bc 272 cams any good?
Jul 20, 2010, 01:45 PM
#31
Evolving Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (14)
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: florida
Posts: 366
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
well we are talking about sound arent we? now can you honestly tell me youd rather listen to an evo over say a ferrari? ar even a nice exhaust on a mustang?
but first i cant afford a ferrari and i may like the sound of an old v8 but they are garbage. so here i am with an evo.
but first i cant afford a ferrari and i may like the sound of an old v8 but they are garbage. so here i am with an evo.
Jul 20, 2010, 02:49 PM
#32
Evolving Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: s.c.
Posts: 387
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The lope of a cam is almost completely dependent on the tune.. You can tune the lope out of just about every cam to make it sound nearly factory.
I have BC 272s in my car and I love the way they sound.. I actually have the lopiest cams out of all the local guys and the rest of them are running Kelfords that have nearly no lope, but again it's probably just because they were tuned that way. I'm also faster ; P lol.
IMO BC cams are good if you're doing AutoX/Road Racing because they seem to respond very quickly, make good downlow power, and because of the gradual ramp rate they're easy on your stock valvetrain, whereas the Kelford 272s are much more aggressive. The Kelfords should make more power but you can probably pick up a set of BC 272s for like $200 *cough* MINE! *cough* lol. When I was on just basic bolt ons and stock evo8 turbo I loved how much quicker my car felt after I installed the BC cams. After a little bit of tuning they were great. When I bought them though I was under the impression that they were one of the better cams to get on the market.. But now if you're just going for peak horsepower numbers Kelfords/GSC seem to be the way to go on stock frame turbos.
I have BC 272s in my car and I love the way they sound.. I actually have the lopiest cams out of all the local guys and the rest of them are running Kelfords that have nearly no lope, but again it's probably just because they were tuned that way. I'm also faster ; P lol.
IMO BC cams are good if you're doing AutoX/Road Racing because they seem to respond very quickly, make good downlow power, and because of the gradual ramp rate they're easy on your stock valvetrain, whereas the Kelford 272s are much more aggressive. The Kelfords should make more power but you can probably pick up a set of BC 272s for like $200 *cough* MINE! *cough* lol. When I was on just basic bolt ons and stock evo8 turbo I loved how much quicker my car felt after I installed the BC cams. After a little bit of tuning they were great. When I bought them though I was under the impression that they were one of the better cams to get on the market.. But now if you're just going for peak horsepower numbers Kelfords/GSC seem to be the way to go on stock frame turbos.
Jul 20, 2010, 03:07 PM
#34
Evolving Member
iTrader: (6)
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Sucktown, MO
Posts: 352
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You are also correct though in that every cam will sound a little different on install. I'm not debating that. Just saying that if you aren't happy with how lopey your cam is, it can be changed.
Jul 20, 2010, 07:15 PM
#35
my 1st tune with basic bolt ons i made 297whp/???tq (cant remember 
)... re-tuned by Sean Ivey after installing the BC 272s and jumped to 330whp/324tq... i thought these cams were the best bang for the buck back then... i was impressed with the results @24lbs... this was on a stock 8 turbo also...
i have kelfords now but thats because im running the FP Black and Sean told me i should have a more agressive cam for my setup... im kinda curious to kno what numbers i would have put down on the BCs...
i wouldnt rule the cams out, i mean now there are much better cams out on the market for decent prices, but i wouldnt just base my decision on one tuning company's comparison test...
)... re-tuned by Sean Ivey after installing the BC 272s and jumped to 330whp/324tq... i thought these cams were the best bang for the buck back then... i was impressed with the results @24lbs... this was on a stock 8 turbo also...i have kelfords now but thats because im running the FP Black and Sean told me i should have a more agressive cam for my setup... im kinda curious to kno what numbers i would have put down on the BCs...
i wouldnt rule the cams out, i mean now there are much better cams out on the market for decent prices, but i wouldnt just base my decision on one tuning company's comparison test...
Jul 20, 2010, 07:31 PM
#36
i like how ams writes a bs review in a mag about them just because they had a falling out and now they get labled as junk ever since. ive had my bc 280's since bc came out. ive made great power with them and run them at 0 degrees. alot of big time evo shops talk alot. doesnt mean its true use ur own brain to figure out what u want to go with dont base it off of everyone elses thoughts. crower has been making cams longer then everyone listed in this thread. whether its the father or son brian, u dont think they use the same techniques.
Jul 20, 2010, 07:43 PM
#37
Evolving Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: s.c.
Posts: 387
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
iam pretty sure bc cams are made in China buddy. And its very cheap on price. I dont trust nobody, i just dont trust stuff made from The Republic of China. Never heard any thing good made from china that's all.
Jul 20, 2010, 08:32 PM
#42
I don't recall having problems with Crower (not Brian Crower) cams being well off cam card specs, and my experience with Crower cams goes back to 1986. AMS' revelation that the BC cams were well off published spec is telling. Does that mean the BC cams are inconsistently off spec, or consistently off? It makes a difference.
The world of questionable QC is not a fun one.
Jul 20, 2010, 09:44 PM
#45
Evolving Member
iTrader: (6)
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Sucktown, MO
Posts: 352
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The guy that tuned my car has a 1G DSM running the BC280 cams on a 2.0L 35R like me.. stock head, stock intake, stock tb, dsm link, e85, and stock drivetrain with an ACT clutch. Fastest DSM in the area right now. He runs 10.5 @ 135-136mph pretty consistently and it takes him like half an hour to shift from 1st to 2nd because of the clutch trying to lock him out.. If he had a better tranny/clutch that car would be a 140mph DSM on basically stock everything but a 35R, some E85, and a set of BC280 cams.
Brian Crower cams are far from junk but just like a lot of things on this forum one shop claims "this part's the best!" or "this part is ****!" and the peanut gallery follows. Just look at all the FP Black, Kelford 272, 2.4L, stock ecu builds going on lol. You can't tell me any of these guys have ever tried anything outside of what someone else has told them to run. Doesn't matter if it's something as small as a blow-off valve.. you make a post about it on this forum and 80% of the responses are going to be RECIRCULATE ONLY everything else sucks! Eventhough the vast majority of them are only regurgitating what they've been told. You don't become the fastest by following the crowd..
On a stock evo with boltons would I choose the BC 272s again!? Definitely. They're very affordable, make good power, don't have an aggressive lift or ramp rate so it's easier on your valvetrain. They make good low end/mid range power just like what you want on a stock turbo car. It's not about what makes the most peak horsepower.. it's what will work for your goals with the car and your setup.