Don Terrill’s Speed-Talk

We see Comp Cams used everywhere..how about Lunati! On the intake choice I would like to see how a ported AG Performer stacks up against the Super Victor. I didn't know there was a Funnel Web intake available that fits the 351W unless you are using something like the PME adapter plates.

David Vizard wrote:.. I had thought of testing on an Edelbrock Performer Air Gap and a Parker Funnel Web. I have a mod to the latter that bumps up output everywhere but is is a pain to do...
DV

I hope you'll go into mod details in the SBF book David. Our 380" SBF road racer is making 720 HP @ 8,000 with a Big Joe-massaged original FW, but more is never enough..

David Vizard wrote:

Walter R. Malik wrote:With that engine, I would get it around 10.5/1 to 11/1 compression and use an aggressive hydraulic roller lifter set-up for street use, (camshaft somewhere in the 255 to 260 at .050" range), and run the smaller Victor Jr. intake to achieve the peak torque you are after.
Of course, being that you are testing the TFS heads you might want to try their intake manifold that goes with them.

Just my opinions ... a 414" engine was pretty close and your using consensus better heads.

Walter,
Thanks for the input. I had intended to run a 10.5/1 CR but a cam somewhat smaller than you suggested here. I was thinking more in the 244/248 at 0.050 with a valve train that will deliver about 0.7 lift. As for the intake I had thought of testing on an Edelbrock Performer Air Gap and a Parker Funnel Web. I have a mod to the latter that bumps up output everywhere but is is a pain to do.
As for the cam I am as yet undecided as to whether it should be a Comp, Crane or Mike Jones. Might be interesting to see what brand ST posters would like to see used!

DV

With using that much valve lift you will probably be able to get enough lobe area with that shorter duration; I was thinking more like .625" or so for an everyday street engine.
I can tell you with certainty that a Victor Jr. will make more peak torque and horsepower however, will be way less BELOW the peak torque RPM level.
Use a Mike Jones or Lunati or Howard's or Crane or Bullet or Demo's and show us any testing with anything but the ever popular Comp Cams.

Why on earth would you put anything other than a single plane intake on a 4" stroke engine? Super Vic MINIMUM ..

paulzig wrote:Why on earth would you put anything other than a single plane intake on a 4" stroke engine? Super Vic MINIMUM ..

If I did not put on a dual plane rpm performer i would not be able to show the difference!!!!
DV

paulzig wrote:Why on earth would you put anything other than a single plane intake on a 4" stroke engine? Super Vic MINIMUM ..

It's a free country and he can build what he wants! Problem with small block strokers is there isn't enough width between the heads to design a large
runner dual plane intake like the Chevy big blocks or Ford big blocks. I see many 496 big block Chevy builds making big torque and horsepower with
large dual plane manifolds. For a street 2000-6000 RPM band with most action below 4500 RPM the dual plane is still the way to go.
I'd like to see a fully ported dual plane flowing 300 cfm up against an out the box Super Vic. I like the instant torque and throttle response on the street at low and mid RPM...more the better and if it does blow the tires off and get sideways at an RPM I can enjoy it at well that's a FUN street machine.
We are not all building for the last tenth of a second for a 9 second race car.
Something like that old Torq Link intake that was built of course for the small block Chevy would be nice on a big Windsor!

paulzig wrote:Why on earth would you put anything other than a single plane intake on a 4" stroke engine? Super Vic MINIMUM ..

For best AVERAGE power through the entire RPM range for a street engine, is why ... not everything built is for maximum horsepower ONLY.

Walter R. Malik wrote:

David Vizard wrote:

Walter R. Malik wrote:With that engine, I would get it around 10.5/1 to 11/1 compression and use an aggressive hydraulic roller lifter set-up for street use, (camshaft somewhere in the 255 to 260 at .050" range), and run the smaller Victor Jr. intake to achieve the peak torque you are after.
Of course, being that you are testing the TFS heads you might want to try their intake manifold that goes with them.

Just my opinions ... a 414" engine was pretty close and your using consensus better heads.

Walter,
Thanks for the input. I had intended to run a 10.5/1 CR but a cam somewhat smaller than you suggested here. I was thinking more in the 244/248 at 0.050 with a valve train that will deliver about 0.7 lift. As for the intake I had thought of testing on an Edelbrock Performer Air Gap and a Parker Funnel Web. I have a mod to the latter that bumps up output everywhere but is is a pain to do.
As for the cam I am as yet undecided as to whether it should be a Comp, Crane or Mike Jones. Might be interesting to see what brand ST posters would like to see used!

DV

With using that much valve lift you will probably be able to get enough lobe area with that shorter duration; I was thinking more like .625" or so for an everyday street engine.
I can tell you with certainty that a Victor Jr. will make more peak torque and horsepower however, will be way less BELOW the peak torque RPM level.
Use a Mike Jones or Lunati or Howard's or Crane or Bullet or Demo's and show us any testing with anything but the ever popular Comp Cams.

Walter,
I think you missed the part where i said i have a mod for the Parker intake. with the changes I make it will out-power/torque the Victor at rpm from about 4800 up on a 347 without sacrificing any low speed compared to the Victor jn. (will be detailed in my SB ford book - when it's done) On a 408 it was up 19 hp without any penalty.
As for the Victor Jnr my late friend Roger Dr, Air Helgesen had some port and more importantly plenum mods that really lit a fire under the Victor Jnr's performance. Unfortunately the mods are far from obvious and are now lost due to his passing.

As for cams I am getting the same message as you put forward from others also. Comp do have some great profiles and I like their stuff but yes they are not the only cam company on the planet. Lunati has some great hydraulic flat tappet profiles if you know which to choose. I like dealing with Howard's although I don't use them very often. My friend of 40 years, Chase Knight, has retired from Crane and I am at a loss without his input and help. Need some recovery time here. As for Jonesey, well that guy is always ready to help and does good stuff. But the fact that he is a one man company often leaves me feeling guilty I have used up his precious time. After all if he is talking to me on the phone 100% of his production work force is down. That's not good for his bottom line.

Sooo--- lets have some more cam input here. Let's say we rule out Comp because they are already a proven entity and are always in the lime light. I have some Crane and Howard stuff in the works that leaves Lunati and Jonesey - so here the question for all to comment on - which would you all choose for this 427' build's cam production?

I'd like to see you try something from Howards, Isky, or Crower. When it comes to "catalog" cam companies, Lunati and Comp seem to get all the press.

I assume you are going to run adapters to bolt on the Parker intake to the 351W block? Are you going with hyd. roller cams or solid roller?

For a street based 427 stroker what is a good cam LCA for best over all performance given duration in the 240-250 range?

David Vizard wrote:

Walter R. Malik wrote:
With using that much valve lift you will probably be able to get enough lobe area with that shorter duration; I was thinking more like .625" or so for an everyday street engine.
I can tell you with certainty that a Victor Jr. will make more peak torque and horsepower however, will be way less BELOW the peak torque RPM level.
Use a Mike Jones or Lunati or Howard's or Crane or Bullet or Demo's and show us any testing with anything but the ever popular Comp Cams.

Walter,
I think you missed the part where i said i have a mod for the Parker intake. with the changes I make it will out-power/torque the Victor at rpm from about 4800 up on a 347 without sacrificing any low speed compared to the Victor jn. (will be detailed in my SB ford book - when it's done) On a 408 it was up 19 hp without any penalty.
As for the Victor Jnr my late friend Roger Dr, Air Helgesen had some port and more importantly plenum mods that really lit a fire under the Victor Jnr's performance. Unfortunately the mods are far from obvious and are now lost due to his passing.

As for cams I am getting the same message as you put forward from others also. Comp do have some great profiles and I like their stuff but yes they are not the only cam company on the planet. Lunati has some great hydraulic flat tappet profiles if you know which to choose. I like dealing with Howard's although I don't use them very often. My friend of 40 years, Chase Knight, has retired from Crane and I am at a loss without his input and help. Need some recovery time here. As for Jonesey, well that guy is always ready to help and does good stuff. But the fact that he is a one man company often leaves me feeling guilty I have used up his precious time. After all if he is talking to me on the phone 100% of his production work force is down. That's not good for his bottom line.

Sooo--- lets have some more cam input here. Let's say we rule out Comp because they are already a proven entity and are always in the lime light. I have some Crane and Howard stuff in the works that leaves Lunati and Jonesey - so here the question for all to comment on - which would you all choose for this 427' build's cam production?

I didn't miss it David, it is simply that I can't give actual results from that but, I can with the Victor Jr./Air-Gap and I figured you could extrapolate what the results might be, going from there.

David Vizard wrote:Sooo--- lets have some more cam input here. Let's say we rule out Comp because they are already a proven entity and are always in the lime light. I have some Crane and Howard stuff in the works that leaves Lunati and Jonesey - so here the question for all to comment on - which would you all choose for this 427' build's cam production?

My vote is for Harold's latest designs before his passing. Available through Howard's.

I've read several places over the years that Harold and Mike were the real cam competition and had a lot of respect for each other's work while the rest of the lobe designers were 10 years behind them.

My vote would be a Harold B cam it'd be a nice tribute to a guy who did a lot for our profession; but I'll also throw Straub's name out there. I guess Im tired of the big-box store cams getting all the pub.

If you really want to get the full backyard hotrodder experience why dont you have your neighbor order all of the parts. Then the public will get an accurate report on those companies quality control. Im sure if those companies get an order from David Vizard you will be getting the best of thier best. Then report back to everyone about all the extra fitting and fixing up new parts at least that I run into. That would be an iteresting read to me and informative. The reader would learn companies to avoid, ones that have good customer service, (the most important to me, because people do make mistakes.) and what problems to look for when assembling a new build.