So I just made the leap to upgrade my HKS 280 cams to a set of Kelford 272 cams. I have an upgraded valvetrain and ported head, so I figured it was about time to take advantage of it by running a higher lift cam.

Some things to keep in mind:

A. I run an AEM EMS, so phantom knock is a non-issue
B. I have an AMS built 2.0/VSR intake/IC/50 trim turbo kit

Figure I'll just post the charts and let the debate ensue:

Chart 1: HKS 280 (+2i/0e) vs. Kelford 272 (+2i/0e) running identical 93 octane tune



Chart 2: Kelford 272 (various cam gear timings) running identical tunes (but not the same 93 octane tune as Chart 1). Runfile_005 is the +2/0 timing.



Chart 3: Old Setup (HKS 280) vs. New 93 oct (Kelford) vs. Final 100 Oct tune.



l8r)

 

Interesting. It holds a little better on the top end but nothing to write home about.

Thanks for the data

 

out of curiousity, was the tuner the same for both cam sets?

 

Yes, same tuner: Chris Black @ AMS.

Also keep in mind that the 50 trim really runs out of steam when it gets much past 7000 RPM. I believe that on a larger turbo, the difference up top would probably be a little bit larger, but not huge (i.e., not nearly as much as the difference between the HKS 272 and the Kelford 272 in AMS' cam test).

l8r)

 

Good info, I was thinking about upgrading to the Kelford 272s too. I guess I will keep the HKS 280s for now. Thanks for sharing.

 

That is very similar to what I experienced (but no before/after overlays sorry) when I went from hks280's to the k272's, but it was on the stock turbo. Lost an ever-so-slight amount of boost threshold (200rpm?), picked up 0whp peak, but after peak power, it held way better, and IIRC I saw like 20whp gains at 7200rpm or so.

GREAT DATA!

 

Good one Ludi!

.

 

I'm confused.

Wouldn't you want to retune with the new cams to ensure you're getting optimum gains?

 

Wow, this is great! i know what cams i will be getting!

 

I did get retuned - just not for 93 octane.

The problem is that these days I run only 100 octane in my tank. With the previous tune being 93 octane, there was no chance of getting the Kelfords dialed in for a 93 octane tune. I wasn't about to siphon the 100 octane out of the tank. So the best I can do is a straight 1 for 1 comparison, using the identical tune.

l8r)

 

Good info.

 

So it looks like if I upgrade my cams I should go with HKS 280s over 272 Kelfords

 

^ I would probably get the kelfords if you don't already have cams. If you already have the HKS' just stay with them.

 

I really dont think its far to compare 280's with 272's, it would be a better to do either hks 272's vs kelford 272's or hks 280's vs kelford 280's.

 

The HKS 272 cams were already compared to the Kelford 272 cams in AMS' cam test. Furthermore, just because a cam is advertised at the same duration (e.g., 272, 280) does not necessarily make it equivalent to another cam advertised at the same duration. As can be seen from the results, the lower lift, higher duration HKS cam is pretty close to the higher lift, shorter duration Kelford cam in this particular scenario.

Not necessarily. In my mind the conclusions you can make from this test are:

a. if you don't want to upgrade your valvetrain, then the HKS 280 remains a good choice
b. if you don't have enough turbo to take advantage of the additional flow the Kelford offers in the upper RPM range, then there isn't that much difference between the two

I'm pretty sure the Kelford 272 will outperform the HKS 280, given the right setup (ported head, upgraded valvetrain, better intake mani, large enough turbo), but on a stockish setup, the difference wouldn't be that great.

To be honest, if I didn't have plans for my car (HTA 35R), I'd have been a little bummed with my results.

l8r)