HOW TO MAKE 5.0L FORD POWER! FORD RACING E303 VS NEW SUMMIT E303 PLUS-IS THE E303+ REALLY BETTER?
Vložit
- čas přidán 27. 08. 2024
- HOW DO I MAKE MORE POWER WITH MY 5.0L FORD? HOW MUCH IS CAM SWAP WORTH ON A 5.0L FORD? HOW MUCH POWER IS A FORD RACING E303 CAM WORTH? IS THE FORD E303 A GOOD CAM? IS THE NEW SUMMIT RCAING E303+ CAM BETTER THAN THE E303? IS A SINGLE-PATTERN CAM BETTER THAN A DUAL-PATTERN CAM? HOW MUCH POWER DOES A STOCK 5.0L H.O. CAM MAKE? CHECK OUT THIS VIDEO WHERE I COMPARED THE STOCK 5.0L FORD (302) CAM TO BOTH THE FORD RACING E303 AND THE NEW E303+ (PT# SUM-8900). IS THE NEW SUMMIT E303+ CAM REALLY BETTER THAN THE ORIGINAL E303, AND HOW MUCH POWER DO THESE CAMS ADD TO A MODIFIED 302?
Love the sbf content
I love the thought of a boneyard Explorer 5.0, those heads, the Summit cam, a 4 barrel, RPM intake, and headers for an easy, bolt on 400hp engine. For probably less than 3 grand. Drop that in any Fox body, early Mustang, Falcon, Maverick, etc, and haul ass.
then add 125-hp Sniper NOS nitrous
what about piston to valve clearance with the 2.02 intake valves?
@@bryansage6925 A 4.00 bore should be fine.
I have that setup.Original E303, Runs close with a 2020 Camero SS. Jump out about half car, maybe car behind or less by 120. Stock V6 differential, T5. 110 Mechanical pump. 3.73 and a good tune would probably get it. New Setup 351 @michigan_frankienstang
@@jeffrykopis5468 What does the DIAMETER of the bore have to do with PISTON to valve clearance? He's not talking about cylinder bore to valve clearance. Talking about the higher lift/duration causing the larger valve to hit the piston, especially because the "eyebrows" may only accommodate smaller diameter valves.
Great presentation! I commented several vids back, I believe on the 300-350hp 302 combos that you don't need to do a cam swap(JUST HAVE A GOOD SET OF HEADS) to achieve close to 350hp, and hear you eclipsed that. Not everyone wants to do a cam swap at that level. When I come to street engines I'm from the old school thought of running JUST ENOUGH CAM. Drivability, engine responsiveness, and strong low, mid-range, are important. Plus with a good set of heads you can squeeze some extra top end power from a mild cam. The stock HO cam is a good piece, and would've been considered back in the 70s as a stage 1 even. The E303 was always the go to cam for me back in the day for the aforementioned reasons. With the E303 you can make a really great dual purpose combo(street/strip). Also has great vacuum signal (great for carb combos) and also I didn't notice any huge difference in fuel consumption between the stock cam vs the E303 cam(especially doing regular driving). Another plus. In my opinion too many people OVER CAM their little street 302's and wonder why they are not pleased with the performance. When it comes to cams, and performance level, you can OVER CAM if your not careful. Engines built for strictly track duty and max power may be a different case. Drivability and low to mid-range may not be as important then.
Back in '95 I ran a 5.0 Mustang HO and stock it would not pull well past 4000 or so. The valve spring retainers were very heavy and had rotators built in...so some better springs and lightweight retainers along with Ford Racing 1.72 aluminum roller rockers really woke it up and it would pull strongly to the 6250 rev limiter and stomp a stock engine. I agree that too much cam is much worse than 'not quite enough' and the stock HO cam with good valvetrain ran well enough that I didn't see a pressing need to change it.
@@recoilrob324the 1.7s don't cause premature valve guide wear?
@@BruceLee-xn3nn The geometry was good so you're not talking about that much more side thrust on the guide at all. Plus...going from stamped steel to a roller rocker for sure will lessen any thrust on the guides so I'm confident they'll last at least as well as when stock.
Good stuff. I'd love to see the comparison of the alpha bet cams with GT40p heads with upgraded springs vs. The aluminum heads. It seems that's something that would be found on the street and the track and a realistic comparison.
I ran a FMS E303 in my 89 5.0 with ported cast iron GT 40 heads, GT40 upper and lower intake (lower ported), 65 mm throttle body, 1.72 rockers, shorty headers, x-pipe and 2 chamber flow master mufflers. The car ran really good and was a lot of fun!
Looking forward to the testing on the B and F versions of the plus cams.
Will also be good to see the comparisons between the original E, B and F cams on the same engine. Want to see what those curves look like, comparatively.
I'd like to see these cams compared to the trick flow and extreme energy cams!
It seems like this was a very good combo to start with. If I remember correctly, the stock 302 in your configuration makes about 275 at the top where this one, with the Blueprint heads, makes 368 with the stock cam. That’s huge! Either of the E303 cams then make a nice further increase that you’d notice on the street or at the track. Looking forward to the EFI results, but how about a 327, 331, or 347 shortblock? And maybe some better flowing intakes than the non-air gap? I enjoyed my ‘89 notchback bought new back in the day, but any of these combos would have been night and day better! Thanks Richard!
I'm amazed it made so much with the stock cam, especially compared to other tests you've done. Imagine if it came that way from the factory.
@@Mustang_Chris the factory cams in the GT (ZE Cam) and in the post 94 trucks and exploders (TE Cam) are actually really good cams for the street. All they need is heads and possibly a rocker ratio change. I like to I se 1.7 rockers on the TE and split the ZE 1.6 on the intake and 1.7 on the exhaust. The TE cam with 1.7 rockers is a really, really good torque cam I found
Wow didn't know Summit was doing their own Ford Motorsport inspired cam lineup, very cool! Thank for the info and hope to see more 👍
What a blast from the past! I had an E cam in my LX 5.0 back in the day. I think I ran it with a cobra intake and 3:73s out back.
can't wait for the bigger cams. Good stuff
VERY interesting. WAY back in the day I had a 1987 TBird TurboCoupe that I did a complete 1989 5.0 HO and 5 speed swap. I mean complete with modified wiring harness and factory type installation. Plan was stock swap but decided to mildly port the exhaust ports and ran into a situation requiring a rebuild. Ended up with a mildly ported head and stock HO intake and an E303 cam. Machine shop had a set of aftermarket dual springs that I was going to run UNTIL we put them on the scale and they were slightly worse than the 90k mile stock springs. Dyno'd at 249rwhp @ 4600rpm and 314rwtq at IIR 3500rpm. Car ran 13.77 @ 104mph on street radials (real not DRs). on a 1.9 60ft. Figured the stock intake was the problem so swapped in an Edelbrock but no improvement. Either it was the stock ported heads or valve float... IDK... but should have made power well into the mid 5500s. Nice vid. Cheers!
Amazing how well the stock cam did with good heads, etc. The summit cam didn't improved much on the old Ford technology, especially considering how much more lift and split duration. Looking forward to the B303 comparison.
The Summit cam basically brute forces it's way to 12 measly hp over the E303 by using lift and then trying to 'cheat' it by having .540 exh. The Ford E303 accomplishes a big gain with .498 lift and an easier profile. I'd rather have that with a slight duration bump to 230. The summit pattern is inexplicable in other ways as well.
the summit cam is far better than this comparison shows. if they would have kept revving the engine the hp difference would have been greater. the summit cam is actually more efi friendly as well and makes more idle vaccuum. we have used the summit e303 cam in our customers combos and they are a really good design that makes more power everywhere. The better the intake manifold and heads flow the more power it will make up top
My anecdotal evidence says the E7/GT40/P heads were never good enough to truly maximize the small block ford. Considering the LS heads almost bolt-down to a windsor, It would be interesting to dyno a 302 with them on there with some massage work on a mill. In ~2003ish, I was working at a mustang shop at the time and a guy brought in a 92 5 speed hatch that he only did a couple of things to: off-road X-pipe, MAC mufflers, holley systemax intake, and (at the time) the baddest stock angle iron heads made for the SBF: the world products Windsor Sr heads. Chris Howe (of Kaase's shop) ported the heads and he threw 1.7 rollers on it. Made 301rwhp IIRC. Most guys struggled to touch 300rwhp back then and this guy did it with a bone stock camshaft. Really solidified, to me anyways, that the heads were 90% of the equation.
@@pro-seriesfabrication3810 ported iron gt40/gt40p heads can make some good power with a mild combo if ported correctly. We have mild combos dynoing 360whp/350wtrq through a T5 on a dynojet with stock valves. Induction and camshaft plays a key roll.
@@pro-seriesfabrication3810 yup relatively unknown combo is the air flow and exhaust mods you mentioned, there are other running stock cam with 1.7rr but after market heads such as tfs 11r 170 or 190 and afr 165 and afr 185 getting the numbers your buddy got with stock cam and windsor Sr heads
Presentation is the best I have seen for this type of channel, I am a newbie restomod enthusiast
I wish you had ye olde XE274HR in the mix.
sshhh...I did!
@@richardholdener1727 my man 👍
@richardholdener1727
Can't find it
May 2024
I get excited for all the 302 Ford and 4.8L LS content you make, Richard. This info is invaluable to making build estimates of my little 2.4L 22RE inline 4!
It seems from most of the comments i have read, people seem to think it was mainly the cylinder heads that made all of this power? Although cyl. heads are a huge improvement, and would allow a longer dur. cam to work better by pulling more air in through a stock Efi. Intake. You must remember that the stock heads flow around 160cfm., but the stock Efi. Intake also flowed around 160cfm per runner. So this test utilized one of the best flowing/working carbed intakes in the 1,500rpm to 6,500rpm range, AND good flowing, higher Cc runner cyl. Heads, along with an AWESOME exhaust system, its this Whole Combo, that unlocked the camshafts hidden power!
King Lord God B-Cam will crush all comers. Never has a cam been so finely sculpted. Truly a master class in excellence. Tread at your peril.
B cam testing is next!
@@richardholdener1727 My sympathies to the dyno.
@@richardholdener1727 1.7s with that Bcam test?
The 1st B303 cam was accidentally sent back in time.......we know that cam by it's historical name....Excalibur.
Excited to see those other Summit alphabet cams! I just bought the F303 plus for my 5.0 with a set of AFR heads. Totally looking forward to the power gains over my B303 and GT40P setup currently. I bought the cam on a total whim before anyone had good info on them, so I’m stoked to see how good the F303 plus is. Keep it up!!
Would love to hear how well your combo. Is running/how you like it, any info is appreciated. Also what intake, exhaust system, and compression are you running with your combo?
looking forward to the f303 cam comparison!Gret work as always!
Thanks for testing the Blue Print Heads, I have a similar setup in my F150 except with a 650 Demon and a Trick Flow Stage 1 cam.
Maybe the 110 LSA explained the E303 advantage down low compared to the 113 of the E303+.
And less overlap.
E303 plus had higher lift as well and that's more air up top so naturally it's going to increase more bulk high RPM horsepower
Exactly what I was thinking
Hard to say, I would like to know the ICL.
Hell. A stock HO cam and blueprint headed long block looks like a really fun daily driver motor. No lopey lope, but really great all around power.
Couldn't agree more!
I am a fan of the stock HO cam. At the moment one of my mustangs has a 10.8:1cr 347 with 200cc aluminum heads and the factory HO cam. But I am a fan of mild cammed engines with performance machine work and good heads. My camper van has a stock HO cam also. I put Roush 200cc heads on that one along with tight quenching. Really good combos for vehicals that gets driven a lot in my opinion. I have played with big cams also, just my taste in builds has changed over the years. My F250 with a 460ci, which is my daily has a bit of lope in it, but nothing extreme as I need off idle power from it. Also a higher compresion, tight quenched engine with aluminum heads. Now my street stock engine, that has a bit of a nasty cam in it lol.
@@whiplashmachine well that used to be Ford's ethos back in the day. Make the heads breathe. Then a smaller cam for excellent manners. Compare Richards Boss 302 vs Z/28 302 test.
@@travislivengood2744 I have become a fan of street manners. So many ways to build reliable power without rough cams. I build and tune quite a few race engines in a year, so I get my taste of nasty cams still. I quite often get to road test them also, tons of fun lol.
@@whiplashmachine I'm surprised you are able to run 10.8:1 compression with the short timing specs of a stock HO cam. I would think your cranking pressure would be over 200 psi...often in detonation territory even with tight squish and cooler-running aluminum heads. I'm guessing conservative ignition timing, reduced low rpm charge velocity from the larger port heads, and the extra compression bleed-off of the stock cam's longer seat to seat timing must be just enough to make it work.
Can't wait to see the cam comparison of the Summit cams. Would also like to see how all those compare to your favorite Comp XE274 and how they are all affected with the EFI setup. As always, great content!!
Yeah I’d like to see the XE270HR or XE266HR tested as well.
@@msk3905 Xe270Hr makes less than the Xe274, and the Xe266Hr makes less than them all.
Thank you ! For the old school 5.0 Ford testing it’s all ways nice 😊
Used to run a stock 302 cam with 351 heads. Back in the day….
Good power and good gas mileage.
You did a good job showing the different camshafts' real potential with the upgrades. Those things are typically upgraded also when upgrading for more power
Would love to see the F303 and the F303+ compared with boost, especially since a lot of people still use the old F cams in boosted engines!
I will test those-boost won't change anything
F303+ Vs XE274HR
Overall Roller cam Production figures are effectively four types, revised four times:
85-88 5.0: E5ZE-6250-AA 266°/266° at lash 444/444 thou lift (Version 1)................................................ ..1st
89-90 5.0 : E8ZE-6250-CA 276°/266° at lash 444/444 thou lift (Version 2)................................................ 2nd
91-93 5.0: F1ZE-6250-AA 276°/266° at lash 444/444 thou lift (Version 2)
93 Cobra 5.0: F3ZE-6250-CA 270°/270° at lash 479/479 thou lift with 1.7 rocker arm ratio (Version 3)...3rd
94 Cobra 5.0: F1ZE-6250-AA 276°/266° at lash 444/444 thou (Version 2)
95 Cobra 5.0: F4ZE-6250-DA 276°/266° at lash 444/444 thou lift (Version 2)
96-01 Explorer 5.0:F4TE-6250-BA 256°/266°at lash 422/448 thou lift (Version 4)....................................4th
A-cam (Ist flat tappet hyd ) is 204°/214° at 50 thou 448 in. 472 ex...............Deadly Letter A'.....................5th
A-cam (2ndflat tappet hyd ) is 204°/214° at 50 thou 472 in. 496 ex..............Deadly Letter A''....................6th
E-cam is 220°/220° at 50 thou 498 in. 498 ex thou lift..................................Deadly Letter E.....................7th
B-cam is 224°/224° at 50 thou 480 in. 480 ex thou lift..................................Deadly Letter B......................9th
F-cam is 226°/226° at 50 thou 512 in. 512 ex thou lift..................................Deadly Letter F......................10th
X-cam is 224°/224° at 50 thou 542 in. 542 ex thou lift..................................Deadly Letter X.....................11th
Z-cam is 228°/228° at 50 thou 552 in. 552 ex thou lift..................................Deadly Letter Z......................12th
The 8th cam, was the non roller Hydraulic flat tappet "G" VIN code P71 cam for 1980 HO 2bbl 351W Police Cruisers, based on the so called Windsor Marine cam, and used in the 1994 5.8 liter SVT Cobra 351. It's an over scavanging 1971,1972 351C Cobra Jet 4V and 351W D2ZE 6250 AB cam remastered, 270 I /290 E at lash, 208 I /224 E at 50 thou, approx 477/ 481 lift with 1.7 or 1.73 rockers.
thnx
How much duration do the fox cams have at .050?
@@95GTSpeedDemon Ford didn't publish them. You can probably get them from the 50 thou SAE figures NHRA uses, but I haven't looked recently.
@@95GTSpeedDemon 210 @ .050. I measured a couple of them.
@@stuartwall8212 wow. No wonder my 208/216 comp xe258 cam makes Peak torque at 4200 even with my big single plane and why it is a little on the low side for power output and is requiring a lot more boost pressure than I would expect to make the air flow I need
I shouldn't be this excited, but I am. 😆 Been curious about these cams since I stumbled onto them on Summit
Not all that impressed with the Summit E303 plus cam given the significant increase in lift and exhaust duration over the now ancient Ford Racing E303. Certainly not worth yanking the old E303 for.
Wrong LSA...
I will love to see the video of the f303 to the rest of the 303 series cam thank you Richard
We've been waiting for some new SBF videos!
Looks like the wider lobe separation trades hp and tq for all the gains up top. Let’s see more testing sir!!!
Its a very LS style cam. I think a tighter 108 lsa and less exhaust duration would have been beneficial.
There's no comparing those 2 cams... they are completely different in every way but ONE spec. Stupid name... E303+
The other difference between the E cam and the a E plus from Summit is which 2 of the cams won't break. The Ford have been proven to not do that but I have no input on the summit plus cam.
I run a x camshaft and I like it. It's a rowdy cam.
I’m always feel like I’m surprised at the gains a 5.0 makes but I remember back in the day it seemed easy to find power locked away in these engines. I know everybody venerates the SBC (rightfully so) but I don’t know if they realize how fun and cheap the 5.0 was to dink around with.
Slap some decent heads and a cam on a 5.0 and it’s all you need for a weekend car or a solid truck engine.
Great test! Do you ever take any vacuum readings at idle? I'd also be interested to hear the idle sound for the various combinations.
Thanks for doing these comparisons.
Very similar build to the sbf going in my Supra. Excellent!
Thanks Richard. Always love the Ford stuff. I may be wrong, but I basically see the two E cams as the same power out put. Yes, the Summit cam has a few more ponies at the top end, but I am willing to bet the Ford cam will be easier on the valve train and will run practically forever. This proves to me that Ford really put an effort into their cams and are of great value
the E303 was a Crane cam
This is probably why my engine likes a 1.7 rocker on the exhaust and a 1.6 ratio on the intake.
@Richard Holdener
This shows how well the old E303 has aged. It was able to hold its own quite well. I think that E303+ summit cam would be a little too much on the lift for what we were doing years ago with stock e7te heads. Now with modern stuff that all goes out the window.
Naahh it would've been fine 550 lift isn't much you could've got a set of springs to handle that on those stock heads. Kinda like the springs they use on chevy vortec stock heads that handle 560 lift
@@jonathanlawson4667
They don't flow any more air at that lift. No reason to push them that far.
@@tech1302 I used a 560 lift Solid cam in my 1971 Maverick it made 438 hp at 7200 RPM with a 1966 mild ported 289 head! Yes new heads are better but don't try to tell me you can't make power with the stock heads.
@@mylanmiller9656 I really wish people would read before commenting.
I never said stock heads don't make power. I have never owned anything but stock. E7TE, DOOE, GT40 etc
My comment was that Ford along with Crane who ground those old Ford Racing Cams did not see it necessary to push the valve as far as that "E303+". Look at the small power difference with those blueprint aftermarket heads, do you think that with a set of stock e7te the difference would be greater or less? I bet it would be even less.
Why hammer the valve open way past the flow capability of the head and also necessitate the use of more expensive valve springs?
@@tech1302 Your comment was that it is no point in going to a cam with more than 500 lift i say bullshit.
Back in the day, my notchback was a daily driver, I ran the e cam with 1.7 rockers, The drivability was good being a 110 lsa. I drove that car all over and on long trips.
cam snobs made fun of me aLpHaBeT cAm...
it held it's own nicely along with explorer heads, gears ect, against the (new at the time ls6's.
As you see on the dyno, the old-school e cam made its peak power just below the factory efi mustang rev limiter. Mid range was exceptional. Not considered powerhouses nowadays, but impressive combos.
I appreciate the SBF stuff. I would love to see a comparison of the Trick flow stuff as well. I rarely see anyone dyno Trick Flow head or cams. I run a 289 with the 11R 170 heads and a stage 1 cam. The numbers on the stage one are in between the E303 and the Summit cam. Split pattern as well.
please see the several tfs videos I have up
Nice so this old school 302 SBF is making what a gen 1 coyote is making.
Nice power from the stock cam. I wish I still had my Lunati cam card from back in the day. I also had a b for a while.
I know a lot of guys that try to cam their stock block with a gt40p heads with an intake combo... Be nice to hear some of those numbers with cam swaps..on a factory rotating assembly
I'm fixen to install a set of the Blueprint Heads (Part # HP9008) On a 1990 5.0 HO that's been carbed with the Edlebrock performer duel plane intake and Summit 600 carb. I am concerned about the larger valves hitting the stock pistons and my oldschool blackjack headers working with the angle of the plugs. All of this going in my 1978 Mustang ll.
Great stuff! Thanks for the data. Looking forward to all the other cam tests. I’m currently running the Summit F303+ in a stock 302 GT40 heads.
Do you have an Instagram?
@@joshuatarin8447 I do but never post. Might start posting there since I’m doing HR Drag week this year. mike_machnik
It would be interesting to see a comparison with the Comp Cams 270 Magnum 31-414-3 as this is very similar to the E-303 with .500 lift and duration of 224 but it is a flat tappet cam with the regular (non H.O.) Ford firing order. Back in 1991, this was the biggest cam that I was able to run while still being able to pass emissions in my ‘79 5.0L Mustang.
Would like to see the anderson cams up against these as well. N-21, N-41 would be a nice comparison
Yeah those are my favorite letter cams. A friend that ran with like in 1996 had a 347 Anderson stage 3 tw tfs heads maybe n-41 everything from Anderson single plane with fogger kit had a Doug nash gated and faceplated. That car was legit and the fogger looked so cool. 6.2 1/8 in 95-96
N-21 and n-41 are the same cam. N21 uses 1.7 rockers and n41 uses 1.6. Numbers are the same when you factor in the rocker ratio
@@chrisfinamore6364 I meant either one, not those two head to head
Thanks for having old school ford stuff Richard. i cant afford any new stuff. Lol
If you have a choice with a stock engine. Change the heads first.
That gives great gains.
Better than changing a cam with stock heads.
Would have liked to see this test with a gt40/gt40p head
I am curious, other than nostalgia, why the B303 is "still a thing." I am an old-timer (I got my 1990 LX new when I turned 18), and the whole design goal for the B-cam was to compensate for stock heads with tiny valves (which is why they hang the valves open so long, but without a ton of lift) because aftermarket heads didn't really exist. It would seem to me that in 2022, almost regardless of your combination it would benefit with one of the zillions of profiles developed since. That said, I'd be curious to see what they pull...
I run 1.7 rockers and TF 170 heads with a B cam in my Bracket car. I think the lift is about what the F cam is with 1.6 rockers 5.10 - 5.12 Revs good.
The biggest reason that the Ford Racing B cam is still popular is because it has a 110 LSA. This is about where a sbf wants to be. Look around at "shelf cams" with todays technology. LSA is ridiculous on most cams, including this Summit cam. The 220 degrees at.050 isnt much duration at all, way bigger out there !
Nice stuff and yes I'm very interested in f303 cam. I had a hydraulic flat tap version of it 512 lift 288 duration in my high school ride little 302 made lots of noise in it.
I'd also like to see the Z cam.....
How did I not know these cams existed? Damn I need to get out more 🙄
Surprised you didn't mention "B-Cam Mafia"
Might need to get all new cams and do another idle vid...🤪
@@Jim_Lawrence that’s what I was thinking 🤔
I'm doing all the cams
@@richardholdener1727 Wear the "Wrong Cam" shirt for that video 😂
Those big, long tube headers may have affected the power numbers down low, maybe next run use the shorty headers since that's what most people have in their cars. Looked up the part number and it Starts with American bearing steel billets, unlike Comp Cams which is using austempered iron, so right from the start a better-quality cam material. Nice blast from the past.
Don't long tube help down low
@@ryandoyle4344 If the piping is too large off of the engine it will slow down the exhaust flow which would hurt scavenging. In this case short tubes may have helped and it's more in line with what is being used in the cars.
shorty headers do not add low speed torque compared to long tubes
@@richardholdener1727 I understand that my point was the large diameter tubes of these headers may have affected the power down low, and to be more real world and use short tube header since that's what is generally used in the car.
@@tedjones450 Should he hook up all the accessories too, including the broken arm rest pad?
The HO cam did better than I thought. Those Blueprint Engines cylinder heads must be fairly decent.
I can't wait to the the F303 to the F303+
Was anxiously waiting for this video. My current set up is a stock short block. 180cc heads. E cam. Always wondered what it made more less n/a. I spray 150 on it and runs bottom 11’s in my fox. Thanks for the video!
Popped up again I think with AOD and stock exhaust the FORD cam wins. extra exhaust would not help much or maybe it would but I would not trade off the 3000 rpm torque in a LTD or rock crawling bronco ( I own both)( going to take the efi motor and aod out of the LTD and replace the carb motor in the bronco) so great useful test
This engine and a t56 in a fox would be a fun/usable street car
Thanks for this Richard. It sure looks to me like all the crybabies saying the alphabet cams are outdated garbage are way off. E303 was my street favorite with oe (e7/gt40/p) heads back in the day
should test the Jones 210 cam that David Vizard talked about in his E7 videos against these. i think it would smoke them.
Cant wait to see the efi to carb comparison, im building a 302 atm and cant wait to see the info.
Would love to see some testing of the Anderson cams
The Summit cam would likely show a larger PERCENTAGE increase in power under the curve on an engine running stock E7 heads. Factory iron heads are particularly weak in exhaust port flow, hence the uncommonly large 11 degrees additional exhaust valve duration in this cam. The Blueprint heads are better balanced between intake and exhaust port flow, so they would likely be optimized with a cam having less duration split between intake and exhaust. Performance of various cams is less about "better or worse" than how well a particular grind matches and optimizes a particular, overall combination. The Summit cam leans towards a stock motor or one with no better than GT40 type add-ons.
Wow stock cam 302 that thing could break some hearts
Yes I'd like to see you test these cams and whatever you choose on a 5.0 fuel injected, especially a 95 Cobra engine. I bought one last summer with pretty high mileage and wondering which way to go and or how much money 💰 do I need to spend 🙃. Thanks for the video 📹 🙃
The two improvements i got with the 303 plus was a bit stronger from 4-6k (maybe) but where it shined for me was idle and low speed drivability. Ive got a 306 with x2 heads and pro flo 4 efi and the new plus cam plays much nicer with that particular efi system.
Was the gas mileage worse? I’m looking at letter cams for my daily driver 3.31 gears thinking of b cam or e cam it’s a 5 speed
Currently stock cam
@@keithmartin6406 I love my 5spd., with the E 303 cam, its responsive= great tq., and Awesome sound! I dont think my gas mileage was effected much, as i have 2- 1994 (302) Efi Mustang Gt's, 1- 5spd.(with 3.73's, and E cam), and 1-Aode( with 4.10's, and stock H.O. cam). In my opinion= the perfect gearing for each type of trans., with mild bolt on's. But there was a bigger diff. In Mpg loss in Aode= about -4 Mpg on the Hwy. going from the stock 3.2? gears to the 4.10's, with stock H.O. cam vs the 5spd. with 3.73's, & E cam, = Lost about -2 Mpg on the Hwy., and that's with gear's, and cam change! My opinion the -2 Mpg lost is probably all from the gear change, as the E cam, made my engine more eff.!
I would like to see a test between the E-303, and the B-303 in a mild combination. Everyone always went for the E cam back in the day, but looking at the specs, especially on a combination with stock E7 or GT40 iron heads, I always went for the B cam, thinking that the added duration would be more beneficial than more lift, especially when using heads that have peak flow numbers below .500” lift anyway. What are your thoughts on this?
Agreed
Given that the much bigger cam in this video does almost nothing compared to the e303...I would bet the difference is splitting hairs.
It's apparent that the heads are the single greatest investment in your engine for the biggest gain. Yeah, they're probably 1500 bucks, but for an extra 100+ hp, that's a good deal.
bigger cam should add power up top and lose power down low
Yes, but when one cam has slightly more duration and slightly less lift, which is the “bigger” cam?
More info on the Percy's Adjustable jets please. Thanks, love the sbf content!
Sum probably should have left the e303+ LSA at 110.
I really appreciate all the videos you make. It answers many questions. I’d like more info on some boss 302 engines. I’m really wanting to clone one.
The Summit cam is a cheap way to do it. I'd rather have a dual pattern cam with equivalent .498 lift and 220-230 on the exhaust. That will already reduce exhaust valvetrain life. The Summit is a sharper cam lobe as well with 268/278 total vs 282/282. That higher lift and more total valvetrain engagement significantly reduces valvetrain life for sure. Summit tried to mitigate it with .540 lift on the exh, .010 less. But overall it's not worth it for for 12hp up top or a 0.3% gain, a power loss down low, and more valvetrain wear. Bad call and why pure dyno and pure peak results should not be interpreted. You'd be better off racing the smoother cam every time, 12hp is not worth anything. Better than for the Ford E303, just split the profile and hold the exhaust open at .498 lift would net probably 10hp and cost barely anything an slight exh valvetrain engagement. Read the mechanics people, not the metrics.
Hey Richard if you do the efi manifold comparison could you throw the truck long runner in there for giggles
I don't have one-but I should get one
I just found out about these summit cams. At almost $100 less than the ford cams, they’re a bargain too
Yes the cost of these plus Cams Make them look quite desirable. they are100 cheaper than the ford cam. I wonder haw the drivability is compared to the E303. in a Auto car.
Would love to see some oldsmobile engines tested
Well now,This tells me the summit cam is not the choice for a street daily driver/hot rod. You lose bottom end and only gain a small hand full if you run the guts out of your stock 5.0. This would have been better if you did it on a bone stock 5.0. 90% of the guys that buy an E cam put it in a bone stock 5.0 mustang just to make it sound good at idle. The summit cam specks also seem like they would have less valve to piston clearance.
I may be old, but those cars seemed to run good with an e cam and gt40s.
yes
I'm a chevy guy but there's absolutely nothing sounds as good as a cammed small block Ford
Pontiac.
I have always thought sbc sounded like a truck motor, even 35 years ago lol. I know that isn't an objective term but that's what my mind always said when I was a teen.
If the LSA wasnt so huge on either cam they would make tons more torque thus more horsepower. Someday cam companies will stop ripping us off and build shelf cams correctly
Great video Richard as always, I was wondering if you can test the 5.0L
Baby Crower camshaft
Thanks
Not a fair comparison for the 303 Plus series as they are ment for stock irons. The extra exhaust duration was ment to offset the poor exhaust flow within the stock heads. Hence the price...it would be rather silly to put a $500 cam on stock heads that can't support the flow. Equally as silly as buying good heads then cheaping out on the cam..
cams are not meant for specific heads-if they add power with stock heads, they add even more power with after market heads (regardless of intake to exhaust flow relationship-I have tested it)
Can't wait for the fi to carb comparison, me running gt40p stuff makes me really curious about it
the GT40 will be down compared to the dual plane
@@richardholdener1727 everywhere or do you think it will be a low end top end trade off?
great video,man!
I'm waiting to see the f303 vs F303 plus. I have 2 mustangs and already have a ford racing f303 in one and have been on the fence about what to buy for the second one.
coming
please teste the b+ and the f+ compared to the originals
Only thing that makes my scratch my head is what makes this summit cam use the e303 designation at all? There is a same 220° on the intake but nothing else, it seems vastly different, that would that make every sbf cam with an advertised 220° duration a version of an E303 cam? that I can see... As far as I can see is it's just a different summit sbf cam. Maybe some similar timing events? Just seems summit is tossing a letter cam name onto it for marketing reasons to make it jump out and not get lost in a sea of zillions of sbf cams... To call it a particular letter cam id feel the duration would have to be the same as the original but to call it a letter + I think everything should the same with just one feature increased I'd get it like all the same with a slightly different LSA or all the same with more lift or dual pattern with the same exact intake specs but slightly different exhaust or vice versa... Just my opinion, I'm not saying it's a bad cam or it's not better it wouldn't be hard to out perform those old school old camshaft designs I just think the labeling it a version of a letter cam thing is just a marketing. Maybe theres something I'm not seeing?
Would be interesting in a clevor setup
So basically if you have the old E . Don't change it for the new E . Just add 1.70 or 1.72 rockers .
If you don't have any cam at all or the B cam . But the E plus .
Got ya
May 2024.
Ive searched and ive never found the video of the other letter cams... Unless theyre somewhere in the heads tests.
not yet
Perfect video was curious what was the difference..
Hi Richard great job on the Fords how about doing a 6.2 L truck motor
Yes, more sbf
I was Chevy dude growing up got new in 88 a 1987 IROC Z28 5 5speed car with tune port injection 305 cubic only auto trans car had 350 cubic my cuz got Mustang GT 5speed car and beat on it every day bang bang red line dump clutch and jump off line , my Chevy treated it like a Princess that engine was great idle 45lbs oil pressure but trans busted three times busted rear end two times my cuz mustang GT drove it like a fool for years n over hundred thousand miles my Chevy was busted lots so had low miles got Me a Mustang GT 5speed car new in 02 drove daily now 20years and 400000.0miles N replaced nothing but plastic intake due to heater hose fitting cracking n leaking
Summit should have left the lsa at 110. And the cobra and stock efi intake don't allow alot of power after 5800.
On the e303+
Both 303 tested still seem like they have lazier ramp rates compared to even a OE grind.