I'd guess 5-10 over the HO with all things equal. Another 5-15 with a long tube header. I use an 87 Renix cam in mine. Not because I knew it was "better" but rather because I had it NOS from a warranty repair that didn't require it when I did the repair. It was a special order for an extended warranty job I was doing. When I pulled the lifters on the job, the cam was good. I tried to send it back, but the parts dept wouldn't accept it. So I kept it, 11 years later i got a warranty pull shortblock and built it with my parts stash of non used and used warranty parts. I got to have one of the freeist 4.0L's ever putin a Rambler! -- Mark Price Morgantown, WV 1969 AMC Rambler, 4.0L, EFI, T-5 " I was different before people dared to be different" -------------- Original message ---------------------- From: adh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Sandwich Maker) > " From: Wrambler242@xxxxxxxxxxx > " > " > " > " > " The fact that OBD I "HO" holds a code is about the > " only real "advance" to the system.They actually "cheapened" the system > " by throwing away the knock sensor and instead implemented programming > " to quesstimate the "best" settings when the go pedal is smashed. > > they retarded the cam too, to reduce knock tendencies. it also cost > them some low end torque... > > idle curiosity: what hp would a renix 4.0 produce, with a #7120 [early > ho] head and '99-up intake? throw in a long tube header too... > ________________________________________________________________________ > Andrew Hay the genius nature > internet rambler is to see what all have seen > adh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx and think what none thought > _______________________________________________ > Amc-list mailing list > Amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx > http://www.amc-list.com/mailman/listinfo/amc-list _______________________________________________ Amc-list mailing list Amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx http://www.amc-list.com/mailman/listinfo/amc-list