. Compression ratio was approximately 9:1, builder was a little afraid it was a fuzz too high, for a heavy pickup (it was not).
The 406 belted out 300HP and 400 ft/lb torque. THe number sound lame, but were SAE Net numbers, nothing added to fluff anything up. The builder always used these numbers on any build.

My buddy is about 75 years old now, and in poor health. That old Chevy pickup was bad ass. he never, so called, raced anyone, but stop light challenged many of the wanna be Hot Rodders in town, NEVER lost to one...

Point being, High Energy Comp Cams are still made but ARE NOT the same the their currently touted "modern" XE cams