[Vettezuki]

Originally Posted by 94cobra69ss396

Joel is right the cam is small. I looked it up on Summit's website and it only has 204 in./214 ex. @ .050 with a 112 LSA. In a 429 it will probably have a smooth idle with a ton of low end torque. . .

Maybe this is where I was getting deep in the weeds. What difference does it being in a 429 make? I was thinking in terms of my LSx (SBC) where 224/224 114 LSA (my cam) is considered "mild" and has a very slight lope to it. Having heard cams with this kind of duration and LSA (with much higher lift though ) in other LS motors, they sound pretty aggressive.

Do you know how big the original M1 cams were?

[BRUTAL64]

Originally Posted by 94cobra69ss396

Joel is right the cam is small. I looked it up on Summit's website and it only has 204 in./214 ex. @ .050 with a 112 LSA. In a 429 it will probably have a smooth idle with a ton of low end torque. The operating range shows 1500-4000 so it will only pull to about 5000 which will let the engine live a long time.

I don't know much about BBF and have never worked on them but if I were buying one of these I would definately go with the 429. Then pick up a dual plane intake for it. The Weiand Stealth model 8012 is the least expensive on Summit for just under $200.

Weiand Stealth model 8012 is a little tall. May have hood clearance problems. Won't know until you get the motor in the vehicle to measure hood clearance to block height.


Maybe someone has already done this?

Even though I'm not a fan of Edelbrock Performer (RPM is better) it should be low enough to fit in Mustang.

But again, measure block to hood height.

[BRUTAL64]

Originally Posted by Vettezuki

This seems to be the cam in question.

Can we call it on the mild side of larger, or bigger side of mild? It's certainly bigger than any OEM cam I can think of. An interesting question might be, what was the size(s) of the original Mach1 cam?

You're right though it's not a screamer, but 112 LSA is going to lope a bit. Whether that's ok for regular street driving is a matter of personal taste.

Small cam for a 429. Smooth idle with 112 LSA.

Good low end street cam.

[BRUTAL64]

Originally Posted by Leedom

My dad can afford either choice. I think he is trying to stay $3K or under for the engine. His stang will be a weekend cruiser with the occasional spanking of his kid and his big mouth (me). He wants something fairly mild, if a 429 or 460 can be called mild. He is not looking for a lopy cammed motor. He wants something with a little lope at idle and something that can scare the neighbors when stomped on. Originally he was thinking about 400 HP/TQ with his 351, but then started thinking what would a 429/460 be like? Personally I like his thinking.

Didn't someone else you know suggest the 429/460?

[94cobra69ss396]

Originally Posted by Vettezuki

Maybe this is where I was getting deep in the weeds. What difference does it being in a 429 make? I was thinking in terms of my LSx (SBC) where 224/224 114 LSA (my cam) is considered "mild" and has a very slight lope to it. Having heard cams with this kind of duration and LSA (with much higher lift though ) in other LS motors, they sound pretty aggressive.

Do you know how big the original M1 cams were?

The bigger the engine the small the cam seems. I had an Erson in my Chevelle when I had the 396 in it and it had 214/214 at .050 with .514/.514 lift on a 112 LSA and it didn't have a lope at all. It was very smooth with an 800 rpm idle and pulled to 5800. I ran a best time of 13.23 at 103 with that cam with 9:1 compression, a Performer intake with Holley 850DP and 3.73 gears. It was alos my daily driver at the time. I then changed out the cam for a Herbert cam with 244/244 @ .050 with a .544/.544 on a 110LSA and went 12.96 at 106. That cam had a lope to it though and idled at 1000rpm.

[Leedom]

Originally Posted by BRUTAL64

Didn't someone else you know suggest the 429/460?

Yes Glenn you suggested it too. We had been talking about it and I think the conversation with you kind of pushed him over the edge and is not seriously looking into it.

[Vettezuki]

Originally Posted by 94cobra69ss396

The bigger the engine the small the cam seems. I had an Erson in my Chevelle when I had the 396 in it and it had 214/214 at .050 with .514/.514 lift on a 112 LSA and it didn't have a lope at all. It was very smooth with an 800 rpm idle and pulled to 5800. I ran a best time of 13.23 at 103 with that cam with 9:1 compression, a Performer intake with Holley 850DP and 3.73 gears. It was alos my daily driver at the time. I then changed out the cam for a Herbert cam with 244/244 @ .050 with a .544/.544 on a 110LSA and went 12.96 at 106. That cam had a lope to it though and idled at 1000rpm.

Roger. I stand corrected.

FTR, if the choice were between these two motors, I'd go with the 429.

[Leedom]

Seller said the pistons, rods, and crank are stock Ford parts.

[94cobra69ss396]

Originally Posted by Leedom

Seller said the pistons, rods, and crank are stock Ford parts.

No need for anything more than that. I'm not sure what the compression was on the original engine but my guess would be somewhere around 9:1. Glenn probably would have an idea.

[Leedom]

Would I be safe in calling the 429 option a "fairly" tame street motor?

I am assuming that this motor would be over 450HP and about 500 ft/lb?