Cam Help

[sixty9santa]

Hi all, I have a 1976 Mustang with a 302W in her and 2.75:1 gears. With the stock 58cc heads (according to Tom Monroe's book), I have a dismal compression ratio of 8.0:1. I'm doing a budget build for a low compression Ford 302 and here is what it consists of so far: -Autolite 4100 600cfm carburetor -Weiand Stealth intake -1.5" combination spacer -Stock low performance cylinder heads (1.78/1.45 valves) -Hooker 1 5/8" full length headers -2.5" exhaust, x-pipe, mufflers, no cats -MSD StreetFire ignition with rev limiter I would like to change the cam to somewhat boost my performance. Now I know that I shouldn't be expecting much, but more than stock would be great. She's a daily driver and I can't change gears since it somehow has a WER case (integral carrier) and gears are no longer being made. I am on the lookout for an Explorer setup, but I'm not finding any at the right price. Reasons for the cam change for the LOPO motor, I'll be swapping a 408W in a few years and I just want more fun from my current setup. The cams that I'm considering are the Lunati 61000 and 61001, but I fear that the 61001 might be too much cam for such a low compression. I was also looking at Comp's he268h and the xe256h. I just can't decide. Please help me! PS: I'd prefer something from Lunati due to the wider LSA.

This ad is not displayed to registered or logged-in members. Register your free account today and become a member on Mustang Forums!

[kalli]

just an opinion ... let's see what the others have to say
for the intake I'd rather get the action+ if you want a Weiand intake for your setup (part 8124???)
for the cam the xe256h seems quite good choice. I never heard feedback of the Lunatis, so I can't comment onm that

[2+2GT]

Well, I have always preferred the matching-profile Ford cams, in your case I'd use the C9OZ-C hydraulic.

Part Number Engine Intake Exhaust Intake Exhaust Intake Exhaust Overlap Notes
C9OZ-6250-C All .298 .298 .477 .477 290 290 62 2

2. The C9OZ-6250-C camshaft lobe lift value of .298"
was taken from the C9OZ-6250-C instruction sheet
(IS-4285) provided with the camshaft. This equates
to a theoretical lift of .477" (.298" × 1.60 = .477").
However, the same instruction sheet also listed the
valve lift as .470". This value was repeated in other
sources as well.

Of course, if you haven't port-matched your exhaust ports to the manifolds/headers, much of the gain from upgrading the cam will be wasted. Unmodified Ford 289/302 head exhaust ports were horrible, and by 1976 were positively revolting.

[my77stang]

Another Mustang II guy? YAY!!!!!!!!!

I always recommend the summit 218/228 .471/.471 for mild builds as I have personal experience with this cam in the first 302 I swapped into my II. It should destroy the tires off the line but will run out of steam around 5k. You don't even have to upgrade your valve springs

If you haven't already bought your intake and carb, check out Weiand part# 8124, and a Holley 4160 600cfm carb. You are making a good call by using the Hooker headers. I ahve the Hedmans and I absolutely hate them for the II's.

Btw, I'd ditch that rear and grab a 3.40 it makes a world of difference.