Another cam ? but this one is for my specific 401 build.

pablorg

82Waggy wrote
IMO 9:1 CR is just right for the 5054H, and happens to be the cam I am going to use first in my 9:1CR 401 build. Assuming I have done my homework correctly, I hope to have hit the cam choice right the first time.

Thanks again 82Waggy for sharing your knowledge. :t:

So when are you firing up that 401? Do you have the Edelbrock MPFI setup in it?

pablorg

Dusty wrote
Here is a repost of something i posted from the thread "Mild 360 build" that is about 8 below this one on the engine forum, you might want to check it out too there was alot of good cam and engine comparisons.

Thanks Dusty for the heads up. I am trying to make up my mind about the choice of cam for my 360.... Since I don't have much knowledge on the subject I am trying to get the most info and learn a bit. :sa:

82Waggy

pablorg wrote
Thanks again 82Waggy for sharing your knowledge. :t:

So when are you firing up that 401? Do you have the Edelbrock MPFI setup in it?

Sometime this summer, and Yes, I am using the Edelbrock MPEFI.

Dusty

:t: :sa:

82Waggy

pablorg wrote
Thanks Dusty for the heads up. I am trying to make up my mind about the choice of cam for my 360.... Since I don't have much knowledge on the subject I am trying to get the most info and learn a bit. :sa:

Keep in mind that a given cam will act larger in a 360 than it does a 401 due to the difference in valve to displacement ratio and piston dwell time. For example, due to the longer stroke of the 401 it takes more crank degrees of rotation to get the piston moving up off of BDC than it does in a 360, so a 401 can stand to have the intake valve close a little later and still make similar cylinder pressure (assuming static CR is the same). Both engines also use the same intake valve size (if stock anyway), so a 360 will fill cylinders quicker and does not therefore need quite the same overlap to get the job done as the 401. But now we are getting to deep in all of this. #-o

pablorg

82Waggy wrote
Keep in mind that a given cam will act larger in a 360 than it does a 401 due to the difference in valve to displacement ratio and piston dwell time. For example, due to the longer stroke of the 401 it takes more crank degrees of rotation to get the piston moving up off of BDC than it does in a 360, so a 401 can stand to have the intake valve close a little later and still make similar cylinder pressure (assuming static CR is the same). Both engines also use the same intake valve size (if stock anyway), so a 360 will fill cylinders quicker and does not therefore need quite the same overlap to get the job done as the 401. But now we are getting to deep in all of this. #-o

That makes sense. :t: As a side note, I wonder if the difference in weight of your Wagoneer and my CJ-7 would make up for the difference from a 401 and a 360... 111!!! If so I can guess my outcome when you try the cam in your Waggy this summer :mrgreen:

oldscout401

willysworker wrote
I'm waiting for the Engle tech Dept. to reply to my email. The 5052-H looks like the cam I'm going with. Thanks again for everyones input. Special thanks to 82waggy, I never would have looked at an Engle cam. When I get this thing back on the road, I'll give an up-date with my seat of the pants report. Over-n-out

Well hows that cam working out?

« Previous Page