GSC EVO 9 CAM RESULTS DYNO'S Inside!
Nov 3, 2006 | 05:12 AM
#47
Thread Starter
Former Sponsor
iTrader: (44)
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 1,159
Likes: 0
From: Charleston SC
we have been super busy and the car went home with the owner. so we will get to it first of next week hopefully! as long as we can get caught up. there should be others making there way to the dyno.
Nov 3, 2006 | 05:43 AM
#48
Originally Posted by EVIL_EVO_VIII
Gotcha Greg!! Nice results anyhow... Cant wait to see more results on the 280s for the VIII, im in the market for some cams and right now im really leaning towards your product
Get them Miguel! You will cant go wrong with them, I have the 272/272 V2's and when I put mine in it was like I was driving a whole new car....and that was completely untuned. I called everyone I know on my ride home that weekend I was so exceited.
Nov 3, 2006 | 06:10 AM
#49
Originally Posted by Warrtalon
I have the Forge WGA (VIII version, of course), and although it does its job, it is not a substitute for an MBC, imo. We'll see how it works, but I have used MBCs for 8 years and without any hassle. IXs make great power with with good boost gains, so hopefully you can get the boost dialed in where you want it with the WGA. It just sucks having to take the WGA arm off and tighten (or loosen) the turnbuckle just to get to the desired maximum boost level. If you have small hands and great dexterity, you can do it without removing the radiator or anything, but otherwise it's an arduous process.
Last edited by cij911; Nov 3, 2006 at 06:12 AM.
Nov 3, 2006 | 06:12 AM
#50
Originally Posted by BADEVO
Get them Miguel! You will cant go wrong with them, I have the 272/272 V2's and when I put mine in it was like I was driving a whole new car....and that was completely untuned. I called everyone I know on my ride home that weekend I was so exceited.
Nov 3, 2006 | 05:00 PM
#58
Originally Posted by GregGSC
GSC EVO 9 CAMS at Idle....and Leh got board with the GT3 RS so we put that at the end! 
http://www.gscdownloads.com/evo9test...camsatidle.wmv
http://www.gscdownloads.com/evo9test...camsatidle.wmv
Nov 3, 2006 | 08:20 PM
#59
Sorry for the delay everyone. I had to go straight from the dyno to Savannah for a SCCA event at Roebling this weekend.
I asked Doug not to post the results because we couldnt get a fair comparison. We had variables that I didnt feel comfortable with - and the results are biased this way. The pre-cam results netted a baseline of 416whp and 341wtq - at 22.5psi. I installed the GSC 280's early this morning and added a full tank of Costco 93 octane to the tank. Once we strapped the car to dyno the ECU immediately began to pull back timing - at a very conservative 19psi. A lot of timing. Initially, this made no sense to us. Any cams of any type would not cause the ignition timing to become lessoned.
We narrowed the issue down to poor fuel. To counteract the crappy pump pee, we added approx 2 gallons of C16 until it was flowing out of the gas tank (nice...). The timing issue subsided but not entirely.
Anyway, in the pursuit of results - we continued with the tune. The 280s like to be advanced (intake) - by the full 4 deg. These cams also picked up about 200rpms in quicker spool time. The end result was mid 350wtq - with gains above 4.5K.
I dont like using these numbers to reference gains when comparing pre v. post cams. We had some bad variables here that I'd like to get worked out with Doung after the race. We estimated the tq should be in the mid 370's at 22.5 psi. We'll go back to the dyno next week with fresh gas. Sorry for the let down, but these are facts. And that's just how things go sometimes. I feel the truth is always better than some weak smokescreen.
I asked Doug not to post the results because we couldnt get a fair comparison. We had variables that I didnt feel comfortable with - and the results are biased this way. The pre-cam results netted a baseline of 416whp and 341wtq - at 22.5psi. I installed the GSC 280's early this morning and added a full tank of Costco 93 octane to the tank. Once we strapped the car to dyno the ECU immediately began to pull back timing - at a very conservative 19psi. A lot of timing. Initially, this made no sense to us. Any cams of any type would not cause the ignition timing to become lessoned.
We narrowed the issue down to poor fuel. To counteract the crappy pump pee, we added approx 2 gallons of C16 until it was flowing out of the gas tank (nice...). The timing issue subsided but not entirely.
Anyway, in the pursuit of results - we continued with the tune. The 280s like to be advanced (intake) - by the full 4 deg. These cams also picked up about 200rpms in quicker spool time. The end result was mid 350wtq - with gains above 4.5K.
I dont like using these numbers to reference gains when comparing pre v. post cams. We had some bad variables here that I'd like to get worked out with Doung after the race. We estimated the tq should be in the mid 370's at 22.5 psi. We'll go back to the dyno next week with fresh gas. Sorry for the let down, but these are facts. And that's just how things go sometimes. I feel the truth is always better than some weak smokescreen.
Nov 3, 2006 | 08:24 PM
#60
Originally Posted by GregGSC
damn joe an 1.18.22 at roebling is pretty quick....was that on the new pavment or the old?
Thanks, Greg
Those are old pavement numbers. It was grippy as hell, too. I havent layed eyes on the new stuff - and I'll get my first peek at it tomorrow.
I'm hoping for 1.17's - and a new track record.