Diputado

Thanks, guys. Actually, after posting my question, I did a little extra reading myself on the topic. And you're right...not much point of going with a 1.7 ratio when you can just get a cam with the same amount of lift already ground in, and with much less stress on valve guides, etc. Sure, you can do it...but if you want a valve-train that will hold up and last for years (like I do), it's not the best idea.

Have pretty much "gravitated" towards 2-3 potential selections at the time: 2 from Lunati and 1 from Comp. AFTER I decide...I'll let you know which one I choose...and why. I've definitely been learning a lot about cams over the past few months.

barnett468

OK, COOL, WE'LL BE HERE.

Diputado

OK, guys....have finally decided on my roller cam selection for my 289 rebuild. As for the cams I was considering (Lunati, Comp)...I choose "none of the above" and have instead gone with a custom grind from Ed Curtis at FlowTech, along with a set of Morel link-bar retrofit hydraulic lifters. I'll let y'all know how it all turns out.

barnett468

ok, thanks for the update, glad you found something . . send us photos.
.

Diputado

Ok, folks...since my last post back in December, I've been pretty busy with a COMPLETE rebuild of my '65 289. Rather than go into all the details here, I just "updated' the signature lines for my posts, so you can see what the engine now is. I will say a BIG thanks, though, to "Mike" in Maryland for a lot of good advice, and especially Ed Curtis with FTI for all the advice AND great parts!

barnett468

.
looks good except your carburetor is a little small.

also, i would buy the optional secondary springs and install the lightest one.

you should be running at least around 10:1 static compression.

headers are hopefully 1 5/8" if the cam id very big

did you set your total timing?

Diputado

Barnett, yeah, have heard a couple other folks say the carb is a little small. But, for a street engine running under 6,000 rpm, it's ok for now. I might...MIGHT....upgrade to a dual-line 650 one day, but for now I'm fine with it. Will also see how the secondaries perform currently with the standard springs.

Comp. ratio is right at 9.9:1. Runs good on 91 octane pump gas with current cam and ignition timing.

And yes, headers are right size.

And yes...distributor has a custom advance curve based on all vehicle/engine specs. Total advance of 34 degrees (10 degrees initial; 24 vacuum advance) comes in at 3000 rpm.

barnett468

ok, you can NOT in any way shape or form use 24 degrees of vacuum advance . . whoever told you to do that is a complete and utter imbecile [moron].

you need around 32 degrees total without the vacuum advance at around 2800 rpm with no vacuum advance . . your vacuum advance should add around 10 at the most.
.

Diputado

Well, whatever. I think you just didn't/don't understand what I am saying. The INITIAL advance is set at 10 degrees BTDC. The custom advance curve of the distributor is 24 degrees @ 3000 rpm. This advance curve was set by Performance Distributors, where I bought the distributor, and I can assure you they are NOT imbeciles or morons.

Anyway....that pretty much does it for me...no more wasted posts on this topic on this forum. Have much better sources of advice. Good luck to the rest of y'all...!!

barnett468

i did not misunderstand what you were saying.


24 degrees of vacuum advance is far different than 24 degrees of mechanical advance . . do not blame others for your mistakes when you use the wrong word or simply do not know what you are talking about.


you came here asking for advice . . since that advice is FREE, do not complain about it, especially when it is accurate . . no one here is getting paid for trying to help you.


your chance of getting better advice elsewhere is highly unlikely . . many of the people here are extremely knowledgeable and far from inexperienced as imo your comment implies.
.