s14 232/232 cams vs s13 240/248 cams

[brage]

Well I dyno'd at intense a couple weeks back using the stock 95+ 232/232 cam setup. My peak at 89* ambient temp was 291 HP @ 20psi. on friday night I swapped in the 91 240/248 cams and it put down 314 HP @ 20psi with ambient temp of 106*!!!

the 291 dyno with 232/232 cams:



the 314 dyno with 240/248 cams:

[klattr1]

congrats!

[Redline240]

That's one sick gain! How hard is it to find 91 cams in decent shape? How much do they usually go for?

Redline

[Redline240]

Just noticed the low torque numbers, any particular reason for that?

Redline

[Drift Machine]

Damn nice.

[brage]

Just noticed the low torque numbers, any particular reason for that?

Redline

It was 106* out hehe.. but it seems that oithers have similar #s with low compression KAs running the same setup as me (fmax etc) klattr is also running the ross pistons in his motor with the f-max setup and he does 350tq w/ 392 HP so I'm seeing a similar tq to HP ratio...

Sucks, but hey I don't really care it makes 314 whp

[hannibal]

whats your setup if you dont mind spilling the beans??

BTW, Awesome gain from the cams. I wonder what kinda gains we would see on a T3/T4 8psi setup??

[brage]

whats your setup if you dont mind spilling the beans??

BTW, Awesome gain from the cams. I wonder what kinda gains we would see on a T3/T4 8psi setup??

probably a somewhat linear gain... NA i think it picks up 5-6 hp just about all the way across the power band..

I have f-max stg IIt3/t04bcobra maf50# injectorswalbro pumpmodified SR SS DP, catco high flow cat, Apexi N1 cbacktial 7psi WG, boost controlled by profec b spec II

motor is a 96 block with ross pistons .020 over and pauter rods with the rotating assembly balanced. I assembled the motor myself.

Stock '97 head with 38k mi on it...

uh thats about all that is relevant to this thread

[:: orion ::]

Is that the same dyno? (EDIT: I mean the same dynojet...)

If not, why?

- Brian

[klattr1]

Just noticed the low torque numbers, any particular reason for that?

Redline

well, if you look at his graph, the peak tq on his graph isnt really where it should be in his powerband. This is prolly from fuel reasons. It probably jumps from somewhat optimal or leaner air fuel ratios to pig rich during that transition. That is the reason why my dyno has lower tq numbers compared to my horsepower (390rwhp vs. 352ft.lbs). My torque is a straight line across at the top of the curve so it really never has a peak point.

[chandler]

I got soem s13 cams, make me an offer, I wont be needin them any time soon, just lost my job, cant mod the ride any for a while =(

[brage]

Is that the same dyno? (EDIT: I mean the same dynojet...)

If not, why?

- Brian

the first sheet was on a dynojet at intense motorsports, where I got the actual .drf file and that jpg is an export from winpep on my computer. The second sheet is from ADC (arizona dyno chip) and was on the same model dynojet.

Both were on dyno days.... when I dyno at intense next time I will post if anything changes, but the two dynos should be pretty consistent.

-jeff

[Structure240sx]

what was your afr's during the runs? i have a simialr turbo if not the same. im trying to see just how much it sucks.

[huguetpj]

the first sheet was on a dynojet at intense motorsports, where I got the actual .drf file and that jpg is an export from winpep on my computer. The second sheet is from ADC (arizona dyno chip) and was on the same model dynojet.

That alone could account for some differences... either pro or con

[brage]

That alone could account for some differences... either pro or con

I agree, I plan to go back to the same dyno when I get a chance to.

[brage]

the first sheet was on a dynojet at intense motorsports, where I got the actual .drf file and that jpg is an export from winpep on my computer. The second sheet is from ADC (arizona dyno chip) and was on the same model dynojet.

Both were on dyno days.... when I dyno at intense next time I will post if anything changes, but the two dynos should be pretty consistent.

-jeff

Quite rich... running the JWT 50#/cobra maf program. I lost my log of the runs... I have a pretty bad exhaust leak right now and the dynoject afr wasn't reading correctly.

I have a WB in the car, and I relied on that..

My A/Fs on the high end are in the 10:1 region. Next time I dyno IU will be putting the dyno O2 in my DP!!!

-Jeff

[brage]

OH!!! and if you decide to use the '91 cams in a 96/97/98 head, you need to kbock the oil gallery plugs at the rear of the cams in past the last journal! otherwise you'll have oil everywhere out your valve cover breather, etc...

96/97/98 heads don't have that last cam tower.

[deezlins]

96/97/98 heads don't have that last cam tower.

do the 95's?

[turtl631]

probably not, sounds like an OBDII thing

[:: orion ::]

'96 does...'97-98 are the only ones without that last tower.

Why...? Who knows...has nothing to do with emissions.

- Brian

[fiznat]

sorry to dredge this back up, but are the S13 cam durations all the same, or do they differ from year to year? (on just the DOHC models)...

[nonchalant rage]

he's using 91 cams, if thats what your question is. thats the only year the cams are like that.

[Smurf6x6]

All S13 DOHC cams are the same.

[hannibal]

FSM says all 91-94 are 240/248

[:: orion ::]

...thats the only year the cams are like that.

FSM says all 91-94 are 240/248

All S13 DOHC cams are the same.

^^^ All are kinda right...

'91 and '92 ALL had the 240/248 cams.

The FSM for '93-94 is incorrect.

In '93, they took away the seconday butterflies and changed cams, somewhere in that mnodel year. If you have secondary butterlfies on your '93 intake manifold, you have 240/248 cams.No secondary buttflies, then you have 232/232 cams, like S14s.

ALL '94s had the 232/232 setup (and no butterflies).

- - - - -

And I have a 240/248 set for sale, from a '92 = $120 shipped - [email protected]

[/shameless plug]

- Brian

[98s14inaz]

Yes, I have a 95 head on my 98 s14. I am running the s13 240 248 cams with out any issues.