JamieP Posted October 24, 2006 Author Share Posted October 24, 2006 Should have said, I have a HKS 272 inlet and so does Ian C. Thanks but i got a good deal on a new pair from a forum member;) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TLicense Posted October 24, 2006 Share Posted October 24, 2006 I'm not rubbishing them or anything, I'm just saying that one of two types of JUN 272 cams have just over 10mm of lift so if the cam belt goes, the pistons stand a good chance of hitting the stuck open valves. The HKS 272s don't have enough lift to do this. -Ian A bit of a moot point seeing as Jamies already bought a pair of HKS cams, but it's possible, due to the fact that he's changing pistons, that it will still not be an interferance engine, OR now that he is changing pistons, it will be an interferance engine. Depends on a number of things:- valve lift, head gasket thickness, piston head geometry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bondango Posted October 24, 2006 Share Posted October 24, 2006 Jamie are you planning on getting any headwork done? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamieP Posted October 25, 2006 Author Share Posted October 25, 2006 Yep... ferrara valve springs and caps and being flowed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnA Posted October 25, 2006 Share Posted October 25, 2006 Mines a T88-34D, some specs here;) http://website.lineone.net/~jon_ed/Turbo_Table.htm There is no A/R there, just three possible Area figures. In any case it looks like it would be pretty liberal, so you can go with something 'wild' (roughly equivalent to what passes as 1st stage by n/a standards) Be sure to dial them properly, otherwise you'd be missing on half of the benefits. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike B Posted October 25, 2006 Share Posted October 25, 2006 Ian, can you just set me straight; 256 is stock 264 is still non interference 276 can or can't be interference be depending on piston/headgasket and style of cam.. right? so if I'm running 264 I should still be safe if the cam belt eats itself? thanks! They usually fit the widest cams they can lay their hands on, there is a move towards 280s now. Great for peak power figures I suppose. They used to pair 272s until those came out. Oh, anything over 10mm of lift = inteference head as well, the Jun 272s and probably any 280s can do that so you have to weigh up maximum power vs your expensive built engine being minced due to a mundane snapped cambelt. -Ian Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Harwood Posted October 25, 2006 Share Posted October 25, 2006 Ian, can you just set me straight; 256 is stock 264 is still non interference 276 can or can't be interference be depending on piston/headgasket and style of cam.. right? so if I'm running 264 I should still be safe if the cam belt eats itself? thanks! ~224 is stock. And yes, 264's and even HKS 272's are fine for non-interference. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnA Posted October 26, 2006 Share Posted October 26, 2006 Yep, also remember that most 'lift' figures are not comparable, unless they are adjusted for the same 'start lift' point. Also the *shapes* of the ramps can be very different and that won't be reflected in the 'spec' figures although they can dramatically affect airflow at high revs. Quality of construction (surface hardening etc) and consistency of profiles is anyone's guess for aftermarket units. I've seen variance of way over 10degrees among lobes, which makes a mockery of using TDC of cyl#1 Food for thought. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike B Posted October 26, 2006 Share Posted October 26, 2006 ~224 is stock. And yes, 264's and even HKS 272's are fine for non-interference. Thanks Matt, I'm still getting used to terry's car - a lot more involving in every way - It builds positve boost under 1.5k which is just remarkable for a single - more drivable than a sequential on the motorway. You don't have his racelogic com lead do you - he said it may have gone your way? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike B Posted October 26, 2006 Share Posted October 26, 2006 I've seen variance of way over 10degrees among lobes, which makes a mockery of using TDC of cyl#1 Ah yes - good old TDC.... errr actually..could you run that through the numpty filter for me? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Harwood Posted October 26, 2006 Share Posted October 26, 2006 Thanks Matt, I'm still getting used to terry's car - a lot more involving in every way - It builds positve boost under 1.5k which is just remarkable for a single - more drivable than a sequential on the motorway. You don't have his racelogic com lead do you - he said it may have gone your way? I know what you mean about the motorway driving. It's almost as responsive as an NA! - That is what set it apart so much from all the other Supras I've driven. Including mine! As for the RL lead, no, sorry. I've only got one, and that's from my car. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul mac Posted December 2, 2006 Share Posted December 2, 2006 Thanks Matt, - It builds positve boost under 1.5k which is just remarkable for a single - i am amazed at this, how does it make positive boost this low my T61 on UK cams makes boost just under 3k, can someone explain, is this for real ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Harwood Posted December 2, 2006 Share Posted December 2, 2006 i am amazed at this, how does it make positive boost this low my T61 on UK cams makes boost just under 3k, can someone explain, is this for real ! It is for real. Honestly. Terry built this car purposely to be the ultimate street Supra, and it was pretty much no expense spared on a VFM basis. The excellent drivability and quick spool are a combination of small DBB turbo, excellent mapping of the HKS V-pro, and possibly a little help from the VVTi system. IIRC he could achive full boost by 2600rpm! - Terry or Mike would need to confirm that, but I'm fairly sure that's correct. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucifer Posted December 2, 2006 Share Posted December 2, 2006 i am amazed at this, how does it make positive boost this low my T61 on UK cams makes boost just under 3k, can someone explain, is this for real ! Its down to Turbo choice and mapping. Alot of people dont want to spend the proper money for a turbo and think that a £600 Thrust bearing Turbo out of the factory will do - and indeed it will, but it wont be spooling like Terry's did / does. A well masssages DBB, matched housing turbo is the way to go but you ahve to spend the £££ to get / make one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul mac Posted December 2, 2006 Share Posted December 2, 2006 It is for real. Honestly. Terry built this car purposely to be the ultimate street Supra, and it was pretty much no expense spared on a VFM basis. The excellent drivability and quick spool are a combination of small DBB turbo, excellent mapping of the HKS V-pro, and possibly a little help from the VVTi system. IIRC he could achive full boost by 2600rpm! - Terry or Mike would need to confirm that, but I'm fairly sure that's correct. thanks Matt, wow didn't realise DBB could make that much difference and i presume the V-pro would be pulling some pretty big advance low down, awesome, is there a spec anywhere for this car 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.