gsc s2 cams?

[kevbojunior]

will gsc s2 cams be to much for an e3 16g setup? do they need upgraded valve springs as well?

 

[damnslowtsi]

What kind of cams are those? Do you have any link? I 'm not really a noob (or so I think) but I haven't even heard of those..

 

[wangboy925]

My freind has those, H82lose91. PM him and he will enlighten you.

 

[1gDSM4g63]

No, GSC S2 isn't too much for the 16g.

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

That's stock vs. GSC S2 both with big 16g running at 22 psi.

According to the AMS dyno test they said they just used typical bolt-ons so I'm assume that they didn't upgrade the valve springs.

 

[1992awdlaser]

A member of the dsmlink forums did a cam test and the gsc2's made the most power and had the best power curve. I believe this includes against the bc280's. They tested like six different cams.

I think the gsc2's will be fine with a 16g setup.

 

[kevbojunior]

thanks you for replying. that really made my decision on them. i will need upgraded springs though correct? When you go on amsperformance, it says they work well on the stock valvetrain and on maperformance they say they will need to be upgraded. With the info on cam tests, that means the s1 cams should be very comparible to other brand 272's correct?

 

[1gDSM4g63]

A member of the dsmlink forums did a cam test and the gsc2's made the most power and had the best power curve. I believe this includes against the bc280's. They tested like six different cams.

I think the gsc2's will be fine with a 16g setup.

You cannot make that comparison at all. Many engine variable effects the cams powerband or hp and torque.

I mean of course the GSC S2 would make more power than 280/280 cams on a 16g turbo whereas 280/280 would give more power with a GT42.

 

[blcknspo0ln]

You cannot make that comparison at all. Many engine variable effects the cams powerband or hp and torque.

I mean of course the GSC S2 would make more power than 280/280 cams on a 16g turbo whereas 280/280 would give more power with a GT42.

yea, but we're not talking apples to oranges like a 16G versus a GT42, you're just using an extreme to prove a point. Did you read the dsmlink thread of the cam shootout? all in all, I think it was very fair and solid cam testing with as little variables as possible, so I will support Pat and say that the resutls were fairly on point IMHO.

 

[1992awdlaser]

Thanks Tom. You said exactly what I was thinking when I read his post.

The test was on a t67. Cams tested were:
HKS 272's
BC280's
FP3x's
GSC2's

 

[whitedawg]

I would go with the GSC S1's if you're going to stay with a 16G turbo. Greg even recommends this on his website. "The S1 cams are designed for those running a small 16G or large 16G turbo." Whereas the S2's are for larger turbos: "The S2 cams are designed for those running larger turbo's 61mm and larger."

 

[90laserRSfwd]

damnslowtsi: here's the link to the s2 cams....

GSC Power-Division Evo 1-3 and DSM S2 Camshafts :: Mitsubishi :: GSC Power-Division: Racing Inspired Products

 

[olmytsi]

I posted a thread asking about s1's a few days ago. I will be getting these for my 16g setup.

 

[damnslowtsi]

Thanks, for the link Jayce!

Were the cams dialed in via cam gears in that test on Link forums or the stock cam gears were used? I wonder how close they are right from the box. Can some of you guys email or PM me that test if it is allowed by the Link forum rules. I 'm not a member unfortunately.

If they outshone the FP3X's in that test then it tells me something Hopefully Matt (dsm-onster) will chime in here and tell what he thinks about these. From what I saw on the site they seem to have a loo-ong duration. 235 degrees at 1mm lift is quite a lot. If I remember right the FP4's had 220/220 at that lift so you get an idea.

 

[1992awdlaser]

That thread on the link forums is quite long. It started out as "What cams should we test?" Then went to "What cams can other members provide for testing?" All the cam tested were provided by other people except for the hk 272's. I remember the test was with stock cam gears. It was a debate between a lot of us whether using stock gears or having the cams degreed should be done. Most (Including myself) said stock gears since this is how most people will be installing them.

 

[damnslowtsi]

Ok, thanks! It is good to know. Also, by using stock gears one more variable was eliminated so to speak.

Do you have any idea on what the ramp rate is like on these? I know it is silly/tough question since there is no number to measure that but still? I 'm guessing they are not as 'rampy' as x-series of FP since there is no indication of dual valve springs on their site or even a requirement for a certain seat pressure or 'over the nose' but who knows.

 

[1qkfwd]

I would say if you stick with the 16G and don't plan on moving up to much on turbo size after that then stick with the GSC1's. I I based my setup around my GT40R with the upgrade to a 42R later date and I am using the S2's. Most street setups benifit from a 272 based cam. As stated above 61mm or larger wheel you should jump up to a 280 or larger cam. You can use either of the cams with stock springs as long as you are not turning a lot of RPMs. 272 cams should be good with stock springs as long as your not going over 7500-8000 rpm. If you do a quick search I did post up the dyno sheets from the cam test that was done on DSMlink forums.

 

[1gDSM4g63]

yea, but we're not talking apples to oranges like a 16G versus a GT42, you're just using an extreme to prove a point. Did you read the dsmlink thread of the cam shootout? all in all, I think it was very fair and solid cam testing with as little variables as possible, so I will support Pat and say that the resutls were fairly on point IMHO.

I don't get what you're saying. There are variables. There would be a huge hp and torque difference in 264s and 280s on a 16g.

 

[1992awdlaser]

I don't get what you're saying. There are variables. There would be a huge hp and torque difference in 264s and 280s on a 16g.

He is saying there were no variables between the tests. Timing was the same for all cams. Air/fuel was the same for all cams. Boost was the same for all cams. All cams were tested on the same car with no changes to the setup. If a cam produced more power over another or had a better power band it was because of the cam and nothing else.

Your first reply sounded like you thought I was talking about the AMS cam test where they used a 16g. Even in that case guess what made more power. The 272's over 264's. And the 272's made just as good a powerband. The 264's only had a slight jump in torque in one spot on the curve. Just because you have a smaller turbo doesn't mean the smaller cam is the best choice.

 

[Freerevving]

I don't know if this has anything to do with anything, but.. I noticed in the Dyno chart above that the sc2's lost about 40 lbs.ft. torque at 2600...