you haven't told us why people get staggered setups...

you didn't understand that i was referring to my "youre face is..." comment

you failed to read the stuff i posted... cuz that is my proof to back up my statements.

and you also fail to notice that on one dyno, on the same day, back to back, dynos have a sigma of around 10hp, which means that there are variations run to run up to 10hp, simply because your car doesn't even run the same, so it recording the same thing every time would be false... basically, unless you did lots of runs and those are the averages... there's no claim.

in any case with minimal mods it makes sense that the difference isn't that huge. until you get into bigger boost and stuff you can't expect cams to shine. so why get staggered if the other guy ends up having more potential?

what the posts above say are ted b's cam adventures and how he shows that it's all in the cam timing, idle quality, torque curve placement, everything is in how you tune the cams. if you want more idle quality you can dial out the overlap. if you want more peak power you retard the cams. if you want more torque sooner then you advance the cams. same is said in the ams articles, ted b has fuel economy and dynos to prove his results.

 

you're inserting your foot in your own mouth. With your claimed sigma of 10hp on dynos from run to run, you wouldn't be able to discern a difference with straggered or straight setups.

 

i wasn't finished writing... and the arguement is not that it isn't discernable becuase it is if you average several runs... i'm just being **** about proof. there are some people that have switched out of staggered setups with some gain and for sure switching from 264s to 272s with big boost snags a lot of power. does anyone remember when gt40 took the pipe cams out and put hte hks 272s back in?

and this example i would say backs up what i said in the very beginning. if the 272s offer no downside... then why would you go otherwise?

 

lol...you clicked "post" but weren't finished writing?

Please show some dynos of people getting lots of power by switching from staggered setups.

There is no WAY you can give proof because conditions vary too much. Just a simple cool down for cam install/uninstall will throw off dyno numbers by a few HP...add that to your 10hp run to run sigma...and you have "some gain" allegedly caused by a straight setup.

 

which is why people need to take a more rigorous approach to dynoing things, and yes i always click post and then go back and edit about 10 times.

see even right there, i went back and changed the phrase to several runs and your quote says what i first wrote... the runs.

i don't really understand why the burden of proof is on me to provide people with the proof that 272s straight will make more hp than a staggered setup. but if it's gonna come to something like that then i'll quote roadraceengineering.com

The 264 duration cams are the street cams, the 272 duration cams are the race cams. Everyone is building a "race" car in their mind, sure. But if you care about a silky smooth idle, get the street cams. Don't buy the 272s and run to a message board like a ***** and whine about the lumpity idle. If you think you have a street/race car... get the 264 intake and the 272 exhaust. It is a nice compromise.

the compromise i will say is in power for idle which is what scot told me.

 

Dude that's the F-ing point. There's barely ANY difference with running staggered vs. straight setup on the stock turbo. The difference is so small that run to run variance will make any quantifiable variance null and void.

 

whoa... when did we talk about stock turbo? i was speaking in general...

so why again would you pick one over the other if the straight setup offers more potential and capacity?

 

lol...the burden of proof is on you because of your statement that people with staggered setups shouldnt drive evos. This isnt about idle quality or cam gears, this is about a staggered setup vs a straight setup whether its a 264 272 or 280.

 

Id say about 90% of evo owners are still on the stock turbo, so that makes the argument about stock turbos. Stop trying to twist the facts to warp them to make what you said believable. Your like arguing with a child.

 

Fine, let's see it on any turbo....Evodave is putting out 560whp on a staggered setup...I'm guessing he shouldn't be allowed to own an Evo either.

Our theory is the one that has more defense here...you need to show atleast 15whp gains for me to believe that a staggered setup is costing people horsepower.

 

i still don't see why... you still have not even said why you run staggered... you guys keep harping on the fact that i say people that run staggered shouldn't own evos.

i explained why i said this. i said this because ad ONLY for this reason, that most people come running to evom all afraid of of cam lope when in fact there is not that much lope to be concerned about. IF you are one to concern yourself with lope SO much so that it affects your cam duration decision then i'd say you're diluded. (if this has nothing to do with your decision then i'm not referring to you)

you have this performance car and you're putting a serious performance part in it (cams is pretty big, the biggest bump in power after exhaust and short of a large turbo). yet you're gonna skimp a little because of what you may have heard over the internet to be a calmer idle? (which in my opinion is again a non issue because the lope you get with a staggered setup is very similar to just running the straight 272. so why risk? why skimp? because it comes that way stock? all i'm saying is that with more duration you have more flexibility because as i already said, you can dial out the overlap or you can keep it there for the peak power or you can shift the torque peak around for a longer torque curve.

what is the problem? where am i wrong?

 

The problem is that your not reading what im saying or just dont comprehend anything beyong your narrow train of thought. Ive already said this, I run a staggered setup because the motor comes from the factory this way. Tuners are able to tune out the lope if the cust wants without gears so that takes away your theory that people go staggered to avoid bad idle quality. There is a thread on here where all straight durations were tested on a car and yes the 272's peaked 3hp more than the 264's but lost ~10 ft lbs and had a narrower power band. Im done pounding sand with you, think before you speak next time.

Heres a quick idle video from my car. I like the lope. http://www.sihatch.com/Videos/MOV00199.MPG

 

You're all beating yourselves up over this.

The factory exhaust cam is 'smaller', and the reasons for that may be derived in head flow characteristics, and/or more likely, emissions.

Can one make 550+ hp with a 264/272 setup? Yes, it's been done. Does it mean there isn't power left on the table? No. Basic physics dictates that a shorter duration cam set will run out of puff earlier in the rpm range. As to just where this becomes significant is all that's debatable here. This may or may not be very much of an issue at 7000rpm, but will become increasingly more significant at 7500, more so at 8000, even more so at 8500, and definitely by 9000rpm.

And of course, we're talking of cams installed 'straight up', which in the case of HKS, is 110deg and 110deg lobe centerlines. As soon as a set of cam gears is tossed into the mix, a longer duration cam set can deliver greater top end power AND the same or even better midrange torque as a smaller cam set, depending on the details of the application and of course, the efficiency of the tuning.

 

i'll change my original post to if you are citing idle as a rason to run staggered then you shouldn't own an evo. happy? if you are ok with staggered, if it's enough, or if you don't wanna buy cam gears. that's totally fine... not bashing that. what i was trying to say was what ted b said cuz that is my narrowminded philosophy on cams.

 

I would try almost anything once...someone get me a 280!