Re: Mike
Posted by HH56 On 2023/2/18 18:11:18
They did make a couple of cam changes and one that specifically mentions changes for a 359 rough idle. We don't have that particular bulletin to know exactly what that last change was.
Here are the as introduced specs between the 53 327 9 main and the 359.. At first glance it looked like just a 5 degree difference but then at a closer look at the way one angle went up and another down with the spec change it looks like there could have been both a sprocket indexing or position change and a cam profile change.
There was another bulletin specifically saying a cam for different engine would not work in a 359 but if I read it correctly the reason seems to have been about rod connecting bolt clearance and not timing specs.
Attach file:
Comp 327, 359 0 main.jpg (261.65 KB)
Here are the as introduced specs between the 53 327 9 main and the 359.. At first glance it looked like just a 5 degree difference but then at a closer look at the way one angle went up and another down with the spec change it looks like there could have been both a sprocket indexing or position change and a cam profile change.
There was another bulletin specifically saying a cam for different engine would not work in a 359 but if I read it correctly the reason seems to have been about rod connecting bolt clearance and not timing specs.
Attach file:
Comp 327, 359 0 main.jpg (261.65 KB)
This Post was from: https://packardinfo.com/xoops/html/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?post_id=254095