272s with a 2.3 stroker ok? How would this affect it?

JOEY A · 09-21-2007, 01:46 PM

Well I might pick up my freinds car with a 2.3 in it, qeustion is he has normal HKS 272s across. Now how much power am I giving up Vs. Going with stroker cams? Im sorry if this has been asked befor ive done a quick search and didnt find anything...

PS

This car has a 57trim, I belive its the one that slowboy sells with a internal gate wich im not found of...

Id like to get a 37R on it

aero_sallee · 09-21-2007, 02:46 PM

Here is an example of what 272s can do on a stroker.
700+ WHP ! Finally dynoed 40 PSI DSM BLK's car!
40PSI's first time at the track ( A DSM that does not break !!! )

JOEY A · 09-21-2007, 03:47 PM

Thank you!

nanokpsi · 09-21-2007, 08:05 PM

An oldy but goodie..

FP2 vs Fp3: Back to back
clearly the big stroker cams are worth some power, but you need the right valvetrain.

JayRolla · 09-22-2007, 06:40 AM

280's or even 288's would be better. 272's in a stroker are like stock cams in a 2.0.

nanokpsi · 09-22-2007, 02:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JayRolla

280's or even 288's would be better. 272's in a stroker are like stock cams in a 2.0.

I wouldn't go that far. Depending on the goals he might not need to change a thing. Sure there are more agressive cams out there, but some of the ultra high rpm cams aren't going to be that beneficial on a 2.3/2.4 since you don't rev them as high. Any upgraded camshaft is going to be a nice jump over stock, especially on a stroker but the fp3, 4, and 3x (and comparable comp cams) are all very solid stroker cams.

JayRolla · 09-22-2007, 04:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nanokpsi

I wouldn't go that far. Depending on the goals he might not need to change a thing. Sure there are more agressive cams out there, but some of the ultra high rpm cams aren't going to be that beneficial on a 2.3/2.4 since you don't rev them as high. Any upgraded camshaft is going to be a nice jump over stock, especially on a stroker but the fp3, 4, and 3x (and comparable comp cams) are all very solid stroker cams.

My mechanic has ran all setups in his 2.4 and from what he told me the 272's did nothing. He said the high rev cams actually kick in at lower rpms on the strokers. At least 280's are recommended in a stroker.

Bigglesworth87 · 09-22-2007, 04:55 PM

All this talk back and forth is great and all but do you guys have dyno sheets to prove anything on this? Not trying to stir up some stuff but numbers do speak louder then word of mouth. I am actually planning on building a stroker myself and I am trying to figure out which cams I want to go with also.

I have been leaning towards the 280's simply because not everyone uses those. I am trying to be different on this build up and its seems like everyone and their brother is going with the 264/272 or 272/272 combo.

JayRolla · 09-23-2007, 02:49 PM

My mechanic ran 280's over his 272's on his stroker and he ran a better 1/4 mile. No dyno proof but the strip is a better test.

JOEY A · 09-23-2007, 04:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JayRolla

My mechanic ran 280's over his 272's on his stroker and he ran a better 1/4 mile. No dyno proof but the strip is a better test.

Thats telling alot of info, somone said she said he said stuff with no info on the exact setup or dyno slips or track times.

I wanted to know what the down sides were to running these cams in a 2.3 since ive yet to own a 2.3 dsm

JOEY A · 09-23-2007, 04:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bigglesworth87

All this talk back and forth is great and all but do you guys have dyno sheets to prove anything on this? Not trying to stir up some stuff but numbers do speak louder then word of mouth. I am actually planning on building a stroker myself and I am trying to figure out which cams I want to go with also.

I have been leaning towards the 280's simply because not everyone uses those. I am trying to be different on this build up and its seems like everyone and their brother is going with the 264/272 or 272/272 combo.

There is no need to be different when setting up a car, you need to work out the numbers and mix and match the right parts

Just becuse you want to run the setup to be different means you might be building it wrong

Again im only been in the 2.0 scene, and havent really botherd with stroker stuff until now

9:1 compression wesico,eagle rods,ARPs,MLS, 272s was my old setup

vaboys2ndgen · 09-23-2007, 04:52 PM

I'm going to be running BC 272s on very similar stroker setup to yours.

JOEY A · 09-23-2007, 05:54 PM

I need to get more details from my freind on his setup, pretty baisc 2.3 setup with 272s and a 57trim

Nothing crazy....I dont have the money for going with somthing big this year, but ill prob pick up link, and max out the setup if already has...

JayRolla · 09-23-2007, 06:11 PM

I guess I am saying hearsay, but its from reputable guy. The three guys that run the shop have low 11 second cars and maybe one in the 10's once he hits the strip. www.jackstransmissions.com check them out.

nanokpsi · 09-23-2007, 07:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bigglesworth87

All this talk back and forth is great and all but do you guys have dyno sheets to prove anything on this? Not trying to stir up some stuff but numbers do speak louder then word of mouth. I am actually planning on building a stroker myself and I am trying to figure out which cams I want to go with also.

I have been leaning towards the 280's simply because not everyone uses those. I am trying to be different on this build up and its seems like everyone and their brother is going with the 264/272 or 272/272 combo.

If you don't believe people, just call up the cam maker and see what rpm range the cam is designed for. Are you really going to put a 8k+ rpm cam in a stroker motor? What about a 9k cam like the Crane's. The answer should be a "no". Sure, you might see a nice power gain from 8500-9k, but at the loss of some midrage where you will likely be spending more time, infinately more if you aren't going to try to rev it to death. While bigger motors need a more aggressive cam, they need to be aggressive in the right ways to get more out of it.

nanokpsi · 09-23-2007, 07:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JayRolla

My mechanic has ran all setups in his 2.4 and from what he told me the 272's did nothing. He said the high rev cams actually kick in at lower rpms on the strokers. At least 280's are recommended in a stroker.

Define "recomended". All aftermarket cams are recomended, as they all will be a vast improvement over the stockers. More so than on a stock displacement motor. A bigger motor will "tame" a came somewhat, but I don't think you'll see it peak out a a lesser rpm.

If you're mechanic really believes 272s did nothing, then I would find a new one

Granted, they certainly aren't my first choice for a stroker build (i run the 101400s as the 3xs weren't available when I ordered these) but they will still make plenty of power in a good set up.

BoostFrenzy · 09-23-2007, 08:19 PM

If you plan on going for high horsepower numbers, I would recommend the 280's with a larger intake manifold and TB. But if you don't have those 2 things or you do not plan on upgrading them, the 280's are pretty useless. This is because the intake manifold can't let in enough CFM with such a high grind cam.

Check out eclipsegsx1736's posts in the BC 280's thread.
If you have DSMLink on your laptop do look at the Dat. files.

Brian Crower 280's

JayRolla · 09-24-2007, 10:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BoostFrenzy

If you plan on going for high horsepower numbers, I would recommend the 280's with a larger intake manifold and TB. But if you don't have those 2 things or you do not plan on upgrading them, the 280's are pretty useless. This is because the intake manifold can't let in enough CFM with such a high grind cam.

Check out eclipsegsx1736's posts in the BC 280's thread.
If you have DSMLink on your laptop do look at the Dat. files.

Brian Crower 280's

So many people say this. He is running 288's and a stock intake manifold with no problem. He is nearly in the 10's with simple setup. E85/2.4l/T67/288 cams. No need for smim, porting or any of that hard shit. Do what you want, I was just trying to give info from a guy that has tested everything from FP1 to FP3X cams. He ran quicker times on the 280's than 272's and not reving past 8000rpm.

He sells about 20-30 transmissions a month all over the world. He has a car running 9's on his tranny now I believe. He has been around. Sorry I have no proof, but 272's would be a waste of money from what Ive seen and been told by him.

Bigglesworth87 · 09-24-2007, 10:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JOEY A

There is no need to be different when setting up a car, you need to work out the numbers and mix and match the right parts
Just becuse you want to run the setup to be different means you might be building it wrong
Again im only been in the 2.0 scene, and havent really botherd with stroker stuff until now
9:1 compression wesico,eagle rods,ARPs,MLS, 272s was my old setup

Valid point, my friend. I am doing as much research on this before I go buying parts. I would hate to have purchased a set of cams only to not be happy with it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by nanokpsi

you don't believe people, just call up the cam maker and see what rpm range the cam is designed for. Are you really going to put a 8k+ rpm cam in a stroker motor? What about a 9k cam like the Crane's. The answer should be a "no". Sure, you might see a nice power gain from 8500-9k, but at the loss of some midrage where you will likely be spending more time, infinately more if you aren't going to try to rev it to death. While bigger motors need a more aggressive cam, they need to be aggressive in the right ways to get more out of it.

As I stated above, i want to be sure that what I buy is the right cam for my application. I was going with the 280's simply because they are a more aggressive cam. What you said though does make sence and i will be making phone calls to get more of the techinical information I want. Oh and the thing about not believing people..... I do but I am sure you can agree with me that there has been a lot of BS floating around threads these days. (not saying anything about anyone in this thread) I just have learned not to trust everything that people say in forums. UNLESS, its a trusted source. ONCE AGAIN, nothing against anyone in this thread.

JayRolla · 09-24-2007, 11:08 AM

I fully understand. I would call up not just the cam makers but some big dsm tuning shops. Ask them what would be a better cam. Call about 5 different places and then make a decision. From what he told me from his personal experience that when you build a stroker it takes away from the cam. Running 264's would be like a stock cam, 272's would be 264's and 280's would run like 272's.

I know this is not my personal experience but I do trust him. Ive known him for 7 years and when I first met him he already had a stroker with a 50trim of some sort. I remember when he bought the maf-t the day it was released. So he has been building these for a long time and now runs a very good transmission/performance shop for dsm's only.

My buddy had a 2.3L built by him with 280 DKS cams. Everything else is stock from the 14b to the exhaust. I can t