Someone sent me a PM based on my sig. asking about them, and I realized I never made a thread about them.

I know the 272's are very popular after the AMS testing, but the car they were using was well beyond anything I'll have in the near future. I looked around and had considered pretty much everything. I wanted decent power and didn't really care if the idle ended up having some lope or not. The main thing was I wanted this without replacing the stock springs/retainers. I had actually ordered the new version of the GSC S1's originally, but they were having problems getting the first batch out so I looked at the Kelford 264's.

I'll skip all the in between stuff...but they feel great. It did me me a lopey idle but it doesn't bother me too much. I'm waiting for my tactrix cable to show up so I can tweak some things at idle. Other than that these things are top notch. For the most part they seem to be as aggressive a cam set you can go safely without upgrading springs and retainers.

The car was dynoed before at AMS and done after the cams and LICP at a different location. Because of this I won't bother posting numbers because you certainly can't compare from one dyno to the other. I will say I now build power all the way to redline. The turbo spools quicker and the power response is noticeably sooner. Nothing against GSC, but I'm glad I ended up with the Kelford cams.

If anyone cares to see the cam card from them I can try and go dig it up.

*cliffs* Kelford 264's are awesome. Buy them.

 

I've been watching this thread since it cropped up. No feedback?? Nobody else running these?

 

A bit OT but I had the 272s installed by TTP. Pulls really hard up top (when tuned) compared to a similar modded Evo 9 with HKS 272 cams The idle lopes a bit but nothing crazy.

I suspect the Kelford 264 are close to the FP and GSC varients from some of the write ups Ive seen.

 

We stock all of the above. We also have a special version 11.2mm intake and 10.5mm exhaust with lower duration we want to test on a stock turbo. Glad you like the cams.

 

The Kelford 264's would be slightly more aggressive according to the cam card it came with. I love them. If I upgrade turbos I would be sticking with something stock frame (so FP Red would be the largest) so these cams would still work for me. I was shocked to see it pull all the way to redline on the dyno. I'm extremely happy with them.

 

Upgrading springs/retainers is NOT something that I want to do either. I read through the entire AMS cam test (nearly 500 posts) and the Kelford 272 were #2 after the GSC S2. I'd be interested in anything else you have to offer or post a dyno chart so that I can take a look at it.

 

Are you talking to me or TTP? If you're talking to me, is there something in particular that you are curious about or concerned with?

 

Kelford claims upgraded springs are not needed with the 272's; many people are running them with stock springs and we'll be installing a set on my friend's IX w/stock springs next week.

 

Interesting! Can we get more info on those?

 

They say you don't need them because you don't, but they certainly suggest them. That goes for most 272's for all that matter. GSC S2's are the same.

 

Ok, so cam newb here, but if your going to get more aggressive cams, why wouldn't your upgrade the valve train? cost?
Also, say your get a set of cams that aren't that aggressive and you go ahead and upgrade the valve train, will that set of springs and retainer work for a more aggressive cam later on down the road?

 

Cost is one reason. Not really needing it is another. HKS for example are low lift cams so stock valvetrain is fine. For your second question...yes.

 

I based my decision mainly off of my ultimate goals. If I upgrade turbos it will be something small (stock frame) so I don't need anything too big. I might end up just leaving things how they are for quite a while, and I'm very happy with the results. I daily drive the car so I don't need anything too aggressive. I'm sure I left a few HP on the table by not going larger...but I'm not trying to break records.

 

Stiffer valve springs also means more valvetrain loss = less hp. If you don't plan on revving higher than the stock rev limit (i.e. stock turbo) then there is no reason to worry.

 

I would be interested in reading what these cams are all about.

I would like to take a look at the card if you find it. Also, would you happen to have a dyno sheet of your "after" so that the power under the curve can be checked out?

I'm not sure I understand what you're referring to by "going larger" (i.e. - cams or turbo) but the main thing to consider are the flow rates for any cam you decide to go with. On a stock head, anything over 10.5mm it is highly recommended that springs/retainers are upgraded not to mention that the stock head suffers and is choked up by the increased rate of flow. You have to remember that everything compliments everything (i.e. - turbo, cams, FMIC, etc.) and having bigger cams doesn't necessarily equate to more power if their full potential can't be taken advantage of.