260H or 268H???

[Anonymous]

Hi everyone, Im looking to install a new cam for my stang real soon and im wondering which cam to throw into my ride...i thinking of either the comp cams 260H or the 268H...currently my car is stock besides the flowmaster exhuast(2.25'' dual exhuast), a few other mods(wires,plugs,coil,etc) and recent rebuild to the block and head...im wondering which would be the best buy...as a future thought to when i do get the cam...also want to get a cliffy or pacemaker header 6into1, port divider, 2 bbl carb (thinking holley 500cfm)...these are the major mods...what do you think or should i get something else...your response is greatly appreciated...thanks gary

 

[xctasy]

I think that it is a good idea to stick with a 260 cam, and 350 cfm Holley or perhaps the 32/36DGAS Weber. The stock head is a restriction, but the cam will liberate lots of power and you'll love the way it behaves.

A 500 cfm is a 200+hp carb, and is too large for the hole in the log head. A 350 cfm may run out of gas at around 150 hp, but that's plenty. A cleaned up Holley/Weber or DGAS is a 140+ carb too.

Some people have found 500 and 350 cfm Holleys are touchy working under leadership from a long duration cam, and its safer to undercam a car in these situations.

If you really want extra grunt without giving in to the Argentine and Aussie 2v brigade, then go halfway...rebuild an imported 221 block from an SP or ME headed engine. It uses stock 200 mounts, and is only .660 inches taller. The front water pump housing is a little taller, but it will fit your 66. Easier than the 250, which doesn't mate up to the same gearbox. And all the bits are interchangable. The 221 is a good little engine with short 289-style conrods and a short stroke but longer than the 200.


Good breathing 2V heads are brilliant, but doesn't produce bag loads of low end torque for daily motoring. Going for more cubes is a good idea, but you'll find the 250 is a little bit rougher than the 200 and 221 engines. Same with the cam. It justs adds power, and the more you add the more low speed torque is lost. You cannot create , say , 20 % more top end power without loosing low end torque. The off idle to mid range zone will always suffer unless you run a Intec VCT 4.0 SOHC or DOHC Aussie six with variable cam timing.

If you don't mind a moderate loss in low-end power, get a lower diff ratio (higher numerically) and look to that 268H cam grind. Just remeber that it's easy to over cook the cam, and a big engine can handle over camming more than a smaller (200) capcity engine.

 

[Anonymous]

IF you deside to go with a holley 2bbl for your 200 intake let me know i got an adaptor brand new 40 including shipping

 

[Anonymous]

thanks very much for the info XECUTE! well does anyone know any other good cams that would be as goo f not better than the comp cams 260h...i also heard of a 264 but im not sure fom who? clifford? crane? this would be great to know or should i stick with using a comp cm 260h...thanks

 

[Anlushac11]

I think that it is a good idea to stick with a 260 cam, and 350 cfm Holley or perhaps the 32/36DGAS Weber. The stock head is a restriction, but the cam will liberate lots of power and you'll love the way it behaves.

A 500 cfm is a 200+hp carb, and is too large for the hole in the log head. A 350 cfm may run out of gas at around 150 hp, but that's plenty. A cleaned up Holley/Weber or DGAS is a 140+ carb too.

Some people have found 500 and 350 cfm Holleys are touchy working under leadership from a long duration cam, and its safer to undercam a car in these situations.

If you really want extra grunt without giving in to the Argentine and Aussie 2v brigade, then go halfway...rebuild an imported 221 block from an SP or ME headed engine. It uses stock 200 mounts, and is only .660 inches taller. The front water pump housing is a little taller, but it will fit your 66. Easier than the 250, which doesn't mate up to the same gearbox. And all the bits are interchangable. The 221 is a good little engine with short 289-style conrods and a short stroke but longer than the 200.


Good breathing 2V heads are brilliant, but doesn't produce bag loads of low end torque for daily motoring. Going for more cubes is a good idea, but you'll find the 250 is a little bit rougher than the 200 and 221 engines. Same with the cam. It justs adds power, and the more you add the more low speed torque is lost. You cannot create , say , 20 % more top end power without loosing low end torque. The off idle to mid range zone will always suffer unless you run a Intec VCT 4.0 SOHC or DOHC Aussie six with variable cam timing.

If you don't mind a moderate loss in low-end power, get a lower diff ratio (higher numerically) and look to that 268H cam grind. Just remeber that it's easy to over cook the cam, and a big engine can handle over camming more than a smaller (200) capcity engine.

Hey quick question for you re: the 221

Did you say the 221 uses the US 200 motor mounts and oilpan?

If so what bellhousing pattern does it use?

 

[Anonymous]

Yep, Mr. Adam Phillips[sp] confirmed this many months ago. The 221 has a similar configuration as the US 200. In fact he also mentioned that the 221 frame mounts has 2 mounting points to "tweak" its position in an engine bay. I'm sure he'll clear things up more.

Later, DB

ps: sorry for hijacking the thread

 

[xctasy]

Hi-jack away.

Hi Jack, I'm away!

 

[Falcon62]

260 or 268? There's not much of a difference in the two to matter a whole lot. If you have an automatic, I'd go for the 260 and if you have a manual then the 268. As for the 264 (Clifford's cam) - consider it essentisally equal to the 260 Comp Cam.

Longer duration cams prefer a loose converter, so that's something to keep in mind when moving up the duration scale.

 

[addo]

Just to clear up Mark's question and Dennis' comments: The US 200 pan is narrower (ours may not be ) than 221, but the motor mount bolt holes on the block, I believe are identical.

The "XT" and "XW" 221 (1968-70) motors had mounts with two sets of holes. What this meant was you could either tilt the engine, or raise or lower it to suit the install. Clearing the centre link is always the main issue.

I wanna know about the Argentinian bellhousing, too! Crank bolt PCD?

Cheers, Adam. (Rained outta work today )