EVOTEXAS

iTrader: (12)

As stated, I dynoed on a Mustang Dyno which shows realistic torque and HP. EvO11v dynoed on a Dynojet which reads about 15 HP higher than my Mustang Dyno and also inflates the torque number. If I dynoed on the same dyno I would show more like 375/380. I went from the HKS 264 to the GSC 272/264 and picked up a litle torque. Did you read the thread at all? If you had, you would also see that I had 89 in the tank which means a less aggressive timing map which means less torque.

slvrevo

EvoTexas,

Curious as to your ECU map when you had the 264's and the 272/264 GSC cams. Was your ECU map stock for both HKS and GSC cams? I was wondering how safe it would be and how much gains I would get without having to reflash with the 272/264 combo.

Thanks,
slvrevo

HuskerEVO

EVOTEXAS, I might have missed it but are you using Cam gears?

EVOTEXAS

iTrader: (12)

My ECU was custom tuned for the HKS 264s and I put in the GSCs and made about the same power. When I got a custom tune for the GSCs is when the numbers really got good. I do not recommend running cams without some sort of fuel compensation, flash or otherwise. You will run very lean in the midrange and very rich in the top end.

I do not have cam gears but I have some on the way. You don't need them, but I just want to play with them and see what happens.

Nez136

iTrader: (10)

I dynoed on a AWD Mustang Dyno, "Mustang" Doesn't mean the car

fsugatorbait

iTrader: (16)

Can someone please explain the reasoning behind a 272/264? Wouldnt you be choking on the exhaust side in the higher rpms?

redevo561

iTrader: (15)

there has been alot of threads on that topic just do a search bro =)

fsugatorbait

iTrader: (16)

lol...ive been reading up on it for the past few hours and have heard every opinion under the sun.

anjapower

iTrader: (18)

oh no....someone is being sneaky

fsugatorbait

iTrader: (16)

BigLEVO

iTrader: (8)

yea could you please post the mods that the car had and what type of gas this was done on to get theese type of numbers, this number is hard for me to swallow without knowing the mods,

I am also considering these cams, just dont know which combo to go with...i want most power yet i dont want any lump idle....decisions decisions....

fsugatorbait

iTrader: (16)

From what ive read you can get a consistent idle with a good tune. GSC recommends for a daily driver/autox car 272/264. The only thing im still worried about after reading up on these cams is the long term reliability of the valve train. Cam gears are also no needed for the above mentioned setup.

HuskerEVO

FSU, when you ask about long term reliability of the valve train, are you talking about the GSC cams vs. HKS or do you mean in general? Since they are both designed to use the stock valvetrain what would give you concern? The HKS cams have been around for a long time and people have used them reliably for many years...

fsugatorbait

iTrader: (16)

The numbers that ive seen have them beating the HKS cams by a good margin and with the same lift/duration. One of the concerns is that GSC is able to do this by having steeper cam lobes which are harsher on the valvesprings, however the detailed specs havent been released yet so this is just an assumption at this point. The other alternative is that they are 'underrated' in terms of lift.

Here is a great thread that discusses these cams...
https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/sh...light=gsc+cams

Nesiop

iTrader: (25)

Bringing back an old thread but from this quote... I plan on eventually putting in a 35r turbo and some 272's, Eventually I will either stroke or at least do pistons and rods. But to get the most out of the car anyway I want to have a higher rev so I would go with Ferrea probably and run 8500-9k redline but does that mean the HKS cams or GSC Cams wouldn't work because of the higher revs/ made for stock valvetrain?