This is Dustin from BC. I will be the first to admit back in 2008 we had some issues. Brian started the company in 2006 and it actually expanded too fast and we didn't have the correct staff in place we experienced some growing pains. Any issues we had were taken care of years ago and we made the correct employee changes and all issues have been addressed. If any one has any questions or concerns with the BC Line my direct line is 619-749-9018 ext 101 or you can email me direct at dustin@briancrower.com

 

I always liked how that HKS 272 graph looked, zero low end loss! But I wonder if zero loss still applies with a stock turbo? I use my Evo for Autocross, so low end power is important to me, I wonder what camshaft type (if any) would provide near zero low end loss & some significant mid-high end power with a stock engine/turbo, similar to that HKS. I'm currently considering 3 types, HKS 264, HKS 272, GSC S1. Any tips or links to other camshaft reviews would be appreciated.

 

I have a GSC S2 on my 2.0L Gt3076r and is there any better way of setting the cams for more better low end response?

 

The WORKS 269 Cams that I am currently running made a significant increase in HP and TQ vs stock, using the stock turbo with virtually no low end loss. Planning to switch them out soon, cause they are not big enough for my current setup. If you are not planning to switch to a bigger turbo they might be a good set to look at.

 

What's your current setup? Do you have dyno a sheet for those Works results?

 

My current setup is

Built 2.0l
Built head, stock size valves
WORKS 269's
Autronic PNP
AMS F1-I IM
Boomba TB
Apexi RX6R Turbo Kit
and a whole lot more

You would be more interested in the results when all I had was

Intake
Turbo Back Exhaust
IC piping
Autronic

Then installed the cams, and injectors, AEM boost control solenoid

Let me hunt down that graph, I have it somewhere...

 

Ok I found them. Sorry the first one got pretty beat up, it is from 2004 though.

Also, I think I miss quoted parts, I believe that I had the Autronic installed with the cams now, so that will make some difference. Although at those power levels a good tuner should be able to get similar results.

Not sure what was going on with the TQ reading, I want to say it was actually about 265. lol

The power increase cam from an o2 outlet housing

Before Cams





After Cams



As you can see the torque comes on only a few hundred RPM later with great results. Idle is pretty much stock.

 

Not bad! Let me know when you get new cams, I might buy the 269s from you. Are you using aftermarket springs & retainers?

 

Get GSC S2s and don't look back. They are WAY better than the ones you listed above and minimal to no lose in spool from S1 to S2. Yuo need springs/retainers for the S2s though. Works 269s are horrible cams in my opinion.

Mikey

 

Could you elaborate further about the Works 269? Do you have a dyno test for S2s? Bear in mind that I need cams with minimal or no low-end loss with a 'stock turbo'. The S2s are good cams, but unlike the S1s, they are advertised by the manufacturer for the use with a GT30 size or larger turbos, not stock.

 

There are tons of dyno graphs with the S2 cams on this site. You will not lose any "low end" with these cams. It has been proven time and time again.

 

S2's are what I am going with, if I don't do a custom cam. I have to argue about the WORKS being horrible though, my graphs are proof they are not bad at all. 65whp max power increase and if you look closely there are spots that they increased power by 95whp. How do you judge your cam if the 269's are horrible?

I am not the end all to knowledge regarding engine building and Evo's or anything having to do with cars for that matter, but here is my opinion. Everyone uses the S2's as the catch all cam. They are an incredible cam there is no doubt about it, however with lift being 11.5 and 11mm they are too big for 80% of the cars out there. The stock head can not flow enough air to take advantage of more then 10.5mm of lift, so why go with the larger cam that requires the additional spring/retainers for stock long block cars?

Foxbat, I am using Kiggly beehives, I wore out the WORKS springs and retainers I was using. They had 45K miles on them with lots of track days and 8700rpm redline, which is why I ran springs and retainers in the first place.

 

Hi Mikey,
can kindly share what is the cams setting for S2?
just follow the cam setting specs from GSC?

Thanks

 

First off there are a lot more variables in making power other than "lift"... Effective durration and ramp rate are exstremely important, more so than lift in most ocasions. I may agree with you on the stock head not being able to utilize the 11+mm lift but you buy the S2s for more than their lift. The S2s ramp rate is what allows you to run a larger cam without the expense of low end power.

The below graph is a HKS 272/280 combo swapped out for a custom S2. Substaintial gains with no loss in spool, nothing was changed on this combo but the cams. This cam is a 12mm lift cam and a 274* just like a std S2s. These cams are LARGER than the S2s in effective duration and make the same power as S3s but with zero loss in spool. Cam engineering is a lot more than a * and mm lift. At 8000rpm the new cams are making 150whp more and have a smaller "advertised" duration than the HKS 280s. Now that is GSC making a cam that works and works better than any other cam on the market in my opinion. You have to look at the whole cam, and lift is just a small piece of the pie, not saying you weren't just stating what I have dealt with in the past.



I'll tell you from my experiance with works products, not just their cams, you pay more and get less compared to what else is on the market. Works actually molded the 269 after the HKS line up, a combo of the 264 and 272. I have also never seen 269 cams give someone the power you are claiming, not saying that your numbers are incorrect or that you did other upgrades between the two dynos but I think the most I have ever seen 269s were 30whp and that was a 3076 car. They do tend to produce more mid range tq than HKS cams but HKS 272s usually make more power. Any cam that sounds like stock cams wont make the power plain and simple

Your dyno graphs are also 3 years apart so as far as I'm concerned I don't believe for a second you gained 95whp from a works 269. Maybe with more boost...

btw did this on my phone so the spelling may suck. damn driod

Mikey

 

Found a dyno graph comparing S2s to Kelford 272s, it shows that both are equal at low end, the S2s are slightly better at mid range which means that they are great cams. I still have no proof of their low end capability! If they are equal to Kelfords at low end, it means that some low end loss is expected. My hunch is that a lower than 272 degrees cams are needed for a close to zero low-lend oss. Good 272+ cams might show good low end performance but, in modified cars, larger turbos, or larger piping & ICs, with which the car already has more lag than stock.