Anyone have an L79 cam in your 327 Chevy? Are you happy with it? I am considering one and want a good fast driver with a little at***ude on idle. Have heard that these were a top choice.. Cheers, Bob
Camshaft technology has really come a LONG way in the 45 years since GM came out with the L-79 camshaft. Most any of the popular camshaft companies makes a vastly better camshaft NOW. I suggest calling the cam comany of your choice and getting their techs to suggest a camshaft. One engineered and tailorered to meet your cars needs and match the equipment you have The camshaft makers WANT YOU TO BE HAPPY ... They will get you the best camshaft for your situation ...
I have one in my 327. Sounds a little lumpy at idle and smooths out by about 1600rpm. Good cam, pulls hard.
The L79 350 HP cam is a great choice for your 327. I have one in my '56 chev, had one also in a '55 and a '66 nova that were also 327 cars. It has a noticeable lump at idle and pulls real hard through the mid rpm range. I wouldn't hesitate to use one again.
I guess I'm a hopeless romantic stuck in the 50s and 60s but I don't care if my hot rod is not as efficient or as powerful as it could be with a modern cam shaft. The 097, 327-365 and the L79 are iconic cams in my mind and worth any compromise in potential HP. I had several buddies that had L-79 Chevelles and Chevy IIs in the middle 60s. They kicked *** on the street but were true daily drivers...their only car. I've always thought that it was the best compromise cam for the street for a hopeless romantic. JMO
This cam was made for an 11 to 1 motor. Wont make power with pump gas friendly compression. As said above, look at new grinds like Comp Cams thumper series. Good luck.
If I had one I would use it, if I had to go out and buy a cam, I agree with those who say technology has brought us much farther. unless you want to say you have one or like the sound I would go with a comp cam myself I use the a lot and very happy with them
I too am like Tommy with an ole' school allegiance to the early Chevy cams. The L-79 has been one of my favorites. However, as was said the L-79 engine was an 11:1 motor with the Chevy aluminum hi-rise and I believe the 461 heads. If you are building an engine with variations in heads and compression I would have to agree with doing some homework with the cam grind that would be best for what you are combining. Call their tech line or check with reputable engine builder. There are some good knowledgeable guys on here that will respond if you lay out just what you are using and what your intentions are for driving .
Also ive read too, something to consider is the slow ramp angle of the old cams it meant to be happy with stock parts and low spring rates, meaning it will be more reliable than some of the newer grinds which are made strictly for performance, on motors that dont see daily driving
what deuce roadster and others have said--great cam but needs some compression to run hard--also not too happy in an auto trans car-tried one in wife's 55 many years ago (1979)-ran hard but not too good in town with an auto-went to a Sig split duration-better choices now I think --but I still use 097 cams now and then-really old technology and idle at about 800-850-love the sound-work great with Rochester FI-L79 works well with FI too-but both need at least 10:1 comp to run right from my experience-Just my 2 cents
Back in the day these were a good choice for a motor with some higher compression numbers. With todays lower compression they sound OK, but are thirsty and not really suited for automatics. Like other people have said, there are tons of cams on the market that would give you the sound you are looking for and better performance overall. Some 30 years ago we didn't have the choices we do today and certainly had better octane numbers. I won't beat a dead horse, but give a cam grinder a call and tell him what you have and what you want to accomplish and I'm sure he will give you something you will like and it will perform better today than the ole L79 did back in its hayday. IMHO
I've run the 151 cam in 327s with flat top pistons, and had no complaints about how they performed. You probably wouldn't want to use in in a car with a stock automatic and 2.73:1 gears, but as long as you've got some decent overall gearing, I wouldn't be afriad to use it. As far as the "newer, better technology" argument goes, it's obvious that there are newer camshaft designs that optimize the overall situation better, but brakes have come a long way since 1939, too........is anyone going to sell their early Ford hydraulic setup for s**** and convert to four wheel discs?
I have considered using it in my 283 with PG and 3.73 gear rear in a bucket. Seems like it was fdairly common then so I say why not. It sounds good and does the job.
I'm running that profile in my 153 Chevy II 4 in my T roadster. A little weak below 2500 with a 8.5 comp engine, but BOY does it like to rev. 6500 with stock Chevy valve train. Of course I got a 5 speed with 4.11 rears which helps. Ran that cam in a bunch of various SBC's over the last 40 years many with just stock springs etc.
The L79 cam will definitely perform better with higher compression and a manual transmission. I ran one backed by an automatic and it wasn't the same as the 4 speed cars.
Yes, This is the cam I have in my 327 (331 actual) 10.5 compression , 1.6 rocker ratio (which makes the cam even bigger) 3500 stall converter , Built 400 Turbo , 3:73 rear with 29.5" tires. Sounds Awesome , melts rear tires with the push of the pedal... Yes, there are better cams available now , but , I'm old school, One note when my combo went together I purchase this cam from "Lunatti" as a Kit with lifters and a timing set. The whole thing was about $135. Desert PS: Yes this is a very high stall converter but its very streetable , no fluid over heating problems.
I'd even use one in a short stroke 302 build up.. (283 crank in a early 327 block). Chevy use a solid lifter cam in it's Z/28's, but every 10k or so you had to re-adjust the lash which was a messy job. When I had my Z, I switched to the L-79 "151" cam and a smaller 600 cfm Holley with vacuum secondaries.. The car had alot more low end torque and got better mpg. I sure do miss that car.
I found a pile of NOS cardboard cam tubes a while back and all of them had the ID's on them. They were really cool. Like an idiot I used them all, gave some away, sold a few and now I have none. I didn't even keep any of the tubes. I went searching for some specs of that cam and the 350 horse 350 L-82 cam. Credit goes to the Corvette site. OEM #3863151, 350 HP, L-79, 327 WG-996 (Cam only) WG-996Kg 151H Hyd C 222 222 306 306 .447 .447 110/118 OEM #3896962, 350 HP, L-82, 350 WG-1170 (Cam only) WG-1170Kg 962H Hyd C 224 224 292 288 .450 .459 115/113
I had one in a 1966 Pickup, low compression 327 with small heads, torker intake, 600 Holley, duals, built Turbo 350, 4:11 posi. I put 90,000 miles on it so I have some experience. Nice lumpy idle in gear but pretty smooth in neutral. Gutless below 3,000 RPM (3,700 lbs vehicle) but would pull to 6,500 all day. I cruised the highway at 3,500 RPM. I agree it's old tech made to last forever with light springs. Go with one of the thumper cams and make some power. I had one in a brand new 68 Nova with the 11 to 1 compression, big heads etc. and it ate spark plugs after 2,000 miles (maybe it was the lead in the gas?) I think Hot Rod did a comparison test with it and some new tech cams and picked up 40 HP!
The deal is the compression !!! The old L-79 worked great with 10.5 to 1 or better compression. I had a bunch of them ... but with today's fuel and the compression required to run it ... there are just a LOT better choices. If you already have one ... then by all means use it But if you are going to have to BUY a new Camshaft ... There are LOTS of better choices
Ran one in an old 57 sedan delivery. Ran great fair milage, had to run the best gas you could find, But back then it was less than 50 cents a gallon
I was just thinking how the little chevy 302 would have ran if it had flat top pistons, 58 cc 305 4 barrel heads and a modern camshaft??? Ford made it work with the 5.0L in the FOX Mustangs (like my '91). It also has a 4.00" bore and a 3.00" stroke. I'd like to hear some input on this setup.
I've got one in my truck. L-79 cam in a 65' 327 w/1.94 camel humps & 10.5 to 1 compression. Stage 2 200-4r trans with a 2200 stall & 3.73 gears, & 670 cfm Holley. Very reliable with good power. It runs great. There's definitely some better cams out there, but if you want to go the nostalgic route it's perfect.
I AGREE!!!! but then again some people have no idea why you would want to put a 283 or a 327 in a car when you can buy a brand new zz4 motor too 15 yrs ago i put a L-79 cam in a low mile 305 that was in a 3/4 ton truck with th350...it woke up that little motor ... it was no 454..... but it sure surprised me , pretty good accomplishment in a big ol truck like that! for what its worth i dont think 305s have much more than 8.75 comp. either
Agree 100%. That cam NEEDS 10.5-11:1 compression to work well. We rebuilt a '63 Impala 250 hp and added 1.94 64cc 291 heads (stock 250hp were the 1.72 power packs) and three dueces. Put it back in the Impala with a PG and 3.36 gears. I think the stock 250hp w/ a 4gc ran better. Major disappointment in a true 9.5:1 engine with no gear.
The Jalopy Journal
