FP3X cams,,,,what do you guys think

[nanokpsi]

are the FP2x's making you happy? i considered them as well, i want something stronger than the 272s, i thought the FP2xs were about the same but im not a 100% sure. i am starting to consider going a step lower, does anyone have any info on the FP4's or heard anything about them. FP's numbering scheme doesnt make sense, so i have been trying to figure out what order they go in as strongest to weakest, i think i got it

FP3X
FP4
FP3
etc...

can anyone confirm or correct me?

You are correct. There is no FP4x because we are limited by geometry in the head and the valve guides. FP 4xs would be bigger than the Crane's that Shep runs. Brent Rau actually runs bigger Crane's than Shep, but has had problems popping off rockers and his springs are pretty close to coil bind. I am interested to see how the cranes compare to the FP3x cams. If I can get a loaner set I want to do a dyno comparison when the head is done consisting of the comp 101400s that I have, the cranes which I want to get, and whatever people want to lend for the test.

 

[chuckdog_5]

im pretty sure im going to go with the fp2x's, thanks guys

 

[dsm-onster]

Forced Performance themselves has said on several occassions that you'll see better performance from the FP2 cams than the FP3 cams in a 2.0. If you're running the 3x you HAVE to have dual springs. FP recommends the FP2 cams for a drop-in replacement on the 2.0, and the FP2x for a drop-in with upgraded springs.

Here is a comparison betwee the FP2X and the FP3:

You must be logged in to view this image or video.

Obviously the FP2x is more aggresive than the FP3. It even has a more retarded intake cam. FP3s would do great in a 2.0. My FP2Xs do phenominal. The FP3 would give you more down low than the FP2X because of the of the less intake cam retard.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Below is a comparison of the FP2X overlaying the FP3X.

You must be logged in to view this image or video.

As you can see both FP3X intake and exhaust cams are retarded under 5*. Retarding cams yields more power up top. A stock 2.0L 4G63 can rev to +9000 and stay together far better than a stroker.


The ramp rates between the two are the same. Ramp rate is tuned for flow. If there were a tremendous difference in flow between the 2.3 and 2.0 then the ramp rates would be different. The primary difference is the lift.

Read my recent article, Cam Basics, to better understand how these specific profile characteristics affect engine performance.

Also my recent post, FP2s and 10,000 rpms, will change your mind about what FP3s can do in a 2.0L. Much, much more aggresive cams have been used w/ great success and drivability.

 

[dsm-onster]

rob told me himself that hes seen fp2x's float at 8500-9k with a 80-85lb seat pressure. And thats about a crower/manley setup at 1.520 height. Dual springs really are necessary, but i also wouldnt suggest fp3's on a 2.0. Go with the FP2x's over 3x's IMO.

Under my FP2Xs, my Manley singles have held great to 8500 rpms repeatedly for thousands of miles...

Smooth, consistant power to the red every time...

 

[dsm-onster]

So you called FP, told them you are running a turbo this small on a 2.0l, and they told you the FP3x would be fine? I call BS.

For the record, I am running the FP3 cams in my 2.0l with aT67/P trim and my car just made a noticeable improvement in spool and peak power over 272s. My car has been on a few different dynos so I can't offer direct comparisons but I will say that the improvement was well worth it.

I can offer a direct comparison. I'm not flaming you. Just don't forget to take a look at my reply two posts up. There's no BS in there. The 3Xs will continue to supply power later where the stroker cannot rev but a 2.0 can !!!

In fact, I'm looking back and wishing I had gotten the FP3Xs. Even though the 2Xs are more aggresive than the FP3s or FP4s, the 3Xs offer more cam retard right out of the box and higher lift. I probably will settle for retarding my FP2Xs to the same centerline degree as the 3Xs and be done with it.

 

[dsm-onster]

You are correct. There is no FP4x because we are limited by geometry in the head and the valve guides. FP 4xs would be bigger than the Crane's that Shep runs. Brent Rau actually runs bigger Crane's than Shep, but has had problems popping off rockers and his springs are pretty close to coil bind. I am interested to see how the cranes compare to the FP3x cams. If I can get a loaner set I want to do a dyno comparison when the head is done consisting of the comp 101400s that I have, the cranes which I want to get, and whatever people want to lend for the test.

I'm not sure that an FP4X grind would be so crazy. FP4s are less agggresive than FP3X. Straight from FP's website:

FPCam4

Dual valve springs recommended. This camshaft is a small step up from the FPCam3 grind. FPCam4 is actually a less aggressive and smaller camshaft than the FPCam3x, so much for a consistent numbering scheme.​

 

[dsm-onster]

im pretty sure im going to go with the fp2x's, thanks guys

Great choice. This is the second most aggresive cam FP offers. And is WAY more cam than the 272 HKS-ucks. I can't believe they are so expensive! It would be one thing if they were about the same price as these cams. Oh well.

The best thing is that you'll do fine with high performance singles up to 8500. Then after that a set of duals and some degreeing will give you PLENTY for almost any turbo.

 

[chuckdog_5]

Great choice. This is the second most aggresive cam FP offers. And is WAY more cam than the 272 HKS-ucks. I can't believe they are so expensive! It would be one thing if they were about the same price as these cams. Oh well.

The best thing is that you'll do fine with high performance singles up to 8500. Then after that a set of duals and some degreeing will give you PLENTY for almost any turbo.

Dude, you have helped out so much through my hole cam process, i cant thank you enough for explaining everything and taking the time to give me your opinions, to all you guys, thanks, ill let you guys know how the 2x's do

charles

 

[nanokpsi]

I'm not sure that an FP4X grind would be so crazy. FP4s are less agggresive than FP3X. Straight from FP's website:

FPCam4

Dual valve springs recommended. This camshaft is a small step up from the FPCam3 grind. FPCam4 is actually a less aggressive and smaller camshaft than the FPCam3x, so much for a consistent numbering scheme.​

Wow, you can read and copy/past from a website My information is direct from Robert @ FP. All of what I posted was paraphrasing him. I bought the 101400s before there was even an fp4 or 3x, so we got into a pretty good exchange on all the cam line and compared against Sheps cams (Cranes). I was debating selling the comp101400s and getting the 3xs, but I wanted to be sure there wasn't going to be a 4x in a few months. My previous post was his response. The stuff on Brent's car is what I discovered from talking to my head builder.

 

[nanokpsi]

Great choice. This is the second most aggresive cam FP offers. And is WAY more cam than the 272 HKS-ucks. I can't believe they are so expensive! It would be one thing if they were about the same price as these cams. Oh well.

The best thing is that you'll do fine with high performance singles up to 8500. Then after that a set of duals and some degreeing will give you PLENTY for almost any turbo.

How many times do I have to tell you that YOU ARE WRONG when you tell people this. You are ohnly hurting other peoples cars/performance. Now you are asserting that the fp2x is more aggresive than the fp4, I back up my imformation with facts, information from the cam designer. The fp4 and 2x are almost a wash on lift, but have a good bit more duaration. You just look at one aspest of the cam profile. Telling people that the 2s will be better on a 2.0 than the 3, 4 or 3x is also wrong. The thread started even feels like you are helping him when you in fact are selling him short. If you are buy the big springs to run the 2xs, there is no reason you should shy away from the bigger cams.

All this hooplah about not needing the bigger cams unless you are running a "X"lb/min turbo is also crap. People have made 7-800whp on hks 272s, so I guess we don't need anything bigger. The bigger cam will let you max out smaller turbos on less boost. What peopl don't read into that is the motor will also make more power on pump gas, as it will be flowing more air at the same boost as the smaller cam car will. The justification behind the whole premise is that if you can max out the compressor you are using with the 272s, fp2, etc. then there isn't a point into getting the biggest cam and stiff/expensive valve train.

 

[chuckdog_5]

How many times do I have to tell you that YOU ARE WRONG when you tell people this. You are ohnly hurting other peoples cars/performance. Now you are asserting that the fp2 is more aggresive than the fp4,. In the other post where you have stted that, I back up my imformation with facts, information from the cam designer. You just look at one aspest of the cam profile. Telling people that the 2s will be better on a 2.0 than the 3, 4 or 3x is also wrong. The thread started even feels like you are helping him when you in fact are selling him short. If you are buy the big springs to run the 2xs, there is no reason you should shy away from the bigger cams.

All this hooplah about not needing the bigger cams unless you are running a "X"lb/min turbo is also crap. People have made 7-800whp on hks 272s, so I guess we don't need anything bigger. The bigger cam will let you max out smaller turbos on less boost. What peopl don't read into that is the motor will also make more power on pump gas, as it will be flowing more air at the same boost as the smaller cam car will. The justification behind the whole premise is that if you can max out the compressor you are using with the 272s, fp2, etc. then there isn't a point into getting the biggest cam and stiff/expensive valve train.

So what would you reccomend for what im wanting?

 

[nanokpsi]

So what would you reccomend for what im wanting?

If you don't mind paying for the springs, just get the 3xs or the Cranes. Don can get you the grind number for the cams that Shep runs. My head is on its way to him as we speak for his magic.

 

[dsm-onster]

How many times do I have to tell you that YOU ARE WRONG when you tell people this.

You have to tell me over and over and over again, because you are not looking at the cam profile and analyzing the data. The FP2X is more aggresive than the FP3 and FP4. The FP3X is more aggresive than the FP2X. How many times to I have to repeat and post the profile overlays. Who are you? The post police? Contact a moderator for me spreading my misinformation...
_________________________________________________________________________________

You are ohnly hurting other peoples cars/performance. Now you are asserting that the fp2x is more aggresive than the fp4, I back up my imformation with facts, information from the cam designer. The fp4 and 2x are almost a wash on lift, but have a good bit more duaration.

You must be logged in to view this image or video.

Now you're being funny. Where's the more duration? I see more overlap. This yields quicker spoolup and moe down low and takes a little from up top. At 0.050" lift, there is not more lobe on the 4 vs. the 2X. Only the centerlines differ so there is more retard and advance. Did you even look at the profiles before you replied?
_________________________________________________________________________________

You just look at one aspest of the cam profile.

Have you been reading my posts all the way through? or stopping when you see me say the fp2Xs are more aggresive. See post #28. I discuss 1) Ramp rate 2) cam retard and 3) lift. You tell me what the duration differences is between these cams. I see on the FP profile sheet, at 0.050" lift, the duration between the 3X and the 2X is the same ... I can't help it. It's on the profile. That's why I didn't discuss duration.
_________________________________________________________________________________

Telling people that the 2s will be better on a 2.0 than the 3, 4 or 3x is also wrong.

WTF

Great choice. This is the second most aggresive cam FP offers.

In fact, I'm looking back and wishing I had gotten the FP3Xs. Even though the 2Xs are more aggresive than the FP3s or FP4s, the 3Xs offer more cam retard right out of the box and higher lift. I probably will settle for retarding my FP2Xs to the same centerline degree as the 3Xs and be done with it.

I proved the 3s and the 4s are less agggresive then the 2Xs. But WTF !
_________________________________________________________________________________

The thread started even feels like you are helping him when you in fact are selling him short. If you are buy the big springs to run the 2xs, there is no reason you should shy away from the bigger cams.

I cam run Manley singles w/ my 2Xs to 8500 rpms. But I doubt anyone can run the 3Xs to 8500 rpms w/ singles. Didn't FP tell you that?
_________________________________________________________________________________

All this hooplah about not needing the bigger cams unless you are running a "X"lb/min turbo is also crap. People have made 7-800whp on hks 272s, so I guess we don't need anything bigger. The bigger cam will let you max out smaller turbos on less boost. What peopl don't read into that is the motor will also make more power on pump gas, as it will be flowing more air at the same boost as the smaller cam car will. The justification behind the whole premise is that if you can max out the compressor you are using with the 272s, fp2, etc. then there isn't a point into getting the biggest cam and stiff/expensive valve train.

Who the he!! said that? I didn't. No one said that. Show a post.
_________________________________________________________________________________

chuckdog_5, as I said, the 2Xs are a great cam. It is the second best cam that FP offers. And my Manley singles do well with it to 8500 rpms... Of course the 3Xs will yield more power as I already proved w/ the cam profile overlay. Nevertheless, the FP2Xs are plenty for most turbos and setups out there for huge power. To determine which cam suits your goal, look at the profiles and study which cam characteristics do what.

1) FP3X
2) FP2X
3) FP4
4) FP3
5) FP2

 

[dsm-onster]

Wow, you can read and copy/past from a website My information is direct from Robert @ FP. All of what I posted was paraphrasing him. I bought the 101400s before there was even an fp4 or 3x, so we got into a pretty good exchange on all the cam line and compared against Sheps cams (Cranes). I was debating selling the comp101400s and getting the 3xs, but I wanted to be sure there wasn't going to be a 4x in a few months. My previous post was his response. The stuff on Brent's car is what I discovered from talking to my head builder.

So the a 4X cam would be too aggresive to function properly. . . I won't waste my time proving otherwise. That's probably true.

The FP2Xs offer more up top than the FP3s (A 0.050" lift . . . FP2X intake: 212 duration; FP3 intake: 207 duration FP2X/FP3 exhaust: 212 duration . . . also the FP2X intake cam is retarded more) and more lift. The FP2Xs offer more up top than the FP4s (NOT because of having more duration: the duration is the same) and more lift.

 

[nanokpsi]

To be honest I didn't even notice your replies other than the one I quoted. I also wasn't saying the you said that about "X" lb/min turbo. Other users posted that in this thread.
fp2x specs
I
lift .416
dur @ .050 212
E
lift \ .400
dur @ .050 212
FP4 specs
I
lift .415
dur @ .050 220
E
lift .399
dur @ .050 220
The duration doesn't appear to be the same to me..........

This may also seem familiar to you, as you "wrote" it in your "Cam Basics" article in the tech articles:
"What does this have to do with duration. Higher duration gives you more VE up top and takes VE away down low. So many say that changing duration changes your power band. But it also gives you more peak power if you raise your duration or your VE at high rpms where the engine displaces more volume per minute."

As far as chosing the cam based on spring choice, it should be the exact opposite. Find the grind that meets your goals and choose the appropriate spring. Selling yourself short by limiting rpm and or the cam profile by stipulating a cheaper spring is caca in my book.

Also, revving a stock motor to "9+k" is a good way to get a built bottom end sooner than you think. I'm sure the stock 130x mile bearing and rod bolts love it.

As to reving the 3xs to 8500 on Manley singles, I recomended buyinn the big springs, ie. the supertech duals and to get the bigger cam. I'm sure FP wouldn't recomend the Maley singles for the 2x either. Getting a spring that can only rev to 8500 is just waiting to buy another set anyways. I am sure running a "marginal" spring on that cam does wonders for its service life as well. Maybe you can unprade the whole long block when your valves float and tear everything up in a year or two. Then you will be really happy you cheaped out on the springs.

For someone that has such great compy/paste skill from da intraweb, you should steer your new found power to turbochargers and airflow. That way you can get away from wanting to rev a bolt on turbo to 10k rpms.

 

[chuckdog_5]

well i just got off the phone with Forced Performance, again they did assure me that i could run the 3x in my 2.0 with no problems, it would just give me more mid range power than top end, he recomended the 2x for higher power range. Same goes with the FP3, more mid range power, so i will stick with the 2x

 

[chuckdog_5]

thanks again guys

 

[dsm-onster]

fp2x specs
I
lift .416
dur @ .050 212
E
lift \ .400
dur @ .050 212
FP4 specs
I
lift .415
dur @ .050 220
E
lift .399
dur @ .050 220

I see where I messed up. I counted 1 less 1o degree incriment. That's good to see. Thanx for the correction. Keep in mind that the FP4s also have significantly more overlap...Like I said. Overlap takes away some power up top on a turbo car. As the exhaust mani pressure is usually higher than the intake boost pressure at this point.

When a hotside is well chosen for the setup the opposite comes into play. The fresh aircharge PLUS gas blows straight through the cylinder and right into the HOT exhaust mani. In the process the charge burns heating up the exhaust valve and turbo unnecesarily.

This may also seem familiar to you, as you "wrote" it in your "Cam Basics" article in the tech articles:
"What does this have to do with duration. Higher duration gives you more VE up top and takes VE away down low. So many say that changing duration changes your power band. But it also gives you more peak power if you raise your duration or your VE at high rpms where the engine displaces more volume per minute."

If I had counted correctly then I would have agreed that the FP4s have more intake duration. I know what I "wrote". I know what duration does and why it does it.

As far as chosing the cam based on spring choice, it should be the exact opposite. Find the grind that meets your goals and choose the appropriate spring. Selling yourself short by limiting rpm and or the cam profile by stipulating a cheaper spring is caca in my book.

No one said that one should get a cam based on cheaper springs. If that were the case I would recommend stock camsWTF . I said that the FP2Xs probably offer all he needed. No need to go bigger w/ his stock block. Just like you're saying.

Also, revving a stock motor to "9+k" is a good way to get a built bottom end sooner than you think. I'm sure the stock 130x mile bearing and rod bolts love it.

My plans include forged internals and ARP bolts. No need to get the FP3Xs if his bottem end can't handle it. Unless he's getting bottem end work done soon. I said that for performance sake, that the FP3X is the best cam... Where are trying to go with this

As to reving the 3xs to 8500 on Manley singles, I recomended buyinn the big springs, ie. the supertech duals and to get the bigger cam.

No one said this.

I'm sure FP wouldn't recomend the Maley singles for the 2x either.

I'm sure they wouldn't their springs cost more.

Getting a spring that can only rev to 8500 is just waiting to buy another set anyways. I am sure running a "marginal" spring on that cam does wonders for its service life as well.

Manley Springs

Maybe you can unprade the whole long block when your valves float and tear everything up in a year or two. Then you will be really happy you cheaped out on the springs.

Not if he gets the FP2Xs and manley springs. If he wants FP3Xs then I've already told him that he should get duals.

For someone that has such great compy/paste skill from da intraweb, you should steer your new found power to turbochargers and airflow. That way you can get away from wanting to rev a bolt on turbo to 10k rpms.

I posted that thread to find out what I need. It makes no sense to think that I WANT to rev my 60-1 to 10,000 rpms I just wanted to know if my CAMS can still deliver. I was asking about CAMS. Title: FP2s and 10,000 rpms. I was asking what my current setup could get away with.

There's no need to insult expecially when you were wrong about the FP3s being more aggresive than FP2Xs. I could question your competance on engine dynamics as well. But let's not do that. Bring the facts. I'll listen like I have. Shove these shallow insults up your ass.

 

[dsm-onster]

well i just got off the phone with Forced Performance, again they did assure me that i could run the 3x in my 2.0 with no problems, it would just give me more mid range power than top end, he recomended the 2x for higher power range. Same goes with the FP3, more mid range power, so i will stick with the 2x

!!!!

Good job.

 

[chuckdog_5]

i want to see how much power i can make on the stock bottom end

 

[nanokpsi]

i want to see how much power i can make on the stock bottom end

You can make more than the bottom end can take with fp2s/272s and keep the stock springs/retainers.

 

[chuckdog_5]

You can make more than the bottom end can take with fp2s/272s and keep the stock springs/retainers.

the stock springs and retainers are good up to 8500rpms? i may just fork out the 170$ for the manley spring kit just so i can have peice at mind

 

[dsm-onster]

i want to see how much power i can make on the stock bottom end

See here.

I don't know who Rizz is but he made 585whp and 450ft/lbs on a stock 6-bolt bottom end running 32psi.

 

[dsm-onster]

the stock springs and retainers are good up to 8500rpms? i may just fork out the 170$ for the manley spring kit just so i can have peice at mind

Shep took stock springs to the 9s or better (i think), At least the 10s. BUT! they were shimmed AND who knows how often he swapped springs. He was running these numbers at a time when good springs for the 4G63 was practically non-existant.

If you go w/ FP2Xs, your stockers (that MAY have significant life behind them) MAY float with a raised rev limit. The manley singles are good insurance. And you can probably get away with alot more than 8500 rpms. Since you're going w/ the retainers as well... Based on SBRs experience and my experience w/ these springs.

You'll make more power under the curve w/ FP2Xs vs. the FP2s/272s. peak power isn't everything. The ramp rates on the 2Xs give you more lower in the rev range and higher in the rev range than FP2s/272s.

 

[The Flash]

DSM-Onster, thanks for all the good information about the FP cams. I have a couple additional questions for you. I'm pretty much sold on the FP2X cams, but I"m still thinking about the FP3X cams. I'm wondering if you'd have an opinion as to which ones idle better and what the cam duration is for the FP3X cams. I know you posted that the FP2X cams are 212 intake, 212 exhaust. I have a feeling that the came with elss intake duration would idle better if degreed with the same overlap. Also, the extra lift in the 3X cams makes them tempting. I am running a 2.0 with an FP3052 and don't plan on revving much past 8500 RPMs. Your opinions (and anyone else's) would be greatly appreciated.