FP2's vs. Web Cams?

[93_tsi_fwd]

Which one is better? both are 272's, but one is $300 and the other is $250.

 

[buddahboost]

I have FP2's and I fuc king love them!!

 

[dsm-onster]

Do you have cam specs or a cam card for the web cams?

I have fp2x cams and I really like them too!

 

[93_tsi_fwd]

They are 453/228. basically 276/274s

Web Cam Inc. - Performance and Racing Camshafts / Chrysler Eagle Talon (85-99) ; Mitsubishi Eclipse 4 G 63 (85-99) 2.0L ; Mitsubishi Galant 4 G 63 (85-99) DOHC 16v Timing Card

 

[dsm-onster]

First the intake cam will make your setup behave more like a miller cycle than fp2 cams. Which provides good fuel economy. This also will lead to significantly less mid-range and but more top end power than the fp2s. This will negate some spool speed since VE is down in the spool range vs. fp2s. They appear to offset this with opening the exhaust valve earlier, during blow down which will give higher energy exhaust to the turbine wheel to do work. The web cams have much less overlap which depending on the nature of your setup, will likely cause you to beable to develope more topend power once you start pushing your turbo (higher exhaust back pressure than your boost in the intake manifold). Apparently these cams are geared more toward topend and they would operate like 288/272 cams not '276/274s'.

What are your goals? Those cams are bigger than hks 272s and BC 272s and FP2s. Comparable web cams would be the web 264/274s. And those are still geared toward more topend than the fp2 cams. The fp2 cams provide a little more topend than hks 272s.

My fp2X cams (fp2s with SLIGHTLY more ramp rate) worked superb with my small 16g and stock intake/exhaust manifolds. VERY fun setup. I had plenty of powerband and she wouldn't die up top. At only 22psi from the small 16g, I saw 36lb/min. The stock intake manifold resonates with the fp2 cams at 4000rpms and 5300rpms. Torque peak occured between 4300 and 5300rpms for me (close to where grams/rev would peak out). I really love these cams with a stock long block. And when I upgrade the manifolds and finish porting my head, I know I will still have plenty of cam for my larger holset h1c.

 

[v8s_are_slow]

Personally, if I had to choose, I'd be going with the FP2's. Dunno if the Webcam's are even still in production or not. If so, maybe they've changed the way they make them. Back in the day they use to be BAD for flattening out and destroying the valvetrain. Had a buddy that had some of these cams and they went bad on him as well. This was about 8 or 9 years ago though. But I haven't heard too many good things about those cams. Just my 2 cents.

 

[93_tsi_fwd]

I havnt bought anyone of those yet but im more toward the FP2's now. Thanks.

 

[kawboy]

Personally, if I had to choose, I'd be going with the FP2's. Dunno if the Webcam's are even still in production or not. If so, maybe they've changed the way they make them. Back in the day they use to be BAD for flattening out and destroying the valvetrain. Had a buddy that had some of these cams and they went bad on him as well. This was about 8 or 9 years ago though. But I haven't heard too many good things about those cams. Just my 2 cents.

I agree

Web cams get smaller/wear out over time.

I have FP2/Comp 101200's and I love them. Bigger then BC and HKS 272's.

 

[v8s_are_slow]

When I read this statement that FFWD put up regarding their cams, the only reason that comes to mind for them putting up the statement is the history with Webcams. I mean what other cams could they be talking about???

A SPECIAL NOTE ABOUT OUR CAMS: There has been some smack talk within forums and whatnot that these cams are "spray welded" or exhibit some other cheap crap done to them during the regrind process. These cams are NOT welded on and are just as hard on the outside as they are on the inside. The grinding process does not detract from its surface hardness. Period.

In fact, cams that have already been run for years and years (such as in regrinds), have proven themselves in longevity whereas the brand new stuff, might have manufacturing flaws within the casting or billet that will certainly rear its ugly head during usage.