yep, another help me with a cam choice question

Discussion in '1994 - 1995 Specific Tech' started by R100RT, Dec 16, 2006.

  1. Ok Guys, My big summit order arrived and a made a mistake. Instead of a E303cam, I ordered the B303 cam. I have done some research and I need to decide if this cam will work for me. I am running a 331, 9.7:1 KB forged, GT40Y with a mild port and cleanup, FMS springs good for .650 lift, BBK shorties, C&L 77MM cold air, Cobra intake, 24#. The car is a fat '94 Vert with 5 speed. The use is occasional street driver with emphasis on torque. If I want to go really fast, then I take out my TT '65.

    Current thinking is that the B303 is out of date. That is generally because the E303 will do just as well without the idle probelsm. To back this up, check out the book 5.0L Ford Dyno Tests by Richard Holdener. To sum up his results , on a moderately modded 302, the B303 average HP was 246.1, and 315.2 Ft-lbs. The E303(Comp 2040), did 249.1/319.1. So, the E303 is just as much cam but without the B303 idle challanges. Thats all good except my heads dodn't flow like the heads on that test motor. You probably know that the Gt40Y heads crap out at .500 lift. The B303 cam is .480 lift but using my 1.72:1 rockers, that works to .516. The E303 ca would work out to .535 which probably wouldn't do any thing for my heads.

    I treid to get a FTI cam but Ed Curtis has dropped off the face of the earth. No reponce after thre e-mails over a two week period.

    Anyway, curent thinking is that the SBF heads are helped with dual pattern cams, like the TFS stage 1,(51402000), with more lift on the exhaust. comparred to the E303, The TFS cam has a 1 degree more duration on the intake, 5 degrees more on the exhaust and more lift on the exhaust but is not decribed as a computer friendly cam.

    I probably will keep this car a long time and we dodn't need annual smog checks here.

    So, you B303 dudes, hows your idle? PAss a sniffer test?

    You TFS stg 1 dudes, same questions.

    You E303 dudes, glad you went with this cam?

  2. i like the sound of the e303 in my setup
  3. my car will idle dead perfect at 700rpm with the tfs cam and MY TWEECER. before any tuning i had some stalling issues and what not.
  4. say no to the b303 and hello to the stage 2 tfs cam.
  5. Ditch the B303 cam. I made the mistake of trying to run one after my first engine mod back in '95. Injected 5.0 HATE these cams due to the overlap. With 1.6 rockers use the Crane 2030 and with 1.7's use the Crane 2031. You won't be disappointed.
  6. I have the Y heads (ported) and I use the "Baby " Crower 15510 cam.
    Plus exhaust & all the bolt-ons.
    Gobs of torque (300+), but modest HP gain.
    I wanted a smooth idle w/stock computer and no chip, and I got that---idles near stock.
    The Y heads were cheap, but I should've gotten Edelbrocks or AFRs.
    And if I had it to do over again, I'd get the mild Crane. I was too conservative.
    But it's a daily driver & runs year long on regular gas.
    I just got a power pipe & 24s w/a new Mass Air, & this should really help---the stock intake ducting is the only remaining plug.
  7. Thanks for the input, Guys. I went with a TFS stage 1. I did a mild port on the Y303 heads and also did the lower Cobra intake.

    I will let you know how the idle works out.

  8. Out of curiousity: What RPM does your combo pull till with the 15510? Did you dyno it?
  9. a friend of mine runs a b-cam in his 89 and it idles and runs fine. i was going to put one in mine till i read this. is it the 94-95 computers that the cam don't like?
  10. Hello Eric

    Your Q's are valid :D
    You make some good points to me :nice:
    Here is a thought or two ...... as I see it :shrug:

    I usually think of Ford Alphabet Cams as outdated myself

    On the other hand, would it not be fair to say this? :shrug:

    Those heads were made much earlier than say AFR's?

    Generally speaking, many have said the heads of earlier years needed
    a cam with a bias toward the exhaust to crutch up those heads poor
    flow rates in the exhaust ports

    That TFS cam was made for heads which do not have those issues
    as you pointed out ... it has some bias toward the exhaust

    I have to wonder if that cam and those heads are gonna give you
    the best outcome over other possible choices

    Just thinking out loud here Eric :)
    I'm not claiming to know all about cam choices as you see what I did ;)

    You mention concerns for drivability issues ....

    Unlike cam choice ... I'm in my comfort zone here :rlaugh:

    Honestly ... based upon my findings
    any h/c/i combo has at best ... a 50 50 chance of not having em
    My experience along with research shows ........

    Combo parts selection based upon those concerns will
    most likely ... have those issues anyway
    that selection of parts that did not avoid those issues
    left power untapped for an additional ... final disappointment

    I feel strongly when I make this statement :D

    Pick combo parts to make power :banana:
    and not to
    Avoid pcm issues

    Optimize the pcm ;)
    To deal with drivability issues

    btw ... my cam has specs "they" say is not suitable for 94-95 pcm's :eek:
    My 95 drives like a little stocker except for cam lope

    Think of an investment in Self Tuning Equipment or Chip as
    A Speed Part ..... like heads, intake, steeper gears,
    No Differently from any other combo part

    About the emissions testing thing :D

    I pass strict, state of Texas emissions testing each year with ease :nice:
    It makes about the same amount of power as most other similar combos
    in spite of
    I used several stock parts
    All emissions equipment is in place and in good working order

    Eric ... Just tryin to point out that ........
    Other options are available
    Not all of the info that "they" say should always be taken to heart ;)

  11. If you were going to buy a new computer processor, knowing that its one of the most integral parts to your computer, would you buy one that used technology from the 1980s?

    So why would you use a cam, knowing that its one of the most integral parts to your engine, that used technology from the 1980s?:shrug:

  12. Hey Grady,

    A little update..

    I went with the TFS stage 1 and the car is on the road. Lets back up because I'm home sick and maybe this will help others.

    It took 4 days to do the engine swap. One day was dedicated to fixing the bent radiator core support. The car was in a front ender, the outside looks great but the inside was a mess. I hade to pull the lower part in order to get the radiator back in without stress the plastic tanks. The lower parts was pulled so far forward, that the bumber cover and nothing to attach to.

    After all that work, the car started up but had a ticking sound. I parked it for the night but before I went in, I checked for leaks and had oil under the bell housing. I sweated out fixing a rear main seal problem but it turned out to be leaky valve cover gasket. The only problem I have now is a BAD exhaust leak that appears to be comming from the MAC shortys to MAC 2 1/2" exhaust. They didn't mate up so good. I may take them appart and try a litlle anti-sieze to see if that helps them pull together. The ticking turned out to be the FMS rockers tapping against the oil baffle under the oil fill tube.

    I dealing with idle problems right now. Somethimes the idle is steady, sometimes not. I have been slowly adding more TB opening. the air bypass is at 2.5 turns. When it is steady, it sounds lumpy nice except for that #!%@$ exhaust leak.

    A Tweecr may be in the future but I want to see how far I can get with the normal stuff like clocking the meter, etc.

    I have about 30 miles on the car. It pulls strong but I guess I'm a little disappointed. I think I to used to what happens when I mash it in the TT Fastback, LOL

  13. Sorry to hear about the issue with the front end

    I think it wise to see how much headway you can make with drivability
    issues using mechanical adjustments before getting involved with tuning

    Here is something to think about ;)

    The pcm can help those issues
    Its range of adjustment is somewhat limited

    I'd take this approach ........
    make one and one only mechanical adjustment
    give the pcm a few days to gather data
    find its sweet spot in that range of adjustment

    that is ... if your mods have not driven things beyond that range

    Good Luck to you Eric!