Jeep Strokers

Anyone here have any feedback on the Comp Cams 68-235-4 cam. I know most people here use the 231 or 232, and a few have mentioned the 68-239-4. The old Crane Cams 260 [204 @ .050] and the 272 [216 @ .050] used to be good cams, but i always thought that something that split the difference in them; 266 [210 @ .050] would be really good with the right gearing. Of coarse the Comp Cams have an aggressive ramp rate quite like the Lunati. In fact the 235 almost fits right between the two lower ended Lunati cams 208 & 213 @ .050. The 239 is more of a mid range cam with extended rpms, and I'm thinking the 235 would be a low to mid range leaning a little more towards mid range. Anyone have any real experience with the 68-235-4.

By the way, the 231 & 232 are 206 @ .050, the 235 is 210 @ .050, and the 239 is 218 @ .050.

I6FAN wrote:Anyone have any real experience with the 68-235-4.

Golen currently use that cam in their 4.6 strokers.

if you want more mid range and upper rpm power the 235 and 239 would both provide it. The 235 would take less of a low rpm hit compared to the 231 than the 239 would.

It depends on what you want. I like the Hesco RVOB over the 231 because it has a lot more upper RPM, but at the expense of low RPM torque. It would say its comparable to the 239. The Hesco also has a much quieter valve train over the Comp 231. I wouldn't mind the noise but in my case I have other noises to listen for. If I went with comp again I would probably go with the 239.

I6FAN wrote:
Anyone have any real experience with the 68-235-4.

Golen currently use that cam in their 4.6 strokers.

I've noticed that. IIRC I think I've seen another cam spec out there from them also. Maybe they customize?

if you want more mid range and upper rpm power the 235 and 239 would both provide it. The 235 would take less of a low rpm hit compared to the 231 than the 239 would.

That's exactly what I was thinking. Hopefully the 235 wouldn't be a "jack-of-all-trades-master-of-none". The only thing about the 239 is it would extend the usable rpms up into the "danger zone" of harmonics. I'm kind of really scared of that.

I6FAN wrote:The only thing about the 239 is it would extend the usable rpms up into the "danger zone" of harmonics. I'm kind of really scared of that.

Just don't hold it there. How are you changing the rev limiter?

Let me rephrase that. The 239 would have more to offer 5200 +, so if I was going to use it I'd want to benefit from its full operating range potential. But it might perform better than the 235 right before 5200, so what you lose after 5200 from rev limiter might not matter other than giving up the low end. Haven't built the stroker yet, but don't plan on going past the rev limit.

Advance the cam a bit, move the rpm range down a bit. 2 to 4 degrees max

U talking about advancing the cam at the timing chain?? Is it marked?

dirtri4er3 wrote:U talking about advancing the cam at the timing chain?? Is it marked?

You would need and adjustable timing set. Stock ones are non adjustable.

SilverXJ wrote:

dirtri4er3 wrote:U talking about advancing the cam at the timing chain?? Is it marked?

You would need and adjustable timing set. Stock ones are non adjustable.

A couple of quick thoughts.

First off Chris is correct that advancing the camshaft lowers the power band and consequently retarding the camshaft timing will move it in the other direction and raise the power band.

I sell and recommend both the JP Performance and Rollmaster timing sets. The JP Performance is slightly less expensive because of its split roller, but both timing sets utilize billet gears with the Crankshaft gear having multiple keyways allowing timing changes in 2° increments.
I also might mention that Comp and others Will already have anywhere between 2 and 4° ground into the cam. So before you make any changes be aware of that. And if you do make changes to the camshaft timing, degreeing it in would be highly recommended.

Comp has made some changes for me with the 231, 235, and 239. Instead of the 111° lobe separation angle which is standard for their catalog cam, they special make those camshafts for me on 113° instead.
The change gives me a slight improvement in manifold vacuum.

If you plan on doing a tune with Ryan or Chris Jensen you might consider leaning to a more of an aggressive cam choice because of their ability to recalibrate and make adjustments

Not to step on Russ`s toes but don't forget the Hesco/Clay Smith sticks.

224 @ .050 with 480 and 113*. Advertised 274/480. Typically pulls 14 inches at idle.

I run this in my personal stroker +4* and it works well. We also ran that stick in Mike Johnson`s 4488 EMC rig.

It pulls reasonably well down low then starts to come up on the cam around 2500 and continues to 5200 rev limiter.

A few thoughts.
My dyno runs were with an OBD1 system and the rev limiter was hitting before the cam ran out. Have yet to try it wit the OBD2 "Jensen" cal which has a better tune and no rev limiter. This iwas with a 12 cwt crank, steel BL`s and 37`s pushed with 513`s. The other (new) changes would be 538`s with Racelines and a RJ60 instead of the 8.8 of before. Be interesting to se how the numbers and curves compare.

Have a set of 1.7 adjustables from Russ but have not yet installed them. Thinking they ought to be most noticeable down low with perhaps a little more runout on top.

Mike Johnson was running an automatic and the cam was pushing the convertor in the slow stuff. Even with 5.86`s and 37`s. He could go into low range but at race time that takes too long.

Bottom line, if you have the gearing the 224/480 is worth a look.

I've been running this cam with stock valves and the impossible to find 268 springs. Is that right? It's been a while. Absolutely love it. Immediate power from idle. Plus it sounds mean as any 4 letter word with only a flow master 40 series.

akadeutsch wrote:I've been running this cam with stock valves and the impossible to find 268 springs. Is that right? It's been a while. Absolutely love it. Immediate power from idle. Plus it sounds mean as any 4 letter word with only a flow master 40 series.

"Assume" you are running the Comp Cams 68-235-4? Correct? Not the Hesco cam?

Correct, It seems to have power as high as I want to rev it. I cant ever remember hitting 5,000 rpms. I chose this cam for its high lift and long duration which lead to fairly immediate throttle response, even off idle, and a great exhaust note as well. I am still thinking about bigger valves. I wonder what this stick would do with the LS1 valves...?