xxcat Posted February 9, 2008 Share Posted February 9, 2008 What do you guys think about the GSC Power-Divisions S1 Camshafts? In comparision with HKS. GSC Stage 1 According to supraforums: Conclusion: In conclusion, the GSC cams over the 264 HKS cams make 40-50 MORE rwhp at the same boost while sacrificing 50-100 rpm of spool. The curve with the GSC cams is MUCH MUCH MUCH better, holding power to redline at all power levels up to about 950 rwhp. At the end of the day, these cams are the best thing since sliced bread. Power pick-up over the HKS 264 cam and the ability to fit the head with simple shimming of the valves. There is no need to do any cutting or burring of the head, they pop right in. From my perspective, I highly recommend these cams. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nic Posted February 9, 2008 Share Posted February 9, 2008 What do you guys think about the GSC Power-Divisions S1 Camshafts? In comparision with HKS. GSC Stage 1 According to supraforums: Who on Supraforums came to that conclusion, was he by chance trying to sell them? Did they do back to back testing of both? Don't believe everything you read The cams do have a different profile and higher lift compared to the HKS cams, so on a big turbo may have some top end benefit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tDR Posted February 9, 2008 Share Posted February 9, 2008 From the blurb above and the one of the website I'd say they sound too good to be true. The website also talks about needing a 'valve spring upgrade' after previously saying easy install with just reshimming.... Would like to see back to back comparison testing with some of the other aftermarket cam sets available. Cheers, Brian. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nic Posted February 9, 2008 Share Posted February 9, 2008 They are also a similar price to the HKS and JUN cams. I know which I would choose to use. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xxcat Posted February 9, 2008 Author Share Posted February 9, 2008 Who on Supraforums came to that conclusion, was he by chance trying to sell them? Did they do back to back testing of both?... link They are also a similar price to the HKS and JUN cams. I know which I would choose to use. which and why? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nic Posted February 9, 2008 Share Posted February 9, 2008 which and why? I personally use HKS cams in my own car, but would have no hesitation going with either JUN or HKS, as they are both thoroughly tried and tested in many engines. The JUN cams give a little more lift compared the HKS, but are slightly more expensive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Syed Shah Posted February 9, 2008 Share Posted February 9, 2008 Of course the springs need upgrading, it is due to the lift. It *should* be done with the HKS ones too IMHO. GSC are a very well respected company who have done a lot with the Supra/2JZ platform. I would pick them over HKS cams every day of the week. Turbo engines like lift, HKS seem too focused on duration (hence the 280s, which have no more lift than their 272s, and make no more power). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kim1978 Posted May 15, 2008 Share Posted May 15, 2008 bumping this thread... has anyone had experience with these cams? they seem to be pretty good. Only downside is you will get an interference motor Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Syed Shah Posted May 15, 2008 Share Posted May 15, 2008 HKS 272s should also be treated as interference. A lot of Yanks use them with good results. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kim1978 Posted June 11, 2008 Share Posted June 11, 2008 HKS 272s should also be treated as interference. A lot of Yanks use them with good results. they only have 9.3mm lift? which doesn't make it an interference motor...or am I wrong? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thorin Posted June 11, 2008 Share Posted June 11, 2008 they only have 9.3mm lift? which doesn't make it an interference motor...or am I wrong? I don't believe they do no, the JUN 272's have a higher lift though and I think are interference. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Digsy Posted June 11, 2008 Share Posted June 11, 2008 Of course the springs need upgrading, it is due to the lift. It *should* be done with the HKS ones too IMHO. Not nesessarily. If nothing else in the valvetrain is changing then the spring rate would only need increasing if the maximum valve acceleration was increasing. This may happen if the lift increases but the duration does not. Cams that lift higher but do so over a longer duration may not need stronger springs. I'm not saying that any particular cam lifts or duration combinations do or don't require spring upgrades, but just clarifying that it doesn't automatically follow that higher lift = stronger spring Going with the manufacturer's recommendation is a sensbile thing to do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bondango Posted June 11, 2008 Share Posted June 11, 2008 (edited) GSC has a Very good Reputation in the EVO world, infact you'll find more big power evo's running GSC S1's than HKS cams, and many people are upgrading from HKS to the new S1's on their cars. I believe this is due to the fact that with a smaller duration say 264 vs 272 the 264 S1's have more of an aggressive lift than the hks 272 so gaining a lot more mid range power. Edited June 11, 2008 by bondango (see edit history) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nic Posted June 11, 2008 Share Posted June 11, 2008 (edited) I don't believe they do no, the JUN 272's have a higher lift though and I think are interference. JUN do 2 versions of the 272° cams, the higher lift cams make the engine interference. 272° - 9.3mm 272° - 10.8mm Edited June 11, 2008 by Nic (see edit history) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thorin Posted June 11, 2008 Share Posted June 11, 2008 JUN do 2 versions of the 272° cams Ah never knew that, always thought it was just the higher lift versions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kim1978 Posted July 6, 2008 Share Posted July 6, 2008 GSC has a Very good Reputation in the EVO world, infact you'll find more big power evo's running GSC S1's than HKS cams, and many people are upgrading from HKS to the new S1's on their cars. I believe this is due to the fact that with a smaller duration say 264 vs 272 the 264 S1's have more of an aggressive lift than the hks 272 so gaining a lot more mid range power. Yeah, I heard that too, many Evos are running the GSC cams but they dont't seem to have been used that extensively in the supra scene. Also, I believe the S1s are not 264s but 269s Any more input would be appricated Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bondango Posted July 6, 2008 Share Posted July 6, 2008 Yeah, 269 is the measured duration for the S1. I know the s2's have been put up against the HKS 264's and came out on top. Though the test bed was a 1000hp supra, im still waiting on a test with results from Greg on GSC S1 cams vs hks 264's in a medium power engine. Theres a thread on supraforums that is worth keeping an eye on. Marty Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.