Hey, Listen…
Just beginning to install a 'fresh' (47 y/o) motor and remove my '68 170 in a bronk I've been running since '83.
My assembler started w/o me (he owes me as we have a barter arrangement - have been in this good relation for years) but I wanted to be there. Here's two reasons why (I trust him but wanna learn as I've never assembled an engine):
I have a '69 just machined. Got a head from FLA as I understood the larger log '77-plus would be more desirable. I seek tq only (@ low rev) - a lill different, most here seek HP as I don't want to spin tires (am in dirt most the time). Was shipped a '73 head (by casting #s) eventho I put the money down on a " '78 Fairmont". Anyway, I'll put it on unless I find a C9xx-6090-M as I just learned a very limited edition of the '69 - with the < M > - can be found. "Better runners for the low rev tq" I hear. Back Later with specs on parts ordered and machining particulars done.
So the 2 Qs I'll ask your assistance on (many more as the process unfolds I'm sure) if you'll permit, is about the cam. The machinist ordered all internal parts as well as machining it. It's a Comp Cam. My assembler partially assembled, and as he went, found binding w/ this cam (I believe at the bearings).
* He took it back to the machinist to B turned down "1 or 2 thousands" I believe he said.
* Also the ordered timing set when fitted had to be returned for another one & this one still is not right - I think he's going with the new chain and one of the sprockets (i.e. 1 old/1 new gear).
Seems like 2 unusual developments, no?
I want the '69 to '72 timing set as it's better for my tq goal and can't understand the cam bind. If I wasn't a newbie I might see that these 2 work around strategies are perfectly OK. I have confidence in both the assembler and machinist BUT you guys know these engines better than either of these 2 folks…
Thanks for lookin in & any comments you wish to offer.
Just beginning to install a 'fresh' (47 y/o) motor and remove my '68 170 in a bronk I've been running since '83.
My assembler started w/o me (he owes me as we have a barter arrangement - have been in this good relation for years) but I wanted to be there. Here's two reasons why (I trust him but wanna learn as I've never assembled an engine):
I have a '69 just machined. Got a head from FLA as I understood the larger log '77-plus would be more desirable. I seek tq only (@ low rev) - a lill different, most here seek HP as I don't want to spin tires (am in dirt most the time). Was shipped a '73 head (by casting #s) eventho I put the money down on a " '78 Fairmont". Anyway, I'll put it on unless I find a C9xx-6090-M as I just learned a very limited edition of the '69 - with the < M > - can be found. "Better runners for the low rev tq" I hear. Back Later with specs on parts ordered and machining particulars done.
So the 2 Qs I'll ask your assistance on (many more as the process unfolds I'm sure) if you'll permit, is about the cam. The machinist ordered all internal parts as well as machining it. It's a Comp Cam. My assembler partially assembled, and as he went, found binding w/ this cam (I believe at the bearings).
* He took it back to the machinist to B turned down "1 or 2 thousands" I believe he said.
* Also the ordered timing set when fitted had to be returned for another one & this one still is not right - I think he's going with the new chain and one of the sprockets (i.e. 1 old/1 new gear).
Seems like 2 unusual developments, no?
I want the '69 to '72 timing set as it's better for my tq goal and can't understand the cam bind. If I wasn't a newbie I might see that these 2 work around strategies are perfectly OK. I have confidence in both the assembler and machinist BUT you guys know these engines better than either of these 2 folks…
Thanks for lookin in & any comments you wish to offer.
This won't be easy not being there to see it or without some pictures I through out a few items to check. Sounds like there could be a problem with the installation of the cam bearings look to see if they were installed in the correct order (the journals are different sizes larger to smaller) and or if they aren't installed straight into the blocks cam bearing journals etc.. 
I would stop and take the time fix what's wrong rather then mod any of the parts, if everything were right it shouldn't be required to clearance those cam journals. The cams journals are highly poshished finish like the crankshaft journals are too. Did he or the machinist mic / or measure the cam journals and or the cam bearing sizes? In the worse case senerieo a bearing could have been Nicked or mushroomed on the edge from being driven into the block in that case it would be better to lightly scrape that damaged area of the cam bearing with a bearing knife or remove the cam bearings and start over with a new set. Not having the correct clearances between the cam and the bearings can effect the oil pressure too. The cam bearing issue may also be part of the reason the timing set isn't fitting unless he miss ordered the parts. But if you wanted to use the early timing chain set (1969 to 1972 about the best of the two stock sets) these early timing sets are the narrow chain and gear set so you can't mix and match any the parts from the 1973 and later wide chain timing sets with the early parts or vis versa. To see the differences see my post in the "250 Double Roller Timing Chain Kit Supply and Demand". Best of luck Chad on the 250 rebuild. 
