My only concern would be valve springs.  Assuming you will replace those, too, that cam should make noticeably more torque and not cause any negative issues.  Plus will sound nicer.

Stock cams are fine for stock engines.  Your engine isn't stock.  To optimize it I would swap the cam. 

I would inspect the bearings when the cam was out.  If they look good I wouldn't worry about it.  If they look bad I'd pull the engine and rebuild it.  If the cam bearings are bad the rest of the bearings are worse.  I've yet to see cam bearings that were worn out in a good engine, but a good friend put a cam in an engine that had bad bearings.  Told the owner about it and the guy ignored his advice.  That engine had a short life and ended up a boat anchor.

I would install new lifters along with the cam.  They are cheap and its not worth the risk of one going bad.

I would install new valve springs for the same reason.  They are maxed now, but that assumes everything is perfect.  If its not they are beyond maxed and again, boom.

On the cam, I would call one of the cam companies and get their advice on what profile to run.  Personally I prefer Crane because they answer their phone.  I've had great results with the cams they sent me for three different engines.  I would want to know the I/E relationship on those heads for that conversation.  Port flow at various lifts.  On a street engine I pay particular attention to the lower lift flow.  This will bolster low/midrange torque where you will feel it.  Top end HP is great on paper and at the track, but torque rules the street. 

TKOPerformance wrote:

I would install new lifters along with the cam.  They are cheap and its not worth the risk of one going bad.

I was already planning on that.  The cams I was looking at all come with new lifters.  packages are $400-$500

TKOPerformance wrote:

On the cam, I would call one of the cam companies and get their advice on what profile to run.  

Thats a fantastic idea.  I actually once did an article for FordMuscle when I was writing for them where I did just that and called several cam companies to get their opinions on a cam for basically the same engine only a 302.  It was most illuminating, I shoulr reread it and something I should do again with my current specs.

MS wrote:

The thing with springs is you have a part that has been cycled many times to one position max lift. If you install a cam with more lift, the springs see more stress than they are used to Even though the new lift may be within their original design specification, it is different than what they are used to seeing. When you compare the cost of a spring failure (dropped valve) against the cost of new springs, I think you will agree to replace them.

I am going to replace the springs anyway but for my own education can you provide me a little more information on this?  I am familiar with the concept and the mechanics makes sense what I am wondering is at what point does it become an issue, as in run time?  These springs have 3 hours or less total run time and most of it was at idle.  So if they were not at max with the cam I am considering would I still need to replace them with only 3 hours or less on it?
 

Daze, I'm surprised...can't believe that the ultimate DIY-er isn't figuring out how to build his own cam. 

Lunati Voodoo is a fantastic grind--one I've gone with in a few larger engine builds I've done. 

I would not worry about the three hours run time.  What I would worry about is that you are at max lift.  No margin for error.  Let's say a couple of those springs are shimmed a little on the short side of the installed height tolerance, or the machining is such that the tolerance stack up that way.  Those couple springs may not actually be capable of withstanding the max lift.  The head manufacturer isn't going to pay to fix your engine if it fails.  So to my mind, springs are cheap; engines are expensive.  Its just not worth the risk. 

That added torque is WELL worth it.  IME 20-25lbs/ft down low can make an engine feel totally different.  It moved the curve up, so you're seeing that extra power in the 2,000-4,000 RPM range, right in the sweet spot for street use.  It also lowered the RPM of the HP peak without changing the curve.  It dropped about 500 RPM.  Again, putting the power in a more usable RPM range.  You can't just look at the peak change; you have to look at the curve.  I'd much rather have the Lunati cam.

What I'll say now is call one of the cam companies and check out what the cam they spec does. 

I agree with TKO. The added torque alone is worth doing it and more torque down low is what you said you were looking for.

If I can give you one suggestion that worked well for me when I was looking for a cam.  Coast High Performance builds a lot of Ford motors and dynos a lot of combinations. They also have a lot of their dyno runs posted on their Facebook page and on YouTube. I spent hours looking at their videos until I came across a combination that had the exact dyno curve I was looking for. I called them up, told them that I'd watched this particular video, and wanted to know what cam was in it because I wanted to buy the same cam.  The guy I spoke to remembered the engine and the video- which was surprising given how many they do- told me that the cam was one of their custom grinds and placed the order for me and I had it in 2 weeks.

With the exception of fuel injection, the engine in the video I watched was basically the same as mine.
When we got my engine together and on the dyno I was pleasantly surprised to find that my hp and torque numbers were within 1.5% of the engine in CHP's video, which was pretty amazing when you consider they weren't dynoed on the same dyno.

DC wrote:

Yes the Lunati is the one. More fun torque curve for sure. A few more HP at high revs just means you get to sweep up smaller pieces when it comes apart.

That made me laugh, great t-shirt material right there

Prof wrote:

Daze, I'm surprised...can't believe that the ultimate DIY-er isn't figuring out how to build his own cam. 

 

Interesting thought, you actually get more lift by grinding the lobes down in the "closed" part of the cycle, so if I took a stock came and started removing a little here and a little there   

There are a lot of things I am willing to DIY but some how I don't think I'm up to grinding my own cam.  
 

There is one more issue to consider.  Behind this engine is a z-spec T5 rated originally at 330 foot pounds.  When Glen built it I know he shimmied all the bearing tight and he installed a billet counter gear stabilizer and those two things push the torque rating up near 400 foot pounds.  I wasn't too worried about it with the stock cam and 351 because according to the digital dyno I just barley reach 400 foot pounds and the digital dyno tends to be a little on the high side.  Reality is probably closer to 350 at the flywheel.  But if I upgrade the cam I am getting it much closer to MAX and the Galaxie is a heavy car so it may not be worth the risk.  I won't be running slicks or dumping the clutch but I still drive hard and if the 351 gets any stronger I think I may be pushing my luck.  It's easy to think, more, bigger, and better and I know I would be happier with more torque but is it worth the extra $ to put the transmission at risk?

Bullet Bob wrote:

Day, which digital dyno software are you using? 

It's an old windows program called dyno 2000.  I have used it so many times when wanting to know how to changing something is going to affect an engine.  I have always looked at it as a "relative" indication.  In other words I know it calculates high so I don't take the top numbers as gospel, BUT I do look at the way the power and torque curves change in relation to one another based on different configurations. So for example in the case of this cam swap I am gaining just around 11% increase in torque and that number I feel is accurate.  If my actual numbers at the flywheel are closer to 350 than with the new cam I can probably expect to see something in the neighborhood of 390 give or take.


 

DC wrote:

Yes the Lunati is the one. More fun torque curve for sure. A few more HP at high revs just means you get to sweep up smaller pieces when it comes apart.

 

Good one!!
6s6