2.4L cam choices

talontsiturbo20 · 06-12-2007, 06:37 PM

I have had a 2.4L in my 1G for awhile now. I have recently dropped in a set of 101200s. I didnt really notice any difference at the dyno. Since then, I had the head machined for 1mm OS valves, and have aquired some BC 280s. Have any of you ran BC 280s with a 2.3 or 2.4? Have any of you ran the 101200s with good results? Thanks

J.P.

HIGHPSI4 · 06-12-2007, 07:20 PM

The BC 280's will work well. I believe the 101200s cams are for stock 2.0's. Some one will correct that if I am wrong.

95GSXBLUR · 06-12-2007, 07:24 PM

I'm building my stroker with 101200s - I can post results in a week or so.

The only thing I'd be worried about is that I think that 280's would push your power band a little too high maybe? Correct me If I'm wrong but I thought those cams are more designed to run @ 4000-8500ish...

Maybe I'm a wuss.. But I'd only probably rev mine to 7500 max. meh? What are your thoughts?

95GSXBLUR · 06-12-2007, 07:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HIGHPSI4

The BC 280's will work well. I believe the 101200s cams are for stock 2.0's. Some one will correct that if I am wrong.

101200s are not stock.. they're a mild-mid upgrade... but not stock.....

snox135 · 06-12-2007, 07:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 95GSXBLUR

I'm building my stroker with 101200s - I can post results in a week or so.

The only thing I'd be worried about is that I think that 280's would push your power band a little too high maybe? Correct me If I'm wrong but I thought those cams are more designed to run @ 4000-8500ish...

Maybe I'm a wuss.. But I'd only probably rev mine to 7500 max. meh? What are your thoughts?

The 2.3/2.4 will move the 280's power range lower due to the increased air flow at the same rpm with the 2.0. The best way to decide where to rev to is by putting your car on a dyno. Picking a number out of thin air because alot of people suggest that is not best for your set up.

95GSXBLUR · 06-12-2007, 07:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by snox135

The 2.3/2.4 will move the 280's power range lower due to the increased air flow at the same rpm with the 2.0. The best way to decide where to rev to is by putting your car on a dyno. Picking a number out of thin air because alot of people suggest that is not best for your set up.

That makes more sense. Not everyone has access to an AWD dyno, so some do have to go off other peoples results with similar setups.

Do you have any numbers of how far the 280's range is moved down? Just out of curiosity? I wonder if I should go with bigger cams....

GVR4592 · 06-12-2007, 09:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 95GSXBLUR

101200s are not stock.. they're a mild-mid upgrade... but not stock.....

He didn't say they were stock, he said they were for stock 2.0, as in stock displacement 2.0 engine's, not 2.3/2.4's.

GVR4592 · 06-12-2007, 09:03 PM

101200's/Fp2's are a waste on a 100mm stroke engine. Get something that was designed for your engine, Comp and Crane both make cams for your application. I would give them a call or check out the FP stroker cams.

Here's a back to back comparison of the FP2's and FP3's. The 3x's would probably give bigger power gains.

FP2 vs Fp3: Back to back

talontsiturbo20 · 06-12-2007, 11:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GVR4592

101200's/Fp2's are a waste on a 100mm stroke engine. Get something that was designed for your engine, Comp and Crane both make cams for your application. I would give them a call or check out the FP stroker cams.

Here's a back to back comparison of the FP2's and FP3's. The 3x's would probably give bigger power gains.

FP2 vs Fp3: Back to back

Unfortunately, I have already looked into getting a set of FP3's or 3x's. In order to use the 3's and 3x's, you have to use their springs and retainers. THe acceleration ramps for the cams and the amount of lift is beyond even the BC springs and retainers. I have SI dual springs and ti retainers which only have so much seat pressure and open seat pressure. They don't have nearly enough pressure that the FP springs and retainers do.

So, I will be looking at cams that are not so aggressive for now.

Do you have any particular opinion on BC 280s on a stroker?

J.P.

vaboys2ndgen · 06-13-2007, 03:05 AM

i had choose to run 272s, had been told by more than a few that 280s would be to much for a streetable car. but 2.3l/2.4l would make sense to lower the range of the 280s.

def sounds like a better idea now that i think about it and it makes more sense to me.

95GSXBLUR · 06-13-2007, 07:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GVR4592

He didn't say they were stock, he said they were for stock 2.0, as in stock displacement 2.0 engine's, not 2.3/2.4's.

So You're staying my stock 2.0 has/had comp101200s? then what are comp 101100s? A down grade?

It's an aftermarket cam that's more aggressive than the stock cam in a 2.0. The cams are NOT stock by any means... How would that make any sense?

I understand that they might not be MUCH of an improvement in the 2.4L but they should net SOME gains, over STOCK 2.0 Cams - which there have been dyno charts to prove that.

COMP101200
Duration

259 Intake
258 Exhaust

STOCK TURBO cams
Duration

252 Intake
244 Exhaust

http://dsmtuners.com/forums/showthread.php?t=17110

It might not be much of an upgrade but it's not stock. I know there is more to a cam than just duration, however, I don't have the time to dig through the threads to prove that they're not stock. period. Duration is one example.

talontsiturbo20 · 06-13-2007, 07:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 95GSXBLUR

So You're staying my stock 2.0 has/had comp101200s? then what are comp 101100s? A down grade?

It's an aftermarket cam that's more aggressive than the stock cam in a 2.0. The cams are NOT stock by any means... How would that make any sense?

I understand that they might not be MUCH of an improvement in the 2.4L but they should net SOME gains, over STOCK 2.0 Cams - which there have been dyno charts to prove that.

COMP101200
Duration

259 Intake
258 Exhaust

STOCK TURBO cams
Duration

252 Intake
244 Exhaust

http://dsmtuners.com/forums/showthread.php?t=17110

It might not be much of an upgrade but it's not stock. I know there is more to a cam than just duration, however, I don't have the time to dig through the threads to prove that they're not stock. period. Duration is one example.

I think he was just referring to the displacement. You would see the most gain from a 2.0 than a stroker. Comp cams claims that the 101200s net you 35hp out of the box...hmm

J.P.

daren_p · 06-13-2007, 08:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 95GSXBLUR

So You're staying my stock 2.0 has/had comp101200s? then what are comp 101100s? A down grade?

It's an aftermarket cam that's more aggressive than the stock cam in a 2.0. The cams are NOT stock by any means... How would that make any sense?

I understand that they might not be MUCH of an improvement in the 2.4L but they should net SOME gains, over STOCK 2.0 Cams - which there have been dyno charts to prove that.

COMP101200
Duration

259 Intake
258 Exhaust

STOCK TURBO cams
Duration

252 Intake
244 Exhaust

http://dsmtuners.com/forums/showthread.php?t=17110

It might not be much of an upgrade but it's not stock. I know there is more to a cam than just duration, however, I don't have the time to dig through the threads to prove that they're not stock. period. Duration is one example.

You miss read the origional post you commented on & then missread GVR4592's post in reply. Nether said the 200's were the stock cam that came with the car. They were simply saying that this aftermarket cam was designed to run in a stock displacement motor (ie 2.0L) & isn't the preferred cam upgrade for someone running a stroker, such as the origional poster.

95GSXBLUR · 06-13-2007, 10:56 AM

I'm an idiot...

GVR4592 · 06-13-2007, 08:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 95GSXBLUR

I'm an idiot...

It's not a big deal, I misread about 90% of the posts and have to go back and edit my responses all the time. Don't worry about it.

Turbocharged · 06-23-2007, 09:46 PM

I installed FP2's (101200's) after my 2.4 swap. I wish I had gone with FP3X's but i was very happy with the results. I gained airflow over the entire RPM band which was suprising; I was only expecting gains up top.

The FPxX cams were designed for stroked motors. The extra lift is critical for stroked motors. I suggest getting bigger cams.

steel_3d · 06-24-2007, 12:28 PM

Acually, the fp3 and fp3x were "designed" for stroker motors. The x series are higher ramp rate (and lift) cams, and higher ramp rate benefits everyone.

Talking to Robert he suggested fp2x for my stroker with mild needs (fp3052).

Not comes the interesting part. I finally figured out how to compare cam profiles on fp's site. Open up two browsers, maximize both, and open the profile graphs of the two cams you want to compare. Then alt-tab quickly between the two browsers and look for differences. The first version with the lobes centered is good for looking at the overall area under the curve, ramp rate, etc. The second one with the 720 degree view is good for looking at lobe center line, ie; advance/retard.

Sorry, now comes the interesting part.

The fp2x and fp3 are basically the same profile except the fp3 actually has lower max lift. In other words the fp2x has the same or higher lift than the fp3 everywhere except in the low lift regions (maybe the quicker ramp in the low lift regions does have some benefit for strokers). Looking at the 720 degree graphs you notice that the intake cam on the fp3 is a couple of degrees advanced compared to the 2x. And that's as far as the differences go.

In other words, I'm glad I got the fp2x's. I actually have higher lift, same ramp, and since I have adjustable cam gears I can always replicate the lobe centerline of the fp3 if it turns out to be beneficial.

Now I gotta get out there and install the suckers.

PS: If you buy Supertech dual springs they come with the slim valve seals, so you don't have to buy them separately. I have a spare set sitting around now cause I didnt know this.

dsm-onster · 06-24-2007, 02:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by steel_3d

Sorry, now comes the interesting part.

The fp2x and fp3 are basically the same profile except the fp3 actually has lower max lift. In other words the fp2x has the same or higher lift than the fp3 everywhere except in the low lift regions (maybe the quicker ramp in the low lift regions does have some benefit for strokers). Looking at the 720 degree graphs you notice that the intake cam on the fp3 is a couple of degrees advanced compared to the 2x. And that's as far as the differences go.

In other words, I'm glad I got the fp2x's. I actually have higher lift, same ramp, and since I have adjustable cam gears I can always replicate the lobe centerline of the fp3 if it turns out to be beneficial.

Now I gotta get out there and install the suckers.

PS: If you buy Supertech dual springs they come with the slim valve seals, so you don't have to buy them separately. I have a spare set sitting around now cause I didnt know this.

This is exactly what I was going to post. Thank you for mentioning this. See my thread for more details about these cams: FP2Xs and 10,000 rpms. To get great stroker cams, an adjustable cam gear is all thats needed for me to get stroker cams when/if I decide to stroke my setup.

Here's an overlay of one the two cam profiles:

Note the FP2X cams have slightly higher lift. Adjusting the intake cam timing is all that is neccesary to turn fp2Xs into stroker fp3s w/ more peak lift. Advancing it increases overlap (helps spool and midrange torque) and optimises timing for lower rpm cylinder filling.

steel_3d · 06-25-2007, 01:26 AM

Goddamnit, I should've gotten the 3x's. Looks like again it's the same profile as the 2x with higher lift, and different center lines. Duration is the same. The only reason I didn't go with the biggest cams was to be able to pass emissions, but it looks like the 3x would've passed just as easily as the 2x with some cam timing tweaks. Live and learn...