I run 2004 trans also, best thing I ever did. 1 above stock cam is all you need if you want to stay close to stock. 212 is a good cam never ran it but looks good.
OK, I knew I saw this someplace and here it is. The factory NHRA 315HP cam specs. I am by far no expert, other than centerline, doesn't the TA 212 seem mundane compared to it??????
not at all TA 212 way more lift and way more duration at @.050 on a 110 LSA compare to 114.5 LSA on the stock cam. TA 212 way more power and with a rougher idle.
The TA 212-350 cam will give you more smiles per gallon than the stock cam or their replacement renditions (FM cs647 or Melling sbc-5, both are "GS 350 replacement" cams). Most people enjoy a nice lopey idle, which the 212 will give, and more mid range and top end (strongest between 3000-5500 RPM) compared to the stock cams. Stock cams are better for more low and mid range (strongest between 2000-5000 RPM). They'll rev past 5000, but power will trail off noticeably. Remember that the cam will only work as well as the rest of the engine will allow it (air flow), and since you have better heads than stock, the 212 cam will make better use of that than the stock cams would, although they'd still perform just fine too. I used to harp on the importance of camshaft/valvetrain longevity, but others here have assured me that these performance cams last a long time too, but is mostly dependent on maintenance and upkeep to ensure a nice long life. You'll need better oil, and keep it changed at regular intervals. Degreeing the cam will be important when using an aftermarket cam, which the OEM replacement cams do not require (plug n play with the stock timing gear/chain). Other than this, there's no reason not to put a happier bump stick in your engine. Others here have had great success with the Crower cams (level 2 and level 3) in stock style engines. All these aftermarket cams will put your intake valve closing point earlier, which boosts dynamic compression and subsequently boosts power. If you plan on keeping your compression the same, these cams are the easiest way to add power by this DCR increase virtue alone. You could bump static and use the stock cams, but that usually ends up being more trouble unless you're insistent on keeping it all stock, or if you intend on rebuilding and replacing the pistons anyway. Using v6 flat tops is the easiest and least expensive way to bump your static compression to around 10:1 or more with little to no machine work, and putting in the Melling cam with 75* IVC would put the DCR at a safe place with premium fuel, and would run better than it did in OEM form off the factory assembly line. It'll be plug n play, wouldn't require tighter than stock valve springs, and you could use an easy to find and less expensive motor oil with around 950-1050 ppm ZDDP or so and be fine. More than one way to skin a cat. (((EDIT: the 75* IVC for the Melling sbc-5 cam is rated at .006 off closing; the 78* IVC shown for "OEM" is rated at .004 off closing, which would probably be very similar if both were measured using the same distance)))
Also to bear in mind is that the OEM replacement cams use an asymmetric lobe (not to be confused with a 'split pattern' cam style, which all previously mentioned cams are) while the aftermarket cams mentioned are symmetric lobed. This doesn't seem to mean a whole lot when sizes are increased beyond a certain point, but matters more when camshafts are smaller in design, which aids in valvetrain stability, longevity, and allows an otherwise small cam to perform better. Just an FYI for anyone interested.
The 212 is ground with tighter specs and higher valve lift, so will make the engine breathe more aggressively while giving a tighter 'squeeze' on the air/fuel mixture. In short, it will provide more power than the OEM cams or their replacements, particularly when the heads have been given more room for breathing. More aggressive specs, tighter springs, more intense ramp profile on the lobe lift=better power. What is the trade off you might ask? I used to say it was longevity, but usually get flamed for it, so I'll let you be the judge. Regardless, if it's a weekend toy or something you take to the track often, it'll provide many years of enjoyment.
Sorry to be a posting hog today, but I wanted to comment on this. That other TA cam has a later IVC point, which would work excellent with the flat top pistons as previously mentioned by the other poster. The main thing holding you back with this setup would be your lack of headers, since this combination of heads and cam would want to breathe much better than the manifolds would permit. Not saying it couldn't be done, but the more you increase in one area, the more you need to increase in other areas to make it balanced. You'd be leaving much more power on the table by using exhaust manifolds with this cam and heads than if you used exhaust manifolds with a smaller cam. It's very important to make sure the parts you choose to use can work well together as a combination.
No matter which combination of parts you decide on, just get the thing tuned right so it'll run strong. Engine aside (and incoming tangent), if you really want the car to jolt the fillings out of your teeth, put in a 4.10 gear and use the 2004r trans. Torque multiplication is why this combination is so good: Gearing = torque multiplication, as shown by some simple math. Say your engine produces 350 ft. lbs. at the flywheel (not difficult at all for a Buick 350). Show torque multiplication as follows: 350 (ft. lbs.) x 2.74 (1st gear in the 2004r trans) x 4.1 (4.10 rear end gearing) to come up with 3932 ft. lbs. at the rear wheels. It would take 456 ft. lbs. to produce the same rear wheel torque using a TH350 trans and a 3.42 rear end (3932/3.42/2.52). Someone please correct me if my math is off or if I used an incorrect formula. Even so, this shows just how important gearing is, and can turn a ho-hum engine into a real performer, at least for taking off from a dead stop. This does not include torque multiplication from the torque converter, which would add to it, for a short time. As you shift through the gears, you're still coming out ahead with the 4.10 rear gearing, and with a .67:1 overdrive, this combination gives a final drive ratio of 2.75 (similar to a 2.73 rear gearing). For fun, let's see how much torque it would take at the flywheel using the TH350 and a 2.73 rear gear (very similar to the final drive ratio you'd have with the 2004r) to get the same rear wheel torque: 3932/2.73/2.52=572 ft. lbs. So a Buick 350 with a measly 350 ft. lbs. using a 2004r trans and a 4.10 rear gear would have the same power in 1st gear as a massive displacement big block using a TH350 and a 2.73 rear gear (in 1st gear). Here's another thing to consider: the Buick 350 in this example would wind out very fast in 1st gear vs a big block using a 2.73 gear, and the torque multiplication would dwindle away as it shifted through the gears, so it would become more favorable for the big block which keeps its massive torque, not to mention the hydraulic torque multiplication from the torque converter would hang on longer for the big block with 2.73 gearing. Then there's parasitic loss to consider, but in all, the 2004r and 4.10 gear would make 350 ft. lbs. take off like it was shot out of a slingshot. Might get a 510 ft. lb. 455 using a 2.73 gear out of the hole, but the 455 would walk past you as both shifted through their gears. Agree? Disagree? Feel free to discuss or comment.
Torque would be reduced, not multiplied, when you were in overdrive, but the 4.10 rear would help with that. Let's take a look: 350 (ft. lbs.) x .67 x 4.10 = 961 ft. lbs. at the rear wheels in overdrive, vs 510 (ft. lbs.) x 2.73 (1:1 final drive ratio) = 1392 ft. lbs. at the rear wheels, so a 510 ft. lb. big block would have considerably more power in its 1:1 final drive ratio (3rd gear) vs the 350 ft. lb. 350 using the 2004r and a 4.10 gear (4th gear)--even though they'd both have essentially the same final drive ratio and the 350 would have more rear wheel torque in 1st gear. Also, I recall Andy saying something about making sure the drive shaft was re-balanced as it would be spinning much faster with that combination of gearing. Conclusion: gearing is crucial when you have less torque, but it's hard to beat raw torque. Ok, tangent over.
2004, 410 gear, 3000 stall, yep, it takes them the whole track to catch me and sometimes they pass me before the stripe. A lot of times they don't, unless I break out on my time on window. and I am using a 373 gear right now
a note on the TA 212... I have bought this for my engine rebuild and what it came in the box is a Crower box with a sticker saying TA 212... haven't looked inside yet, not sure if there's a way to differenciate from a TA and a Crower cam? which leaves me confused if there's actually a cam by TA or they just use a Crower cam? not sure if its the usual procedure they do?
TA never made there own cams. Schneider cams use to grind them. must be Crower is making them now. i think TA said awhile back, something about Schneider being too busy or cutting back.
I've always liked Crower's boxes. Nice black shiny finish, and just CROWER on the box. No stickers. No pictures. Just CROWER.
I would have answered this, but other people already have. I do have a question for you though: TA has changed the specs on their 212-350 cam at least once that I'm aware of, could you please post the specs (cam card) here for us to take a look at to see what TA told Crower to grind it at? Latest rendition of the TA 212-350 cam (according to my memory) was 110 LSA, 218/230 duration @.050, 280/285 duration @.006, and .293/.294 I/E lobe lift. Installing it 'straight up' with zero degrees advanced or retard (intake and exhaust centerlines @110*) with a 280* intake duration @.006 gives it a 70* intake valve closing event, which would be good to use with 9.5-10:1 compression on 93 octane (generally speaking). Many thanks in advance.
You can always press the "I win" button (nitro) should they begin to walk past you. Torque multiplication with that stuff is stupid powerful. (as well you know)
