• Mustang Forums
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech

Cam question

  • Thread starter Thread starter ExplodingGopher
  • Start date Start date Jun 16, 2004

ExplodingGopher

New Member
Jun 11, 2004
517
0
0
The mistake on the lake (Ohio)
Jun 16, 2004
#1
  • Jun 16, 2004
  • #1
Hi guys im new to the forum. Ok my question is can I use an F303 ford racing cam with an AOD transmission? I currently have an E303 cam but want a rougher idle out of my stang and a better mid to top power band. What kind of mods do I have to do to my cylinder heads or any other parts if any for the new cam cause the difference in lift isn't that much. My car is a '91 stang with a built 5.0 naturally aspirated for now with an AOD w/shift kit. Thanks.

Car has on it :

Under hood:

-Origional block acid bathed
-Low compression pistons for supercharging later on
-Reworked cylinderheads
-E303 cam
-Dynomax headers
-Off road H pipe
-Flowmaster no chambers dumped
-3.55 gears
-AOD w/shift kit
-no A/C
-No smog pump
-Electric fan
-75 mm Mass air meter

Inside:

-Switch box for start, ignition, fuel, fan and acc. cause its cool to start the car w/o keys , o and a kill switch.
 

Michael Yount

Mustang Master
Apr 10, 2002
9,039
6
79
Charlotte, NC
Jun 16, 2004
#2
  • Jun 16, 2004
  • #2
With the E or the F, you'd probably be much happier with the way the car drives if you added a higher rpm stall converter to that AOD. Are you running the stock intake?
 

ExplodingGopher

New Member
Jun 11, 2004
517
0
0
The mistake on the lake (Ohio)
Jun 16, 2004
#3
  • Jun 16, 2004
  • #3
ya, new stock intake though, everything on the engine is aftermarket besides the intake, block and pistons. I was thinking about either getting a stall convertor like a B&M Holeshot 2400 or just getting a T5 tranny soon. Do i need to make any adjustments to my cylinder heads for the F303 though?
 

QDRHRSE

New Member
Dec 31, 2002
1,590
0
0
Palmdale, CA
Jun 16, 2004
#4
  • Jun 16, 2004
  • #4
MY is right. Your car would be faster with the stock cam the way you are currently set up. Without a bigger stall and an intake you are wasting your time and money. The E-Cam, a good cam btw, is hurting you down low but will work ok with the stock intake. The F-Cam will make your car worthless- no bottom end and useless peaky top end....especially with an AOD and 3.55's. If you want a little more lope in your idle maybe you should try a set 1.7 roller rockers and perhaps turning down the idle a bit. Just remember "bigger ain't always better"!
 

ExplodingGopher

New Member
Jun 11, 2004
517
0
0
The mistake on the lake (Ohio)
Jun 17, 2004
#5
  • Jun 17, 2004
  • #5
but if i got the holeshot 2400 and a new intake like a gt40 would it work ok with an f cam? This car will be supercharged eventually with a Kenne Bell blower, but im on a tight budget right now. I got pulled over today for my rear window tint. Its 15%. In ohio the state law says the rear window can be any tint but the city ordnance says other like 50%. I went to talk to the supervising officer about my BS ticket and he belittled me and made me feel like an *******. Man i hate cops. FTP. Anyways.....
 

Michael Yount

Mustang Master
Apr 10, 2002
9,039
6
79
Charlotte, NC
Jun 17, 2004
#6
  • Jun 17, 2004
  • #6
If you're gonna supercharge, make your cam selection with that in mind. The stock cam is very effective with superchargers. Your biggest single gain right now will come from replacing your intake, not your cam. That's what I'd focus on if I were you.
 

ExplodingGopher

New Member
Jun 11, 2004
517
0
0
The mistake on the lake (Ohio)
Jun 19, 2004
#7
  • Jun 19, 2004
  • #7
Thanks for the help guys and one more question. I want to get a gear drive timing set but it says will not work with computer controlled vehicles with knock sensors, does this mean i can't use one ?
 

2bad4z28

New Member
Dec 4, 2002
25
0
0
Eastern NC
Jun 19, 2004
#8
  • Jun 19, 2004
  • #8
If you have an 87'-93' I don't think you have a knock sensor... but I'm not really sure. IMO gear drives are annoying anyway, they drown out otherwise cool exhaust noise.
 

dcrahn

Founding Member
May 24, 2002
224
0
0
Springfield, GA
Jun 19, 2004
#9
  • Jun 19, 2004
  • #9
Gears drives offer more accurate timing but they will transmit crankshaft harmonics through the valvetrain and can cause all kinds of problems.
 

drgn5.0

Founding Member
Mar 13, 2001
603
0
0
Jun 19, 2004
#10
  • Jun 19, 2004
  • #10
the e cam is good with forced induction. leave it in there.
 

ExplodingGopher

New Member
Jun 11, 2004
517
0
0
The mistake on the lake (Ohio)
Jun 20, 2004
#11
  • Jun 20, 2004
  • #11
Is there any other cam like a comp cam or other manufacturer that will provide a rough idle but still have good low end power with good mid, also maybe suggest cams that any of you would recommend from using or hearing about? And the E cam is goin bye bye no matter what, im lookin for a rough idle.

Sorry if i make no sense but i just love those cars with lopey idles and the f cam sounded awesome on JadeFalcon's vid. I have the same exact exhaust minus the spintech pro streets which might be ordered soon.

So im ordering an f cam if you guys dont know any other cams with good all around power bands with lopey idles, B&M torque master 2400 from summit, and possibly a gear driven timing set if i figure out if my car doesn't have a knock sensor.

And a correction to my gear ratio in the back, I looked at another post about testing it and found out they are 3.73s not 3.55s. A hair under 3 and 3/4 turns of the driveshaft per one rotation of the tire.

No matter what though thanks for all your suggestions and help.
 

ExplodingGopher

New Member
Jun 11, 2004
517
0
0
The mistake on the lake (Ohio)
Jun 20, 2004
#12
  • Jun 20, 2004
  • #12
hey what about the z303, b303 and x303 cams. What are your opinions on them


O and someone please let me know if a '91 mustang has a knock sensor or not. And if so, is it smart/safe to unplug for the gear timing set and how. thanks
 
N

Nottoofast50

Founding Member
Dec 9, 2000
386
0
0
Cali
Jun 20, 2004
#13
  • Jun 20, 2004
  • #13
I was under the impression that the B cam had more lope to it than the E... could be wrong though... have you thought about a trick flow stage 1?

I'm installing gt40p's and an e cam right now and was hoping for a meaner sound but doesn't sound like i'm gonna get it.
 

dcrahn

Founding Member
May 24, 2002
224
0
0
Springfield, GA
Jun 20, 2004
#14
  • Jun 20, 2004
  • #14
Crane Cam 2031 (Duration 302/311 - Lift .513/.529 with 1.7 rockers)
 

Michael Yount

Mustang Master
Apr 10, 2002
9,039
6
79
Charlotte, NC
Jun 20, 2004
#15
  • Jun 20, 2004
  • #15
gopher - your desires for lopey idle AND strong bottom end out of 302 cubes are in conflict with each other. Generally speaking, the rougher/lopier the idle, the weaker the bottom end, the stronger the top end. But even that description doesn't quite capture the complexity of how the cam needs to work with the other components --- it's all about the match of how the bits work together. The F cam is designed to work with aftermarket intake, heads, gears, exhaust, etc. With your stock heads, stock intake and automatic - the car will likely perform worse than it does now. If there's any power gain up top, it will likely occur at an rpm that you can't reach because your stock valve springs will float before you can get there - the stock heads/springs weren't designed with that cam in mind. Throw the stock auto into the picture - and you'll likely have the worst of all worlds - a rough idle from a car that probably runs worse than it did before the cam swap.

If strong bottom end is what you're after - it's very hard to beat the stock cam for that - given your other components.
 
9

90Notch

Founding Member
Jan 31, 2002
1,046
0
0
Westwood, MA & yes it's killing me that I'm no
Jun 20, 2004
#16
  • Jun 20, 2004
  • #16
"your desires for lopey idle AND strong bottom end out of 302 cubes are in conflict with each other"

Advance the E303 4 degrees so it's on a 106ICL instead of the 110ICL and you should see gain in torque and idle will get a little rougher.
 

ExplodingGopher

New Member
Jun 11, 2004
517
0
0
The mistake on the lake (Ohio)
Jun 21, 2004
#17
  • Jun 21, 2004
  • #17
Ok now im thinking maybe a B303 cam for the low end power with some top as well as a rough idle and the lift isn't as much as an f cam, dont forget im gettin at least a 2400 stall to go with this. Anyone have a b303? is it sort of lopey with decent low to mid ? maybe....just asking.. Just with the current set up i have 243h at rear wheels and 303h on engine that was when i first pulled it out the used car lot.

F cam:

Advertised duration: 288 intake/288 exhaust Duration @ .050 in. cam lift: 226 intake/226 exhaust
Gross valve lift: .512 intake/.512 exhaust
Lobe separation: 109 degrees intake/119 degrees exhaust
Peak horsepower rpm: 6,000
Peak torque rpm: 2,800
Fair idle

B cam:

Advertised duration: 284 intake/284 exhaust
Duration at .050 in. cam lift: 224 intake/224 exhaust
Gross valve lift: .480 in. intake/.480 in. exhaust
Lobe separation: 107 degrees intake/117 degrees exhaust
Peak horsepower rpm: 5,100
Peak torque rpm: 3,300
Provides fair idle quality with good low end torque.
 

ExplodingGopher

New Member
Jun 11, 2004
517
0
0
The mistake on the lake (Ohio)
Jun 21, 2004
#18
  • Jun 21, 2004
  • #18
dudes im probably goin to go with the b cam because it doesn't require as much rpms to make hp on the top end. from what i hear it has lopey idle, decent low end torque and good mid to top. Anyone know if any of the above is true? probably gonna upgrade to a 2800 - 3000 stall for it. thanks again.

One more thing, will the b cam present clearance problems in my stock heads? Any other things need to be done to my heads for the b cam to work. This is where i need input. I will be gettin a gt40 upper and lower soon also to solve the intake problem and maybe some twisted wedge heads in the future. But please let me know if there are clearance issues with my stock heads, rockers, etc. and the b303 cam. I just want to know if it will run and not damage the internals of my stock valvetrain. thanks.
 

Michael Yount

Mustang Master
Apr 10, 2002
9,039
6
79
Charlotte, NC
Jun 21, 2004
#19
  • Jun 21, 2004
  • #19
Anytime you change the cam so that the intake is opening earlier and the exhaust is closing later (most duration increases result in this) you need to measure your p to v clearance -- it's gonna be slightly different in every application, and even from cylinder to cylinder within an engine.

The data you've got on where peak power and torque will occur with those cams doesn't look correct to me. First of all, it will vary quite a bit depending on the set up it's used with. The same cam used with different heads, different compression ratios, different displacments will behave differently. Second, in a naturally aspirated application for 302-based motors, it's rare that you'll see more than a 1000 to 1300 rpm split between peak power rpm and peak torque rpm. Consequently, for the B cam for example - if peak power occurs in the 5200-5500 rpm range, peak torque is likely gonna occur in the 4000-4500 range. I believe the "peak torque" rpm you're showing is not where peak torque will occur, but rather the rpm level will the engine will 'wake up' and start producing reasonable torque.

Lastly - and it's been mentioned before, all the cams you're talking about are designed to be used with other significant mods to the engine - aftermarket or ported cylinder heads, different intakes, exhaust, better flowing maf's/throttle bodies. I don't know what "reworked cylinder heads" means in your sig, but with stock heads and stock valve springs - you're gonna have problems with the B, E or F in terms of premature valve float, and much less low rpm torque than the stock HO cam with those other stock components. As you shift the power band higher - and that's usually done with cams/heads/intake/exhaust that will flow at those higher rpms - the bottom gets softer. There's no magic way around that - only boost or more displacement can return the bottom end that goes away as you make more power at higher rpm. Most folks make up for the lack of bottom end by installing looser converters and even more gear than you have -- 4.10's are recommended for the AOD by most folks.

You keep asking for a combination of parts that will net you good bottom end, mid range and a strong top end - well, we all want that. But as a practical matter, it's very difficult to come by - unless you add boost or displacement. As you shift the power peak up, the bottom end is gonna get weaker unless you're VERY careful with your combo - and none of the cams you're proposing are gonna result in strong bottom, midrange and topend. If I were in your shoes, I wouldn't change the cam at all, until/unless you change out the other pieces needed to take advantage of a cam swap - heads (at least valve springs), the intake bits, the stall converter and possibly even more rear gear.

The E cam is considered the mildest of the 3 you're considering. It was designed by Crane and is identical to Crane's PowerMax 2040 cam. Here's what Crane recommends with the mildest of the cams you're considering:

GOOD MID-RANGE AND STRONG TOP-END POWER, REQUIRES MODIFIED MASS AIRFLOW, AFTERMARKET INTAKE, PERF. CYLINDER HEADS AND HEADERS, MUST USE 5-SPD AND 3.55 OR NUMERICALLY HIGHER REAR GEARS. REQUIRES CRANE SPRINGS AND RETAINERS. (50 STATE LEGAL 85-93, C.A.R.B. E.O. D-225-46) BASIC RPM 2400-6000
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

6
Hey all,I’m putting together a 302 for my 1968 Mustang and wanted to post the combo + some questions to make sure I’m not missing crucial
  • 68_Disgustang
  • Feb 22, 2026
  • 1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk-
Replies
4
Views
931
1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk- Jun 20, 2026
gray owl
G
B
Questions About T5 Manual
  • Blackout67
  • Apr 13, 2025
  • 1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk-
Replies
10
Views
618
1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk- Apr 22, 2025
89ripper
Engine 1990 LX 5.0L EFI Mustang Fuel Management Problems - HELP!
  • 5.0LXStanger
  • May 25, 2025
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech
  • 2 3
Replies
45
Views
2K
Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech Jul 11, 2025
5.0LXStanger
SOLD SOLD!!!! 1993 Notchback Roadracer For Sale. She's a beast!
  • Boydster
  • Apr 25, 2025
  • Fox Body Mustangs For Sale (1979-93)
Replies
0
Views
1K
Fox Body Mustangs For Sale (1979-93) Apr 25, 2025
Boydster
help me understand calibrated maf sensors and injectors
  • stackz
  • Sep 21, 2024
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 2
Replies
21
Views
3K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Feb 7, 2026
AeroCoupe
Share:
Bluesky Email Share Link
  • Mustang Forums
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang 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?