CRG Discussion Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
August 23, 2014, 12:36:08 AM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
Welcome to the CRG Discussion Forum!
Forum registration problems: Make sure you enter your email correctly and you check your spam box first. *Then* email KurtS2@gmail for help.
103369 Posts in 12160 Topics by 4694 Members
Latest Member: tumper93
* Home Help Search Login Register
+  CRG Discussion Forum
|-+  Camaro Research Group Discussion
| |-+  Decoding/Numbers
| | |-+  Cam Options?
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2]  All Print
Author Topic: Cam Options?  (Read 7793 times)
JohnZ
CRG Member
*****
Posts: 4067


View Profile Email
« Reply #15 on: January 01, 2007, 03:48:06 PM »

Head casting # is399492(inverted)
Block casting (driver rear)  3970010
Block casting date (passenger rear)  D241
Front machined head pad   CEB1244
The 464669 numbers I gave are on the interior upper section of the factory alum. valvepans.
       Thanks for replys

That's a 350 block, cast April 24, 1971, most likely furnished originally as a warranty replacement short block. Are you sure the heads aren't 3991492 (not 399942)?
Logged

'69 Z/28
Fathom Green
CRG
GaryL
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 538


Marilyn and me

gandmal
View Profile Email
« Reply #16 on: January 01, 2007, 03:57:33 PM »

That sounds nasty. What SCR did you use? I have camshaft envy. Wink
« Last Edit: January 01, 2007, 05:52:52 PM by GaryL » Logged

Gary

Lemans Blue X33. DZ, M20, manual steering. Only BU code rear end is original.
RamAirDave
Member
***
Posts: 334


RamAirDave
View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #17 on: January 01, 2007, 07:27:48 PM »

Im guessing by SCR youre talking about static compression ratio  Huh

Its built back all stock (except cam  Wink ) with the 11:1
Logged

"Build them how the designers and engineers envisioned them to be"

www.TheMuscleCarGuys.com
DEEJAY
Newbie
*
Posts: 14


View Profile
« Reply #18 on: January 05, 2007, 09:57:36 PM »

Will  pull pans on 1/6 and post correct #.Thanks for reply JohnZ.
                    DEEJAY
Logged
DEEJAY
Newbie
*
Posts: 14


View Profile
« Reply #19 on: January 07, 2007, 03:33:50 PM »

JohnZ......Pulled valve covers & you are correct.Heads are 3991492.
              Are you sure block is 350  with 3970010 casting?
Logged
JohnZ
CRG Member
*****
Posts: 4067


View Profile Email
« Reply #20 on: January 07, 2007, 07:14:47 PM »

JohnZ......Pulled valve covers & you are correct.Heads are 3991492.
              Are you sure block is 350  with 3970010 casting?

Yes - that was its only volume usage (also used with a 3" crank for 302's).
Logged

'69 Z/28
Fathom Green
CRG
Flowjoe
Member
***
Posts: 340


View Profile Email
« Reply #21 on: January 10, 2007, 07:27:36 PM »

Sometimes you can get the same sound out of the 346 cam if you tighten the valves down to about .022".  What we've found in our dyno testing research is that you lose cylinder pressure when installing a higher lift camshaft such as the 140 so there are trade offs.  Bigger is not necessarily better all the time.  The 140 uses a lot of fuel on the street too.

Jerry    
When I first got my Z back in '84 I read about the offroad cam and when I rebuilt the motor in '85 I bought the Crane Blueprint version of the "140" cam and stuck it in (well , had the machine shop stick it in)...more lift, more duration..had to be better right?  With stock compression, stock exhaust manifolds and the stock intake and carb it sounded wicked at idle (everyone thought I was running headers)and at full throttle.  But boy oh boy did it suck fuel (jsut like Jerry said) and off the line it couldn't get out of it's own way (didn't help that the car had 3.07:1 gearing either)...and abolutely no vacuum at idle.  In '98 I changed the gearing to 3.55:1 and that made it more enjoyable to drive around.  In 2003 (after years of procrastination) I decided to crossram it...and read Wayne Guinn's books.  The crossram in combination with Stahl headers final made that cam wake up (Just as Guinn said...it is a package deal, it was all meant to work together)...now it runs very hard, is more enjoable to drive (except when cold) but still sucks fuel like nobody's business ;-)
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]  All Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.08 seconds with 17 queries.