fp2 vs hks 272

[snohacking]

I have both sets already and trying to decided which to keep. They will be installed on my built head spooling a Hx35 with .55ar bep housing
Head specs
• 2g head port matched to a 1g intake manifold
• BC 1mm oversized intake and exhaust valves
• BC spring and titanium retainer
• Ferrea bronze intake guides
• Ferrea Copper alloy exhaust guides
• Ferrea valve keepers and valve seals
• magnus intake manifold

Any thoughts?

 

[theevozero]

Yea, why the hell would you port a 2g head to match a 1g intake???? You just completely defeated to purpose of having a 2g head. Bye Bye velocity.

As for the cams, if you like a cam lope, go with the hks. If you want it to sound stock, go with fp2. As far as the performance goes, no idea. I installed the hks cams and picked on the top end just from installing them. Even more after the NON PORTED 2g head, cams and tune.

 

[snohacking]

I guess I would not call it porting more of a taper so it flows from a 1g intake manifold. I did this for two reasons. One, 2g heads flow better at the exhaust ports, and two I have a 1g magnus intake manifold. It has been debated but 2g's are said to flow better at the valves and 1g flow better at the runners, so I took the best of both worlds and combine them.

 

[DynastyLCD]

i ran an old school set of FP 272's which were supposed to be what the FP 2's are. i also ran the HKS 272's back to back in the same setup with no changes besides cams. i found that like EHmotorsports said, the FP cams were much quieter and didn't lope too hard. also, the FP spooled the turbo a little quicker, but the HKS 272 had a little more power in the top end, with about 100 RPM's more lag compared to the FP's.

for a cam that's been around forever, its hard to touch the HKS 272, IMO.

 

[GSX_TC]

Quoting TheEvoZero:
As for the cams, if you like a cam lope, go with the hks. If you want it to sound stock, go with fp2. As far as the performance goes, no idea. I installed the hks cams and picked on the top end just from installing them. Even more after the NON PORTED 2g head, cams and tune.



Totally opposite, the HKS were supposed to be more stockish. And the FP2's are a bit more aggressive. Here, watch this video of my car when I had just installed a set of FP2 cams. click

 

[turbowop]

Huh? My HKS 272's have quite a bit of lope to them. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/dunno.gif

 

[GSX_TC]

the HKS 272's do in fact have a lope but the FP2's are a bit more lopy, and aggressive duration as well. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif

 

[Mac]

Quoting GSX_TC:
click



I'm sorry to threadjack, but in the video did I see a turbo sans air filter?

 

[cheekychimp]

Quoting TheEvoZero:
Yea, why the hell would you port a 2g head to match a 1g intake???? You just completely defeated to purpose of having a 2g head. Bye Bye velocity.



Do you have any figures to back this up?

I'm not trying to be a dick but I have heard this discussed numerous times and I just don't get it. I have an EVO III head ported to fit an AMG Cyclone (1G big port) intake and the setup plain rips. I have a feeling that the Cyclone itself compensates for loss of velocity in the 1G head and that the changes in design in the EVO III/2G head perhaps made the Cyclone obsolete. That being the case then maybe a stock 1G intake on a ported 2G head isn't ideal. However I ran the standard cyclone on a 1G head and then on a ported 2G head and the difference to me was night and day.

I never had the car on a dyno so I don't have figures to back this up but I would never go back to a 1G head now (not on a small frame turbo at least).

I just want to know if I am on drugs or if this is just a consensus of opinion that is preventing others from trying a combo which in my mind works extremely well (at least on the street).

 

[cheekychimp]

Quoting snohacking:
I guess I would not call it porting more of a taper so it flows from a 1g intake manifold. I did this for two reasons. One, 2g heads flow better at the exhaust ports, and two I have a 1g magnus intake manifold. It has been debated but 2g's are said to flow better at the valves and 1g flow better at the runners, so I took the best of both worlds and combine them.



Perhaps this is the reason? Do you have any further info on this?

 

[matt92vr4]

Anyone have any solid before and after dyno #'s with HKS cams and a 16g/Evo3 turbo and properly tuned car?

 

[GSX_TC]

Quoting Mac:
Quoting GSX_TC:
click



I'm sorry to threadjack, but in the video did I see a turbo sans air filter?



Yep, no filter on in that video. Why?

I normally have an FP 4inch intake with a lil K&N filter though.

 

[theevozero]

As far as the cams go. I have seen fp2 cams installed on several TUNED cars and never noticed any sort of lope. I'm gonna have to completely disagree with that. My knowledge is based completely from real life experience and not what the internet said.

As for the head talk, all I have to base this off of is changes I've had to make to tunes after installing a 2g head. It asks for more fuel in the majority of the power band. The engine is getting quite a bit more air flow, thus requiring more fuel. I really dont understand how bottle necking the intake ports is suppose to help. Unless it acts as a velocity stack, in which case, more power to you. I would personally rather run a complete 2g setup, since I KNOW it works.

 

[snohacking]

I also have a video with fp2 cams installed and I have no looping at all.

 

[snohacking]

click video my car at idle with fp2 installed

 

[GSX_TC]

Quoting TheEvoZero:
As far as the cams go. I have seen fp2 cams installed on several TUNED cars and never noticed any sort of lope. I'm gonna have to completely disagree with that. My knowledge is based completely from real life experience and not what the internet said.




Yes but what your failing to realize is that what you said just now, is still "what the Internet says" because your just saying it. I actually have "real life" video of my FP2 cams in action which speaks more then the whole "based on my experience" internet talk. But oh well, I'm just trying to help out the OP From FP's side. not argue with anyone. My .02 cents.

Maybe someone can chime in with a start up video of someone just installing a set of HKS 272's ? /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/dunno.gif

 

[theevozero]

Copy that. My car 3 years ago when I installed them.

www.youtube.com

P.S. The reason the vacuum is so low is because they were installed in Wyoming when I was in school.

 

[GSX_TC]

Here's a Vid of HKS 272's in action
click

And here's a vid of the FP2's in action.
click

I like them both. They seem awful close to me.


After I Dyno tune the car, I would like to simply change out the FP2's for kelford 272's then jump right back on the Dyno to see how much of an increase they give.

 

[DynastyLCD]

Quoting GSX_TC:
Yes but what your failing to realize is that what you said just now, is still "what the Internet says" because your just saying it. I actually have "real life" video of my FP2 cams in action which speaks more then the whole "based on my experience" internet talk.



so, with that being said, my experience of running FP2's, then changing them out for HKS 272's, is null and void, because i have no videos? /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused.gif

i dont think thats a good statement to make at all. just for that, im gonna pick on you here for a second, Mike. video or no video, the HKS 272's lope more than the FP2's back to back in the same setup with zero changes other than the cams. you could also argue about the tune as well, as you can tune some of the lope in/out by the idle AFR mixture. but that's not the important part of the story. the HKS 272's made a bit more power over the FP2's, however adding a slight bit of lag. that's what were after there. i don't spend my time making videos of how my car sounds. but i do spend my time trying new parts and combinations to achieve peak power. which is what the OP was trying to get at, IMO.

but seriously... why are we even arguing about how much lope what cam has? this is GVR4.org... not tuners. we should be trying to help the OP use the best cams for his application. so saying as i was running an FP3052 at the time, roughly in the same range of airflow, i found the HKS 272's to be better than the FP2's for my setup. then again, i was more concerned with overall power.

 

[snohacking]

Quoting cheekychimp:
Quoting snohacking:
I guess I would not call it porting more of a taper so it flows from a 1g intake manifold. I did this for two reasons. One, 2g heads flow better at the exhaust ports, and two I have a 1g magnus intake manifold. It has been debated but 2g's are said to flow better at the valves and 1g flow better at the runners, so I took the best of both worlds and combine them.



Perhaps this is the reason? Do you have any further info on this?



I did find a few threads on tuners where they talk about 2g's flowing better at the valves but for the life of me I can't find them anymore.