That could be an option and this way I would not take any risk to end up with something that does not work correctly together.

Problem is:

Can I take the Performer RPM cam even if I only have a Performer Intake and Performer Heads? Basically I would be between the Performer and the Performer RPM package right?

Given the fact that I don't do anything myself, a cam swap is a lot of money and I would not want to have to redo it

 

http://www.lunatipower.com/Product.aspx?id=1643&gid=287

or

http://www.lunatipower.com/Product.aspx?id=1644&gid=287

 

the ole cam dilemma. I don't know the isky cams. I do understand that people stick with what they have experience, but I'd personally would go for comp or lunati.
The edelbrock rpm is what I have in new engine but haven't driven it yet so can't comment. There's a few people around that say that ther performer (not rpm) is a bad choice as it's too mild.

I don't see a reason on why not to use the rpm. But: in any case you have to make sure if your valves/springs can handle the lift. and you need to check for piston and valve clearance.

he recommends:

262 Supercam .445 262° 108° (1974-up)
or
264-Mega-cam Hyd. .480” 264° 214° 108°

if you'd take the xe256 from comp cams:
rpm range 1000 to 5200
lobe: 110
lift .477/.484

I don't know that cam but usually take it as a reference for any stock-ish 289/302
better rpm range. should match your gearing. better idle and ~same lift as the 264 mega

The Vodoo Part Number: 61002 mys77stang is suggesting
# Advertised Duration (Int/Exh): 262/268
# Duration @ .050 (Int/Exh): 219/227
# Gross Valve Lift (Int/Exh): .499/.522
# LSA/ICL: 112/108
# Valve Lash (Int/Exh): Hyd/Hyd
# RPM Range: 1400-5800

springs and clearance _might_ be an issue. depends on what is installed on your perfromer heads.

In the end ... if you are having it installed with the man then you might want to go with his opinion. at least ask him what bad experience he had with comp/cams voodoo.

Kalli

Kalli

 

I'd look for a hydraulic roller cam with intake duration @ 0.050" in the two-teens to low 220's. It's a little more $ up front, but you won't be nearly as likely to wipe a lobe and end up having to do it over again (most current oil formulations are not flat-tappet cam-friendly).

For a given upper rpm capability and HP output the HR cam will be nicer (read, smoother and stronger) at the low to midrange revs that represents most of your driving.


Norm

 

One of the problems with most roller conversions is that they require drilling the lifter valley for the spider assembly; not something I'd want to do without tearing the engine down first.

That said, I think one of the cam manufacturers has a link-bar lifter setup for roller conversions.

The other problem is the lack of cam choices for a roller conversion. There just aren't that many reduced-base-circle cams out there to pick from.

 

Thanks.

What would be the price difference to go to roller cam?

I am more and more thinking about the RPM Performer Cam as I don't want to take any risk and I know it will be matching my heads.

Do you think that it would be useful to try to dyno desktop the Isky vs the Performer RPM to compare?

 

If you have access to DD, it can't hurt to run a few simulations. Just be careful about over-interpreting the results. I think I'd put more faith in the shapes of the torque curves than in differences in peak numbers of only a few ft-lbs.


Norm

 

that performer intake is slowing you down too you know, the regular performer is not much better than a factory 4bbl intake.

 

Ok, thanks.

I will have it replaced while putting the new cam then. Should I go for the RPM or the RPM Air Gap? The first one would save me about $100.

 

if you're going for it the rpm will do.

i'll check on what i can do with isky vs rpm cam on the desktop dyno.
That's:
289 engine, compression 9.5:1, performer heads, headers and mufflers, 600cfm