269 cam lifts
Sep 1, 2004, 11:43 AM
#91
Originally Posted by EM@WORKS
Should you get the springs and retainers at the same time? Hell yes! They might not be "needed" for the WORKS 269 Power Cams, but there are a lot of benefits of going to the upgraded valve train.
One of the most obvious is to be able to rev higher. The WORKS 269 Power Cams have a much greater top end than stock, and will still make good torque pass 8000rpms. With the WORKS valve train, you can go there and back everyday, or even higher! (as high as 8500rpms!) Higher Revs with a matched cam will make more power.
With the upgraded Springs/Retainers, we get access up to 8500rpms. Does the power range increase from redline up to 8500rpms, or are we just able to rev that high and the power stays consistent (thereby allowing up to stay in the upper rpm's more)???
Sep 1, 2004, 12:22 PM
#92
Evolved Member
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: bay area
Posts: 1,332
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by EM@WORKS
... there are a lot of benefits of going to the upgraded valve train.
One of the most obvious is to be able to rev higher. The WORKS 269 Power Cams have a much greater top end than stock, and will still make good torque pass 8000rpms. With the WORKS valve train, you can go there and back everyday, or even higher! (as high as 8500rpms!) Higher Revs with a matched cam will make more power.
One of the most obvious is to be able to rev higher. The WORKS 269 Power Cams have a much greater top end than stock, and will still make good torque pass 8000rpms. With the WORKS valve train, you can go there and back everyday, or even higher! (as high as 8500rpms!) Higher Revs with a matched cam will make more power.
Sep 1, 2004, 01:30 PM
#93
Evolved Member
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Salem, OR
Posts: 2,064
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by EM@WORKS
Abrupt gas expansion cools the exhaust gases rapidly and creates undesirable turbulence... back pressure. It's pure thermodynamics we are talking about here. This has been tested; we made it 2.75" for a reason and it wasn't cost. (2.75" material is more expensive than the more common 3")
We are talking about the downpipe. I repeat: the stock O2 sensor housing outlet is very small (2.5"). This is why the 2.75" DOWNPIPE works best, with whatever catback you have. There is LESS backpressure (read: more power) with the 2.75" downpipe partly because of the O2 sensor housing outlet.
I hope this helps you understand. The 2.75" down pipe was engineered to work best with the stock turbo and stock O2 sensor housing. Moving up to our Cast O2 housing with 3" outlet and our 3" downpipe will result in good power gains. But not the 3" downpipe alone.
But boomn29 is right. We should reserve this thread for the original topic. We will be more than happy to discuss fluid dynamics & thermodynamics if you want to give us a call or check out www.asme.org or www.sae.org.
We are talking about the downpipe. I repeat: the stock O2 sensor housing outlet is very small (2.5"). This is why the 2.75" DOWNPIPE works best, with whatever catback you have. There is LESS backpressure (read: more power) with the 2.75" downpipe partly because of the O2 sensor housing outlet.
I hope this helps you understand. The 2.75" down pipe was engineered to work best with the stock turbo and stock O2 sensor housing. Moving up to our Cast O2 housing with 3" outlet and our 3" downpipe will result in good power gains. But not the 3" downpipe alone.
But boomn29 is right. We should reserve this thread for the original topic. We will be more than happy to discuss fluid dynamics & thermodynamics if you want to give us a call or check out www.asme.org or www.sae.org.
Sep 1, 2004, 02:20 PM
#95
Account Disabled
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 396
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by boomn29
I thought the P2 removed the rev limit altogether?
Sep 2, 2004, 12:30 AM
#96
Evolved Member
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: bay area
Posts: 1,332
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by EM@WORKS
One of the most obvious is to be able to rev higher. The WORKS 269 Power Cams have a much greater top end than stock, and will still make decent torque past 8000rpms. With the WORKS valve train, you can go there and back everyday, or even higher! (as high as 8500rpms!) Higher Revs with a matched cam will make more power.
And I have to bump my question about your opinion of the stock bottom end's being able to handle 8500rpm, as this goes against what pretty much every other respected tuner has stated about e.g. our rod bolts.
Sep 2, 2004, 10:11 AM
#97
Account Disabled
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 396
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The valve train will handle high revs with the upgraded WORKS parts. The stock bottem end is a different story. If you want to go to 8500rpms every day and not worry at all, build the bottem end to take it.
Sep 8, 2004, 04:37 AM
#99
Are there any dyno sheets of these cams? Before and after? Everyone keeps saying they "feel " better and faster. I would like to see the improvement in the area under the curver (torque) throughout the RPM range. I am sitting on the fence on which cams to get. I want the most improvement in the lower RPM range and under the curve. Not peak HP numbers. How do these compare to the HKS in that regard?
Sep 8, 2004, 05:39 AM
#100
Originally Posted by TylerO@WORKS
The valve train will handle high revs with the upgraded WORKS parts. The stock bottem end is a different story. If you want to go to 8500rpms every day and not worry at all, build the bottem end to take it.
Sep 8, 2004, 09:42 AM
#102
Evolving Member
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: SoCal
Posts: 315
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by David@Vishnu
Thanks for clarifying why the claim of these HUGE rev limits then? How do you all feel about 8K?
Don't you and your crew have some dynos to recalibrate?
Or temperature probes speaking of "claims"...
Sep 8, 2004, 02:42 PM
#104
Evolved Member
iTrader: (10)
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Orange County, CA
Posts: 1,630
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by David@Vishnu
Thanks for clarifying why the claim of these HUGE rev limits then? How do you all feel about 8K?
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
yitzac1990
08+ Lancer Show / Shine
12
Apr 13, 2010 08:52 AM
