My memory never has been great so I'm going to write this up and hope I get most of it as accurately as I can recall. If I miss something Rogue can jump in and correct me and I'll fix the information if he does.

Here is the basics. Rogue has an EVO8, stock ECU, stock MAF. Engine troubles with his 2 liter meant he needed a new engine. We had built a 2.4 liter engine using the Manley billet 100mm crank, Manley 5.9" rod and Manley custom pistons.

The engine was showing knock counts and I did everything I could as the tuner to get rid of them. The only way to get them to quiet down was to add race gas to the pump gas. The problem in my mind though was the knock counts the engine was showing just didn't add up and at the boost levels I was running I didn't feel should be there. Regardless they were and after a lot of work and a lot of dyno tuning I simply could not get the car to make the big power number I had hoped to see. With the mixture of pump gas/race gas in the car the best I could get out of it was about 440 ft lbs and 430 whp.

A little more information, the car when built was running a FP Red, Kelford 272's, stock cylinder head with single Supertech springs, BR FMIC, BR exhaust, BR manual boost controller, fuel pump, i/c pipes etc. Many of you will remember the thread about the cams and such.

The end result with the car in January was 405 whp and 430 ft lbs of torque, that was tuned on straight 93 fuel as high as I could get the car to run safely and that was a pull in 4th gear. Obviously the air temps in January (here in Ohio) were also very favorable for making power.

Rogue and I talked a lot about my opinions and what I thought could be done to eliminate the knock counts and make more power. The one thing I told him I seem see a pattern with was the Kelford 272's not being able to run as much ignition advance as other cams in every car I see come through here. I have tested a LOT of cams in my RS, over 10 sets/types at this point, but never back to back testing on the Kelfords and I made that clear. It was the one unknown though in the entire combination of parts.

Well Rogue brought the car back to us a few weeks ago and asked us to install a used set of BF272's he had bought and put our dual springs/retainers in the car (which it needs to run our cam). We also changed to the ID1000 cc injectors and those had to be re-scaled.

Today I got a chance to put the car back on the dyno. This is obviously not a true back to back test as the last runs were done in January. **Please note though, January is cold here, the timing/fueling were completely unchanged, the boost was unchanged but slightly higher now, average boost across pull is the same. Also note that the PEAK boost change was for a short period between 3800-4800 rpm.

Now for the actual pulls. I have printed the sheet and it is posted below. The Kelford 272's made more power under 3900 rpm than the BF272's. The Kelford's had considerably higher knock counts than the BF272's. The Kelfords had a higher minimum boost during the pull, 1.8 psi, the BF272's had 1.5 psi more boost at 4200 rpm but as you will see they are very close. Average boost across the 3,000-7,000 pull they are identical with 23.1 psi.

With NO tuning to the fuel or ignition maps other than the injector scaling for the ID1000's the car gained 25 whp and 19 ft lbs of torque.

Here is the dyno sheet:



No, this is not a scientific test, no the testing was not done back-to-back. I am VERY confident in the power change being made from the cams based on the datalogs, knock counts dropping, colder weather as a benefit for the Kelfords in January and the AFR's etc.

 

Dave,

I am not saying this about Kelfords in particular, but one thing I have noticed on some cam manufacturers is the dowels in the cam are not properly located it seems.

This affects how the fuel map looks and the timing. Stock 2005s (some 2003s but very limited) are the worst for this and can need as much as 7-8* more advance everywhere to make the power. The fuel map also will look wrong (for stock injectors) with numbers like 11.6 to get a 11.6...on stock injectors.

I have swapped other cams in and BAMMM back to what I consider a normal timing and fuel map for 92 octane. I have seen it go the other way and for whatever reason I make the same power (lets say 350whp) at 8* on the edge of knock instead of the 14-15* I would suspect on something like the S2 (this was a IX cam issue). Centerline/ramp rate really seems to be the cause when you have a known cam that should perform but something is holding it back (knock or not).

I dont use the Kelfords much and have never personally tested them in my cars. We have installed them and tuned them for customers and much as you found, it seems there was 20-30whp on the table (DJ numbers) that should be there based on the "advertised specs" but for whatever reason wouldnt happen. Timing seemed right, AFR was right, just down on power. In one instance the difference car to car (same turbo, injectors, fuel, and me tuning) was silly. GSC S1s made 424 with a BBK at 26psi in the one and 381-385 in the other with Kelford 272s.

my data anyway

aaron

 

I have Kelford 272 and my car won’t take a lot of timing like others. I can get away with 12* by 7K rpm and 14* by 8000 at the most at 23 psi and 11.3 AFR. Not sure if cams are the reason but that’s how it is.

Aaron,

If on the same car you can run 14* with cam X and 8* with Kelford 272 at the same PSI and RPM point will you be making more power with Cam X because of timing? OR even if you run less timing with the Kelford you make similar or more power? This is comparing to other cam with the same advertised timing (i.e. another 272).

 

Good info David.

I meant to ask you about his car when I was there last week because I thought you had retuned it, lol.

Good stuff!

Thanks for sharing.

 

It's not been said directly, but I'm assuming you degreed the cams in accordance with the mfr's spec card?

If not, this test doesn't reveal much at all.

 

Everything I've read says the Kelford's don't need to be degree'd...but it IS the internet.

 

Interesting David, thank you!

Mikey

 

I had a set of the weird *** stock cams in my 05, still have them as a matter of fact! I remember seeing Aarons face the day he pulled the map off the car! :WTF:

 

JohnBradley, it's intersting to hear you seem to have seen the same results. I know there have been a LOT of Kelford 272's sold because of AMS's testing and personally I have yet to see impressive results from them.

 

Wow!!! Is that on an VIII or a IX? Or neither. Not taking into consideration the AMS test a lot of tuners swear by them. I was told by a local tuner (you know who he is) that the Kelford 272 are the best cams he has used on an VIII.

 

I know that during the AMS cam test, the cams were degreed in, which is the correct way to make sure that no mismachining has occurred. With out degreeing cams in, youre relying totally on the mfrs quality control, which Im sure, not every cam that comes out is spot on every time.

 

Has anybody that has noted low power out of the Kelfords used cam gears and played around with cam timing changes?

 

14* is most stock cams and S2s. Cam "X" that only needed 8* was not a Kelford. They made even power, that was alluding to the cam dowel being incorrect not one making more or less power. That was the S1 to the Kelford 272 on the same type of car and same turbo at the same boost level.

The Kelfords have been down on power in both the VIIIs and IXs in my experience. The IX I can degree on the fly, the VIIIs rarely have cam gears but if they are off it becomes obvious in the timing map very quickly.

 

It looked like a VP import timing map.

Dave,

I have yet to be impressed by them. I am thinking about trying the 280s in something but with the S2 doing what they do and doing it so well, its hard for me to break the mold.

 

I have been thinking bout getting cams for my car and was considering the Kelfords due to a few friends having them in their cars and getting good results. But more and more I am thinking GSC's partly due to cost and what not but I am really not going to have much done either so whatever. I will see how they do at Elevation as well.