 Cams? |
  |
 Feb 4, 2014 - 4:44 PM
|
 
|
|
Enthusiast  Joined Mar 5, '08 From Knoxville, TN Currently Offline Reputation: 1 (100%)  |
But the turbo compensates a little at the top end... This is a tough decision. Quick steady power or slower peaking power that puts out more and lasts longer...
Which webcam is that? Does anyone know? |
|
Feb 4, 2014 - 4:49 PM
|
|
|
Enthusiast Joined Jan 12, '09 From State College, PA Currently Offline Reputation: 1 (100%) |
QUOTE (ILoveMySilly97 @ Feb 4, 2014 - 4:10 PM)  QUOTE (yfn16 @ Feb 4, 2014 - 12:57 PM) Actually crap. I didn't see the difference in the rpm dropoffs till now. I don't know what I'm doing with my life.  lolThe webcams is better for the high peak if that's what you're looking for. The normal power curve our 5sfe went from max power at 5300rpm to falling sky rocket. To 5700rpm and steadily falling for another 500 more rpm. This cam "fix" our 5sfe problem better than the colt. The colt still has the top end "lag". +1 They make the engine perform less like what it's designed for... which is fuel economy. This post has been edited by cardshark525: Feb 4, 2014 - 4:50 PM |
|
Feb 4, 2014 - 8:16 PM
|
|
 Enthusiast Joined Mar 8, '12 From Hanford/Fresno, Ca Currently Offline Reputation: 20 (100%) |
QUOTE (yfn16 @ Feb 4, 2014 - 1:44 PM) But the turbo compensates a little at the top end... This is a tough decision. Quick steady power or slower peaking power that puts out more and lasts longer... Which webcam is that? Does anyone know? Webcams would be the best out of the two imo. It takes out that that low end torque that our 5sfe has. Give it the top end power a sport engine needs. Yea I know the 5sfe is a econbox. Lol. But it'll be more sporty with a top end power. -------------------- |
|
Feb 5, 2014 - 11:43 AM
|
|
|
Enthusiast Joined Mar 5, '08 From Knoxville, TN Currently Offline Reputation: 1 (100%) |
I slept on it. I believe I'll go with the WebCams.
|
|
Feb 5, 2014 - 4:14 PM
|
|
|
Enthusiast Joined Jan 20, '08 From East Coast Currently Offline Reputation: 1 (100%) |
I have colt cams - P2 posted the dyno on it. They made a noticeable difference for sure but after the tune with the SAFC 2, it was a very nice increase. It still runs very strong (although having a fuel issue right now) and is definitely more fun to drive but don't expect to smoke that many cars.
|
|
Feb 5, 2014 - 4:29 PM
|
|
 Enthusiast Joined Dec 22, '06 From Columbia, MD Currently Offline Reputation: 13 (100%) |
QUOTE (6G96GT @ Feb 5, 2014 - 4:14 PM) I have colt cams - P2 posted the dyno on it. They made a noticeable difference for sure but after the tune with the SAFC 2, it was a very nice increase. It still runs very strong (although having a fuel issue right now) and is definitely more fun to drive but don't expect to smoke that many cars. running rich? --------------------  1995 GT::::Diffusing the Situation エキサイティングカーレーシングチーム! march 2010 COTM : 6GC feature 2014 : january 2015-2016-2018 COTM |
|
Feb 5, 2014 - 5:02 PM
|
|
|
Enthusiast Joined Jan 20, '08 From East Coast Currently Offline Reputation: 1 (100%) |
No, Presure2 did the tune for me and set it up up to be as balanced as possible. That was back in October of 2012. There's no sooty deposit on my exhaust port at all.
This post has been edited by 6G96GT: Feb 5, 2014 - 5:02 PM |
|
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:
| Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: November 22nd, 2025 - 12:08 PM |