You don't have a full understanding of what you are talking about and it shows bad, I apologize for commenting but I am embarrassed for you. You say that a TBI will not work with that much power, why don't you explain "why"?

How about explaining why he would want to buy a vortec intake manifold? his heads require a conventional bolt pattern not the vortec bolt pattern. (at least the I didn't see where it said that on the link he provided)

why do you say that cam is too much for a 350? I believe he only gave lift specs, not LSA or duration specs, which are both better judges of how "big" the cam is for the engine. If the parts are matched up you can go much bigger. I've seen a 347ci ford with .620 valve lift only 10:1 compression and 200+cc AFR heads and it was streetable, and fast as crap!

BTW that camquest software isn't very good, it puts my setup over 450hp, and dyno results from engines VERY similarly set up to mine have 360-400hp. with that software I can make a 300hp difference just by changing intake and exhaust on my "engine" setup, it's really not accurate at all.

not trying to be a jerk here, but you talk like you know everything, how about some reasoning behind your claims? You are a guy on an internet forum, you don't have some final word on anything, so you must explain your reasoning, or people will just think you are a "know it all"

 

Yes, if you want more top end you will want something that flows better, and larger CC ports inherently flow better, but what you really want is the smallest possible port with the highest possible, the reason for this is port velocity. Take for instance the Vortec cylinder head vs the edelbrock performer head. The edelbrock performer heads have 185cc ports and 2.02in valves. The vortec heads have 170cc ports and 1.94in valves. The flow numbers between the 2 are very similar. Many people would buy the edelbrock heads thinking they are capable of more power than the vortec heads, but in actuality the vortec heads consistently make more power on the dyno given the cam compression and CID is the same and you can look that up. Just food for thought.

a good flowing 180cc head would work great with that cam I think btw, still have enough power down low and good pull up high I am a strong believer in picking the heads first then the cam to match, not the other way around, but sometimes you get stuck in that situation.

 

if he changes from a tbi to a carb will his car throw codes or is it as simple as changing the parts ?

 

it'll throw codes, the check engine light will always be on, but it wouldn't matter cuz it'd be set up to run just like a 60s or 70s car.

 

Yeah, I can't stand the Edelbrock heads personally. The place that did my Dart's does a lot of stuff for a good number of professional race teams so I didn't mind driving a little bit to go see them. Plus I know they do really great work. They put my Darts up against a number of different brands (before and after being worked so they could show me the difference) and I was really happy with where they came out with flow. I was consistently beating 220+ runners from a number of name brands with my 215's with smaller intake bore and 7 angle valve job. It was amazing to see how much junk was in the casting bores when shipped from the factory (not just including Dart). It gave me a real appreciation of a good valve job just to see what it did stock vs. being done right. Plus pre-built heads are usually put in the safe range with their spring setups. It's world of difference when the valvetrain is setup specifically for your cam with correct spring pressures and installation.

 

First of all, I'm obviously NOT the one that doesn't have a full understanding of the situation. A stock TBI system simply CANNOT supply that much fuel, and the ECU will go completely haywire. I doubt it would even run. Now, you can do things like upgrade the injector pods and the ECU, but the TBI is still a crap system for anything other than a grocery getter.

Second, the heads are a Vortec style head, with dual drilled intake patterns. A conventional style intake will work, but will be highly restrictive due to the difference in the intake runner heights (but you should already know that seeing as you know everything )

Third, there is a link provided for the cam.

Fourth, yes that it a lot of cam for a stock 350. With a good flowing set of heads, 10.5:1+ compression ratio, and a fuel delivery system that will actually support that setup, it will be perfectly streetable.

Oh, and when taking into account the 10-15% inflation factor in Cam Quest, it's actually pretty accurate.

 

First thing I would like to address is the fact that I never made a claim to know whether a throttle body could handle it or not, you made the assumption. Second thing I would like to address is the the Electronic Control Module would not have a hard time keeping the engine running, however high manifold pressure (or low manifold vacuum however you would like to put it) along with a higher volumetric efficiency may cause, as us the professionals put it "driveability concerns." In fact the injectors would only have a problem providing fuel up at higher rpm seeing that there is a higher demand for fuel at higher rpm. Remember the ECM is constantly compensating for the lean/rich conditions to find stochiometric fuel ratio. At idle the injectors are very well capable of flooding pretty much any engine. Third thing I would like to address is that compression ratio number, go ahead and play with a "dynamic compression ratio calculator" keep in mind you only need about 110PSI cylinder pressure for a decent running engine (130 for a good engine) put those cam specs in and play around with the static compression, put in 9.5 and you will see for yourself it doesn't require 10.5:1 to run that particular cam. Fourth thing I would like to address is the vortec manifold comment, I did not see anywhere in the add for those heads that it was drilled for both, however I stated that "I did not see" it, I never claimed it as a fact, to my knowledge the intake port height comment is true given they are vortec style ports. Last I'd like to address the freeware accuracy comment, All I can say is there is no proof of it's accuracy or inaccuracy, however a couple of numbers put into a software program doesn't account for everything. Also I'd like to point out all the factors CamQuest6 doesn't consider in the equation. One; (I think the most important) port velocity, you put flow numbers in, and valve sizes, however port size is not even a factor, the difference between port size is huge in the overall torque curve and peak hp/torque numbers. Two; rocker arm ratio is always assumed to be 1.5. Three; carburetor design is not taken into consideration (which is also an issue with velocity and overall torque figures). Four the exhaust model is very unspecific and does not take into account the cfm of the muffler, or the design of the mufflers, or headers, or diameter or design of the headers (kinda actually but not really) and it plays a HUGE difference in the overall outcome of the results. The list goes on and I'd be bored listing everything it doesn't take into consideration when giving you hp/torque figures based on NUMBERS. sigh, sorry it took me a while to respond, I just had my damn appendix taken out so I've been in recovering, the antibiotics keep me from sleeping so that's why I even decided to sign in here tonight. Oh ya almost forgot, this may sound trivial to you but, we don't use the word ECU, there are three main automotive computers, one would be the Electronic Control Module or ECM this uses inputs from various sensors to monitor engine activity and in turn compensates for optimal engine performance. Two would be the Transmission Control Module or TCM, this uses various speed sensors in the input and output shafts along with positioning sensors, trans temp sensor etc. to provide the best shift for a given situation, also decides to activate the TCC solenoid based on trans temp. Most modern transmission use pulse width modulation to provide a smooth shift and the TCM is what does that. Third is the Powertrain Control Module or PCM, this is simply what they call a module that takes both the tasks of the ECM and the TCM in one module.

 

OH MY GOSH I JUST LOOKED AT THE CAM SPECS that cam has VERY LITTLE duration and the 110 LSA is more than wide enough for a streetable cam in a 350, shoot the thing will probably only have a slightly choppy/lopey idle as it is. I run a cam with quite a bit more duration and only a 112 lsa and I can't keep traction. The thing has so much torque down low! wow I conclude that this kid (the one I've been debating with) is extremely inexperienced and bases everything he says off of the little knowledge he has from reading forums. This is not an attack on him personally by the way, but I learned the most from getting put in my place by knowledgeable techs and I feel that he will fallow suit quickly if slightly antagonized to search for the knowledge with a fire under his you know what. BTW that cam would work fine with 8.5:1 compression I'm sure.

 

Okay guy, you've got me on the cam quest software. You're right, there are way too many variables to give an accurate number. Even with those variables, it always gets me within 10-20hp when you subtract that 10-15% inflation.

You're also right, I am an experience kid. That doesn't mean I don't have a good idea of what I'm talking about. Sure I've learned quite a bit from reading, but more so I've learned from hands on experience. Aside from tinkering since I could walk, I've worked as a paid mechanic for 3 years, have built several high performance and stock engines, and hold several qualifications as a licensed mechanic in Broward County, Florida and am working on my basic ASE credentials.

So yeah, I'm far from experienced, however that doesn't mean I can't know something that someone more experienced doesn't. There have been several instances where I've had to show guys who have been wrenching for 40 years new things. More often it's the other way around though, you're right.

You're also right that that cam WOULD work in an engine with 8.5:1 compression. It would run like ****, wouldn't idle, lose power in the top end, etc.

That cam isn't much at all for an engine that's designed for it. Plopping it in a stock engine however it is a cam that has too much lift and duration for a stock application, and the 1.6:1 ratio rocker arms make it worse.

Bump up the compression, add a ported intake, good flowing heads and exhaust, and fix the fuel delivery system, and it will run just as reliably as a stock engine would run.

 

Ya, I'd definitely run more than 8.5:1 on ANY engine. You're right if you put that in a stock 350 with stock heads etc and 8.5:1 compression the thing wouldn't run great (not as far as power and throttle response anyway). I believe the bottom end is where it would suffer the most though with low compression the top end would be "okay" to say the least.

You are alright though, and you are right, I am very sure you know things I don't know. On my first post here I was simply asking you to explain yourself cuz without explaining your point you sound like you are asking for respect without telling us why you deserve it. If you say THIS is what i think you should do IMO and THIS is why IMO. Instead you were posting like this; "This is this way and only this way and I say you should do this" and you don't explain the "why"

I know I used to come in forums like this and say things, and whether I was right or not I got no respect and that's why, I didn't explain my reasoning, I just remembered things that I heard or learned from forums or reading books. I am only a couple years older than you and I am sorry if I sound like a know it all, cuz I certainly don't .