350-400 HP daily driver
e85 is always good if you have access to it. Just be careful about mixes. Where I'm at some stations switch to e70 (still sold as e85) when it gets colder out due cold start issues, and others carry e70 all year round. Be prepared to buy the little kit to check mixes at stations near you to keep your car safe. Or be lucky and live somewhere its sold as actual e85 all year :-P
Major thread dig I realize but I know how much people prefer that you search over starting a new thread.
I am looking for 400 awhp on my evo 8.5 (2005 with acd)
Current mods
ARP Head studs
Injen intake and intercooler pipes
Mishimoto Black intercooler stock size but 3 inches thick
Tubular exhaust manifold with anti-lag (or so I am told) ports
DNP o2 housing
Megan turbo back exhaust
Walbro 255 fuel pump
AEM Truboost
The problem I am having is with consensus on camshafts and turbochargers. Some people suggest turbo upgrade, some suggest cams, some both, some neither. It is quite confusing.
If I want my car to perform like stock or better during regular driving (ie get at least the same amount of power out of the factory power band), but want 400whp what do I still need besides a tune?
If I do need camshafts then I am torn between these two
Kelford 264 (biggest Kelford has that does not require springs/retainers)
HKS 272
This thread
https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/ev...-cam-test.html
Compared the 272s of both, but does anyone know where I can find a comparison of the 264s?
For the turbo If I must upgrade I would like to go to a ball bearing equivalent of the evo 9 turbo. Any suggestion on which turbo best fits that description would be appreciated as I haven’t seen anything in my research.
I am looking for 400 awhp on my evo 8.5 (2005 with acd)
Current mods
ARP Head studs
Injen intake and intercooler pipes
Mishimoto Black intercooler stock size but 3 inches thick
Tubular exhaust manifold with anti-lag (or so I am told) ports
DNP o2 housing
Megan turbo back exhaust
Walbro 255 fuel pump
AEM Truboost
The problem I am having is with consensus on camshafts and turbochargers. Some people suggest turbo upgrade, some suggest cams, some both, some neither. It is quite confusing.
If I want my car to perform like stock or better during regular driving (ie get at least the same amount of power out of the factory power band), but want 400whp what do I still need besides a tune?
If I do need camshafts then I am torn between these two
Kelford 264 (biggest Kelford has that does not require springs/retainers)
HKS 272
This thread
https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/ev...-cam-test.html
Compared the 272s of both, but does anyone know where I can find a comparison of the 264s?
For the turbo If I must upgrade I would like to go to a ball bearing equivalent of the evo 9 turbo. Any suggestion on which turbo best fits that description would be appreciated as I haven’t seen anything in my research.
I make ~430whp/430wtq on my 05 evo 8. I drive it every single day... if I had 93 oct here I would've used that... but the 91 oct we have here is CRAP. So I used E85... check my thread for mods/tuner : https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/ev...hp-430wtq.html
You don't need to upgrade your turbo. From what I've seen... you can easily make 400+ whp on 93 octane with the stock evo 8 turbo. I'd say just get the 264s if you want stock-like idle/driveability and low end power. With your current mods I think all you really need are some larger injectors, cams, and a good tune. Check the Dyno Tuning and Results section of the forums and you can decide for yourself who you want to tune your car.
For cams you there is no point in going smaller than S2's or Kelford 272's, you will have absolutely no drive-ability issues
Here's my X on pump gas, stock cams, and a MAP EF2 turbo:
Here's my IX on pump gas, stock turbo, and all the bolt-ons you can think of:
Yes, removing the big cams will lose some of the top-end, but with a milder set of cams as mentioned above you'll still be 350+.
Last edited by Kracka; Jan 6, 2012 at 04:31 PM.
I have a spec stage 3 with stock flywheel installed.
And when I look at these cam tests I see a 20hp loss up to 53 mph which is unacceptable for my purposes. I would like to see a dyno graph on the kelford 264s
And when I look at these cam tests I see a 20hp loss up to 53 mph which is unacceptable for my purposes. I would like to see a dyno graph on the kelford 264s
This is absolutely false. After having aggressive cams (FP4R's) in my IX I will never ever daily-drive a car with big cams in it again. Noize and I were actually just talking about this on the phone today, both of us regretted our grabby clutches and big cams more than anything else in terms of daily-drivability. If you're set on cams, check out a nice set of mild cams such as the HKS 272's or GSC S1's; you'll see the majority of the power gains while not having the nasty idle and low-speed drivability side effects. If you do an aftermarket clutch, do a full-face disc with the stock flywheel. Everyone loves to think they're building a race car, but the reality is the vast majority of cars are nothing more than street cars.
shadovarian, that is an old test on a big turbo car (notice peak torque is past 5000rpm), the difference will not be the same with a smaller turbo
Last edited by evo8426; Jan 6, 2012 at 05:17 PM.
If your still located in Folsom, CA theres plenty of guys that tune EVO's out there. my DD has 354 on 93oct and 410whp on E-85 never any issues. I got minimal mods on mine and great power.
Walbro 255
PTE 1200cc inj.
HKS Intake
HKS 272's
Invidia o2 housing
Greddy TBE
Gruppe-S Boost Solenoid
Synapse DV
Walbro 255
PTE 1200cc inj.
HKS Intake
HKS 272's
Invidia o2 housing
Greddy TBE
Gruppe-S Boost Solenoid
Synapse DV
doubt the original poster is still interested. But no I don't live in Cali. Your stats are kind of disheartening. I mean if that is what you got performance wise out of a 2005 turbo then I am going to need both turbo and cams to reach my goal on 93 oct.
I really wanted to avoid a bigger than factory turbo. I want that factory spool and low end power band.
I really wanted to avoid a bigger than factory turbo. I want that factory spool and low end power band.
Last edited by shadovarian; Jan 7, 2012 at 12:07 AM.
doubt the original poster is still interested. But no I don't live in Cali. Your stats are kind of disheartening. I mean if that is what you got performance wise out of a 2005 turbo then I am going to need both turbo and cams to reach my goal on 93 oct.
I really wanted to avoid a bigger than factory turbo. I want that factory spool and low end power band.
I really wanted to avoid a bigger than factory turbo. I want that factory spool and low end power band.
Message a tuner and see what they say... I guarantee you can get 400whp on a dynojet on 93 oct with the stock turbo... 91 is a different story. 93 Oct is more resistant to knock, you can spike like 26 psi run more timing too.
Personally I have no drive ability problems with my GSC S2 cams, but you can tell the car has cams from the lopey sound it makes. Also, below 1500 RPM driveability sucks but that may be because of the exedy twin disk + lightweight flywheel I have. No low end power was lost, I spool up even faster than stock but I'm on E85 so that may be why.