Dyno Graphs for cams

[Mandon]

I have searched and read through about 100 threads on cams, and there is one common theme......THERE ARE ZERO DYNO GRAPHS IN THEM. There are a lot of references to the AMS cam test, but everyone just links to it and since it is no longer on their site anywhere (as far as I can tell) that is of no help. Does anyone have these hosted somewhere?

Also I have read multiple people talk about the dyno graphs from FP's cam tests when they were getting the degrees set up. Apparently there is a graph comparing 101100's and 264's - There are no links to a location for the graph in any of the threads I went through.

If people have any of these particular graphs or any comparative graphs for that matter please post them here. Please only graphs which make direct comparisons between different cams and not "Here is my dyno w/ xxx cams" graphs.

Thanks in advance guys any help is appreciated.

 

[bfdahl]

What kind of info are you looking for? torque curves, horsepower curves?

if you see any dyno charts and they are using a 16 g like the AMS test all bets are off if you on a 50 trim or GT 35. the same aftermarket cams will make bigger power!

On the AMS test they had 315 whp with 264/264 and 320 whp with 264/272 and 20 psi.

the numbers would have been alot bigger with other turbos.

I think the SBR tests had bigger cams with a varity of big turbos.

 

[Mandon]

I just want to see comparative graphs. The peak HP numbers are only a very small part of the picture. That's why I would like to see the graphs. It is nice to be able to look at what if any gains are apparent throughout the entire band instead of just focusing on the peak gains.

I would especially like to see the FP graph comparing 101100's and 264's....

 

[ChvyKc]

I think the SBR tests had bigger cams with a varity of big turbos.

The SBR tests were done to compare turbos on the same motor set-up. I believe that they were running a 2.0L with huge cams that could handle whatever turbo they put on there.

The AMS testing is a good comparison of the cams on a 16G but you are going to see bigger gains on a larger turbo with a larger cam set-up. For instance, if you are planning on sticking with a 16G turbo then a 264/272 is perfect for that turbo. You retain all of the torque without sacraficing to much horsepower. When AMS swapped from the 264/272 cams to the 272/272 they only gained a couple of horsepower but ended up losing over ten foot pounds of torque.

Doing that same thing on a 50 trim would have netted a completely different result. You would have seen a huge gain going from the 264/272 to the 272/272 since the 50 trim flows so much more air and can benefit from the larger cam.

I would especially like to see the FP graph comparing 101100's and 264's....

I didn't even know that graph exists. I would like to see it as well. It basically boils down to what your plans for the car are when you are picking a turbo. It is pointless to worry about what the car is going to make on the stock 14B when you are going to go with a larger turbo in the near future. This is the reason that I went with the FP2's in my car because I plan on having at least a 50 trim on the car by the end of this winter.

 

[Mandon]

I know the standard reply is "just buy the 272 (or its equivalent)". That's not really why I was making this thread. I wanted a place where people could actually see comparative dyno graphs instead of the standard discussions of how aggressive a grind is appropriate. Clearly the type of grind will vary based on current mods/turbo size - so any comparative graphs are better than none.

Anyone actually have either the FP graphs (which are referred to several times in the huge FP cam thread), the AMS graphs, or the SBR graphs?

 

[DSM90AWD]

Checking the WayBack Machine, I found the original AMS Camshaft Test Page

 

[DSMunknown]

Checking the WayBack Machine, I found the original AMS Camshaft Test Page

"I'm lovin' it!" <---- (McDonald's theme song in mind when saying this)



Damn, this link takes forever to load. I clicked and then scrolled the web, and 15 minutes later it still isn't done. It's only up to four little green bars WTF Oh well. Time to save this link to my own little archive space for future reference



EDIT: Not all the dyno graphs currently work. I assume you can contact AMS to see it they still have this in their own personal files, though.

 

[pneumo]

You found it!

I noticed that every dyno graph shows the power falling off at 6k rpm. Since the car had a 1G maf and stock ecu I suspect that's the reason for power falling off, not the cams. Big cams can hold power above 6k, so these charts are only valid for comparing power between 3k and 6k.

 

[perley03]

Checking the WayBack Machine, I found the original AMS Camshaft Test Page

When you click on the link to compare graphs it says that is is no longer on the registured website. I've tried searching AMS's website but there are no graphs, except the ones for their EVO.

 

[ChvyKc]

When you click on the link to compare graphs it says that is is no longer on the registured website. I've tried searching AMS's website but there are no graphs, except the ones for their EVO.

All of the dyno graphs pull up for me.

 

[DSM90AWD]

I noticed that every dyno graph shows the power falling off at 6k rpm. Since the car had a 1G maf and stock ecu I suspect that's the reason for power falling off, not the cams

The "small" 16G used in the testing (prol near 100% capacity at 6K) and the VE of the engine is more the reason for the power decline. Add better flowing intake/head and a bigger turbo, and the power would stretch to the later RPMs

 

[pneumo]

The "small" 16G used in the testing (prol near 100% capacity at 6K) and the VE of the engine is more the reason for the power decline. Add better flowing intake/head and a bigger turbo, and the power would stretch to the later RPM

You'd think so, but some of those cams tested are some of the best for top end, yet they didn't raise the rpm where peak HP occurs. I don't think the turbo simply shut off at the same point, especially since the peak HP was different. If the turbo ran out of steam, then why did the power drop off with the lesser cams instead of continuing across to higher rpm? 325HP is not a lot, plenty of guys have made much more with the stock head and intake manifold, including me. And turbos don't simply shut off when they reach their limits. I learned that from pushing my 14B into the 11's. I also had the stock 1.5" diameter throttle body elbow on the car which is how I learned about bottlenecks and the way they limit power. A bottleneck isn't a fine line between power/no power. It's a grey area where power can still be made, but it just takes a larger pressure differential.

The dyno chart for the Crower Stage 3 cams shows a distict power curve. It shows the power increasing nicely right up to 6k rpm, then it takes a sharp nosedive. Honestly, there's no way to engineer a cam that has a powercurve with a sharp drop like that, even if other parts on the car were flowing near their limits. Something else was at work here.

So take a look at the stock timing curve to get an idea of it's effect. Here's the highest load level timing map straight from the ecu:
RPM timing
4500 18
5000 19
5500 21
6000 24
6500 20
7000 18

Would loosing 4 degrees of timing from 6k to 6500 rpm have that effect? hellyeah. Timing makes power.

Luckily the 2G timing curve keep on advancing as rpm goes up, so they don't have that limitation.

 

[GVR4592]

They all drop off at 6k because of the stock intake manifold.

 

[DSMunknown]

I would like to post up the photos that I am able to view. However, I am not able to access all of them. Someone said they had no difficulties accessing all of the photos. Therefore, for those who are able to see all of the photos, please post up the ones that I cannot access. Thank you.




Stock vs Web Cams:
<a href="http://img169.imageshack.us/my.php?image=untitled1mq6.png" target="_blank"><img src="http://img169.imageshack.us/img169/4976/untitled1mq6.th.png" border="0" alt="Free Image Hosting at www.ImageShack.us" /></a>

Stock vs. Crower Stage 3:

Cannot access it.

Stock vs. Jun Stage 3:
<a href="http://img244.imageshack.us/my.php?image=untitled2io4.png" target="_blank"><img src="http://img244.imageshack.us/img244/1766/untitled2io4.th.png" border="0" alt="Free Image Hosting at www.ImageShack.us" /></a>

Stock vs. HKS 264 In 264 Ex:

Cannot access it.

Stock vs. HKS 272 In 272 Ex:
<a href="http://img244.imageshack.us/my.php?image=untitled2io4.png" target="_blank"><img src="http://img244.imageshack.us/img244/1766/untitled2io4.th.png" border="0" alt="Free Image Hosting at www.ImageShack.us" /></a>

HKS 264 In 264 Ex vs. HKS 272 In 272 Ex:
<a href="http://img169.imageshack.us/my.php?image=untitled5lg6.png" target="_blank"><img src="http://img169.imageshack.us/img169/1776/untitled5lg6.th.png" border="0" alt="Free Image Hosting at www.ImageShack.us" /></a>

HKS 272 In 272 Ex vs HKS 262 In 272 Ex:
<a href="http://img169.imageshack.us/my.php?image=untitled6fe9.png" target="_blank"><img src="http://img169.imageshack.us/img169/5387/untitled6fe9.th.png" border="0" alt="Free Image Hosting at www.ImageShack.us" /></a>

HKS 272 In 272 Ex vs Crower Stage 3:
<a href="http://img175.imageshack.us/my.php?image=untitled10wg6.png" target="_blank"><img src="http://img175.imageshack.us/img175/3029/untitled10wg6.th.png" border="0" alt="Free Image Hosting at www.ImageShack.us" /></a>

HKS 272 In 272 Ex vs. Jun Stage 3:
<a href="http://img314.imageshack.us/my.php?image=untitled11qf1.png" target="_blank"><img src="http://img314.imageshack.us/img314/3601/untitled11qf1.th.png" border="0" alt="Free Image Hosting at www.ImageShack.us" /></a>

HKS 264's vs HKS 272's vs Crower Stage 3 vs Jun Stage 3:
<a href="http://img175.imageshack.us/my.php?image=untitled12pu5.png" target="_blank"><img src="http://img175.imageshack.us/img175/5210/untitled12pu5.th.png" border="0" alt="Free Image Hosting at www.ImageShack.us" /></a>









As you can see, the only charts I had problems accessing are number 2 and 4.

 

[Mandon]

Thanks guys, finding the actual graphs is very helpful. Now does anyone have the FP test graphs or the SBR ones? It would be nice to see some newer tests, since there were no comp/FP cams in the AMS one, and I think the others may have used a bigger turbo?......

 

[DSM90AWD]

Thanks guys, finding the actual graphs is very helpful. Now does anyone have the FP test graphs or the SBR ones? It would be nice to see some newer tests, since there were no comp/FP cams in the AMS one, and I think the others may have used a bigger turbo?......

To what end? Per your profile you have a near stock car. Looking at graphs of 300-600WHP cars with different cams is not what you want to be doing at this point.

There are an infinite number of combinations of turbo, cam, intake, head, compression, displacement not to mention degreeing of cams and other tuning and the results are not meaningful (except in extreme cases) unless the same setup (which resembles your own) is used for each test. So if shopping for cams, check what others with your setup are running and see how well they perform.

FYI.. I've never seen a FP or SBR cam test, and even if they did one, it would likely have been on a "highly evolved" engine. But for the most part the Comp100s / FP1s were patterned after the KH$262 and the Comp200s / FP2s were patterned after the HK$272s. So looking at those graphs will give you a good indication of what to expect

 

[Mandon]

To what end? Per your profile you have a near stock car. Looking at graphs of 300-600WHP cars with different cams is not what you want to be doing at this point.

Guess it's time to update the ol profile! (It's been a few years)

Also the graphs are necessarily for me...I just want them to be available in a thread for those who are looking, since they are MIA everywhere else.

 

[Red97Eclipseboy]

They all drop off at 6k because of the stock intake manifold.

My graph doesn't show a drop off of power until 6800rpm. Stock IM.

 

[nanokpsi]

My graph doesn't show a drop off of power until 6800rpm. Stock IM.

Yours is dropping off and mine hasn't even made peak hp yet
Magnus even with 264/272 cams

 

[91-gsx]

I had a quick question to do with the power drop off that some of you are describing due ot the stock cams. If you have stock cams but a big turbo like a gt35r, the drop in power due to cams is not really felt is it? I only ask because there has to be people running some big turbos on stock cams, maybe looking to upgrade, but running on them non the less. My impression was that if i have a laggy turbo that has a bigger turbine wheel and .82 a/r housing that power up top will be kept for the most part, but cams will always add to the lbs/min flowing and power, so dont get me wrong, I am not questioning that at all. Just wondering how bad the drop would be with the gt35r and stock cams.
thanks for the info

 

[v2ner]

Well, you won't be able to feel the drop until you've felt the gain. Taking a 35R only to 7500RPMs is missing the sweetspot. You'll notice a big gain once you upgrade. It's not needed but I highly reccommend it. Just like I would reccommend at least taking a 35R to 8500RPMs.