'62 Ranchero - 250 - Aluminum Head update

Bob, i agree, do not use this cam.
Call Comp. Cams tech line & they have tremendous list of profiles that they will custom grind for your engine.
Check out their xtreme energy list of profiles in the 275-278 degree area with lift in the .525" area if you have the clearance allows. Check out this link. The grind is #5445.
https://www.compcams.com/lobe-catalog/ page 14
Since the exhaust flows so well i would go with a single pattern profile with 109 L/C.
They normally grind their cams with 4 degrees advance. However you can make that choice.
If you are concerned about wear they can nitride harden the cam from 52 rockwell C hardness to around 60.
Looks like Clay Smith Cams stamped the wrong info on their cam. I would not recommend their grinds for your engine. The only decent cam they offer for a 200 or a mild 250 would be their 264-214@.050"

First, let me say that I can't describe the feeling of relief now that the cam has been identified. I couldn't understand why I couldn't degree the cam and come up close to the expected valve events for the 280/280/110.

@pmuller and @wsa111,

I hear what you are saying and you have some valid points - but can I play devil's advocate for a moment?

I have never experienced the 280/280/110 cam with .320 lift (.512 at 1.6:1). For the last six years, I've been running the 274/274/108 with .300 lift (.480 at 1.6:1). So this misidentified cam - 280/280/109 - has .015 less lift (.024 at 1.6:1) than the cam I've been running for the last six years. Is that really going to make a significant difference regarding midrange torque?

The 280/280/109 has a lot of overlap and won't begin to make much power until at least 2,000 RPM - with a T-5 with a 2.95 first gear and a 3.80 rear gear, in a light car, shouldn't I be able to get to 2,000 quickly? In fact, when I first got the 3.80 rear gear, some people told me that first gear would almost be like a "granny gear" with that combo and that I wouldn't be able to stay in first gear very long.

Assuming that I am able to install the dual springs, what if I used the aluminum head's large ports and valve for higher RPM operation at moderate lift instead of mid-range RPM operation at higher lift? With the ARP main and rod bolts, the early 300 rods, and forged pistons, rotating assembly balanced, my machinist told me that he thought my short block would be ok through 7,000 RPM.

Is it really not worth seeing how the Ranchero would run with this cam? It never has been and never will be a daily driver - it's driven to car shows and cruise-ins only. If it's a bit less streetable, but really hauls at 6,000-6,500 RPM, that could work.

Thanks
Bob

62Ranchero200":2lmt5clk said:

I have never experienced the 280/280/110 cam with .320 lift (.512 at 1.6:1)

Click to expand...

So what you are saying is if you don't know what you are missing it will be alright?

But I know what you would be missing and would be doing you an injustice to advise otherwise.

What I'm saying is this cylinder head has great potential and can make 300 hp on the street but it takes valve lift.
Since this is not a daily driver you should be pushing the head's potential not detuning it.
Your piston's max velocity is at 74.4 deg. ATDC and the sooner and faster you open the valve the more cylinder fill.
The higher lift cam lobe has a steeper ramp rate and opens the valve more before the piston hits max velocity.

That's my take on it and I'm not going to say it is OK to use the 280-9 cam.

Besides if you want to run the engine to 6500 then you should be looking at a solid lifter cam.
The hydraulic lifters will cause valvetrain instability at that rpm with the necessary high spring rates.
With a solid lifter there is no worry about lifter collapse and can run a faster ramp rate than the hydraulic
Go ahead and run the valves out to .550" lift.

You took the time and effort to put the longer rods and light weight pistons in the engine so take advantage of them.

Maybe now it would be a good time to try a solid lifter cam ...These small six's started out with them...Personalty I think that they are easier to set up... They should not need to be adjusted a lot unless something is wrong...Checking under the valve cover occasionally is a good way to catch a problem...It is the only type of cam that I have ever used on my 200...Once that I did hot lash and then checked when cold , I would use those numbers to do when cold .

pmuller9":8hbb85bq said:

62Ranchero200":8hbb85bq said:

I have never experienced the 280/280/110 cam with .320 lift (.512 at 1.6:1)

Click to expand...

So what you are saying is if you don't know what you are missing it will be alright?

But I know what you would be missing and would be doing you an injustice to advise otherwise.

What I'm saying is this cylinder head has great potential and can make 300 hp on the street but it takes valve lift.
Since this is not a daily driver you should be pushing the head's potential not detuning it.
Your piston's max velocity is at 74.4 deg. ATDC and the sooner and faster you open the valve the more cylinder fill.
The higher lift cam lobe has a steeper ramp rate and opens the valve more before the piston hits max velocity.

That's my take on it and I'm not going to say it is OK to use the 280-9 cam.

Besides if you want to run the engine to 6500 then you should be looking at a solid lifter cam.
The hydraulic lifters will cause valvetrain instability at that rpm with the necessary high spring rates.
With a solid lifter there is no worry about lifter collapse and can run a faster ramp rate than the hydraulic
Go ahead and run the valves out to .550" lift.

You took the time and effort to put the longer rods and light weight pistons in the engine so take advantage of them.

Click to expand...

@pmuller,

I have ordered another cam from Clay Smith. They are still open and shipping orders, but with a skeleton crew and the cam not in stock, it will have to be ground to order. There have been more delays and additional costs on this upgrade than I could have possibly imagined (it started on March 8, five weeks ago). Plan to continue with cleaning and painting (radiator, fenderwell, firewall...), and if I don't have a delivery date on the new cam by the time I've done as much as I can without reassembling the engine, I will re-install the previous 274/274/108 cam (which only has about 10,000 miles on it) and keep the newest cam on the shelf for a near future update.

On the head, the machine shop reports that they are able to machine down the steel spring locator, but some of the valve guides broke loose and spun while attempting to do so. Those valve guides will have to be knocked out to remove the spring locator. If undamaged, they can be driven back in, but if damaged, they will have to be replaced, which will introduce even further delays.

Re: hydraulic lifters vs. RPM - On both the Clay Smith and the archive Classic Inlines web site, hydraulic cams are listed with upper RPM ranges from 6,500 to 6,700 RPM - is that a misprint? With the cam, lifters, and timing set all new, and with the new double valve springs installed, to what RPM do you think I can reliably rev the engine, if the advertised RPM limits are not correct? I can limit RPM with my MSD 6-AL if necessary.

Thanks
Bob

62Ranchero200":u5pufqhh said:

if I don't have a delivery date on the new cam by the time I've done as much as I can without reassembling the engine, I will re-install the previous 274/274/108 cam (which only has about 10,000 miles on it) and keep the newest cam on the shelf for a near future update.

Click to expand...

Don't forget that you raised the compression from 9.6 to 10.6 anticipating a new cam with more duration.
If you go back to the 274 duration cam you may have trouble running the engine without detonation.

62Ranchero200":u5pufqhh said:

Re: hydraulic lifters vs. RPM - On both the Clay Smith and the archive Classic Inlines web site, hydraulic cams are listed with upper RPM ranges from 6,500 to 6,700 RPM - is that a misprint? With the cam, lifters, and timing set all new, and with the new double valve springs installed, to what RPM do you think I can reliably rev the engine, if the advertised RPM limits are not correct? I can limit RPM with my MSD 6-AL if necessary.

Click to expand...

Not a misprint, it is plain incorrect. (insert bad language here)
First thing is that a 200 will operate at a much higher rpm than a 250 with the same camshaft and head so to post an rpm range that covers a 170 to a 250 engine doesn't work.
If you look in a professional brand camshaft catalog you will see rpm listings for different displacement engines for the same engine group.

Secondly, not all hydraulic lifters are the same.
It takes a more expensive lifter with limited plunger travel to safely operate at high rpm.
I like margin and prefer not to operate a standard flat tappet hydraulic lifter much past 5500 rpm with 6000 rpm as the limit.

It is a good practice not to build an engine where any part of it is questionable.
With a solid flat tappet lifter you know for sure that it cannot collapse or pump up.

I would cancel your order with Clay Smith & call Comp. Cams & get a profile which your engine needs.
Comp. told me they have the cores & can fill your order in 2 weeks for a custom grind. Their # is 800-999-0853. I would ask for Matt @ extension 1496 he is very knowledgeable.
Don't go back to the 274 cam or even use the bogus Clay Smith you have.
While you are waiting for a decent cam, that would be the time to do some windage mods in the oil pan.
Could be worth at least 5HP with that long leg 250"

Y not total custom w/Schnider @ same price as other guys 'off the shelf' ?
Most of this is above my pay grade (but that's sompin to add to ur conversation)...
Build the motor around that cam...the alu is a heavy 2nd additional consideration

wsa111":2cf335ky said:

I would cancel your order with Clay Smith & call Comp. Cams & get a profile which your engine needs.
Comp. told me they have the cores & can fill your order in 2 weeks for a custom grind. Their # is 800-999-0853. I would ask for Matt @ extension 1496 he is very knowledgeable.
Don't go back to the 274 cam or even use the bogus Clay Smith you have.
While you are waiting for a decent cam, that would be the time to do some windage mods in the oil pan.
Could be worth at least 5HP with that long leg 250"

Click to expand...

Hi Bill,

My original plan for this update was an incremental upgrade in cam, compression, and porting. A cam with slightly more lift and duration, a point of compression, and a mild port.

I know that there are several small things that I could do to to gain few more HP ... Yella Terra rockers, electric water pump drive, electric puller instead of mechanical fan, and windage mods. However, I don't want to get too carried away yet. I really want to paint this car at some point, and that's going to cost $6,000-7,000. To do this, I need to assemble a group of several thousand of my friends (George Washingtons).

As far as the cam, Clay Smith is fulfilling orders in 5-7 business days. I am on a "first name basis" with the ladies in the back office, after ordering a timing set, dowel pin, and dual valve springs there recently. I feel like I'd be starting all over with another vendor, and possibly opening another can of worms as to whether the Clay Smith dual springs can support another manufacturer's cam's lift and duration, etc. The genuine Clay Smith 280/280/110 cam is the perfect incremental upgrade that I was looking for.

If the work on the head goes as planned, with the dual springs and machined-down valve guides, I will have room for maybe .550-.575 lift, and when I'm ready I can go all out with a very high lift, long duration solid cam.

Thanks
Bob

You could have requested a 2 degree or a 4 degree advance when they ground it. That would save you the hassle of worrying about that on your 250.

wsa111":3er5j42z said:

You could have requested a 2 degree or a 4 degree advance when they ground it. That would save you the hassle of worrying about that on your 250.

Click to expand...

@wsa111,

That's an excellent idea and I have in fact requested that it be ground four degrees advanced. After reviewing upper RPM range vs. hydraulic lifters with @pmuller, a 6,000 RPM hard rev limit seems in order (from my MSD 6-AL). Since I won't be able to run higher RPMs, even with the new dual spring setup, it makes sense to install the cam four degrees advanced for more mid-range torque.

As a side note, the previous 274/274/108 cam was installed straight up ... the 250 was probably missing a few HP and ft-lbs as a result. It may be worth noting that with the 274/274/108 cam and with the rev limiter set to 5,500 RPM, HP and torque fell off around 5,100 RPM on all of my dyno runs - higher RPM just made more noise. I'm hoping that the 280/280/110 cam extends the productive RPM range to at least 5,500.

Higher lift, more duration and higher RPM will have to wait for a future solid lifter cam.

Thanks
Bob

Just for fun, I searched the Clay Smith, Comp Cams, and Schneider web sites for high lift, high duration solid lifter cams. After my dual spring upgrade, I should be able to handle at least .550 lift when I decide to go that direction.

Schneider has two high lift, long duration solid lifter cams: the 142F (240 degrees @ .050, .544 lift) and the 147F (258 degrees @ .050, .551 lift) (lift is advertised @ 1.5:1 so it's necessary to do some math for my 1.6:1 rockers).

I did not see anything like this on the Clay Smith or Comp Cams sites; it seems like a custom grind would be needed to get serious with higher lift and longer duration using a Clay Smith or Comp cam.

Thanks
Bob

You are looking for a cam with a .050" duration around 240 degrees.
The Schneider 142F would be a good candidate.
We have two members that are installing the 142F in the 300 six. Excited to see what the engine response is.

I don't see anything in the Comp lobe list for street lobes that have a 240 degree duration with lifts near .550"
The race lobes are way too aggressive.

The Clay Smith CSC 292-10 SSP has a 240 duration but only a .528" lift. (not that I'm recommending a Clay cam)

Crower has one of the largest cam lobe selections.
Bullet cams has a good selection also.

Bob, with the 280 advance 4 degrees you probably won't loose any low end, but will gain top end with more duration than the 274.

Greetings Ford Six Fans,

I can't move forward with reassembling the engine until I get the new 280H cam. Clay Smith has "gone dark" - they're not responding to e-mails. It's anyone's guess if or when they will ship the cam I ordered in the era of COVID-19.

If and when the machinist finishes the head, I plan to ask him how much lift he thinks I can safely run; if it's enough I may also order the Schneider 142F cam and solid lifters. However, I don't want to order a solid lifter cam, even for a long term future upgrade, until I know exactly how much lift I can safely run. If new valve guides were needed (because the old ones were damaged driving them out to remove the steel spring locators), it's anyone's guess how long that will take in the era of COVID-19.

For now and until I receive a breakthrough from either Clay Smith or my machinist, I will be cleaning and painting. I may not post on this thread for a while.

Don't believe I'll be starting any more Ranchero projects that require parts until the economy returns to normal. I'll restrict myself to cleaning and painting.

My advice to others: if you have a car that's fun to drive, just drive it, don't try to upgrade it and end up with the car parked for months due to parts unavailability in the era of COVID-19.

Thanks
Bob

the head is still usable, Bob?

Call Schneider and find out if the valve lift number on the 142F includes the valve lash.
If it doesn't then the actual lift is .544" minus the .016" valve lash.

Hi Bob, sorry to hear of all the troubles your having it isn't much better in this area finding even some of the most basic items. Hopefully your machinist is able to set up your head with .575 or more of valve retainer to valve guide / seal clearance so you can run any of your future cams with a decent amount of lift. Good luck.

chad":3djla22s said:

the head is still usable, Bob?

Click to expand...

@chad,

The head is still at the machine shop having the steel spring locators removed. If the world doesn’t come to a complete standstill because of COVID-19, I do expect the machinist to eventually finish the head.

Thanks
Bob

Long story short, I degreed the new Clay Smith 280H cam and found it to be about 14 degrees retarded! After due consideration, I decided to advance the timing one tooth and the cam is now about 3 degrees advanced. Degree results in picture below:



I'm still waiting on the aluminum head, at the machine shop to have the dual springs installed. The machinist is waiting on the arrival of new valve guides.

Thanks
Bob