| Home | Gallery | Forum | Ads | Sponsored by Yesterday's Tractors |
![]() | The Classic Truck Resource Page Vintage Truck Headquarters |
|   |
|
Re: Re: Truck engine cams vs Car engine camsPosted by Hal/WA on October 04, 2007 at 18:08:57 from (66.45.175.118): In Reply to: Re: Truck engine cams vs Car engine cams posted by Bob on October 04, 2007 at 07:59:23: Great advice. During the early anti-emission years, the camshafts were really lousy, and often the timing sets were changed to retard the camshaft. Retarding the camshaft supposedly lessened some emissions, but ruined the power and economy. The custom cam grinders have many different cams depending on what a given engine is going into and what job the combination will be asked to do. They will ask the vehicle weight and type, the transmission and converter, the rear end ratio and tire size, the other specifications and modifications to the engine, and how you plan to use the truck, as well as a number of other questions. Once they have all the information, they can make a recommendation of what cam to use. I don't know if a 74 half ton 302 would have a different cam than a car 302 of the same year. But it was really remarkable how different some of the FE engines ran a few years before, depending on if they came in a pickup or a car. A friend of mine had a 66 F100 that came with a 352 2 barrel. It was a real slug and got horrible gas mileage. Eventually the 352 got tired and they decided to put in a 390 2 barrel from their recently wrecked 69 Country Squire station wagon. It was a strictly bolt in swap and used the exhaust manifolds from the 352. The pickup with the 390 felt like it had about twice the power as with the 352 and the fuel economy went clear up to 12mpg from around 8. Neither engine required premium gas, so there must not have been a huge difference in compression ratio with the 390. Good luck with your 302. They can be made to run strong and economically.
[Home] Copyright © 2002-2010 Yesterday's Tractor Co. |