Roy Posted November 18, 2003 Share Posted November 18, 2003 is it possible to run a 264 in cam and a 272 ex cam ? if so, how much difference will this make ? what else needs to be done to support this if at all ? is there anything to take note of / be wary of ? hoping from input from the technically gifted ones eg terry, CW, ian, dude (even!). thanks guys ... edit : is it ok to run one hks cam and one jun cam ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roy Posted November 18, 2003 Author Share Posted November 18, 2003 anyone care to venture an opinion even ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigRoy Posted November 18, 2003 Share Posted November 18, 2003 Originally posted by Roy anyone care to venture an opinion even ? Well I suppose its possible! It might run like a pile of poo but its possible! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roy Posted November 18, 2003 Author Share Posted November 18, 2003 why a pile of poo ? is it to do with other ancillaries that need to be tweaked/adjusted to do it right or is it a matter of configuration that would make this all wrong ? i went from stock jap cams to both the 264's with barely a murmur of difference (even an untuned safc! but with pump/regulator done prior) so was wondering if i swopped out the 264 ex for a 272 jobbie, the differences would not be that much ? or am i (as usual) missing something here ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigRoy Posted November 18, 2003 Share Posted November 18, 2003 Sorry Roy I was just joking! My knowledge of cam profiles is as good as yours! Terry? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wez Posted November 18, 2003 Share Posted November 18, 2003 Don`t see why there should be any physcial reason but for performance reasons you would need to speak with one of the techies on here on which cam profiles are better for what you are trying to achieve. I know the JUN cams have a higher lift than the HKS and that JUN are also in cahoots with Cosworth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dandan Posted November 18, 2003 Share Posted November 18, 2003 Hi roy When u say you changed to a pair of 264's with "barely a murmur of difference " do you mean you couldn't feel any difference at all? What spec and boost are you currently running? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian C Posted November 18, 2003 Share Posted November 18, 2003 I found a lot of difference going from stock (everso mild) j-specs to 256in 264ex, lovely. Keeping them staggered like the factory config is a good idea, the 272ex might be a bit mad though, by all accounts I've heard about the 272's are only much good on drag cars/mid-sized turbo's upwards. There is a good power graph floating around somewhere on the net which shows a disturbing power loss low down with not exactly that great a gain up top... To be honest it's probably not worth the £350 or so the cam will cost. -Ian Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaz Walker Posted November 18, 2003 Share Posted November 18, 2003 Staggered is fine Roy. 272 is a tad on the high side unless your putting down decent numbers with a big single/twin kit... Gaz. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roy Posted November 18, 2003 Author Share Posted November 18, 2003 wez - i thought so too ... dandan - as far as i can recall, swopping over to the 264's caused me no driveability issues at all ie no lumpiness or rough idle normally associated with a higher lift duration cam profile (at idle, there is very little burbling). i am not sure why but i do know that at 150+ leptons, the car was still pulling quite strongly .. hence i have gained top end with no discernible low down loss although i must admit i was expecting some. i have a Hiper exhaust, fully DeCatted, Walbro/SAFC/FSE, ERL W.I., Blitz SUS filter and a HKS 'S'-type Intercooler aside from the cams and running about 1.25 on max boost ian - thanks for the reply as i was hoping for your input on this. i take your point re the intrinsic value of this idea circa the 350 pounds. i was wondering if i kept the profiles staggered like you have ie 264 in and 272 out if this would alleviate any possible lumpiness (foreseeably) as well keep low down power in a useable band ? i can understand a total swop to both 272's would curb low down power but was hoping a staggered approach may not ? are there any possible problems with using a HKS 264 in cam and a JUN 272 ex cam ? thank you edit : just saw your reply gaz ... thanks. am just trying to figure out the ins and outs of this at the mo' ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thorin Posted November 18, 2003 Share Posted November 18, 2003 also I believe 272's turn the 2JZGTE into an interferance type engine (ie. expensive if yer cam belt snaps). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roy Posted November 18, 2003 Author Share Posted November 18, 2003 inteferance ? is there a simple description of what this means plz? sorry but am a techless moron .... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wez Posted November 18, 2003 Share Posted November 18, 2003 interference is valve meets piston = expensive repair The 2JZGTE is a non interference engine in stock form and I thought only the crower cams made it interference not the HKS and JUN. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharpie Posted November 18, 2003 Share Posted November 18, 2003 I have read that PW runs 264in 272ex Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roy Posted November 18, 2003 Author Share Posted November 18, 2003 so am i correct in saying theoretically it can be done ? does aything need adjusting ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wez Posted November 18, 2003 Share Posted November 18, 2003 To get the full benefit fueling and timing should be adjusted if possible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roy Posted November 18, 2003 Author Share Posted November 18, 2003 so the safc needs tweaking ... ? what about the FSE ? thanks Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wez Posted November 19, 2003 Share Posted November 19, 2003 FSE only controls fuel pressure, would be better if you could map the fuel rather than just dumping alot more in. Too much fuel robs power and to little is dangerous, its a fine balance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roy Posted November 19, 2003 Author Share Posted November 19, 2003 ah ... thank you for that. bah ... more bloody homework ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharpie Posted November 19, 2003 Share Posted November 19, 2003 Originally posted by Roy bah ... more bloody homework ! Isn't that always the case Shame they did not have Soop Homework at school I'd have enjoyed that :D ........just thinking if the MKIV was out when I was at school........errrr NO! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roy Posted November 19, 2003 Author Share Posted November 19, 2003 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.