The Central Hub for DSM Community and Information

For 1990-1999 Mitsubishi Eclipse, Eagle Talon, Plymouth Laser, and Galant VR-4 Owners. This is where the DSM platform history is documented and archived. Log in to help us in our mission, and to remove most ads from the browsing experience.

kelford 280 cams

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

The tx-288 are made for high performance race engine. They will require a solid lifter conversion to run them.

All of the cams that they have on their page that require solid lifters say that they require solid lifters.

I think that these are the top for the hydraulic lifters.
 
All of the cams that they have on their page that require solid lifters say that they require solid lifters.

I think that these are the top for the hydraulic lifters.

I think you got of backwards. The tx-264, tx-272 and tx-280 are designed for hydraulic lifters and the tx-288 will require a solid lifter conversion for a more aggressive cam profiling that can accelerate the valve off the seat and open more quickly at higher rpms.
 
I think you got of backwards. The tx-264, tx-272 and tx-280 are designed for hydraulic lifters and the tx-288 will require a solid lifter conversion for a more aggressive cam profiling that can accelerate the valve off the seat and open more quickly at higher rpms.

Nope I just got an email from Kelford, they said that they are for hydraulic lifters. So there you go.
 
They must having redesign them because they were strictly for solid lifters before to be more stable or higher rpms.

Ya, I think that they had a 288 and a 290? something that were solid lifter design. The TX series is the newer stuff, and they dont list a solid lifter pre-made.
 
Well. Don't think it would matter much. Keeping an eye on and re-adjusting lash is a menial thing for a motor that will see results merriting kelford 288cams. ;)

ya just one less thing I will have to do while I'm changing bearings every other weekend. :-/
 
The mechanical "solid" lifters allow you to run higher RPMS without the possibility of Hydraulic fluctuation, Above 6,400 rpm's the hydraulic lash adjusters can have reliability issues. Setting lash is easy in this engine and also allows you to track tune your engine. Less lash = more camshaft, more lash reads less camshaft.
 
"overlashing" makes the lobe slam into the roller and cause the valve to purposefully float. Problem is you really need hella forgiving springs for that. Super accelerated ramp rates. . .
 
don't own one at this point, but have run a cam in the range of 292 ish.

It's not top secret just standard rules to set up with, and tune from there.
 
Shows what I know about head building :) . . . If those are safe limits then for most profiles when using solid lifters, I'll bet it comes down to the spring in determining how much overlap/duration you gain, right?
 
Also Delta, the wrong spring seat pressure will cause rocker arm dismounts at higher rpm. I understand that the ''tx'' series from kelford are for hydraulic cams and there "hl" are for solid lifters. Either way I have Delta's K280 cams on my 2.0l drag motor and they scream up top. Does not play nice with the street.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Add Value - Be Respectful - No Trolling - No Misinformation - Participate Often!
Support Vendors who Support the DSM Community

Build Thread Updates

Latest Classifieds

Back
Top