Or an 097 solid cam--we put many in 283's in the early 60's-ran great with a single 4 bbl and sounded good too. If driven civilized valve adjustment is no issue My 57 Fuely with that cam very seldom needed lash adjustment and they sound SO good! My 62 Corvette same cam in a stock 340HP 327-ran strong and sounded great also.
Fireman trying to rescue you: "Dearest kindly sir. I regret to inform you that, at this time, your domicile is being consumed by combustion such that your health and well-being may be compromised. I beseech you to exit the premises with a heightened sense of urgency."
Although, I do agree with Gimpy, maybe the softer, gentler HAMB of the new millenium is in order. I would like to apologize for my tongue in cheek comments. Please accept my sincerest apologies to all that are offended previously and in the future. Eric is right, the OP asked about running a .580" lift on a bone stock 283 with 1000 cfms of carburetion. I will rephrase my answer. Yes, that is a splendid idea. I hope that you will have many trouble free miles from this combination.
Butch isn't it over lap that is why you need valve reliefs when the piston is not a the top lift isn't a big deal except to the valve train.
Ahh yes, camshaft questions always seem to bring out the best in everyone. Now excuse me while I go install that .780 lift cam in my stock 265. Sent from my iPad using The H.A.M.B. mobile app
Well, FlyinBryan48 ran dual Edelbrock 500's on the 283 in his 34 and I don't recall him complaining about the performance. In fact he said it ran damn good. Videos are short, but sounds good. Here's proof of a man completely miserable about the way his poor 283 w/ dual quads is running. Poor guy, I almost feel sorry for him..........NOT!
But , but. But , but , that can't work !! All the engineers , rules formulas , math , GM papers , guys who think they're intellectually superior say it can't work , ever !
I wonder how many hours he had in them tuning with a wideband to get them somewhat acceptable idlewise, throttle response, flat spots, etc.....
I don't usually jump in on a thread after it gets degraded into a bit of a pissing contest. But the OP is admittedly new to this, so this is for him. The key ingredient to any successful engine built is a set of parts that will allow the intended result to work as the intended outcome. When you start to focus on a single component you start to loose your way. That's why some guys can run a 6x2 with all carbs working, or others run a blower motor that does not belch black smoke, and others can not. A 283 can, and obviously has been, run with 2 fours in a street application. The successful ones typically have smallish carbs without mechanical secondaries, heads with smallish ports, and a relatively mild cam. It's all about intake air velocity so the carbs get a strong enough signal to correctly meter.
Lol, I don't think he used a wideband O2 meter at all, I suspect it was just a standard tuning by ear with the parts that came on the carbs stock. But you could always ask him. I don't see him around here too much these days, but shoot him a pm, see if he answers. He's a nice enough guy. He shared the entire build process of that car, you could go through the thread and see what he posted about it. If if was a big deal I'm sure he would've included something about it. I don't recall that he did.
There are a lot of opinions in this thread. Here is my take on it. The OP's question was, is .580 the max valve lift for a stock 283. Probably, but without knowing the exact specs of the cam it is impossible to determine definitively. Can it be done? Sure, a 65 Chevelle with a 220 horse 283 fit a number of different NHRA super stock classes in the 70's and 80's and were very competitive. Rules said stock compression and stock carb, headers, any cam and any intake allowed. These were 11 second drag cars so it can work. That said, is it a good combination for someone who maybe lacks tuning ability or just wants a car to sound good, NO,NO,NO. I personally have a Crower solid flat tappet .525/.543 cam in a flat top piston 283. I make numerous 70 mile round trips for local cruise nites, and I would never take it on a cross country trip, but I have other cars for that.
YES. Piston is far down the bore when either valve is at full lift. Duration is the big factor that effects valve to piston clearance, on the overlap when both valves are open and the piston is near TDC pushing exhaust out and getting ready to draw fresh mixture in. Lobe centerline and lobe separation angle also play a big part in clearance. Peak valve lift has about nothing to do with it. Good to see a few guys here aren't just drinking the Kool-Aid. The OP, Edward E. Scheib is probably scared off of ever asking another question. HAMB Mafia strikes again
You guys need to realize that even when the folks on the HAMB disagree, it's all in fun. Don't take it personally, it's just junk cars we are talking about. Most of the time I am just poking at folks, trying to invoke a response. I applaud everyone that takes the time to type out their responses. There is a lot of collective knowledge on this board. I'm sure all of you will be helping me to lay out the dual quad setup on my 390 Cadillac, or at least I hope so. And since I am a giver.........I give you this article to read. It's a decent article. https://www.hotrod.com/articles/5-tips-dual-quad-carburetion-success/
How long can you be a member and still be considered a newbie to get a trophy? Asking for a friend... I have your number in case I need a hug or something... And, on a serious note, the power pack heads I have at the machine shop were set up with a set of springs for likely a mid- .600"ish cam lift. But, that is to go with way too much porting and the 2.05" & 1.60" valves...oh, and they were on a 350, so none of this helps much.
It seems that occasionally, folks here get tied up in what is possible on a race car, versus driveability on a street car. The OP stated no interest in track records, that he wants a high lift cam, and he has a Powerglide. My answer that two 500's are too much for THIS 283 are predicated on that data. Not saying it won't work, but it may not work as well as the OP might like it to work. As to the question about maximum lift on a 283, not my field, I don't know; but I have played with a few carburetors Jon.
I don't believe there were 02 sensors to tune multi carb engines prior to 1965 , just mechanical expertise/ hotrodder knowledge !
Yup. I usually suggest a hydraulic cam only because mist of the people I am suggesting to are not mechanics.
My 1956 ford with 292 ran great when I installed the factory 2x4 intake. I also put a Mallory dual point distributor on it. It started and ran very well. If ford can do it I'm sure chevy can too.
Funny how we all get on guys for not using "traditional" stuff on their builds. Whats more traditional than multiple carbs.. even if they didnt run to perfection? Im sure they didnt run any better back then than they do now but it was part of owning a hot rod. If you want your 283 to run great, get good mileage and not have to do much tuning just stick with the stock 2 barrel carb, or a small 4 bbl. But who wants to open the hood to show his buddies that?
If the technology is there to get an engine to run as efficient and make the most power with minimal trial and error I'll use it on every engine I have. Best $130 tuning aid you can get. You can bet if they were available in 1965 Bill Jenkins, Dyno Don and all the rest would have used them.
Nonsense. Getting only a fraction of the potential performance out of an engine, while wasting as much fuel in the process is traditional.
It's funny. Contrary to what some believe, not everybody in past past was good at things. Just like today. Except, today, we have the opportunity to learn from those who were good as well as those who are good now.
The Jalopy Journal
