Edelbrock performer cam in a 350 with number 7 heads. Ya

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Jan 4, 2026 | 05:05 PM
  #1  
goatwgn's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 233
Edelbrock performer cam in a 350 with number 7 heads. Ya

On my '68 350 build, with number 7 heads, this engine was "rebuilt", although I am having a machine shop go through it. This is not going to be a hot rod, just a smooth, runner. The engine has an Edelbrock performer camshaft, lifters and springs in it, from 2001. Very little run time. Cam is broken in, so I am considering reusing this. 204/214 @.050. Have any of you used this cam, or something similar in a 350, and if so, how was the drivability?? Something close to stock is what I am looking for. Using a Qjet and HEI ignition.
Old Jan 4, 2026 | 05:40 PM
  #2  
old80cs's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 382
From: S.E. Massachusetts
I have the Edelbrock Performer cam, lifters, 600CFM 1406 carb and intake on my Olds 350 with #5 heads. It runs very well (idles smoothly) and pulls nicely in my '80 Cutlass with a TH700R4 and 3:73 rear gear.
Old Jan 5, 2026 | 05:30 AM
  #3  
goatwgn's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 233
Originally Posted by old80cs
I have the Edelbrock Performer cam, lifters, 600CFM 1406 carb and intake on my Olds 350 with #5 heads. It runs very well (idles smoothly) and pulls nicely in my '80 Cutlass with a TH700R4 and 3:73 rear gear.
Nice. Mine is going into my '74 Cutlass Supreme. It is a highway cruiser. Almost 530000 miles. Original low compression 350. This should spice it up.
Old Jan 5, 2026 | 06:21 AM
  #4  
oddball's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 2,148
From: Plano, TX
204/214 is a very very common cam, might even be the old school "RV" cam. Very mild, it'll idle and cruise basically like stock but with some more oomph.
You'll quickly get hungry for more.
Old Jan 6, 2026 | 07:58 PM
  #5  
69CSHC's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Aug 2019
Posts: 2,095
Originally Posted by goatwgn
The engine has an Edelbrock performer camshaft, lifters and springs in it, from 2001.
Mild bump up from stock but seems like it fits the bill for what you are looking for.

Basically turns your mid 1970 350s power into late 60s 350 power, minus the compression and gas quality issues. Christian (Olds 307 And 403) has plenty of experience with the cam including track testing. Ran slightly quicker than my 69 while weighing more, but with a much better drivetrain for quickness.

Edelbrock themselves tested the cam on a Chevy 350 but with their high performance heads as well.

It showed 320 hp gross and 382 lb ft gross.
(Chevy L48 270 hp gross and 360 lb ft gross. Stock for 1971.)
(Olds L74 260 hp gross and 360 lb ft gross. Stock for 1971.)

Figure just the cam gets you about 20 hp.

https://www.edelbrock.com/performer-...%20Legal%20E.O..

Old Jan 8, 2026 | 05:35 PM
  #6  
69CSHC's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Aug 2019
Posts: 2,095
Apples and oranges with the L48 to L74 comparison, but there's just more readily available test specs on the Chevy.

L48 Lift: .390 / .410, Duration @ .050: 195 / 210
L74 Lift: .400 / .400, Duration @ .050: 187 / 200




And here is an L48 with Edelbrock Performer Cam and 305 heads for a compression boost...



And what 206 wheel horsepower looks like on a 4200 lb test weight.


On a 74 M code Supreme Coupe it's a 1 second improvement, you will feel it. (and quicker than the stock 74 455 C/S coupe)

And for good measure here is a another 77 Vette as first screenshot but auto, also wheel dynoed.



Side note The Corvette Forum is excellent. As far as reliability its on par with ClasscOlds as best I can tell. I have browsed around there for years.

The biggest reason for the substantial gains in hp are due to true dual exhaust.

https://www.corvetteforum.com/forums...o-results.html
https://www.hotrodders.com/threads/e...crease.185108/
https://www.corvetteforum.com/forums...o-results.html
Old Jan 9, 2026 | 05:18 AM
  #7  
olds 307 and 403's Avatar
Out of Line, Everytime😉
 
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 10,145
From: Melville, Saskatchewan
Like I said, used this cam multiple times, including advanced two degrees with 9.6 to 1 with .065" piston to head. It was pissy on 91. Used very cold plugs and reduced timing. A custom tuned Qjet definitely helped. Running the same Qjet on both 9 and a half to 1 Olds 350. I rebuilt it and further tweaked it. Honestly I just ran my current 9.5 to 1 Olds 358 with the same 204/214 cam but only about .045" piston to head, decent quench. I got some pinging on Shell 91 from the same station. I switched back to Coop 91, also non ethanol but moves plenty of Premium. The pinging went away. What is your plan for fuel grade? I am going to a roller and slightly less compression with new Edelbrock heads.

Last edited by olds 307 and 403; Jan 9, 2026 at 05:30 AM.
Old Jan 11, 2026 | 08:21 AM
  #8  
olds 307 and 403's Avatar
Out of Line, Everytime😉
 
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 10,145
From: Melville, Saskatchewan
Originally Posted by 69CSHC
Mild bump up from stock but seems like it fits the bill for what you are looking for.

Basically turns your mid 1970 350s power into late 60s 350 power, minus the compression and gas quality issues. Christian (Olds 307 And 403) has plenty of experience with the cam including track testing. Ran slightly quicker than my 69 while weighing more, but with a much better drivetrain for quickness.

Edelbrock themselves tested the cam on a Chevy 350 but with their high performance heads as well.

It showed 320 hp gross and 382 lb ft gross.
(Chevy L48 270 hp gross and 360 lb ft gross. Stock for 1971.)
(Olds L74 260 hp gross and 360 lb ft gross. Stock for 1971.)

Figure just the cam gets you about 20 hp.

https://www.edelbrock.com/performer-...%20Legal%20E.O..
I just looked up the flow numbers for the 310 HP and 378 ft-lbs weakest version in that dyno test. In the Performer cam lift range probably 230cfm intake and 145 exhaust. They are 253/163 max flow supposedly out of box. I maybe hit those numbers on the ported #6 heads with W31 valves, 9.6 to 1, Performer 204/214 cam advanced 2 degrees, shorty headers and 2.5" dual exhaust, 2350 stall 2004R and 3.42 open with 26" tall slicks with under 10 psi. In a 3750 pound 88 Cutlass, it ran 9.4 in the 1/8 with a 2.1 60 ft. I adjusted the APT on the Qjet a 1/2 turn each run, ran about .1 quicker. I think it had 9's flat in it in the 1/8 mile. My current 9.5 to 1 358 has #6 heads with a 2.07 intake valve with 1.56 stock exhaust, bowls opened with a cutter and a basic valve job. Better quench and full length headers. Definitely less powerful but also a 2100 stall 4L80E and 3.08 posi with a 1.5" taller tire. My guess is 250+ HP and low 300 ft-lbs of torque but who knows without track or dyno data. I would shoot for 9 to 1 compression max, to get there, I would only deck the block to hit 9 to 1. With reasonable timing which should be fine on 87 octane. I would also add a 2000 stall minimum. The stock 1600 rpm won't help with the higher peak torque.

Last edited by olds 307 and 403; Jan 11, 2026 at 08:43 AM.
Old Jan 11, 2026 | 09:50 AM
  #9  
69CSHC's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Aug 2019
Posts: 2,095
Originally Posted by olds 307 and 403
ported #6 heads with W31 valves, 9.6 to 1, Performer 204/214 cam advanced 2 degrees, shorty headers and 2.5" dual exhaust, 2350 stall 2004R and 3.42 open with 26" tall slicks with under 10 psi. In a 3750 pound 88 Cutlass, it ran 9.4 in the 1/8 with a 2.1 60 ft. I adjusted the APT on the Qjet a 1/2 turn each run, ran about .1 quicker. I think it had 9's flat in it in the 1/8 mile.
Nice, that's much quicker than the earlier test I was going off of. That takes you from a 1/10 quicker than me to a full second.

Originally Posted by olds 307 and 403
With Sanderson shorties with 2.5" X pipe dual exhaust, a stock 1900 stall 2004R and 3.42 open with a Holley reman 800 cfm Qjet. In my 3750 pound 88 Cutlass plus fat me ran a 9.9 in the 1/8 mile with ignition break up over 4000 rpm.
Post #13 here https://classicoldsmobile.com/forums...0-olds-170793/

Christian, test weight more like 4000 lbs which I was assuming or did you mean 3750 lbs including you ?
Old Jan 11, 2026 | 03:55 PM
  #10  
olds 307 and 403's Avatar
Out of Line, Everytime😉
 
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 10,145
From: Melville, Saskatchewan
Originally Posted by 69CSHC
Nice, that's much quicker than the earlier test I was going off of. That takes you from a 1/10 quicker than me to a full second.

Post #13 here https://classicoldsmobile.com/forums...0-olds-170793/

Christian, test weight more like 4000 lbs which I was assuming or did you mean 3750 lbs including you ?
No 3750 car only. Both my cars, were heavier than a lot of cars on here. Both on the same certified truck scale, calibrated at least once a year. My 70 was about 100 heavier than the 88. I should be close to my 88 weight wise with my aluminum head swap.

Last edited by olds 307 and 403; Jan 11, 2026 at 04:00 PM.
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
tru-blue 442
General Discussion
6
Nov 29, 2021 06:01 AM
brownbomber77
Parts For Sale
6
Nov 13, 2015 04:44 AM
69CutlassAlex
General Discussion
8
Jul 30, 2013 08:18 AM
Surftrip00
Small Blocks
9
Sep 23, 2011 04:51 PM
BigTrav
Small Blocks
7
Nov 6, 2010 07:36 PM




All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:58 AM.