• Mustang Forums
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 1994 - 1995 Specific Tech

Aftermarket CAM closest to stock 94/95?

  • Thread starter Thread starter doctorj357
  • Start date Start date Feb 5, 2020

doctorj357

5 Year Member
Aug 7, 2018
98
22
18
Michigan
Feb 5, 2020
#1
  • Feb 5, 2020
  • #1
Without going into a lot of detail why, I am returning my 95 GTS with 55k miles, back to mostly stock. I will be running the stock ECU, MAF, 19lb injectors (ev6), ported factory upper/lower intake, rebuilt E7 heads ported with 3deg valve grind and 1.6 rockers. My end game is to be in the 225-240hp range. Only component I can't find is a new cam closest to stock profile. Does anyone have a recommendations what off-shelf cam is closest to the factory specs for 94/95 5.0? I don't want to buy used from a junk yard and can't find NOS for 95/95 cars.
 

08GT500

5 Year Member
Jul 12, 2018
918
140
63
Massachusetts
Feb 5, 2020
#2
  • Feb 5, 2020
  • #2
Hi,
Regarding the “closest to stock” Cam parameters for your 1995 Mustang GTS, the below IS the stock. I use Sealed Power for all OE reversion Cam’s.
#(CS760) CAM is $279.79 at Rock Auto..$327.99 at Summit- same part; Sealed Power.(Rock Auto & Summit link below).
Key in your info at Rock Auto.
Cam KIT (KCT760) @ Rock Auto 480$: Includes #CS760 H.R.Cam/H.R.Lifters/Timing set. Unsure about included Gaskets.
IF you need Gaskets ($90 Ford Master Kit) at Jeg’s. Gaskets pricey @ Summit(!). (link below).
Lucas semi Synthetic Ass’y lube (#10153-1), or Clevite’s (#2800-B2), or Comp’s.

https://www.rockauto.com/en/catalog/

(Single pattern H.Roller)
Stock lift: 0.445 (I & E)
Lobe lift :0.278 (I & E)
Stock R.Ratio: 1.6
0.278 • 1.6 = 0.444.8 (Valve lift).
Lobe separation was: 115
Sealed Power CS760
  • CS760
Cam TypeHROL
Intake Lift0.278
Exhaust Lift.278
Intake Duration210
ExhaustDuration.210
(CAM)



https://www.summitracing.com/parts/slp-cs-760/
FORD PERFORMANCE GASKETS: (90$)
https://www.cjponyparts.com/ford-racing-engine-gasket-hi-performance-set-289-302-351w-1965-1995/p/M6003A50/
Ok, think that cover’s it.
Good luck!
-John
 
Last edited: Feb 5, 2020
Reactions: RaggedGT

revhead347

Apparently my ex-husband made that mistake.
20+ Year Stangneter
Jun 14, 2004
9,302
1,645
214
Acworth, GA
Feb 5, 2020
#3
  • Feb 5, 2020
  • #3
I have a 94' Cobra cam and heads here if you are interested. They are used, but worked fine when removed. Should be so close to stock no one will ever know the difference. Shoot me a PM if you are interested.

Kurt
 

VibrantRedGT

"STANGNET'S PENGUIN SMACKER"
15 Year Member
Nov 29, 1999
14,679
424
154
Boca Raton, Florida
Feb 10, 2020
#4
  • Feb 10, 2020
  • #4
revhead347 said:
I have a 94' Cobra cam and heads here if you are interested. They are used, but worked fine when removed. Should be so close to stock no one will ever know the difference. Shoot me a PM if you are interested.

Kurt
Click to expand...


Dive on this, GT40 Heads are much better than ported or tricked E7's. Maybe have the GT40's ported.

I have a stock cam for sale if there is something wrong with yours (65,000 miles).

Actually I'd upgrade the cam if you're going through the process of changing it anyway. You get a split duration cam with a high LSA of 113+ and you'll have zero idle issues. Crower 15511 (baby cam) comes to mind. Increase the lift if you run 1.7 rockers.

Crower 15511, Valve Lift Intake w/1.6 rockers-.468, Valve Lift Exhaust w/1.6 rockers-.486, Duration Intake (at .050)-218, Duration Exhaust (at .050)-224, Lobe Center-114, Emission Legal-Yes
 

revhead347

Apparently my ex-husband made that mistake.
20+ Year Stangneter
Jun 14, 2004
9,302
1,645
214
Acworth, GA
Feb 10, 2020
#5
  • Feb 10, 2020
  • #5
VibrantRedGT said:
Dive on this, GT40 Heads are much better than ported or tricked E7's. Maybe have the GT40's ported.

I have a stock cam for sale if there is something wrong with yours (65,000 miles).

Actually I'd upgrade the cam if you're going through the process of changing it anyway. You get a split duration cam with a high LSA of 113+ and you'll have zero idle issues. Crower 15511 (baby cam) comes to mind. Increase the lift if you run 1.7 rockers.

Crower 15511, Valve Lift Intake w/1.6 rockers-.468, Valve Lift Exhaust w/1.6 rockers-.486, Duration Intake (at .050)-218, Duration Exhaust (at .050)-224, Lobe Center-114, Emission Legal-Yes
Click to expand...

Just to be clear these are stock GT40 heads from a Cobra, not the more desirable GT40Ps from an Explorer.

Kurt
 

VibrantRedGT

"STANGNET'S PENGUIN SMACKER"
15 Year Member
Nov 29, 1999
14,679
424
154
Boca Raton, Florida
Feb 10, 2020
#6
  • Feb 10, 2020
  • #6
revhead347 said:
Just to be clear these are stock GT40 heads from a Cobra, not the more desirable GT40Ps from an Explorer.

Kurt
Click to expand...

The P's are more desirable? Had them, sold them, wasn't a fan.
 

General karthief

wonder how much it would cost to ship you a pair
20+ Year Stangneter
Aug 25, 2016
27,958
10,600
203
polk county florida
Feb 10, 2020
#7
  • Feb 10, 2020
  • #7
The P's are more desirable cept for the spark plug interference with long tube headers, LT's for them are no longer mass produced.I
I like my LTs
 

revhead347

Apparently my ex-husband made that mistake.
20+ Year Stangneter
Jun 14, 2004
9,302
1,645
214
Acworth, GA
Feb 11, 2020
#8
  • Feb 11, 2020
  • #8
VibrantRedGT said:
The P's are more desirable? Had them, sold them, wasn't a fan.
Click to expand...

Well, they are easier to make power with I guess. I've never run them.

Kurt
 

Mustang5L5

That is…until I whipped out my Bissell
Mod Dude
Feb 18, 2001
43,265
17,952
224
Massachusetts
Feb 12, 2020
#9
  • Feb 12, 2020
  • #9
P’s will make more power but fitting headers is the pita. Once Ford Racing discontinued its P shorty header, a lot of guys lost interest in them.

The standard GT40s fit better, even in non-mustang applications. So the demand is still high.

If you gave me the choice between GT40 and GT40Ps I would pick the non-P....and this cam

FTI "GT40-KR1" Hydraulic Roller Camshaft Kit

FTI "GT40-KR1" Hydraulic Roller Camshaft Kit
www.flowtechinduction.com


If the OP wants a stock cam, I’d at least try and grab an 85-88 camshaft. It’s a tiny bit more aggressive, however in a post on a different forum, Ed Curtis did suggest that when checking profiles on stock cams, they are all over the place and rarely what the spec sheet claims. Probably a good reason why some stock mustangs run poorly and some run like a raped ape stock
 

revhead347

Apparently my ex-husband made that mistake.
20+ Year Stangneter
Jun 14, 2004
9,302
1,645
214
Acworth, GA
Feb 12, 2020
#10
  • Feb 12, 2020
  • #10
Mustang5L5 said:
P’s will make more power but fitting headers is the pita. Once Ford Racing discontinued its P shorty header, a lot of guys lost interest in them.

The standard GT40s fit better, even in non-mustang applications. So the demand is still high.

If you gave me the choice between GT40 and GT40Ps I would pick the non-P....and this cam

FTI "GT40-KR1" Hydraulic Roller Camshaft Kit

FTI "GT40-KR1" Hydraulic Roller Camshaft Kit
www.flowtechinduction.com


If the OP wants a stock cam, I’d at least try and grab an 85-88 camshaft. It’s a tiny bit more aggressive, however in a post on a different forum, Ed Curtis did suggest that when checking profiles on stock cams, they are all over the place and rarely what the spec sheet claims. Probably a good reason why some stock mustangs run poorly and some run like a raped ape stock
Click to expand...

I need to keep my distance with Ed Curtis, but $849 is a lot for a cam. That's like aluminum head money. Plus, if this is about returning to stock, the last thing you want is a cam with 108 degree lobe seperation.

Kurt
 

Mustang5L5

That is…until I whipped out my Bissell
Mod Dude
Feb 18, 2001
43,265
17,952
224
Massachusetts
Feb 12, 2020
#11
  • Feb 12, 2020
  • #11
I swear that cam was cheaper before.

Edit: looks like what I posted was a kit with springs and pushrods. The cam alone is $350 which is custom grind ballpark. I could have sworn it was a bit cheaper than that still
 

revhead347

Apparently my ex-husband made that mistake.
20+ Year Stangneter
Jun 14, 2004
9,302
1,645
214
Acworth, GA
Feb 12, 2020
#12
  • Feb 12, 2020
  • #12
Mustang5L5 said:
I swear that cam was cheaper before.

Edit: looks like what I posted was a kit with springs and pushrods. The cam alone is $350 which is custom grind ballpark. I could have sworn it was a bit cheaper than that still
Click to expand...

Much more reasonable. 108 degree lobe seperation though. Sounds like a trophy stock cam or something.

Kurt
 

02 281 GT

Agreed...My wife has great Boobs
15 Year Member
Feb 3, 2009
3,208
1,972
194
Cabot, AR
Feb 12, 2020
#13
  • Feb 12, 2020
  • #13
The stock cam in the Cobra is just slightly more aggressive (a bit on par with the Crower 15511 mentioned earlier). I’ve had people ask me if my ‘95 Cobra has an aftermarket cam.
 

revhead347

Apparently my ex-husband made that mistake.
20+ Year Stangneter
Jun 14, 2004
9,302
1,645
214
Acworth, GA
Feb 12, 2020
#14
  • Feb 12, 2020
  • #14
Cobra cam, taking up space in the shop. Going cheap. Make it worth the effort of shipping, and it's yours. About to chuck these GT40s in the scrap metal pile.

Kurt
 

ngiotta

Member
Jan 29, 2019
19
7
13
California
Mar 15, 2020
#15
  • Mar 15, 2020
  • #15
I'm running a TFS Stage 1 Cam. It's idles quite well and has just a tiny bit more oomph than stock.
 

beyondEOD

Active Member
Nov 23, 2019
106
12
28
Indiana
Mar 21, 2020
#16
  • Mar 21, 2020
  • #16
Elgin E-836-S, 210/211 stock HO replacement cam.

Melling SYB-51, 210/211 stock HO replacement cam.

Comp XE258, 206/212 will need springs to control the lobes.

Some options
 

doctorj357

5 Year Member
Aug 7, 2018
98
22
18
Michigan
Mar 30, 2020
#17
  • Mar 30, 2020
  • #17
Ended up getting the Melling SYB-51 for $211 on rockauto. Price was what attracted me initially, but its Michigan based (as am I) was a no brainer. Putting the cam in sometime in April.
 
Reactions: beyondEOD
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

SN95 Desktop 363 Engine Combination - Looking for input
  • WhiteCobra95
  • Sep 8, 2025
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
11
Views
1K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Oct 6, 2025
Habu135
Which aftermarket cam is closest to stock drive-ability?
  • doctorj357
  • Oct 22, 2019
  • 1994 - 1995 Specific Tech
Replies
8
Views
2K
1994 - 1995 Specific Tech Oct 23, 2019
jozsefsz
T
SN95 Sn95 351w Swap To 408 Stroker
  • tyboudreau
  • Oct 22, 2017
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
19
Views
10K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Nov 6, 2017
revhead347
R
Engine 1992 Mustang Hesitation/Cutting-Out
  • RTW0223
  • May 2, 2018
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech
  • 2
Replies
21
Views
14K
Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech May 26, 2025
Noobz347
Install '87-'95 Heads, Cam, Intake Install
  • 5spd GT
  • Sep 25, 2013
  • Resource Discussion Forum
Replies
3
Views
11K
Resource Discussion Forum Sep 26, 2013
Gearbanger 101
Share:
Bluesky Email Share Link
  • Mustang Forums
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 1994 - 1995 Specific Tech
Menu
Log in

Register

  • Forums
  • What's new
  • Media
  • Resources
  • Contact
  • Sponsor
X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?

X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?