Cam test: I will be dyno test: delta hks 272, delta K272 and BC 272 cams!!!!

[keltalon]

Well guys I have volunteered to take a little time and put to rest this issue about some cams that really are not getting the attention of the big name brand cams such as Hks, Kelford, Gcs, Crane, Comp and so forth. Delta is a little company that feel really confident about there cams and ask me to test two grinds of cams for them, they say I will not be dissapointed, I said what the heck and took them up on their offer!

They sent me their hks 272 grind and their Delta K272's and I agreed to put them in the car and dyno them.
Also Brian Crower sent me a set of their 272 to test and I agreed to test them as well considering that they have been tested before and got a bad rep I was thinking to myself that the bc 272 must be pretty decent considering they are selling a good bit of them Maybe its the affordability or maybe some are taking the time to get a good tune on them and are very satified with them.
I remember when people thought that you could not make big horsepower with the hks 264 and that called to mind the nursery rhime the little train that could, and had I confidence that these little cams could! And they did, 504whp that is with stock intake manifold I will give the bc 272 all the tune they need to see if we can improve what has aready been written with my setup. I will say this from helping a couple of buddies of mine tune several bc cams the power that they were able to achieve surprised me therefore I have no problem taking the time to test their product!
I just want to let delta and Brian crower know I am nuetral and will do all I can to draw whatever power their cams have to offer and post the results for the benefit of all here on dsm tuners. Whatever the dyno says is law. My setup is in my profile and is up to date. please be paticient with me for each change of cam will be giving an opportunity for the lifters to set and the ecu to reset itself to current changes, a tune will be applied and after this happens we will strap her back down for the numbers.
Test should be completed in about 30days. here is my current dyno sheet with the hks 264cams and stock intake manifold and evo 3 exaust manifold. If there are any vendor that would like for me to test their intake or exhaust manifold just let me I will do it while I am in the testing mood and will do it after the cam test is complete and with the cam making the best power curve for my set up just PM me and let me know.

 

[El Cuervo]

This is going to be great!! Keltalon, thanks for taking your time on doing this test. This would also be the perfect time to test the magnus intake manifold vs the jmf intake manifold!!

 

[keltalon]

This is going to be great!! Keltalon, thanks for taking your time on doing this test. This would also be the perfect time to test the magnus intake manifold vs the jmf intake manifold!!

If they both would agree I would have no problem what-so-ever doing the test but I highly doubt they would be willing especially magnus. Delta and Bc both think what I have put together as far as mods are concerned makes my set-up prime candidate as far as testing is concerned considering my power level with such little cams and restrictive intake manifold. I have recently upgraded my valve spring to be able to handle the Delta K272's so I am ready.

 

[JEFFREYCASTGSX]

Why just these 3 cams? Do you know about the BIG differences between these 3 cams?

 

[keltalon]

Why just these 3 cams? Do you know about the BIG differences between these 3 cams?

Make no mistake about it I am very satisfied with my current hks 264. These vendors feel that their cams can out perform my current hks 264 and contacted me to try their cams. I thought about it and felt that I have nothing to loose so I agreed to the testing. Now if other cams manufactorers would like to be included I guess to make if fair I would include them as well but right now only these guys have offered for me to test their product. I think this will give them an opportunity to show that their product is worth the upgrade. well about the big 3 differences I guess the dyno will tell me

 

[JEFFREYCASTGSX]

Make no mistake about it I am very satisfied with my current hks 264. These vendors feel that their cams can out perform my current hks 264 and contacted me to try their cams. I thought about it and felt that I have nothing to loose so I agreed to the testing. Now if other cams manufactorers would like to be included I guess to make if fair I would include them as well but right now only these guys have offered for me to test their product. I think this will give them an opportunity to show that their product is worth the upgrade. well about the big 3 differences I guess the dyno will tell me

I got you. Heres my prediction from highest to lowest Kelford>>>HKS 272>>>>HKS264=BC272.

 

[Rob10_99]

Yeah I'm with Jeff on this one, only time will tell!

Hopefully you will save all the logs and post them? for those stfu or ptfu people?
Maby some mag will jump on this for you and pay for extra crap you might need, bolts/seals ect, sounds pretty reasonable right?

 

[TSimage]

Not quite sure what is being proven here... We all know what kind of power these cams can produce. Delta didn't do anything but copy what already was there. . The HKS 272s are the only true 272s.. The BCs are smaller, and the Kelfords are much larger. I think what people want to know considering the Deltas are their durability and their ability to not only "look" the part but perform on par with their orginal counterparts.

This would be the only real test anyone needs considering Delta. These test have been done many times over.

 

[JEFFREYCASTGSX]

Not quite sure what is being proven here... We all know what kind of power these cams can produce. Delta didn't do anything but copy what already was there. . The HKS 272s are the only true 272s.. The BCs are smaller, and the Kelfords are much larger. I think what people want to know considering the Deltas are their durability and their ability to not only "look" the part but perform on par with their orginal counterparts.

This would be the only real test anyone needs considering Delta. These test have been done many times over.

yep.

 

[keltalon]

Not quite sure what is being proven here... We all know what kind of power these cams can produce. Delta didn't do anything but copy what already was there. . The HKS 272s are the only true 272s.. The BCs are smaller, and the Kelfords are much larger. I think what people want to know considering the Deltas are their durability and their ability to not only "look" the part but perform on par with their orginal counterparts.

This would be the only real test anyone needs considering Delta. These test have been done many times over.

Well here is the deal. From my understanding and what was mention to me. Some people feel that the AMS test was somewhat biased. Maybe or maybe not. We shall see. I agree with you as far as the power goes that's why people upgrade to bigger, better cams. Like I said in previous posts people who wanted to make big power didn't believe in the small hks264 and told me that if I wanted to reach my goal of 500hp that I really needed to ditch the cams and go bigger. I have always been somewhat unorthodox when it comes to performance and the type of person who after much studying and research that would try what some may consider being a waste of time. Case and point take a look at this dyno chart it has a comparison of my dyno vs. my buddy's dyno run. My mods are in my profile his setup includes a sheet metal intake manifold, 272 cams, turbo header, and AEM stand alone ecu and his turbo is a gt35r. His engine compression ratio is 9 to 1 mine 8 to 6. Here's what interesting his boost was set to 22 to 25 psi and mine was set at 30psi. His car is a top end monster. He could not turn up the boost because he started to run out of fuel up top. The walbro 255 could not push enough E85 to the injectors. I think he would have ended up somewhere around 600+hp rpm toping close to 9000 @ about 30psi only the future will tell. But if you look my dyno you will notice that my car is more street friendly and it's all because of the route I chose with my setup. The guys around here has named my car the little train that could, because of being a complete torque monster with the little 264s. So not all cams have the same power results its based on how you choose to set your car up, considering every set up is different cams will have different results. This is the main reason people get frustrated when a particular cam or turbo don't give them the results that's advertised or the power someone else has its not the cam or turbo its their set up that is why I built my setup around my turbo nothing more or nothing less. I am thinking that the smaller BC 272 and hks 272 will do better than the larger kelford 272 in my car because of the way my car is set up with the stock intake manifold for this reason bc and delta like my concept considering my car is a daily driver like 90% of the forum. So bigger may not always be better it"s balance that counts. Like I said previously if JMF wants to test a manifold against Magnus I have no problem doing it. Just a little incite on the delta kelford grind they are made from the same billet blanks that all the big name brand cam manufacturers are using. Just my $.02

Yeah I'm with Jeff on this one, only time will tell!

Hopefully you will save all the logs and post them? for those stfu or ptfu people?
Maby some mag will jump on this for you and pay for extra crap you might need, bolts/seals ect, sounds pretty reasonable right?

I will indeed save all the logs and my intention is also to video tape each run.

 

[pboglio]

All tests are biased to a certain extent. I didn't see anything blatently biased about AMS's cam test. Sounds like an interesting test. Since I own HKS 264s and a set of Kelford 272s, I'm not sure I personally would gain from it, but I could see the budget guys getting something out of it. What I would be curious about is whether their cams would perform as well as the original HKS or Kelford cams.

 

[dsm-onster]

The test was biased because kelford 272s are not in the same duration range as hks272s or any other 272 cam for that matter. The kelford makes more power because it increases VE higher in the rev range. They have higher duration than most 288 duration cams. Why would you compare hks 272s to 288 cams?

Yes, the interesting test would be to varify that the regrind is as good as the original grind or the copy grind is as good as the original. Which they likely are.

 

[keltalon]

All tests are biased to a certain extent. I didn't see anything blatently biased about AMS's cam test. Sounds like an interesting test. Since I own HKS 264s and a set of Kelford 272s, I'm not sure I personally would gain from it, but I could see the budget guys getting something out of it. What I would be curious about is whether their cams would perform as well as the original HKS or Kelford cams.

Yeah its mostly for the budget and up and coming guys which is about 80% of us. Its for me all just fun

 

[Bender]

The test was biased because kelford 272s are not in the same duration range as hks272s or any other 272 cam for that matter. The kelford makes more power because it increases VE higher in the rev range. They have higher duration than most 288 duration cams. Why would you compare hks 272s to 288 cams?

Yes, the interesting test would be to varify that the regrind is as good as the original grind or the copy grind is as good as the original. Which they likely are.

Close, but a little backwards.

Duration is the same, but the lift isn't. The Kelford 272's have 11mm of lift with a 272 duration at 0.1mm of lift.

Most 272 cams have 10-10.5mm of lift with a 272 duration at 0.1mm of lift.

The greater power is gained from opening the valve further and faster.

The 280/276 cams have an 11.5/11.0 lift, at 280 and 276 duration, and the 288/280 cams have a 12.0/11.5 at 288 and 280 duration.

This is not Kelford labeling their cams wrong, but rather putting an excessive lift in a small duration. Their 272 cams have the same lift as other manufacturer's 280 and 288 cams. That is not Kelfords fault.

 

[welfle18]

Just ordered the set of kelford 272 copy delta cam on thurday. I hope they perform as well as the original kelfords do, which I dont know why I wouldnt seeing that they are an exact copy. The kelford grinds are made from a blank billet so no need for shims or it being out of circle. Well we will see when I get them.

 

[dsm-onster]

Close, but a little backwards.

Duration is the same, but the lift isn't. The Kelford 272's have 11mm of lift with a 272 duration at 0.1mm of lift.

Most 272 cams have 10-10.5mm of lift with a 272 duration at 0.1mm of lift.

The greater power is gained from opening the valve further and faster.

The 280/276 cams have an 11.5/11.0 lift, at 280 and 276 duration, and the 288/280 cams have a 12.0/11.5 at 288 and 280 duration.

This is not Kelford labeling their cams wrong, but rather putting an excessive lift in a small duration. Their 272 cams have the same lift as other manufacturer's 280 and 288 cams. That is not Kelfords fault.

Nope, duration at .05" lift for the kelfords is 226/226. Fp2X cams are 212/212 and Hks 272s are 213/213.

Yes they do have accelerated "preramps" (lift rate before .05"). They have 272 at .004" likely. But where duration counts, from .05" open to .05" close, the duration and ramp and lift is where common 288 cams are. Like I said: The test was biased because kelford 272s are not in the same duration range as hks272s or any other 272 cam for that matter. The kelford makes more power because it increases VE higher in the rev range. They have higher duration than most 288 duration cams. Why would you compare hks 272s to 288 cams?

 

[TSimage]

That didn't make the test per se' it just showed that people shouldn't buy cams based purely on advertised duration. At the end of the day the unknowing, which were pretty much all of us as far as the Kelfords go since they were a Evo cam first, gained new incite on a cam that most would have assumed were direct competitors of other true 272 sized cams.

Through other test, what we found was the Kelfords actually perform on par with even FPs brand new 4r cam which is the biggest cam we can install with out geometry issues. That was huge.

The test a lot of us want to see was mentioned before, the original Kelfords vs the Delta grinds or even show us some 280 kelford grind numbers because they have yet to show a good test on their power. This test wont really shed light on anything, people should already know that if you are sticking with a street setup, the smaller the cam the better. This is common sense. The stock intake manifold is geared for low to mid range power due to the pea shooter turbo our cars come with stock. Both SMIMs and Cams are used specifically to move your power range further up in the RPM range. The bigger the cam or the larger the SMIM the more it benefits you up top of course as long as you have the supporting turbo/mods to benefit from them.

Some cams don't sacrifice as much down low as others, such as the Kelfords compared to the BCs of similar size but other test have proven this already. I am trying to see the main outline of your test in its entirety and I guess you are trying to show which 272 cam is better for a street setup? But as you mentioned, it varies. For starters a 2.3/2.4 is the true start to any beastly street setup. With that you can move up to larger turbo/ cam etc without sacrificing your bottom end and still reaping the gains of top end muscle. A part from that it will have so many variations that itd be hard to please everyone due to the many turbos and routes one can go, all depending on budget.


I love the idea of a test but 'm just trying to see from Deltas point of view what they gain from it I guess..

Either way, I'm always in support of shedding light on options for the community. I guess this one is the "Which cam is better for keltalons car" .

 

[Bender]

Nope, duration at .05" lift for the kelfords is 226/226. Fp2X cams are 212/212 and Hks 272s are 213/213.

Yes they do have accelerated "preramps" (lift rate before .05"). They have 272 at .004" likely. But where duration counts, from .05" open to .05" close, the duration and ramp and lift is where common 288 cams are. Like I said: The test was biased because kelford 272s are not in the same duration range as hks272s or any other 272 cam for that matter. The kelford makes more power because it increases VE higher in the rev range. They have higher duration than most 288 duration cams. Why would you compare hks 272s to 288 cams?

I am talking about total duration. From those points I will agree it is close to those of a 280/288 cam grind, but open point to close point, it is still a 272 cam.

The problem arises because most dsmers think duration is all that makes a cam. Which can't get any more false. This is why when you buy a v8 cam, you state the duration and lift. They both play a huge part. Before Kelford came around, it wasn't a problem since the lift was pretty common through all the different manufacturers. By Kelford increasing total lift, the increased both the duration and lift of all the other points. This can't be changed unless you design a wave lobe.. which would be very inefficient.

And we are comparing total duration to total duration, so therefor the Kelford 272's can fit in the 272 category. If the test was designed for duration at certain lift points, then yes... the Kelford 272's would belong in a 280 cam test.

 

[keltalon]

To say the least I am looking forward to it. If you can use the infomation gatherd when test is complete then good If not them Oh well!!

 

[dsm-onster]

I am talking about total duration. From those points I will agree it is close to those of a 280/288 cam grind, but open point to close point, it is still a 272 cam.

The problem arises because most dsmers think duration is all that makes a cam. Which can't get any more false. This is why when you buy a v8 cam, you state the duration and lift. They both play a huge part. Before Kelford came around, it wasn't a problem since the lift was pretty common through all the different manufacturers. By Kelford increasing total lift, the increased both the duration and lift of all the other points. This can't be changed unless you design a wave lobe.. which would be very inefficient.

And we are comparing total duration to total duration, so therefor the Kelford 272's can fit in the 272 category. If the test was designed for duration at certain lift points, then yes... the Kelford 272's would belong in a 280 cam test.

It doesn't matter if the .004 lift is 272 or not. Real flow doesn't begin until just after .05" You can hang your valves open at .05" and in the compression stroke make with in spec compression numbers (121psi). Thus not much activity under that lift where some cams offer a more gradual preramp like 288s vs. kelfords sudden jump.

Regarless of what dsmers think, Duration alone makes more power because it offers higher VE at higher rpms. Higher VE means higher torque. Torque over time is HP. More torque at a smaller amount of time (higher rpms) means more horsepower. . . basics you likely already know.

. . . duration below .05" lift is just fluff. And is used to put a cam in a catagory it doesn't really belong. That is why the industry standard .05" lift is used. So. . .again. . . The test was biased because kelford 272s are not in the same duration range as hks272s or any other 272 cam for that matter. The kelford makes more power because it increases VE higher in the rev range. They have higher duration than most 288 duration cams. Why would you compare hks 272s to 288 cams? The test should have been cams of all the same .05" duration where real flow activity begins in the head. This would prevent unsuspecting folks from buying a cam that is tweeked at insignificant points to MAKE it fall within a certian catagory of typical engine manners.

What's fair is to test cams with the same .05" duration to see which one has the best net results with their various ramp rates, timing, and peak lift . . . that's what's fair. . .

 

[NOSLO2PT0]

I think the REAL cam test should be if the Delta cams provide the same HP as the originals, in both the Kelford 272 and HKS 272 regrinds. We know what cams make what power. It's been beaten to death over and over. However, with Delta offering a cheaper alternative to the more well-known, albiet pricier, name brands out there, this test should be in proving that their products deliver as promised, on both price AND performance.

 

[TSimage]

Thats why I said this cam test has no benefits for Delta, but its more so a comparison for Kels personal car . Either way it goes, it'll be cool to see some information. Its not every day you get to see the process some one uses to pick the perfect cam.

 

[keltalon]

I think the REAL cam test should be if the Delta cams provide the same HP as the originals, in both the Kelford 272 and HKS 272 regrinds. We know what cams make what power. It's been beaten to death over and over. However, with Delta offering a cheaper alternative to the more well-known, albiet pricier, name brands out there, this test should be in proving that their products deliver as promised, on both price AND performance.

This would be a big stepping stone for delta to actually have a dyno sheet to to sell their cams. I spoke with jon and he seems to know a thing or 2 about what he is doing to say the least.

 

[dsm-onster]

I think the REAL cam test should be if the Delta cams provide the same HP as the originals, in both the Kelford 272 and HKS 272 regrinds. We know what cams make what power. It's been beaten to death over and over. However, with Delta offering a cheaper alternative to the more well-known, albiet pricier, name brands out there, this test should be in proving that their products deliver as promised, on both price AND performance.

Amen!

 

[keltalon]

Thats why I said this cam test has no benefits for Delta, but its more so a comparison for Kels personal car . Either way it goes, it'll be cool to see some information. Its not every day you get to see the process some one uses to pick the perfect cam.

Well not just my car alone. I think all of us has patterned our cars after someone whom we thought had horsepower numbers that impressed us. Maybe some newbie will look at my set up and say I want to also join the 500whp club let me get what he got