[Stan Weiss]

OK I took a file I had for a 461 and used it. The first picture shows what the heads flow. The UD cam, the Crower 60919 with the duration number I had and the Crower 60919 with 304/316

Stan

[Cliff R]

"Does anyone have a cam card for the Crower 60919 that they can post?"

The old cam card differed from the cam card Crower shows on their website when you look up that cam number.

304/316, 231/240@.050", .470"/.470" lift and 113 LSA with the ICL at 109 is correct for the card that showed up with those cams, at least thru 2009.

I'd also note that the cam is NOT advanced to come in at 109ICL. It ALWAYS came in at 112ICL or very close to it. This indicates to me that Crower was most likely "re-boxing" the Melling SPC-8 cams from CMC and just "juggling" the numbers a bit:

SPC-8 INT. 3 BTC 48ABC 231 32 BTC 92 ABC 304 .313 .469 112 HYD
EXH. 54 BBC 6 ATC 240 84 BBC 51 ATC 315 .313 .469 115 HYD

More recent users of the Crower 60919 cam have reported that it is now different and closer to the specs on the website, but I have no way to know if this is accurate or not.

INTAKE Opens: 7.5 BTDC
Closes: 43.5 ABDC
EXHAUST Opens: 56.0 BBDC
Closes: 4.0 ATDC

LOBE SEPARATION 112º

Duration at .050" Intake: 231º
Exhaust: 240º
LOBE LIFT Intake: .313
Exhaust: .313

Not sure if any of it matters all that much but I have witnessed dyno runs (same dyno) from very similar 455's with factory iron heads and close to 10 to 1 compression with both the Ultradyne 231/239/110 cam and the Crane RAIV "computer smoothed" version. There wasn't a nickles worth of difference between all of them and all the cars they ended up in ran about the same at the track as well if you factored in the vehicle weight........FWIW.......

[Steve C.]

The obvious, one advantage of ordering a custom cam is you can have it ground with any lobe separation desired.


.

[Stan Weiss]

This the result using the cam file I have for the Melling SPC-8.

I have a Cam Dr file for the Crane cam sent to me by Ken C / HO. I will make a file that can be used for a simulation and post that later.

; Crane 969681 Blue Print 041
; HC0235 01-17-90 Test # 35
; Rocker Ratio - 1.5:1 Intake - 1.5:1 Exhaust
; Checking Height = 0.004
;
; C1_File_-_Header_Information From Papers
; PVN,ICL,ECL_=_xxx,113.8,113.8
; Overlap_=_86.1
; Intake_Open_=_31.9____Close_=_98.9____Duration_=_3 10.7
; Intake_Cam_Lift_=_.31374____Valve_Lift_=_.47061___ _Area_=_25.85
; Exhaust_Open_=_83.6____Close_=_54.2____Duration_=_ 317.9
; Exhaust_Cam_Lift_=_.31319____Valve_Lift_=_.46978__ __Area_=_26.58
;
; From a Different Piece of Paper
; 0.050_Overlap_=_8.4
; Intake_0.050_Open_=_1.5____Close_=_50.2____Duratio n_=_231.6
; Exhaust_0.050_Open_=_52.8____Close_=_6.9____Durati on_=_239.7

Stan

[Stan Weiss]

As Jay said above the software I am using only handles symmetrical lobes. The other problem in this process is where is the seat-to-seat duration measured at. As seen above HO was looking at 0.004" Other cam manufactures use 0.0045", 0.005" or 0.006" You can see below the difference in seat-to-seat duration at these small difference in lifter raise for the Crane RAIV cam.

CAM_______Lift______Opens___Closes__Duration
_________________Deg_BTDC__Deg_ABDC_____________Ar ea____ICL
_________0.00150____40.80_|_111.81_|_332.61_|__26. 07_|_125.50
_________0.00400____31.84_|__98.92_|_310.76_|__26. 04_|_123.54
_________0.00450____30.62_|__96.65_|_307.26_|__26. 03_|_123.02
_________0.00500____29.60_|__94.47_|_304.07_|__26. 02_|_122.44
_________0.00600____27.77_|__90.14_|_297.90_|__26. 00_|_121.19
_________0.01000____22.53_|__77.20_|_279.73_|__25. 93_|_117.34
_________0.02000____14.78_|__65.40_|_260.18_|__25. 78_|_115.31
_________0.04000_____5.21_|__54.28_|_239.49_|__25. 46_|_114.53
_________0.05000_____1.45_|__50.18_|_231.64_|__25. 27_|_114.37
_________0.10000___-14.18_|__33.72_|_199.54_|__24.05_|_113.95
_________0.15000___-28.41_|__19.15_|_170.75_|__22.12_|_113.78
_________0.20000___-43.49_|___4.01_|_140.51_|__19.43_|_113.75
_________0.25000___-61.28_|_-13.92_|_104.80_|__15.29_|_113.68
_________0.30000___-89.31_|_-41.84_|__48.86_|___7.44_|_113.74

Stan

[Mr Twister]

Impressive dialog above. Here is a combo I used on my first (350) build many moons ago. It ran well, but the short block did not last long due to a few mistakes I made
-72cc big valve heads
-HC-02 cam
-VS-11 springs
-Holley 3310
-TRW forged pistons
-performer intake (i think)

[Stan Weiss]

Originally Posted by Mr Twister

Impressive dialog above. Here is a combo I used on my first (350) build many moons ago. It ran well, but the short block did not last long due to a few mistakes I made
-72cc big valve heads
-HC-02 cam
-VS-11 springs
-Holley 3310
-TRW forged pistons
-performer intake (i think)

Do you remember what your CR was?

Stan

[Mr Twister]

Originally Posted by Stan Weiss

Do you remember what your CR was?

Stan

No, but the block was chamfered in the bores. and the heads were 670 with the intake unshrouded. so maybe 9 1/2 to 1

[KJ223]

I really appreciate all the advice, I have another question. when installing the timing set, do I align the dots with each other, as in cam dot is on bottom, and crank dot is up top lined up with the cam dot? I’m fairly certain this is how it’s done, but I’ve also seen someone say to install the cam dot up top lines with with the crank dot, rather than on the bottom. Which way is correct?

[johnta1]

Either way will work.
With the dots close to each other easier to see if off.
With that setup it will be at #6 cyl firing, so set distributor rotor to #6 plug/post.

Crank rotates twice for one revolution of cam.
(could after setting gears/chain, rotate crank one revolution to put it at #1)

Could check the alignment after rotating also. Dots would be up.

[Rar_421]

Originally Posted by Cliff R

"Does anyone have a cam card for the Crower 60919 that they can post?"

The old cam card differed from the cam card Crower shows on their website when you look up that cam number.

304/316, 231/240@.050", .470"/.470" lift and 113 LSA with the ICL at 109 is correct for the card that showed up with those cams, at least thru 2009.

I'd also note that the cam is NOT advanced to come in at 109ICL. It ALWAYS came in at 112ICL or very close to it. This indicates to me that Crower was most likely "re-boxing" the Melling SPC-8 cams from CMC and just "juggling" the numbers a bit:

SPC-8 INT. 3 BTC 48ABC 231 32 BTC 92 ABC 304 .313 .469 112 HYD
EXH. 54 BBC 6 ATC 240 84 BBC 51 ATC 315 .313 .469 115 HYD

More recent users of the Crower 60919 cam have reported that it is now different and closer to the specs on the website, but I have no way to know if this is accurate or not.

INTAKE Opens: 7.5 BTDC
Closes: 43.5 ABDC
EXHAUST Opens: 56.0 BBDC
Closes: 4.0 ATDC

LOBE SEPARATION 112º

Duration at .050" Intake: 231º
Exhaust: 240º
LOBE LIFT Intake: .313
Exhaust: .313

Not sure if any of it matters all that much but I have witnessed dyno runs (same dyno) from very similar 455's with factory iron heads and close to 10 to 1 compression with both the Ultradyne 231/239/110 cam and the Crane RAIV "computer smoothed" version. There wasn't a nickles worth of difference between all of them and all the cars they ended up in ran about the same at the track as well if you factored in the vehicle weight........FWIW.......

Has anyone tried the Howards version of the RA 4 cam?
Manufacturers Description: Excellent RAM Air IV replacement. Will work well with NOS.
Intake Duration @ .050": 231
Exhaust Duration @ .050": 241
Advertised Intake Duration (@ .006"): 285
Advertised Exhaust Duration (@ .006"): 295
Intake Valve Lift with OE Rocker Ratio (1.50): .480"
Exhaust Valve Lift OE Rocker Ratio (1.50): .470"
Intake Lobe Lift: .320"
Exhaust Lobe Lift: .313"
Intake Valve Lift with 1.55 Rocker Ratio: .496"
Intake Valve Lift with 1.60 Rocker Ratio: .512"
Intake Valve Lift with 1.65 Rocker Ratio: .528"
Exhaust Valve Lift with 1.55 Rocker Ratio: .485"
Exhaust Valve Lift with 1.60 Rocker Ratio: .501”

Exhaust Valve Lift with 1.65 Rocker Ratio: .516”

Lobe Separation Angle: 114 Degrees
Intake Centerline: 110 Degrees

[Cliff R]

Highly unlikely Howards is grinding that cam.

Like all the others they just buy them from CMC and "juggle" the numbers ever so slightly to make in look like an in house grind.

If you want a RAIV cam I'd buy it from Rock Auto or Amazon. It's listed as Melling part number 26308. It will be the same cam made in USA for a lot less money.....

https://www.amazon.com/Melling-26308.../dp/B00XQ3R6SM

[JB Eng Wis]

Pick any custom cam from Howards list ........
I just recieved my Howards Custom Pontiac HFT.
It took 7 weeks.... they said 8 weeks...........

[Steve C.]

They have some of Harold Brookshire's designs that came with the purchase of Custom Camshaft Company. These are from when he was at Custom Camshaft Company (Arrington Performance) in the mid/late 2000s. These would be Harold's last available designs. The Lunati Voodoo's predate his time at CCC.

They are on page 28 here:

https://www.howardscams.com/sites/de...01-20-2014.pdf



.

[Jim Moshier]

Here is a recent Crower 60919 Cam Card. says to install at 108 ° and it's ground 4° advanced. So it does look like CMC re-boxing

[Jay S]

The current 60919 is ground on a different cam core than a Melling SPC-8. It also specs out differently, narrower LSA, less seat timing. It is not a CMC rebox, Crower grinds it.

That Howard’s RA4 replacement is Howards grind also, I don’t think Howard’s uses CMC for any cam that I know of. It is ground like a Crower 60919 with more aggressive profile than an SPC-8, but on a 114 LSA instead of a 112. The lobe numbers are listed in the Howard’s lobe catalog.

There are many white box cams supplied to various companies from CMC, those two cams just happen to not be one of them.

[Cliff R]

If Howards is taking time to do a slightly altered RAIV grind someone should talk them into doing the Wolverine 5059 cam. It's superior to the RAIV grind at every level, IMHO, and a near perfect cam for a 455 street engine build with around 10 to 1 compression and factory iron heads with 230-250cfm intake flow.......

[Jay S]

In the current world of CNC cam grinding you would think that Wolverine could be reproduced. Howard’s has replicate some pretty low production grinds for various OEM replacements.

I wonder if the cam core the Wolverine cam was ground is not made anymore though? Seems like there is some type of road block that everyone runs into when they try to copy it.

[KJ223]

Here’s an update, I ended up buying the summit 2800 cam, reason being is it fit my price range and I was able to get it delivered quickly. I have a 3 week break here to be able to work on it and I couldn’t wait for the lunati. I have a question that keeps coming up in my head. Would I be ok not changing the valve springs with this fairly mild summit cam? As in keeping the current springs in and not touching them. It was mentioned earlier that this cam should be ok with the stock springs but I just want to run it by you guys again and make sure this might be ok.

[Jay S]

With 1.5 rocker arms, we have never used anything more than stock valve springs with that 204/214 cam.