288/280 vs 280/272 cams.

[HassanEido]

have you done same engine with both cam sets with no other changes other than the appropriate tune for each?

I have not, but I've done enough cars to piece a clear enough picture of what to expect with each setup.With that said, cams aren't a magic bullet. The has to be in top shape otherwise obviously, I've seen stock cam cars make more than some cammed cars, and some cammed cars making 50 whp more( with similar state of tune barring cams)..so ymmv. But in general, the trend in power gain is as described above.
To others who've asked, yes if I had to do it again, I'd still get the mods bit by bit. Cams, then airbox (or vise versa ) then exhaust etc... At the end of the day, what you really get out of this is the journey, the added performance is just a side effecet imho Also each individually add power on their own, and of course they work even better combined. At the end of the day, it's NA mods

[STAATS]

I have not, but I've done enough cars to piece a clear enough picture of what to expect with each setup.With that said, cams aren't a magic bullet. The has to be in top shape otherwise obviously, I've seen stock cam cars make more than some cammed cars, and some cammed cars making 50 whp more( with similar state of tune barring cams)..so ymmv. But in general, the trend in power gain is as described above.
To others who've asked, yes if I had to do it again, I'd still get the mods bit by bit. Cams, then airbox (or vise versa ) then exhaust etc... At the end of the day, what you really get out of this is the journey, the added performance is just a side effecet imho Also each individually add power on their own, and of course they work even better combined. At the end of the day, it's NA mods

Hey mate - just noticed in your mods list you have TMS pulleys - you are also in a hot climate so how do you find these? I have often toyed with the idea of getting them... almost more as a fun / easy next project but just worried about any adverse effect on cooling due to the reduction on the water pulley... not as fussed ubout alternator and PS pump, they will be fine with a reduction...

[x Spades x]

I think the 280/272s are a better choice for cars that see any street use.
-Better power below ~7800 rpm
-can reuse stock followers, which makes install much easier (and cheaper)
-smoother idle

I wouldn't be tempted by the 288/280 setup unless I was doing an increase compression ratio and/or stroker and/or high revving (8700+ rpm) build. For a "normal" (full exhaust, CSL intake, etc) bolt on build, 280/272 is the way to go IMO.

My 288/280 Schrick crammed car idles like stock. No looking what's so ever.
Also, I'm strI'mer in every part of the rev range.
I dont see the value in getting cames other than 288/280.

[x Spades x]

I'm very lucky that I have Paul Smith aka Polclaude here to dyno tune it after.

Paul tuned me 2 weeks ago... car feels AWESOME. He is the best tuner, for these cars.

[digger]

I have not, but I've done enough cars to piece a clear enough picture of what to expect with each setup.With that said, cams aren't a magic bullet. The has to be in top shape otherwise obviously, I've seen stock cam cars make more than some cammed cars, and some cammed cars making 50 whp more( with similar state of tune barring cams)..so ymmv. But in general, the trend in power gain is as described above.
To others who've asked, yes if I had to do it again, I'd still get the mods bit by bit. Cams, then airbox (or vise versa ) then exhaust etc... At the end of the day, what you really get out of this is the journey, the added performance is just a side effecet imho Also each individually add power on their own, and of course they work even better combined. At the end of the day, it's NA mods

idk mate if you’re seeing huge variations like that then it’s seems like the only real result you get is swapping on the same engine. To many variables to be anything close to scientific

[Dave]

Reliability/follower issues aside, I feel like we're still missing a lot of data on these things. And hell, this thread has proven that even some of the data we thought we had (is what the OE CSL cams are) isn't necessarily widespread public knowledge either. I would like to figure out a way that we could test and answer, from a tuner, on the same car, if the age-old assumption of "288/280 shift the power curve to the right" (so, like Obioban says, 280/272 are better down low) is actually true. We accepted this for years, and thus 288 were less common.

Then x Spades x and Nick did their cars with 288. And Nick's car with 288/280 dynoed really really high, even in the middle of the curve, because he had Chris on hand in person to sit there and tweak things.

I think that led to a bit more acceptance of 288s, but it's still one data point, and he had special access to a tuner in person that many of us don't.

Ultimately, I think we'd all be just fine if we got 280s and called it a day... even if we got a bit more out of 288s, chances are most of us wouldn't know it, or that some of the perceived difference could be a placebo.

But... I like that we're curious. And I wonder how we can stay curious and try to get more answers.

So I'm wondering... I have a set of 288s sitting in my garage, I have a stimulus check that I haven't cashed yet, and I have some free time. (Not that swapping camshafts is even that difficult a job once you've done it... but it still requires the ability to set a couple days aside.) I'm wondering if anyone else is also in the same boat, and I wonder if maybe we could band together a group of us to run some tests where we work with both of them with the same tuner, so that that tuner can play with them side-by-side with all other variables controlled. That would serve the dual purpose of getting us all more data and also giving that tuner a ton more experience and authority on the differences.

Is there a way we could do sort of a controlled experiment here? Say maybe I go out and buy a set of 280 CATs to compare to my 288 CATs, someone else with 280 Schrick buys a set of 288 Shricks to compare, we all work together with Paul and Hassan, and everyone learns a lot? Is that worth our time at this point?

[x Spades x]

Reliability/follower issues aside, I feel like we're still missing a lot of data on these things. And hell, this thread has proven that even some of the data we thought we had (is what the OE CSL cams are) isn't necessarily widespread public knowledge either. I would like to figure out a way that we could test and answer, from a tuner, on the same car, if the age-old assumption of "288/280 shift the power curve to the right" (so, like Obioban says, 280/272 are better down low) is actually true. We accepted this for years, and thus 288 were less common.

Then x Spades x and Nick did their cars with 288. And Nick's car with 288/280 dynoed really really high, even in the middle of the curve, because he had Chris on hand in person to sit there and tweak things.

I think that led to a bit more acceptance of 288s, but it's still one data point, and he had special access to a tuner in person that many of us don't.

Ultimately, I think we'd all be just fine if we got 280s and called it a day... even if we got a bit more out of 288s, chances are most of us wouldn't know it, or that some of the perceived difference could be a placebo.

But... I like that we're curious. And I wonder how we can stay curious and try to get more answers.

So I'm wondering... I have a set of 288s sitting in my garage, I have a stimulus check that I haven't cashed yet, and I have some free time. (Not that swapping camshafts is even that difficult a job once you've done it... but it still requires the ability to set a couple days aside.) I'm wondering if anyone else is also in the same boat, and I wonder if maybe we could band together a group of us to run some tests where we work with both of them with the same tuner, so that that tuner can play with them side-by-side with all other variables controlled. That would serve the dual purpose of getting us all more data and also giving that tuner a ton more experience and authority on the differences.

Is there a way we could do sort of a controlled experiment here? Say maybe I go out and buy a set of 280 CATs to compare to my 288 CATs, someone else with 280 Schrick buys a set of 288 Shricks to compare, we all work together with Paul and Hassan, and everyone learns a lot? Is that worth our time at this point?

Sooooo what I get from this is.... I'm one of the founding fathers of 288/280 cams. Got it!!!

I take PayPal gift hugs... :-).

[duracellttu]

Reliability/follower issues aside, I feel like we're still missing a lot of data on these things. And hell, this thread has proven that even some of the data we thought we had (is what the OE CSL cams are) isn't necessarily widespread public knowledge either. I would like to figure out a way that we could test and answer, from a tuner, on the same car, if the age-old assumption of "288/280 shift the power curve to the right" (so, like Obioban says, 280/272 are better down low) is actually true. We accepted this for years, and thus 288 were less common.

Then x Spades x and Nick did their cars with 288. And Nick's car with 288/280 dynoed really really high, even in the middle of the curve, because he had Chris on hand in person to sit there and tweak things.

I think that led to a bit more acceptance of 288s, but it's still one data point, and he had special access to a tuner in person that many of us don't.

Ultimately, I think we'd all be just fine if we got 280s and called it a day... even if we got a bit more out of 288s, chances are most of us wouldn't know it, or that some of the perceived difference could be a placebo.

But... I like that we're curious. And I wonder how we can stay curious and try to get more answers.

So I'm wondering... I have a set of 288s sitting in my garage, I have a stimulus check that I haven't cashed yet, and I have some free time. (Not that swapping camshafts is even that difficult a job once you've done it... but it still requires the ability to set a couple days aside.) I'm wondering if anyone else is also in the same boat, and I wonder if maybe we could band together a group of us to run some tests where we work with both of them with the same tuner, so that that tuner can play with them side-by-side with all other variables controlled. That would serve the dual purpose of getting us all more data and also giving that tuner a ton more experience and authority on the differences.

Is there a way we could do sort of a controlled experiment here? Say maybe I go out and buy a set of 280 CATs to compare to my 288 CATs, someone else with 280 Schrick buys a set of 288 Shricks to compare, we all work together with Paul and Hassan, and everyone learns a lot? Is that worth our time at this point?

2 years ago, I went through this same debate on cams. I reached out to several of the well known members on the forum to gather advice. At the end of the day I was still torn, but decided to pull the trigger with 288/280. This was one mod in a very long list, that was apart of my “dream build” to which I was sparing to expense. See my signature for details.

Long story short, I collected a lot of dyno data along the way. As an engineer, half the fun was analyzing the metrics. Lang built my head, and installed 280/288 Schrick cams and DLC followers with Paul doing my tune. Being in California, and wanting to stay on easy to access fuel, I was limited to 91 octane. Only concerns I have with the tune is that occasionally I still get the “CSL hesitation” on full throttle, low RPM, sometime.

I’ll start a separate thread to share all of this info. It will be another good data point for anybody else planning to go down this path.

[ATB88]

Only concerns I have with the tune is that occasionally I still get the “CSL hesitation” on full throttle, low RPM, sometime.

I was under the impression that the "CSL hesitation" was something that only happened to MAP-less alpha-n setups? Or maybe I'm conflating two different problems. Is this something that happens on real CSLs?

[terra]

I was under the impression that the "CSL hesitation" was something that only happened to MAP-less alpha-n setups? Or maybe I'm conflating two different problems. Is this something that happens on real CSLs?

On cars with csl software (factory or otherwise) if the wind is blowing due East at 22.634 mph and the Earth, moon, and Titan are aligned with each other, then you may very briefly experience slight hesitation when going suddenly WOT from ~3k RPM.

[BMWahba]

On cars with csl software (factory or otherwise) if the wind is blowing due East at 22.634 mph and the Earth, moon, and Titan are aligned with each other, then you may very briefly experience slight hesitation when going suddenly WOT from ~3k RPM.

Lol!!!

[Cubieman]

On cars with csl software (factory or otherwise) if the wind is blowing due East at 22.634 mph and the Earth, moon, and Titan are aligned with each other, then you may very briefly experience slight hesitation when going suddenly WOT from ~3k RPM.

[duracellttu]

I was under the impression that the "CSL hesitation" was something that only happened to MAP-less alpha-n setups? Or maybe I'm conflating two different problems. Is this something that happens on real CSLs?

I'm running the Kassel MAP sensor, and still get it rarely.

On cars with csl software (factory or otherwise) if the wind is blowing due East at 22.634 mph and the Earth, moon, and Titan are aligned with each other, then you may very briefly experience slight hesitation when going suddenly WOT from ~3k RPM.

Finally, somebody tracked down the root cause! LOL

[M3KVU]

On cars with csl software (factory or otherwise) if the wind is blowing due East at 22.634 mph and the Earth, moon, and Titan are aligned with each other, then you may very briefly experience slight hesitation when going suddenly WOT from ~3k RPM.

Lol.

[M3KVU]

2 years ago, I went through this same debate on cams. I reached out to several of the well known members on the forum to gather advice. At the end of the day I was still torn, but decided to pull the trigger with 288/280. This was one mod in a very long list, that was apart of my “dream build” to which I was sparing to expense. See my signature for details.

Long story short, I collected a lot of dyno data along the way. As an engineer, half the fun was analyzing the metrics. Lang built my head, and installed 280/288 Schrick cams and DLC followers with Paul doing my tune. Being in California, and wanting to stay on easy to access fuel, I was limited to 91 octane. Only concerns I have with the tune is that occasionally I still get the “CSL hesitation” on full throttle, low RPM, sometime.

I’ll start a separate thread to share all of this info. It will be another good data point for anybody else planning to go down this path.

What power did you get in the end mate ?