Any specific camshaft/intake/carb setup recommended?

The engine is a 1993 SBC 350 out of a Pick-up. Right now, I am converting it to a carb set-up with a Elderbrock 600 CFM carb and Elderbrock Performer RPM intake. I'm also adding a set of headers. The rest of the engine will remain bone stock.

There are so many different cam profiles available, I'm not sure which one to get!

Once again, any help is greatly appreciated!

There may be better cams since I built my engine 25 years ago, but I called COMP Cams and talked to their rep. I'd encourage you to do that, there are specifics about your heads, and compression that can make a difference. I've been real happy with their 12-212-2. It is about the most I can use without more compression(about 9:1). It has a lumpy idle and what I liked is a nice flat torque curve but it doesn't come on until about 1800-2000 RPM and will pull all the way to 6000+. LOW END TORQUE is what will kill a 901 and CV joints.
I'm not familiar with your engine and when they went to roller tappets, but that will open up a lot more choices. Call the cam reps, they really know their stuff.

There are many cam makers out there. You need to call them. Try to find a cam with a higher rpm torque curve. A roller cam will give you higher rpm capability. You can also "degree" any cam to move the hp/torque curve up or down. If you go with aluminum heads, you can up your compression ratio to take advantage of more radical high rpm cams. A single plane intake manifold will also help move your torque curve up in rpms. A dual plane manifold will lower the curve.

cams are kinda like music.
i might put up with absolutely no low end and a really rough idle, but you would rather have a nice idle and be able to let the clutch out with out putting your foot on the gas to get moving.


so ...... call the cam manufacture and tell them what you have and what characteristics you prefer.

[quote name='Bruce Hinds' date='May 2 2010, 10:11 AM' post='1312465']
There may be better cams since I built my engine 25 years ago, but I called COMP Cams and talked to their rep. I'd encourage you to do that, there are specifics about your heads, and compression that can make a difference. I've been real happy with their 12-212-2. It is about the most I can use without more compression(about 9:1). It has a lumpy idle and what I liked is a nice flat torque curve but it doesn't come on until about 1800-2000 RPM and will pull all the way to 6000+. LOW END TORQUE is what will kill a 901 and CV joints.
I'm not familiar with your engine and when they went to roller tappets, but that will open up a lot more choices. Call the cam reps, they really know their stuff.
[/quote

Thanks Bruce; I will call Comp Cams. I looked up the cam and saw the specs. It looks like it will work in my engine. I have a non-roller engine. Not sure of the exact CR, but I know it's pretty low, maybe around 8.5:1.

What about the rest of the setup? Does the intake and carb setup make sense if combined with the Comp cam you mentioned? IIRC, the intake I have is a mid range intake, albeit, a dual plane one.

Anyway, thanks for the info!

if it's a dual plane it will make a bunch on low end torque, you could find an old edelbrock torker single plane that would be better and they are also lower in height to fit under the engine lid.

Ok, a lumpy cam sounds bad. It will make it harder to take off from a standstill. But the light car is easier to get moving. You will never need a high reving play toy on the street. A stock roller cam motor is rev limited to about 5800 rpm at best because of the heavier valve train (stock roller lifters). I know a 97 vortec was a roller cam motor but I don't think the 93 was. I think the vortec was the first in trucks. Believe me tell the cam mfg exactly what you have to use. Compression ratio, carb, and intake. He will tell you what is best, believe him. Thats not a vortec motor so it's pretty low hp stock but will have good torque numbers probably and was more than likely built more for emissions than torque. A reasonable hp figure with a small cam and the stock heads would be maybe 300 hp at the crank. Higher compression will need good gas. I'm kinda dumb on the location you have posted so not sure of the summertime temps for air temps you will be using.

If you are on a budget use what you have and leave the cam alone. You still need a dist get a good one.

The land of ID is the Boise Idaho area. I found out that the engine is a non-roller with 9.3:1 CR. I called Howard Cams and they recommended a cam with .449/.449 lift, 290/300 Adv Dur, LSA of 112 and an RPM range of 1600-6000. I'll be running this with a Victor Jr. intake, a 650 Carter carb and shorty headers. Is this a good combo?

Not sure how they do it, but Howard Cams also has a cam that has .390/.410 lift (less stress on the stock valve springs), 296/302 Adv Dur, LSA of 114 and an RPM range of 3200-6400. This would seem to be a better match to the intake manifold and it would definitley move the RPM's higher up...may be too high?

So should I go with the recommended cam or go with the one that I think would work better in the car? Am I missing something here?

you wont acheive that high rmp with out changing the stock valve springs.

the 449 lift cam is about what the high preformance factory engines used [L82=350hp 350cu, L 350 hp 327 cu]

those are good for a very streetable engine.

I drive the crap out of my V8. 75% of the time the rpm is below 3000. Only goes above shifting fron 1-2, 2-3. Aruond town cruising is below 3000

Each part plays a role and the intake can make a difference between drivable and a pain in the butt.
All the specs said go the single plane (Edlebrock torker) so I did. What a screamer, but it was very difficult to drive, ruined my wife for ever driving a clutch again. Also when you go up above the 5500 to 6K range the valve train gets real critical. Since I was running the 1.94 intakes and not the 2.02s I just kept it simple and went to a dual plane manifold.
It will still scream, but the time I spent above 5500 was not worth the non driveablility and extra effort in changing to the screw in studs, springs and push rods.
Spend your money on a gear swap to widen the ratios instead.

The gear swap is in the master plan, as soon as the budget allows. It sounds like the concensus is to go with the mild cam (.449/.449) versus the high rpm cam (3200->). I guess this makes sense. Is the mild cam a good match to the Victor Jr? Which dual plane plane manifold did you switch to?

Thanks again for all the help!

Personally I wouldn't change the cam. It's just something to talk about to whoever asks what cam you are running? The 450 lift cam will improve torque, it's mainly a offroad type profile. I have a old 460 lift in the 350sbc in my jeep truck and it would pull from 1000 rpm really good. It will also tack 5800 in high gear. Thats also with a 600 cfm carb. In the light 914 your motor will probably will float the valves in high gear. If you've got the guts to try it. Course the jeep has 4:09 axles also. A 600 cfm carb is not a high rpm carb so keep it reasonable and save the money for the stuff you gotta have.

just drive that bitch and stay off the sidewalk - where the type 4's drive



alright - i just sold a home today - feelin a little upbeat : )))

Why not stick with the fuel injection? You can get a wire harness from Howell and have a perfect running engine that is computer controlled. I don't however know if it will all fit as low as you want. If it's too tall you can go to an older throttle body style that is no taller than the carb setup. I can even burn you the chip if needed.

I converted my 71 Chevy truck to FI and would never think about a carburetor again.

That should be a roller cam engine.

If you must carb stick with a Holley but for the same price you can run FI

Good Luck!

If you are running stock heads, you probably have pressed in valve spring studs. You'll probably want to stick with the stock springs unless you upgrade to screw-in studs, but if you're thinking of pulling the heads to do that, you might as well think about going to aluminum heads anyway.

I think trucks went to roller cams with the vortec motor which was 96 or 97. I think 88 or so in cars but the truck will have a roller cam block but won't be drilled for the spider that holds the roller lifters straight. I have a 90 truck motor and it's flat tappet.

Article on a cheep roller cam motor.

http://www.chevyhiperformance.com/techarti...cams/index.html