Vintage Mustang Forums banner
1 - 20 of 23 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
31 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I'm thinking of putting a Comp cam 35-514-8 roller cam in a 2000 efi 302 P engine. Is anyone running this cam is a similar setup? I would love to hear your take on this cam, how it performs, and how it sounds. Thanks in advance for any input!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,365 Posts
In addition to the engine, cam selection is dependent on the transmission, converter stall speed, rear end ratio and vehicle use. You might be best to call a cam grinder, Howard's, Isky or Lunati and see what they recommend for your use, setup.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
31 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
In addition to the engine, cam selection is dependent on the transmission, converter stall speed, rear end ratio and vehicle use. You might be best to call a cam grinder, Howard's, Isky or Lunati and see what they recommend for your use, setup.
I'm putting a stock 2001 4R70W behind it, 3.55:1 gears. Engine and transmission will be controlled by a Holley Terminator Max.
 

·
Registered
1965 Mustang Fastback restomod
Joined
·
1,512 Posts
That cam has way too much lift for stock pistons and valve springs.. a good cam to use on a stock long block 302 is a ford racing F303 cam or E303 cam. both will work with the stock components. they sound ok, pretty mild cams but will drop right in a stock engine
 

·
Registered
1967 Mustang Convertible
Joined
·
1,246 Posts
I don't have that cam, I was looking at it for my mods in my signature but ended up using one, that is one level down. Equivalent to the XE264HR. I know that you will be giving up a little of the down low torque to pick it up at the higher end. You will definitely need new Valve springs on the GT40P heads to match the cam and you will need to check your PTV clearance to be sure of clearance.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GunRunner64

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,693 Posts
I don't have that cam, I was looking at it for my mods in my signature but ended up using one, that is one level down. Equivalent to the XE264HR. I know that you will be giving up a little of the down low torque to pick it up at the higher end. You will definitely need new Valve springs on the GT40P heads to match the cam and you will need to check your PTV clearance to be sure of clearance.
I had XE264HR in my car, great cam and it will work will with a stock torque converter. The XE266HR's lift seems excessive for a cruiser and would need new valve springs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GunRunner64

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,027 Posts
A TFS Stage 1 might work well in a P engine. It would work with bigger heads too if you decided to go that way later on. Best of all, you can find them used for pretty cheap on Corral. New valve springs are likely in your future if you go with anything other than an Alphabet Cam.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GunRunner64

·
Registered
Joined
·
31 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
I was told that there was a cam out there that will really wake up the p heads. Haven't found it yet. Call Comp Cam, they recommend the 35-514-8, and the springs that I'll need. They said that it will run in a stock engine. Anyone running a Voodoo?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,027 Posts
Don't take their word for it. Check piston to valve clearance. You can grind on the stock pistons a little if there's a slight interference issue. Or get the cutting tool that goes in place of the valve, but those are pricey.

There are a lot of Voodoo cams. A guy on here ran one of the more aggressive ones (like .579 lift) and ran 12s in his '69 convertible with a 302. He also had 190 11R heads.

I really do think the TFS Stage 1 is the right cam for you with stock (or even ported) iron heads. I think taking it much further will give all the negatives of larger cams (high idle, reduced vacuum, more aggressive stall/gear requirements, etc.) without any positives because the heads will limit the RPM where you make peak power.
 

·
Registered
1967 Mustang Convertible
Joined
·
1,246 Posts
No personal experience with this cam, but I have heard folks have had good results with it and GT40P heads, comes with springs and other parts needed:

.
Similar to the cam you are looking at too.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,027 Posts
Interesting. I would not have thought a stock engine could take so much lift but now I see why, on both the FTI cam and the Comp. While they have big lift, there is not very much duration. I retract my prior statement about the Comp being too much cam. I just saw the lift numbers and made false assumptions about the rest of the cam characteristics.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
317 Posts
I'm running that cam in my coupe. It has a ton of low end torque. It pulls really hard up to about 5K. Very nice on the street. I'm running it with a T5 and 3.55 gears. I'm running a set of AFR 165 heads. I'm not sure what to say about the sound. Thats relative to the individual and in my opinion, not a good criteria for cam selection. It doesn't sound stock, but its not choppy either.
 

·
Registered
1965 Mustang Fastback restomod
Joined
·
1,512 Posts
All hail the 25 year old alphabet cam? Brad must be napping!
lol i never recommend alphebet cam for anything unless the owner wants to keep the engine all stock via not change springs etc . They just want to be able to say it has a cam in it lol. That is exactly what the ford cams are meant for lol. Normally i try to push solid cams do it right or dont bother lol
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,693 Posts
lol i never recommend alphebet cam for anything unless the owner wants to keep the engine all stock via not change springs etc . They just want to be able to say it has a cam in it lol. That is exactly what the ford cams are meant for lol. Normally i try to push solid cams do it right or dont bother lol
Every SBF technically "has a cam in it" or it wouldn't run!;) I'm too lazy for solid cams, and I'm getting 6400 out of a hydro roller cam on an iffy 331 every run.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1 Posts
I'm running that cam in my coupe. It has a ton of low end torque. It pulls really hard up to about 5K. Very nice on the street. I'm running it with a T5 and 3.55 gears. I'm running a set of AFR 165 heads. I'm not sure what to say about the sound. Thats relative to the individual and in my opinion, not a good criteria for cam selection. It doesn't sound stock, but its not choppy either.
Did you have any problems with firing. Order? I just dropped in engineering with that cam and trick flow heads been getting a lot of backfiring on cranking I’ve read so many different post about it using a different firing order
 
1 - 20 of 23 Posts
Top