When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Mitsubishi’s 4G63 engine is arguably one of the best four-cylinder engines ever built. While the early variants set records powering DSMs, later versions of the engine propelled the EVO VIII and EVO IX. In terms of strength, power potential and ease of service, the 4G63 engine simply has no equal. When DSPORT set out to conduct an extensive camshaft showcase, the 4G63 EVO VIII engine was the obvious choice. Thanks to the Volumetric Efficicency (VE)-based technology in the latest-generation of aftermarket ECUs, DSPORT is able to conduct the most comprehensive, accurate and repeatable “cam-paro” ever.
The 4G63 has a number of design features that make it ideal for high-performance upgrades. The 4G63’s cast iron block doesn’t require sleeving to support extreme cylinder pressures and power output. The factory crankshaft is also capable of handling in excess of 1,000 horsepower. Simply upgrading the rods and pistons allows the power handling of the short block assembly to eclipse the 1,000-pony mark.
We tested a vast variety of cams such as HKS, Comp, Kelford, Cosworth, GSC, Tomei, Buschur, and Jun. Be sure to read the full article to see how all these cams performed.
What was done as far as boost for different cams? Was boost control adjusted to deliver the same boost on each cam, or was the boost control left alone and boost allowed to vary with each cam?
And wow, its not surprising to see the numbers measured by you guys vary from the claimed specs, but some of them are pretty far off of claimed. The GSC S2 and S3, in particular the S3 has a 9* variance on the exhaust cam. Other manufacturers appear to be much closer to advertised, that's a very large variance for the claims GSC makes of being a high quality manufacturer.
Why didn't you guys give measured vs advertised lift numbers?
And I wonder if Buschur is going to be mad that everyone now knows his "top secret" 272 cam specs...haha
Yes, there are some things here that seem a bit goofy, so I wouldn't scrutinize this with a magnifying glass. For example, the recorded VE between HKS 272 and Tomei 290 is virtually identical at 8500 rpm, but there is an 80 whp difference. Obviously, something has to be different to account for the disparity in power. What is it? And since the BF 272 cams were mentioned, how is it possible for them to have greater duration @ 0.050" lift than 1 mm? I'd like to see the shape of that lobe!
It's a fun test and a good read, but there are unresolved issues.
Yes, there are some things here that seem a bit goofy, so I wouldn't scrutinize this with a magnifying glass. For example, the recorded VE between HKS 272 and Tomei 290 is virtually identical at 8500 rpm, but there is an 80 whp difference. Obviously, something has to be different to account for the disparity in power. What is it? And since the BF 272 cams were mentioned, how is it possible for them to have greater duration @ 0.050" lift than 1 mm? I'd like to see the shape of that lobe!
It's a fun test and a good read, but there are unresolved issues.
Also just wanted to say thanks to the DSport guys. You guys are awesome. Great to work with, and just the type of people we need to keep the industry informed. It was a fun project.
The car has been running awesome. It has seen a few changes since the test. It is now on the FIC 1650cc High Z injectors, and Curt Brown Ported stock IM, 4port EBC, Spoolin Up CDI Blue COP, and a 1pc Carbon Fiber drive shaft.
Dyno sheet with the current setup.
AEM Infinity
12 position trim switch
4port boost controller
FIC 1650cc - 83%dc - BFP 53psi
ETS Ti UICP
Stock Rebuilt Throttle Body
CB Ported IM
Light port to head
Supertech Dual Springs + Retainers
SS Valves
GSC S2 Cams
ARP 625+ studs
CP Pistons 10.5:1
Carrillio Rods
Stock Crank
JMF Vband Exhaust Manifold
FP 3586 .63 Tial housing
Pump E85
Jun 29, 2015, 08:55 AM
