Revolver Cam Test! HKS who?
Dec 31, 2006, 12:43 PM
#136
I don't have duration @ 1mm specs for the JUN 264s, but the specs for the 272s imply the 264s probably give around 220-225deg @ 1mm, which is comparable to an HKS 280.
As far as JUN 272 vs. Revolver, the specs indicate that both are best suited to applications using larger turbos and ported heads. The longer effective duration of the JUN 272 indicates it should have an edge where all-out applications that use HUGE turbos and high rpm are concerned, while the Revolvers are probably best suited for the most common GT series (GT3076R and 35R).
As far as JUN 272 vs. Revolver, the specs indicate that both are best suited to applications using larger turbos and ported heads. The longer effective duration of the JUN 272 indicates it should have an edge where all-out applications that use HUGE turbos and high rpm are concerned, while the Revolvers are probably best suited for the most common GT series (GT3076R and 35R).
Dec 31, 2006, 12:49 PM
#137
ok well i will be useing a stock unported head. jun 272 cams and a 50trim turbo kit. but the turbo kit will be last. so how do you think these cams will do on stock turbo with meth as the only thing i dont have is the cams. meth is not installed yet but its ready to go in and will go in when i get the jun 272's. o and i will be useing the stock ecu
Dec 31, 2006, 01:23 PM
#138
FYI: Neither of the JUN cams should be used with the factory valvesprings, period. I am assuming you are aware of this and will be installing their valvesprings simultaneously.
A 50 trim really isn't enough turbo to make power in the rpm ranges the JUN 272s are designed to use. The JUN 264s would appear to be a better choice given your medium-sized turbo and stock ECU. Additionally, the very long duration of the 272s won't make tuning the idle easy.
A 50 trim really isn't enough turbo to make power in the rpm ranges the JUN 272s are designed to use. The JUN 264s would appear to be a better choice given your medium-sized turbo and stock ECU. Additionally, the very long duration of the 272s won't make tuning the idle easy.
Dec 31, 2006, 01:27 PM
#139
FYI: Neither of the JUN cams should be used with the factory valvesprings, period. I am assuming you are aware of this and will be installing their valvesprings simultaneously.
A 50 trim really isn't enough turbo to make power in the rpm ranges the JUN 272s are designed to use. The JUN 264s would appear to be a better choice given your medium-sized turbo and stock ECU. Additionally, the very long duration of the 272s won't make tuning the idle easy.
A 50 trim really isn't enough turbo to make power in the rpm ranges the JUN 272s are designed to use. The JUN 264s would appear to be a better choice given your medium-sized turbo and stock ECU. Additionally, the very long duration of the 272s won't make tuning the idle easy.
idle i could care less about. as long as it dont stall im ok. it could ilde at 100rpm for all i care. lol max power is what im looking for. so you feel the 264/264 setup would make more power then the 272/272 setup.
and if you say the 264's then how do you feel they compare to the revolver cam's? what set would be best for my kind of setup. thanks for your good addvice and input on this hole thread
Last edited by EvoDan2004; Dec 31, 2006 at 01:30 PM.
Dec 31, 2006, 01:46 PM
#141
yea i was going for jun 272 or revolver. but from what ted is saying if im reading it right is the jun 264 cams are closer to the revolvers then the 272's are. so now im looking into 264 or revolver. idle and whatnot means nothing to me. i can sound like **** for all i care as long as it makes max power from the parts i got im happy. i do love a bumpy idle though.
Dec 31, 2006, 01:50 PM
#142
Evolved Member
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: City O Sin, MA...the not so sinish part though...
Posts: 712
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I noticed Ted B talking about cam gear settings for revolvers. If your installing revolvers because you want the torque and spoolup they offer(and believe me its great), dont bother with cam gears. I installed them with my revolvers and tuned them at about a dozen different positions and none gained spool. Revolver really did their homework with these cams and must have done quite a bit of R&D because they absolutely achieved what they wanted, great midrange punch and great spoolup. There was some topend to be gained and a little smoother idle but these were both at the cost of midrange and spool. I have these with a 2.3 35r setup and its a great combo. I'll be doing another phase of mods this winter(hopefully the final phase 
) and plan on using a degree wheel and dial indicator to gather some hard specs for the revolvers.
) and plan on using a degree wheel and dial indicator to gather some hard specs for the revolvers.
Dec 31, 2006, 02:01 PM
#143
The Revolver set has more lift than either JUN set, but headflow data I have from two different sources shows that a stock head can't use the extra lift - it'll just be harder on the valvetrain.
Aside from that and LC differences that likely give the JUN 264s a little bit better idle, the Revolver and JUN 264s appear to be more similar than different where a stock head is concerned, and I'd bet they perform similarly as well.
Aside from that and LC differences that likely give the JUN 264s a little bit better idle, the Revolver and JUN 264s appear to be more similar than different where a stock head is concerned, and I'd bet they perform similarly as well.
Dec 31, 2006, 02:21 PM
#145
Now this makes it interesting, the only question would be Ted, and this is in my case, which one (264 Jun's or the Revolvers) will work better on a flashed ECU? And as far as midrange and spoolup Im a Road Racer so for me those are going to be extremely good, but I wonder about the torque, which the Revolvers seem to shine.
Dec 31, 2006, 02:22 PM
#146
The Revolver set has more lift than either JUN set, but headflow data I have from two different sources shows that a stock head can't use the extra lift - it'll just be harder on the valvetrain.
Aside from that and LC differences that likely give the JUN 264s a little bit better idle, the Revolver and JUN 264s appear to be more similar than different where a stock head is concerned, and I'd bet they perform similarly as well.
Aside from that and LC differences that likely give the JUN 264s a little bit better idle, the Revolver and JUN 264s appear to be more similar than different where a stock head is concerned, and I'd bet they perform similarly as well.
Dec 31, 2006, 02:24 PM
#147
Now this makes it interesting, the only question would be Ted, and this is in my case, which one (264 Jun's or the Revolvers) will work better on a flashed ECU? And as far as midrange and spoolup Im a Road Racer so for me those are going to be extremely good, but I wonder about the torque, which the Revolvers seem to shine.
see now im a drag racer and highway puller. i need the right cam for drag racing and highway pulling. all mid to high rpm's. but i would still like to make some real nice torque though
Dec 31, 2006, 02:30 PM
#148
Now this makes it interesting, the only question would be Ted, and this is in my case, which one (264 Jun's or the Revolvers) will work better on a flashed ECU? And as far as midrange and spoolup Im a Road Racer so for me those are going to be extremely good, but I wonder about the torque, which the Revolvers seem to shine.
The improvement in spool characteristics and thus midrange torque delivered by both the Revolvers and JUNs I attribute to their more aggressive ramp profiles.
Dec 31, 2006, 02:34 PM
#149
And you will need to be certain that you do get the upgraded valvesprings as part of the cam set. This will increase the price, but is absolutely necessary.
As for drag racing and highway pulling, again, the turbo is going to be the limiting factor, not the cams. The JUN 264s are more aggressive than the HKS 280s I'm presently using, and I'm not exactly suffering from a lack of highway power.
