Cam question -Opinions please

I am looking for some hard facts, some experience based opinions, and even some myths.
302 rebuild. Roller cam or not? Solid or hydraulic roller? or solid or
hydraullic non-roller?
I want to have a good streetable car with some sleeper qualities. reasonalble torque curve from about 2k to 6k. Reasonable but not outrageous horsepower, no adder, just a good carb. I am looking at cams, would like recommendations as to durability of rollers versus non rollers. Thanks bob
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
@verizon.net says...

Roller lifters make possible radical cam profiles that are difficult to acheive with flat lifters. The durability question is almost irrelevant, since the racing engines that benefit the most will likely die from other causes long before it is an issue.
AFAIK, all reputable makers of hydraulic lifters employ anti pump-up designs that have pretty much relegated solids to the history books, except for some racing applications. Unless you want a noisy engine that requires frequent adjustment.
Actually, your description of desired performance sounds a lot like the stock camshaft. I would not look at anything but mild hydraulics. Beyond that, the characteristics of your vehicle bear consideration. Heavy vehicles can benefit from the "torque" grinds for truck/RV applications, while light cars can benefit from more overlap and higher RPMs.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I used to have a 77 merc Monarch with a 302. I rebuilt it and kept everything stock except for an RV cam and a Holley 600 cfm 4-barrel on an earlier Ford 4-barrel manifold. It idled well and ran smoothly. It was far from a racecar, but it was a lot quicker than the average car of it's size. The most noticeable difference was in passing situations. Put your foot down and the tranny would downshift and the car would haul ass. This was in socal and when you could pass emissions if you knew someone and paid extra. If you have to pass emissions be sure anything you put on will pass inspection.
Every day is a good day- it's just that some are better than others.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I used to have a 77 merc Monarch with a 302. I rebuilt it and kept everything stock except for an RV cam and a Holley 600 cfm 4-barrel on an earlier Ford 4-barrel manifold. It idled well and ran smoothly. It was far from a racecar, but it was a lot quicker than the average car of it's size. The most noticeable difference was in passing situations. Put your foot down and the tranny would downshift and the car would haul ass. This was in socal and when you could pass emissions if you knew someone and paid extra. If you have to pass emissions be sure anything you put on will pass inspection.
Every day is a good day- it's just that some are better than others.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Thanks Folks, I appreciate your feedback and your reecommendations Spot on info for me thanks you bob
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.