280 Cams Installed !!!!!! Wow !!!
Feb 12, 2005, 05:00 PM
#32
Evolving Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: San Jose, Ca
Posts: 497
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
now, by just altering the duration your just moving the powerband up, arnt you?
on a turbo car your should run as much lift as possiable. duration is how and when the cams kick in. so wouldnt you want to run somthing with more lift and duration, instead of just more duration?
someone correct me if im wrong!?!?!
on a turbo car your should run as much lift as possiable. duration is how and when the cams kick in. so wouldnt you want to run somthing with more lift and duration, instead of just more duration?
someone correct me if im wrong!?!?!
Feb 13, 2005, 08:18 AM
#33
Originally Posted by V8 HUNTR
...yes the car is MUCH more fun to drive vs. stock cams...You know when you hit 5500 RPM's and the car feels like its dead ? This changes everything...
Naturally, one wouldn't know any of this unless he saw dyno comparisons or at least a dyno sheet of a well-documented combination with said cams, so nothing conclusive can truly be drawn until someone delivers information with which we can make a convincing comparison.
Feb 13, 2005, 11:16 AM
#41
Originally Posted by Ted B
The same can be said for *any* of the HKS cams (or just about any other aftermarket cam set) as compared to the factory cams. However, the HKS 272 set gives up a bit of torque to the 264 set, and I imagine the 280 set gives up more. The 272 set gives just a bit more HP than the 264 set, but the power band is moving in a direction where the stock turbo can't keep up. Furthermore, the 272 set loses a bit of spool time to the 264 set, and the 280 set should be expected to create a further delay in spool. In other words, you give up something to get something else, and the tradeoff isn't always favorable.
Feb 13, 2005, 11:20 AM
#42
Evolved Member
iTrader: (15)
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Bakersfield, CA
Posts: 512
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i dont know about you guys, but i want these cams. just need to find out if i can to them without gears. also, i think these would be great because our cars without upgraded turbos really lack top end.
Feb 13, 2005, 11:21 AM
#43
Evolved Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 565
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by EVO8LTW
This is what I suspect as well. Although Buschur found that on the dyno the 280/280 combo made more power "everywhere" than the 272/272 combo, you don't dyno a car from idle. The bigger cams have to be weaker than the shorter duration cams in the low rpms...like idle-2000. That means that unless you slip your clutch a lot all the time from a stoplight, the bigger camgs are going to mean more sluggishness in traffic and more time off boost in 1st gear. If the clutches on our cars weren't so shortlived (even aftermarket), then maybe this wouldn't be such an issue.
Once underway the factory turbo spools very quickly. We shall see..
Feb 13, 2005, 11:22 AM
#44
Evolving Member
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Green Bay
Posts: 322
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good point. I'm still looking for a very streetable cam setup with the stock clutch which still has a lot of life left. I guess I'll just wait for all the numbers and reviews.
