Hello everyone,,

Mod List is the following:
AMS upper and lower intercooler piping
AMS intercooler
AMS intake
AMS downpipe
AMS hfc
ETS V2 exhaust
GTX3076 *The most hated turbo on the forums
ID 1000's
AEM fuel pump
Cobb AP
****I DO NOT have an electronic boost controller. Totally my fault. That will be added shortly
Tuned on 93 Numbers: 383/356

I have some Kelford 214b's and was wondering if that would be overkill for my daily driver. The car will maybe see 3 track days a year. It will see 2 for sure. This car is my daily and I would not have it any other way..

 

270/262 cams aren't bad on a street car. Given your mods, I would actually recommend going ahead and installing those to get some more powerband out of your turbo choice!

 

The 214b’s are great on the street. You can barely even tell the car has cams at idle.

You’ll gain about 30-40 whp depending on boost level with your setup

 

It'll be worth installing them. Just make sure to get appropriate valve springs, and that your tuner turns off the exhaust mivec.

 

Wut

 

The reason the exhaust mivec gear breaks is because the exhaust mivec does not receive enough oil to control the cam when running larger cams + aftermarket higher rate springs. The the rotor flops around in the housing until it finally fails. The bandaid fix is the billet housings, but they don't fix the really issue that the system just isn't strong enough to hold the cam in place with increased load. So it needs to be turned off in the tune so it stays on the lock.

This isn't something I'm making up. Its straight from English Racing, and I think they have a pretty good handle on the 4b11 tech.

 

Never seen that issue. I have a billion logs on my personal car and hundreds on others. Shrug.

crazy spring rates yes, but for springs that support 214b and gsc s2... no.

going to 100% disagree with you on this one.

 

To add some data here.

Here is a log of my Evo 10 when it had Kelford 214b cams and Kelford springs. You can see the intake cam and exhaust cam both run about 2-3* off from what the ECU is commanding at WOT all the way to 8700rpm

https://datazap.me/u/razorlab/sedyno...&zoom=745-1144

Here is another Evo 10 with AMS TPMS cams (kelford) with the same intake/exhaust dynamic:

https://datazap.me/u/razorlab/w1?log...-28&zoom=39-99

Another Evo 10 with GSC S2 cams and GSC springs:

https://datazap.me/u/razorlab/mr-gtx...7&zoom=327-565

 

Cool story. There's a reason there's an aftermarket housing available that doesn't break, and it's bandaid for the real issue, which I know exists.

 

Guarantee oil pressure doesn't exceed the burst pressure rating of the housing and break the rotor apart...

 

Lmao, I show data and you say cool story. Might as well have just said fake news.

I never denied that the housings break, I denied the need to zero out mivec with mild cams and springs. It’s not needed until aggressive cams and springs.

 

I guess you didn't notice thats a stock cam that was run with GSC springs.

The very small change in spool up (150rpm or so) isn't worth risking that thing totaling failing and lunching the motor.

 

Knowing nothing about this issue, my first thought (naturally) is to want to blame the victim. So I'm wondering were the springs in these failures just slapped on, or were all the critical measurements and adjustments made? I could imagine coil binding causing some serious hydraulic pressure for example.

 

I don't even know what we are arguing about at this point. I know the OEM housing can break. The times I have seen it happen are with stiff springs or poorly adjusted buckets or a combo of both.

I'm agreeing to disagree on the need to zero out mivec. So... I agree to disagree.

 

No coil bind.

Worth noting, springs for these cars have room for additional lift over what any available cam has (especially the GSC springs) or to be shimmed for more seat pressure. I've never run into a coil bind issue.