All Small Six Looking for RV type of cam for 200

[nearGettysburg]

Title says it all. I a, doing a stock +/- rebuild on a 200 six for my stock '64 Falcon s dr sedan. Power will go thru a C4. I am not looking for hi rpm, but as much grunt as i can get off the line--hence an RV type cam.
Does anyone still sell them?

 

[wsa111]

Call Schneider Cams. Ask for Jerry-619-297-0227

 

[aussie7mains]

Use a stocker, its as good as anything else for torque, save your coin for other mods.

 

[alwill923]

I went to schneider for my cam. 256 cam. Trouble was they did not have any blanks, so I sent them my cam to be reground. I also have a schneider cam in my 240 big block. Highly recommend them.

 

[falconcritter]

I may have what you are looking for . I just got it with a parts hall last week . The guy said it was a mild cam the the other was wild . It looks stock or just above that ( RV ) . I can’t find the part number on a online search but it is a Clevite ##726 . Let me know if you are interested .

 

[B RON CO]

Hi, the experienced engine builders here like the Schneider cams, but I went with the Comp cams milder version for the 200 engine family. I used the kit with lifters and springs. I am very happy with it. There is more power over the old cam, and it is smooth and strong from idle to 4500 RPM. Whichever cam you choose, you MUST DEGREE THE CAM. I needed the adjustable timing gear set from Vintageinlines to get my cam timed properly. Good luck

 

[nearGettysburg]

I appreciate the replies. I am still undecided on the cam. I may go oem.
I have another question---I have the FSM and can read the factory specs---what I want is --
What are the REAL WORLD specs on piston-to-cylinder clearance and taper?
If my measurements are accurate , --never mind. Looks like I have about ,030 clearance and .009 taper. ( I misplaced the decimal point when i did it in my head, and though my clearance was .003--NOT .030.)
I think I am lookjing at a rebore.
I have a good oen cam--can i just install it with new lifters? A few of the original lifters had no radius remaining on their bottom surface--not concave, but not convez, either.

 

[aussie7mains]

IMO the taper is a bit high for a good use. 0.003 piston to wall clearance is a bit high, but where in the bore? As to reusing the cam, ideally you should not reuse it if the tappets are flat, the cam lobes may be parrallel, they are meant to be tapered. At a pinch you could reuse it with the lifter if your on a budget and dont expect or need a long life. Again I would get a stock cam and lifters to replace it, stock usually gives best torque and fuel economy. If you want torque, get a 250!

 

[nearGettysburg]

IMO the taper is a bit high for a good use. 0.003 piston to wall clearance is a bit high, but where in the bore? As to reusing the cam, ideally you should not reuse it if the tappets are flat, the cam lobes may be parrallel, they are meant to be tapered. At a pinch you could reuse it with the lifter if your on a budget and dont expect or need a long life. Again I would get a stock cam and lifters to replace it, stock usually gives best torque and fuel economy. If you want torque, get a 250!

This is the direction I am leaning--at least for now.
I still may reuse the cam, but I will mic the lobes to make sure there is still some taper.

 

[aussie7mains]

This is the direction I am leaning--at least for now.
I still may reuse the cam, but I will mic the lobes to make sure there is still some taper.

Also, the lifter faces can be re-ground to get the correct curve, Ive done that in the past.

 

[Cox Custom Mechanical]

IMO the taper is a bit high for a good use. 0.003 piston to wall clearance is a bit high, but where in the bore? As to reusing the cam, ideally you should not reuse it if the tappets are flat, the cam lobes may be parrallel, they are meant to be tapered. At a pinch you could reuse it with the lifter if your on a budget and dont expect or need a long life. Again I would get a stock cam and lifters to replace it, stock usually gives best torque and fuel economy. If you want torque, get a 250!

100% agree unless you are running hypereutectic pistons then .003 is fine, but if its tapered than you need to pay a visit to the machine shop.

Put a 250 in it.

As for a cam 260/267 adv, 194/202 @ .050 and .390"/.408" which is a Crow grind will be good for 9.0:1 if installed straight up at 112 ICL. The C4 is a good gearbox when using it without a shift kit you need a good vacuum source to stay away from tight cams.

 

[nearGettysburg]

100% agree unless you are running hypereutectic pistons then .003 is fine, but if its tapered than you need to pay a visit to the machine shop.

Put a 250 in it.

As for a cam 260/267 adv, 194/202 @ .050 and .390"/.408" which is a Crow grind will be good for 9.0:1 if installed straight up at 112 ICL. The C4 is a good gearbox when using it without a shift kit you need a good vacuum source to stay away from tight cams.

Thank you for the details.
I did not know that lifters could be reground to establish the radius. I will check with my local machine shop. I should be delivering the head, block and crank tomorrow.

 

[78_200_C4]

The large log ENGINETECH ES658 + MELLING FOV9 cams are both 256 .366" lift. Early small log cams were around 246 at .350" lift
Higher lift aftermarket cams will have a smaller base circle which will lower the lifters in their bores. I think the smaller base circle would increase the chance of a lobe going flat.
My 200 with an ENGINETECH ES658 will wind to 5,300+ in low. I usually do WOT shifts at 5,000.

1978 FORD FAIRMONT 3.3L 200cid L6 Camshaft | RockAuto

RockAuto ships auto parts and body parts from over 300 manufacturers to customers' doors worldwide, all at warehouse prices. Easy to use parts catalog.

www.rockauto.com

 

[aussie7mains]

The large log ENGINETECH ES658 + MELLING FOV9 cams are both 256 .366" lift. Early small log cams were around 246 at .350" lift
Higher lift aftermarket cams will have a smaller base circle which will lower the lifters in their bores. I think the smaller base circle would increase the chance of a lobe going flat.
My 200 with an ENGINETECH ES658 will wind to 5,300+ in low. I usually do WOT shifts at 5,000.

1978 FORD FAIRMONT 3.3L 200cid L6 Camshaft | RockAuto

RockAuto ships auto parts and body parts from over 300 manufacturers to customers' doors worldwide, all at warehouse prices. Easy to use parts catalog.

www.rockauto.com

View attachment 19410

Thats about as close to a stocker as you can get.

 

[Cox Custom Mechanical]

The large log ENGINETECH ES658 + MELLING FOV9 cams are both 256 .366" lift. Early small log cams were around 246 at .350" lift
Higher lift aftermarket cams will have a smaller base circle which will lower the lifters in their bores. I think the smaller base circle would increase the chance of a lobe going flat.
My 200 with an ENGINETECH ES658 will wind to 5,300+ in low. I usually do WOT shifts at 5,000.

1978 FORD FAIRMONT 3.3L 200cid L6 Camshaft | RockAuto

RockAuto ships auto parts and body parts from over 300 manufacturers to customers' doors worldwide, all at warehouse prices. Easy to use parts catalog.

www.rockauto.com

View attachment 19410

Smaller base circle cam reduced the rotation speed of the lifter due to the reduced circumference of the heel of the cam. This will not increase the chance of damaging a cam, flat tappet cam and lifter failures are because of installation problems. I have yet to have a camshaft failure.

 

[Frank]

Smaller base circle cam reduced the rotation speed of the lifter due to the reduced circumference of the heel of the cam. This will not increase the chance of damaging a cam, flat tappet cam and lifter failures are because of installation problems. I have yet to have a camshaft failure.

I'm glad you addressed this, been wondering about the effect of smaller overall circumference. Because the net speed of the cam against the lifter face is reduced but the relative motion of the valvetrain is the same, doesn't that increase the load moment on the lifter relative to the contact patch of the lobe?

 

[Cox Custom Mechanical]

I'm glad you addressed this, been wondering about the effect of smaller overall circumference. Because the net speed of the cam against the lifter face is reduced but the relative motion of the valvetrain is the same, doesn't that increase the load moment on the lifter relative to the contact patch of the lobe?

That all depends on the ramp rate on the cam. Yes with more lift you have to run higher rate springs and the faster you turn the cam the more load it places on it.

The failure of flat tappet camshafts that many people are experiencing is not just exclusive to higher lift cams it still happens with stock replacements. As I mentioned in the past I have not had a failure to date, I believe that if you inspect parts correctly and ensure your lifter bores and cam alignment relative to the lifter bore is correct you will be ok. Most people go off on a tangent about the country of origin of the parts and inferior materials or modern oils not containing enough ZDDP. One of the things I have found is the way the lifter face is machined can be a contributing factor to some failures not the material.

 

[Frank]

That all depends on the ramp rate on the cam. Yes with more lift you have to run higher rate springs and the faster you turn the cam the more load it places on it.

The failure of flat tappet camshafts that many people are experiencing is not just exclusive to higher lift cams it still happens with stock replacements. As I mentioned in the past I have not had a failure to date, I believe that if you inspect parts correctly and ensure your lifter bores and cam alignment relative to the lifter bore is correct you will be ok. Most people go off on a tangent about the country of origin of the parts and inferior materials or modern oils not containing enough ZDDP. One of the things I have found is the way the lifter face is machined can be a contributing factor to some failures not the material.

Thank. I concur. And have not had a failure either- 100% flat tappet. Hopefully didn't just jinx myself, another FT break in coming very soon. .

What I was considering in the first post about lobe diameter is the difference in actual psi on the contact patch on the rising slope. I confess sometimes I get turned around in my head and see things reversed. That said, it seems like the smaller diameter has a higher pressure Moment (math calculation at a given instant in time) than the larger lobe. Because of the relative slower speed of the smaller lobe. The valve lift geometry is the same relative to the crankshaft, so the slope-rise is the same, but is spread over a shorter distance- thus more lifter to lobe pressure than a larger diameter lobe.
???

 

[78_200_C4]

My only cam failure at home or working in a shop was a mew 260 Comp Cam that failed a base circle run out check.
It had .006 run out for about 30 degrees.
The 256 Enginetech cam that I replaced it with had 0 base circle run out.
Both cams were ground on cores with the same casting numbers.
I have never had a lobe go flat.
I still think the smaller base circle would increase the chance of a lobe going flat.
My belief has nothing to do with "reduced the rotation speed of the lifter."
It turns out I didn't need a higher lift smaller base circle cam.
I can do 5,000+ rpm shifts full or part throttle with a Enginetech 256 cam.
The 256 cam works fine at low speeds or 5,000+ rpm shifts where the rpm only drops to 4,000 due to having 6 forward gears.
I think stock 200's don't even have enough carb. cfm flow for a stock 256 cam.

 

[chad]

I usually step back, get the right Q B4 comment & see if I understand. As such it’s all ways abt application.
I’m w/the 1 fella who sez “Use the 250/4.1 for tq. " (the 200 is more for rev & HP)
But the right Q might B (how did U come up w/ "my 200 needs a hi-er tq cam") WHAT is the Application, end goal?

“...did not have any blanks..."
world-wide shortage right now on blanks &/or it’s post covid, prepair to wait &/or there’s only 1, 2 co.s that make the blanks, etc
We use Schnider’s, they custom grind for same price as off shelf, & “X”, “Y” or some other name is there (Jerry’s son) as "he's
in the rockin chair now.” (Kevin?)
Often we spend pages w/’solutions' just to find "its all sompin else”. example: Fella off shore asks “Where’s the best fan for my over heat problem?” Find out there’s no real problem w/that (temp rise, no ‘puke out’ over flow tank, cap, etc). Also dozens of posts later - he’s got no fan shroud. We finally fix it w/that (prt # for shroud). Sometimes “This is my problem. Any ideas?” is the best. Not sure here (so Y that Q comes up 4 me now).