Comp XE270HR cam - Page 2 - Ford Mustang Forum
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Rookie
 
kclaw66's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2012
Location: Saint Amant
Posts: 5
 
Don't know if you seen this so

here is some info and videos for you

Comp XE270HR cam dyno numbers - YouTube


dyno numbers

COMP Cams® - Xtreme Energy 270 Hydraulic Roller Camshaft, Part # 12-422-8 Dyno Sheet
kclaw66 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
GT Member
5.0L Member
 
stangdawg's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2011
Location: Singapore
Posts: 1,899
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by kclaw66 View Post
That dyno sheet is from a Chevy 350 Motor....

1989 GT - Show Car Project
Mods: AFR165 - Comp XE264-12 cam, WC T5Z, Tmoss Cobra Intake, full bolt-ons, 305 rwhp / 345 rwtq
stangdawg is offline  
SHELBY GT 350 Member
5.0L Member
 
need4spd90's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2009
Location: Mountain Top
Posts: 6,366
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by stangdawg View Post

As for numbers, my torque numbers seem slightly higher than the typical GT40 set-up

no, they dont..your bumpy tq curve poked above 300 for one quick instant..thats where your "slightly higher" peak # comes from

take a look
http://www.allfordmustangs.com/forum...e264-gt40x.jpg

the rest of your tq curve avg is below 300 thru 99% of the pull

heres my old gt40p/Bcam,exploder intake dyno chart for "comparison"...
http://i335.photobucket.com/albums/m...illmanTune.jpg

and heres a comparison between 2 gt40p/gt40 intake cars, mine with the Bcam, and the other with a TFS stg1cam..all the same "usual mods"..(the Bcam made more TQ and HP in the lower rpm range
http://i335.photobucket.com/albums/m..._2278443_n.jpg



Quote:
Originally Posted by stangdawg View Post
on off the shelf GT40 heads I think the XE270 is not a good choice.
what? the duration on the XE270HR is actually LESS than a TFS stg 1 cam

xe270hr= 218/224 @ .050"
TFS stg1= 221/225 @ .050"

the XE has more agressive lobe design, faster ramps, etc..it also has a wider 114* LSA vs the 112 LSA of the TFS1..if anything, the XE270HR should be more drivable than the TFS1 without sacrificing any power

so i nguess in your line of thinking, the TFS STG1, thats been usedwith GT40's in successful combos thousands of times, id "not a good choice" then??

1987 Notchback - N/A stock 302, TFS heads, Holley Systemax, FTI cam, Astro A5
Best so far: 10.92 @ 123mph with a 1.49 60ft
need4spd90 is offline  
GT Member
5.0L Member
 
stangdawg's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2011
Location: Singapore
Posts: 1,899
 
Here's the clean curve after removing the shims from the rockers.

Nice smooth curve.... well above 300 for the fat part of the curve

And my XE with 1.7 rockers uses the 112* LSA

I still say the Comp Cam gives more TQ for these set-ups....
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	Dyno run final tune.jpg
Views:	312
Size:	111.3 KB
ID:	154215  

1989 GT - Show Car Project
Mods: AFR165 - Comp XE264-12 cam, WC T5Z, Tmoss Cobra Intake, full bolt-ons, 305 rwhp / 345 rwtq
stangdawg is offline  
SHELBY GT 350 Member
5.0L Member
 
need4spd90's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2009
Location: Mountain Top
Posts: 6,366
 
glad you got it straightened out, i hadnt seen that graph of yours

that just goes to show what a modern cam profile with agressive lobes can do, vs. the "old tech" of the letter cams and even the tfs cams

still, all said in the end, you're still in that avg "give or take" hp and tq range of your given head/intake combo...soild setup, but no record setter either

the xe270hr would wind up making roughly the same power and tq, just at a higher rpm

1987 Notchback - N/A stock 302, TFS heads, Holley Systemax, FTI cam, Astro A5
Best so far: 10.92 @ 123mph with a 1.49 60ft
need4spd90 is offline  
GT Member
5.0L Member
 
stangdawg's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2011
Location: Singapore
Posts: 1,899
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by need4spd90 View Post
glad you got it straightened out, i hadnt seen that graph of yours

that just goes to show what a modern cam profile with agressive lobes can do, vs. the "old tech" of the letter cams and even the tfs cams

still, all said in the end, you're still in that avg "give or take" hp and tq range of your given head/intake combo...soild setup, but no record setter either

the xe270hr would wind up making roughly the same power and tq, just at a higher rpm
As you may recall, I struggled deciding which cam to use and after much research the Comp cam seemed to be the overall winner. A 14 ft-lb increase is a ~4.5% improvement over the letter and TFS1 cam.

When I spoke to Comp, the guy on the phone said the 264 was a better cam for the GT40 heads and that 270 would probably work best on TFS170 or AFR165/185 heads.

The only guys I see with the 300+ Hp GT40 set ups are guys with worked heads and intakes. My stuff was right out of the box and the intake had the wonderful 'Made in China' stamped right on it

I attribute my decent TQ number to the cam.

1989 GT - Show Car Project
Mods: AFR165 - Comp XE264-12 cam, WC T5Z, Tmoss Cobra Intake, full bolt-ons, 305 rwhp / 345 rwtq
stangdawg is offline  
SHELBY GT 350 Member
5.0L Member
 
need4spd90's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2009
Location: Mountain Top
Posts: 6,366
 
thats what the cam was designed for..did you tell the guy at comp you wanted more of a daily driver rather than a drag race type setup?

1987 Notchback - N/A stock 302, TFS heads, Holley Systemax, FTI cam, Astro A5
Best so far: 10.92 @ 123mph with a 1.49 60ft
need4spd90 is offline  
GT Member
5.0L Member
 
stangdawg's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2011
Location: Singapore
Posts: 1,899
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by need4spd90 View Post
thats what the cam was designed for..did you tell the guy at comp you wanted more of a daily driver rather than a drag race type setup?
I told him it was a street/show car with occasional run down the strip. He simply said the 270 is not ideal for the GT40 and strongly steered me to the 264.

1989 GT - Show Car Project
Mods: AFR165 - Comp XE264-12 cam, WC T5Z, Tmoss Cobra Intake, full bolt-ons, 305 rwhp / 345 rwtq
stangdawg is offline  
SHELBY GT 350 Member
5.0L Member
 
need4spd90's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2009
Location: Mountain Top
Posts: 6,366
 
ehh..i'd disagree with that statement

to say the 264 is more ideal for a street car/daily driver would be more accurate IMO

FWIW, my new cam is more drivable than my Bcam was lol
224/230 @ .050", .605/.597 lift w/1.6 on a 112LSA

1987 Notchback - N/A stock 302, TFS heads, Holley Systemax, FTI cam, Astro A5
Best so far: 10.92 @ 123mph with a 1.49 60ft
need4spd90 is offline  
BOSS Member
5.0L Member
 
Bullitt95's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2007
Location: Al Ain, UAE
Posts: 3,586
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by need4spd90 View Post
that just goes to show what a modern cam profile with agressive lobes can do, vs. the "old tech" of the letter cams and even the tfs cams

still, all said in the end, you're still in that avg "give or take" hp and tq range of your given head/intake combo...soild setup, but no record setter either
No record setter for peak HP/TQ but the CompCams delivers a flatter torque curve either side of the peak, so the area under the curve is higher than with the FRPP letter cams or the TFS1.
I've been saying for a long time that the Compcams XE264HR12 cam is tailor-made for a GT40 set-up and that dyno chart confirms it.


2006 GT - 5MT - 12.74 @ 108.62 - 306rwhp 324rwtq
JLT 3 CAI, DIY CMDPs, Steeda UDPs, FRPP X-pipe, Brenspeed 91 tune
Bullitt95 is offline  
PONY Member
 
5point0stang88's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2011
Location: Houston
Posts: 443
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by need4spd90 View Post
ehh..i'd disagree with that statement

to say the 264 is more ideal for a street car/daily driver would be more accurate IMO

FWIW, my new cam is more drivable than my Bcam was lol
224/230 @ .050", .605/.597 lift w/1.6 on a 112LSA
What cam is this? You have a video of the car?

Sent from my SPH-D710 using Tapatalk 2
5point0stang88 is offline  
SHELBY GT 350 Member
5.0L Member
 
need4spd90's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2009
Location: Mountain Top
Posts: 6,366
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bullitt95 View Post
I've been saying for a long time that the Compcams XE264HR12 cam is tailor-made for a GT40 set-up and that dyno chart confirms it.
its a shame nobody has a dyno chart posted anywhere for the xe270..it'd probably make roughly the same numbers and move the curve to the right...

Quote:
Originally Posted by 5point0stang88 View Post
What cam is this? You have a video of the car?

Sent from my SPH-D710 using Tapatalk 2
custom grind for my setup/intended vehicle usage

i dont really have any video of the new setup, wife hasnt been to the track with me yet this season...pics of timeslips and the dyno pull are all i have

made 335/335 at the tires, runs 11.3x's @ 118-119mph, lightweight car

http://i335.photobucket.com/albums/m...0/Tune-STD.jpg

http://i335.photobucket.com/albums/m.../WP_000080.jpg
http://i335.photobucket.com/albums/m...0/tripzero.jpg

1987 Notchback - N/A stock 302, TFS heads, Holley Systemax, FTI cam, Astro A5
Best so far: 10.92 @ 123mph with a 1.49 60ft
need4spd90 is offline  
PONY Member
 
5point0stang88's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2011
Location: Houston
Posts: 443
 
Nice that is pretty stout
I would love to make that power.
But I heard the t5 is weak.
Makes me think about not putting a 125 shot on it on top my gt40p setup with TFS1 cam

Sent from my SPH-D710 using Tapatalk 2
5point0stang88 is offline  
SHELBY GT 350 Member
5.0L Member
 
need4spd90's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2009
Location: Mountain Top
Posts: 6,366
 
yep..heres my T5 after about 8 passes with this setup..its now a "4 speed"..tore all the teeth of 3rd gear and took the cluster with it
http://i335.photobucket.com/albums/m.../WP_000087.jpg

i have a nice TR3550 setup for sale that would handle that 125 shot with ease..wink wink.. lol

1987 Notchback - N/A stock 302, TFS heads, Holley Systemax, FTI cam, Astro A5
Best so far: 10.92 @ 123mph with a 1.49 60ft
need4spd90 is offline  
GT Member
5.0L Member
 
stangdawg's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2011
Location: Singapore
Posts: 1,899
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by need4spd90 View Post
its a shame nobody has a dyno chart posted anywhere for the xe270..it'd probably make roughly the same numbers and move the curve to the right...
I think that may be the problem with the XE270 is the GT40 heads will run out of air and you clip off part of the meat of the torque curve.

It would be nice to see a dyno curve on a typical GT40 set-up though to prove it out.

1989 GT - Show Car Project
Mods: AFR165 - Comp XE264-12 cam, WC T5Z, Tmoss Cobra Intake, full bolt-ons, 305 rwhp / 345 rwtq
stangdawg is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Ford Mustang Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a VALID email address for yourself, otherwise you will not receive the necessary confirmation email needed to confirm, validate and activate your new AFM member account.

Failure to provide a VALID email address, will result in the cancellation of your new AFM member account registration.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in









Random Question

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome


1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183