![]() |
Kelford 264's
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.
|
Originally Posted by TTP Engineering
(Post 6068963)
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.
|
Originally Posted by S2kracka
(Post 6069878)
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.
|
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.
|
Originally Posted by TTP Engineering
(Post 6068963)
We also have a special version 11.2mm intake and 10.5mm exhaust with lower duration we want to test on a stock turbo.
Originally Posted by RyeLou
(Post 6064204)
For the most part they seem to be as aggressive a cam set you can go safely without upgrading springs and retainers. If anyone cares to see the cam card from them I can try and go dig it up.
Originally Posted by RyeLou
(Post 6070412)
If I upgrade turbos it will be something small (stock frame) so I don't need anything too big. 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.
|
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:25 PM. |
© 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands