Has anyone ever ran a cobra cam in box panther before?

[hotrodtc]

Well my local yard has a 93 t-bird that I'm pulling the motor from for my townny. I figured use thexplorer cam in townny build for low end and torque then use the cobra cam in the mark build for better top end. I'm really trying to keep parts oem just make a little more power

[Lincolnmania]

i have a 87 HO cam in the town car..........yrs ago when i got it i had read somewhere it's a little hotter than the 88+ HO cams, dont know if that is true or not tho, but 15.91 out of a town car i think is pretty darn good lol

[zoomie]

Yes, it can be used in a dumpster.

when you yank it ill take it off your hands.... lol

[88grandmarq]

Yes, it can be used in a dumpster.

I will agree.... 2020 cam suxs !

[sick88tbird]

Well my local yard has a 93 t-bird that I'm pulling the motor from for my townny. I figured use thexplorer cam in townny build for low end and torque then use the cobra cam in the mark build for better top end. I'm really trying to keep parts oem just make a little more power

I've said 10,000 times before and I'll say it 10,000 times more...the cobra-spec cam had nothing to do with the cobra version of the 5.0 being more willing to run. There is a reason the 5.0's in those 89-up cougars/bird were only rated at 200hp, same HO motor, cobra-cam...the only reason(s) the '93-'95 cobra ran like it did was due to the heads and intake...the "cobra" cam was a crutch in those motors(and not a very good one at that)...used only to try and keep as much low end torque as possible...those MN-12 cougars/birds are heavy pigs, that's why they used that cam....the old chicken and the egg debate...which came first, the "cobra" cam or the '93 cobra? Answer, the cam came first....should be called a cougar cam....the cobra ran 1.7rr's on that cam to try and get a little more lift in an effort to not offset the higher rpm gains found via intake and heads...it was a ready-made parts bin compromise.

If I had a 4000+ lb car, I would put in gears and a mild convertor behind an HO motor LONG before even considering installing the "cobra" broomstick.

As for the '86-'87 SD cams...they had 10* less advertised duration but same @.050" lift...Ford supposedly moved from 266* adv duration to 276* adv duration in mid to late 87 production to reduce "valvetrain wear" because they thought the ramp rate was a little steep. I don't know about actual benefits one way or the other, but desktop dyno seems to favor the earlier HO cam.

Sorry for going on a tangent...I get going and it's hard to stop....lol. Common misconceptions are so common, it's hard to get people thinking any differently than they're used to sometimes.

Good luck,
Don

[gadget73]

What he said. Its a 'bird cam, meant for a porky car. Its a better match for a Panther with a stock converter than the HO cam is, but it probably does lose a bit of top end compared to the HO cam. Unfortunately the HO cam sucks under 2500 rpm, so unless you change the converter and gears to make good use of that it will feel pokey off the line.

I have driven a 92 Grand Marq with a 92 Couger motor in it and the Mark VII HO intake. Basically an HO with the Cobra stick. All stock, 3.08 gears, and whatever converter would have been in a 1992 4.6 AOD car. It runs, and well. None of that kick in the pants at 2500 rpm feeling like the HO stick has. It feels like it was meant to be there. An HO cam with a looser converter and gears would probably overall be faster, but if you want a totally stock drivability setup, that Couger motor works. It also runs perfectly happy on stock speed-density with a Mark VII computer, no burping or other BS like some of the P head setups seem to want to do.

[sick88tbird]

Thank you! Somebody else that knows...lol. I agree, the HO cam is a bit soggy below 2500 and with an AOD it really sucks...my first '88 HO swapped 'Bird was either granny-like driving or balls-out. My buddy used to have a mustang notch with a stone stock HO with a B-cam and LT headers, 5-speed and 3.73's. Below 2500rpm felt just like an HO cam, suprised me. I think the cougar cam is great for bottom end torque...I just don't know if I would go through the effort required just to put one in...if you want torque, a 351W is a direct bolt-in and will give you an amazing torque curve that you'll immediately fall in love with, especially if all you're used to is soggy 302's.

351W's for everyone!

-Don

[88Vic]

Buddy of mine just got an Explorer engine, don't know what year but i'm trying to convince him to swap a stock HO cam into it so I can have his old Explorer stick, I need to gather HO parts since I need to do a top end rebuild and I can find HO parts for next to nothing, and an Explorer cam would go great in my fat Lincoln since I plan on keeping the stock converter and going 3.55 gears, but I really want that Explorer engine. Problem is those and/or GT40 parts aren't easy to find and when I do they're not cheap. Buddy has a 5spd 1st gen Explorer he wants to swap the new engine into, I told him put a bigger cam in it and lower gears and it'll run like a raped ape with a 5spd

[t65neon5]

[if you want torque, a 351W is a direct bolt-in and will give you an amazing torque curve that you'll immediately fall in love with, especially if all you're used to is soggy 302's.

351W's for everyone!

-Don[/QUOTE]....YES...the difference down low between a stock 302 and a stock 351w is a bunch(my old p72 felt much better off the line and low speed acceleration than any 302 ive had in the rest of my panthers )...how ever the penalty is less fuel mileage (my p72 had the VV carb...the replacement motor was an 85 f-150 h.o. with a 4 bbl holly.....no real difference in fuel mileage btween the 2....approx 16 mpg was the best i could get outta either....)

[sick88tbird]

I had a 2mpg difference between the 5.0 LOPO in my '88 bird and the fuelie 351w in the same car...around town...highway mileage was pretty much the same...car was 3837lbs with me in it. It's really not a killer...with aluminum heads and a 5-speed it should be about the same weight(or at least close) as an iron headed 5.0 with an AOD.