Notices
Evo Engine / Turbo / Drivetrain Everything from engine management to the best clutch and flywheel.

GSC Stage 1 cams installed, wow!

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Apr 25, 2008, 03:27 AM
  #1  
Evolving Member
Thread Starter
 
Tracer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Ca/Hi/Ga
Posts: 472
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
GSC Stage 1 cams installed, wow!

So I had my GSC Stage 1 cams installed at Topspeed in atl. (great place!) first impression sounds like stock idle, very smooth if that's an issue. Now to the dyno, I only made about 9 whp and 13 lb ft. of tq., now here is where it gets interesting and some of you gurus can help with this. My car made over 20 pulls because the first 12 were with bad gas, damn. So we had added some shell 93 octane and did around 11 more. Well here are the factors and created such a low gain at least in my and their eyes. At least 20 degreese hotter (86), twice the humidity, and heat soak, Scott said my water temps were really high. Now these numbers are at 23lbs of boost tapering to around 18lbs. there is zero knock and I believe afr's were 11.7 or so at idle and 14.5 or so under boost those are what I think he said, in other words everything was exactly where it was supposed to be. Now to driving impression, butt dyno was outstanding it pulls very very hard I could def. tell a major difference so I was very pleased with that! Now I know dyno numbers are for some people bragging rights, all I can say was I really don't have that many mods and this was in the south in 86 degree weather so even though I expected higher numbers I realize that those 3 factors play a major role in what is produced, fwiw they dynoed much better that cossi's 272's on a similar 9 MR the day before and the power came on much stronger much sooner. I am very glad I went with the GSC's, gues the only thing I need now is an intercooler! This was on a DYNOJET as well.
Old Apr 25, 2008, 04:53 AM
  #2  
Evolving Member
iTrader: (32)
 
alicea8541's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Jville, NC
Posts: 344
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by Tracer
So I had my GSC Stage 1 cams installed at Topspeed in atl. (great place!) first impression sounds like stock idle, very smooth if that's an issue. Now to the dyno, I only made about 9 whp and 13 lb ft. of tq., now here is where it gets interesting and some of you gurus can help with this. My car made over 20 pulls because the first 12 were with bad gas, damn. So we had added some shell 93 octane and did around 11 more. Well here are the factors and created such a low gain at least in my and their eyes. At least 20 degreese hotter (86), twice the humidity, and heat soak, Scott said my water temps were really high. Now these numbers are at 23lbs of boost tapering to around 18lbs. there is zero knock and I believe afr's were 11.7 or so at idle and 14.5 or so under boost those are what I think he said, in other words everything was exactly where it was supposed to be. Now to driving impression, butt dyno was outstanding it pulls very very hard I could def. tell a major difference so I was very pleased with that! Now I know dyno numbers are for some people bragging rights, all I can say was I really don't have that many mods and this was in the south in 86 degree weather so even though I expected higher numbers I realize that those 3 factors play a major role in what is produced, fwiw they dynoed much better that cossi's 272's on a similar 9 MR the day before and the power came on much stronger much sooner. I am very glad I went with the GSC's, gues the only thing I need now is an intercooler! This was on a DYNOJET as well.
Just wanted to say you have your AFR's listed in the wrong order. Should be 14.5 at idle and 11.7 under boost. I have these cams too and they have impressed me since day one.
Old Apr 25, 2008, 05:25 AM
  #3  
Evolved Member
iTrader: (38)
 
recompile's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: New Hampshire, USA
Posts: 1,745
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes on 5 Posts
The heatsoak probably did account for some of it.

1) S1s are not very aggressive
2) You have a IX, the stock cams are very well suited to the stock turbo

Peak HP changes are not what upgrading cams is all about... you want to get a stronger powerband with gains across the entire RPM range, not just peak. If you post a comparison of the two runs on top of each other, we can see if the cams helped the entire powerband or not.

I made a smooth and strong 328whp on a Mustang dyno on stock turbo, stock cams, stock O2, and Shell 93... IMHO there is no reason to upgrade cams on the IX until you upgrade the turbo

The fact that you said your car dyno'd "much better than cossi's 272s on a similar 9" leads me to believe the tune is lacking in both cases, moreso on the other car.

Last edited by recompile; Apr 25, 2008 at 05:28 AM.
Old Apr 25, 2008, 08:46 AM
  #4  
Evolving Member
 
Neuspeed06's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Reno, NV
Posts: 204
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by ShamelessCookie

I made a smooth and strong 328whp on a Mustang dyno on stock turbo, stock cams, stock O2, and Shell 93... IMHO there is no reason to upgrade cams on the IX until you upgrade the turbo

The fact that you said your car dyno'd "much better than cossi's 272s on a similar 9" leads me to believe the tune is lacking in both cases, moreso on the other car.

Agreed. Ive been looking at cams also for my IX (Still on stock turbo) and been told the same thing. So I probably wont spend the $1000+ on cams for a minimal 10hp gain.
Old Apr 25, 2008, 01:44 PM
  #5  
Evolving Member
Thread Starter
 
Tracer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Ca/Hi/Ga
Posts: 472
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
It's not so much the hp #'s but how the car does pull on the street across the entire powerband, besides the inital tune it's probably the most noticable mod yet, don't regret doing them at all because my biggest complaint was after the inital thrust if you will of the car it slowly would go away, not any more hence the tapering of boost, it just pulls a lot harder and much longer
Old Apr 25, 2008, 02:03 PM
  #6  
Evolved Member
iTrader: (25)
 
sabastian458's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Upstate, SC
Posts: 1,607
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Good numbers, and glad to see another Evo guy in the area!

Now it is time for some exhaust work Buddy of mine made right at 350 whp on the older GSC 272's and stock turbo (evo 8)
Old Apr 25, 2008, 02:48 PM
  #7  
BBS
Evolved Member
iTrader: (18)
 
BBS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 1,337
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by ShamelessCookie
The heatsoak probably did account for some of it.

1) S1s are not very aggressive
2) You have a IX, the stock cams are very well suited to the stock turbo

Peak HP changes are not what upgrading cams is all about... you want to get a stronger powerband with gains across the entire RPM range, not just peak. If you post a comparison of the two runs on top of each other, we can see if the cams helped the entire powerband or not.

I made a smooth and strong 328whp on a Mustang dyno on stock turbo, stock cams, stock O2, and Shell 93... IMHO there is no reason to upgrade cams on the IX until you upgrade the turbo

The fact that you said your car dyno'd "much better than cossi's 272s on a similar 9" leads me to believe the tune is lacking in both cases, moreso on the other car.
well said!
Old Apr 25, 2008, 03:35 PM
  #8  
Evolved Member
iTrader: (88)
 
wshihdnevo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Tacoma
Posts: 2,765
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
s2's, cosi m3's would be what I would go w/ even on a stock turbo on a IX. Just from seeing dyno numbers on both. Glad you are happy w/ them as I will eventually be upgrading to s2's this winter.
Old Apr 26, 2008, 09:40 AM
  #9  
Evolving Member
Thread Starter
 
Tracer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Ca/Hi/Ga
Posts: 472
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Yeah I could have gone with the S2's but my next mod will probably be an ets intercooler with pipes, that being said once those mods are installed I will retune and then do some suspension and some real track time with professionals. Next maybe the poss. hta green, S2's and valvetrain, with an aem setup.
Old Apr 26, 2008, 11:37 PM
  #10  
Evolved Member
iTrader: (3)
 
Hikaru's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 768
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Our cars are almost exactly the same. Same model, color, springs, intake, hallman, walbro,different tbe but they are pretty much the same. Only thing different is you got cams and o2 housing on me. I was tuned at Topspeed as well by Scott and few weeks back. Great shop by the way. He pulled out 322hp and 309tq. My question is this...is it worth it in your eyes to get the gsc s1's and a 02 housing or should I just save up money for the green? Would the power the green makes alone eclipse the power added by the cams and o2 or do I need the green with the cams to really notice a decent power increase? Basically what would net a bigger power increase; the cams and 02 or the green by itself? Nice ride by the way but I'm a little bias...
Old Apr 28, 2008, 12:06 PM
  #11  
Evolved Member
iTrader: (88)
 
wshihdnevo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Tacoma
Posts: 2,765
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Prob the cams over the turbo. Or just get the cams and the green.
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Bugermass
Evo Dyno Tuning / Results
2
Mar 6, 2010 10:15 PM
PERRIN_JOHN
General Engine Management / Tuning Forum
24
Apr 23, 2009 11:01 AM
tuning g
GSC Motorsports - Charleston, SC
42
May 26, 2007 11:18 AM
AutoMotoSports
Vendor Service / Parts / Tuning Review
25
Nov 10, 2006 07:08 AM
David Buschur
Evo General
74
Aug 26, 2005 08:24 AM



Quick Reply: GSC Stage 1 cams installed, wow!



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:43 PM.