Inliners International Forums General Discussion Engines Best 292 truck Cam?

Thanks Scot, That will give me a good Idea of what I can do.!

Never heard about this site, thank you for sharing. Do they deliver abroad? As I am currently in my property in Cyprus

Has anyone tried a hydraulic roller cam for street use? Thinking along the lines of durability.

Mike Kirby did several for the street about 10 years ago. I heard they've been performing as expected as far as longevity and no maintenance.

I went with Tom's aka 12 bolt Hytork cam kit and doing a little port work on the head so all the ports are matched to the intake and exhaust (nothing excessive) and grinding the port dividers into a wing shape. Using a 2bbl fuel injection on an Offenhauser intake and hopefully using a set of cast exhaust header, I'm hoping to hit 200 HP. Also using roller rocker arms and dual valve springs.

Sounds good. What injector setup are you going to use. I'm going to try the early 90s GM and my MegsSquirt again. If I have trouble with it again I'll buy one of the new kits.

Now I got my hands on an Affordable Fuel Injection unit which uses the GM throttle body and keeping the Holley unit for a backup. They are both 2 bbl units but the GM unit is easier to get parts for and a lot lower cost and works with a stock HEI distributor.
https://affordable-fuel-injection.com/?gclid=EAIaIQobChMIraSq37jU6QIVNSCtBh0mPgyyEAAYASAAEgIW6vD_BwE

Thanks for the link I can read some there.

When EFI DIY and I did the demo at Bonneville in 2008 we put a GM TBI with a MegaSquirt on the 270 GMC in my '53 Chevy pickup. He had in running in about 30 minutes. We had a big vacuum leak because no one had an allen wrench. And we didn't get to drive it because the fuel line kept blowing off. I had prepped the truck at home for the connections but not quite well enough.
I'm bringing that thread back up so I can restore the pictures. I could spend the rest of my life restoring pictures here thanks to Google/Picasa.

Interesting to see someone access this factory info--Everybody here seems to think the 292 is such a "torque-monster--please post the dyno graphs for the two barrel 283 V-8 and we will see the 283 comes out on top--it's more of a engine size thing rather that some romantic illusion we have for the "mighty six"

1965 C10 specs:
[img:left]https://drive.google.com/file/d/1k0Zrxk38vWQodOsDcZWcf1wdR3Vt_2Xz/view?usp=drivesdk[/img]

Dynos from back in the day:

283:
[img]https://drive.google.com/file/d/1k28etC8ZCKKblYjAyZVUszY2wtzgMMib/view?usp=drivesdk[/img]

292:
[img]https://drive.google.com/file/d/1k4iwTvc_3qhptQzPZGFtzmW9rn3ngHrS/view?usp=drivesdk[/img]


So the 292 has a broader torque curve which is also higher at lower RPMs (from idle). Especially the net numbers.

If you wanted to, a V8 could be built with a smaller cam, valves, ports, restrictive manifold and small carburetor - which is where the "torque monster" fable comes from.
The number of cylinder confers no benefit except packaging.

+1

Cylinders effect primary and secondary balance which can be corrected at a small power loss.

Interesting. For my needs torque off idle is more desirable. My truck won't see much freeway time. Thanks for those charts.

Sorry, not sure what you mean?
An L6 has primary balance, but still (as always) rocking couple.
V4, 6, 8 (but not V12) engines are always out of balance to some degree.

my bad, I had mis-read those graphs years ago, your a$$ is blackest !!!....use the net numbers as they represent the more real world conditions--good work finding those graphs !

You do have to take into consideration the TQ and HP scales are different. TQ is x2 making the curves look funny.

If you look at the cert, those are GM dynos toward the end of 1964 for the 1965 models.