W-30 cam 350
August 31st, 2018, 04:18 PM
#1
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Nebraska
Posts: 168
W-30 cam 350
I知 wondering if anyone has ever tried running a w-30 type cam in a 350? I am doing my first build on my own? I have a 1972 cutlass convertible it has the 395558 block with 7a heads I believe #409147 with a fresh valve job being done stock intake and edelbrock 600cfm carb, it has th350 tranny and 3.42 Posi rear end, I知 running power brakes and a/c I知 doing a restoration so I want it to look stock as possible but!!! Also 2-1/2 inch dual exhaust factory style manifolds hopefully this is enough info for someone to help would that be a good cam or what would be the best cam for my application. Thanks
August 31st, 2018, 04:44 PM
#2
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Palm Bay, FL
Posts: 4,249
The compression ratio is going to dictate what you can get away with for a cam. If you are running the stock pistons from 72, that 350 will be an absolute dog until close to 4000 rpm with something close to what came in the W30 cars.
Talk to cutlassefi (mark) and he can hook you up with something that will work well with your combination.
Talk to cutlassefi (mark) and he can hook you up with something that will work well with your combination.
September 1st, 2018, 05:59 AM
#4
Old(s) Fart
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Northern VA
Posts: 47,311
WHICH "W-30" cam?
1966-67 308/308
1968-69 328/328
1970 MT 328/328
1970-71 AT 285/287
1971-72 MT 294/296
1972 AT 286/287
Keep in mind that as displacement shrinks, a given cam will act "bigger".
Note that the 308/308 cam was used as the W-31 cam in 1968-70. It won't support power brakes. The 328/328 cam won't support power brakes in the larger 455; it would be extremely radical in the 350. Frankly I wouldn't recommend any of these for your application. There are much better cam designs available today.
1966-67 308/308
1968-69 328/328
1970 MT 328/328
1970-71 AT 285/287
1971-72 MT 294/296
1972 AT 286/287
Keep in mind that as displacement shrinks, a given cam will act "bigger".
Note that the 308/308 cam was used as the W-31 cam in 1968-70. It won't support power brakes. The 328/328 cam won't support power brakes in the larger 455; it would be extremely radical in the 350. Frankly I wouldn't recommend any of these for your application. There are much better cam designs available today.
September 1st, 2018, 06:32 AM
#5
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Nebraska
Posts: 168
Thank you
WHICH "W-30" cam?
1966-67 308/308
1968-69 328/328
1970 MT 328/328
1970-71 AT 285/287
1971-72 MT 294/296
1972 AT 286/287
Keep in mind that as displacement shrinks, a given cam will act "bigger".
Note that the 308/308 cam was used as the W-31 cam in 1968-70. It won't support power brakes. The 328/328 cam won't support power brakes in the larger 455; it would be extremely radical in the 350. Frankly I wouldn't recommend any of these for your application. There are much better cam designs available today.
1966-67 308/308
1968-69 328/328
1970 MT 328/328
1970-71 AT 285/287
1971-72 MT 294/296
1972 AT 286/287
Keep in mind that as displacement shrinks, a given cam will act "bigger".
Note that the 308/308 cam was used as the W-31 cam in 1968-70. It won't support power brakes. The 328/328 cam won't support power brakes in the larger 455; it would be extremely radical in the 350. Frankly I wouldn't recommend any of these for your application. There are much better cam designs available today.
September 1st, 2018, 08:04 AM
#6
Registered User
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Delta BC Canada
Posts: 3,688
hard no
thanks I appreciate the info and response what I was looking at wa 297/297 cam lift 475/475 valve lift 110 lobe @50dur 244/244 sae dur 314/314 from what I have gathered it痴 not a good application for me I was told it would work and I知 sure it could run, I知 sure it would be a dog I am now looking at possibly like a lunati 318A2 or lunati 318A3 I sent cutlassefi a message not sure if he got it hopefully I知 heading in the right direction now I appreciate the help people on here have been very helpful.
September 1st, 2018, 09:22 AM
#7
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Nebraska
Posts: 168
Thank you, yes I have established that would not be a good cam for my application, i have been in contact with cutlassefi and he is going to help me figure it out, Thank you every one this is why CO is fricken awesome, always knowledgeable people willing to help out its great
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
