David,? Thanks for adding a little smile to my day.?
?Gary in SoCal
On ?Thursday?, ?December? ?10?, ?2020? ?01?:?23?:?22? ?AM? ?PST, D. Hadley via groups.io <dhadley390@...> wrote:
I am running a Comp Cams XE262H # 33-238-4 (Note: Comp's cam specs are based on 1.73 ratio rockers. I have the 1.76 ratio rockers so you need to recalculate to the larger #s by multiplying 1.76 by the cam lobe lift to get the correct valve lift #s) cam in my S code 390 (with 10.75:1 compression also a touch hotter than stock) that is also a step over the factory GT cam (same cam used in the 428CJ/SCJ) & is only a touch smaller than Gary's. BUT with my motor being smaller it makes the cam look bigger & his motor being bigger makes his cam look smaller so this I would figure just about equals them & I have NO issues with brakes & I wouldn't think he would have much issues if any with his.
The link to my cam specs
https://www.compcams.com/xtreme-energy-218-224-hydraulic-flat-cam-for-ford-352-428.html
If I am correct, below is a link to the specs of Gary's cam
https://www.crower.com/camshafts/ford-332-428-compu-pro-hydraulic-cam-280-hdp.html
David from WNY
On Wednesday, December 9, 2020, 11:49:01 AM EST, Gary Wittman via groups.io <gary.wittman@...> wrote:
Linc, I would not say it has great brakes but they are pretty good.? The cam is decent one.? It is a Crower 280HDP which is slightly more cam than a stock 428CJ cam.? It is a very streetable cam and has a very slight lope at idle.? Once fully warmed up, the lope is only detectable when the C6 is in gear.
I know your comment was tongue in cheek, I thought I would give you the specifics anyway.?
Gary in SoCal
