Here is the
AMS cam test
The engine in question is a 2.0L with a 35R, but you can kind of tell what's going on by where the peak power points are. The bottom end is kind of diluted by the huge turbo, but the characteristics of the 280's still show through.
Here's another evo test by
Turbo Magazine. 35R again, but you can still see the difference.
The 280 cams don't even start picking up until over 4500-5000 RPM, and put the engine's peak power way up in the 8000-9000 RPM range. 5000-6000RPM going to be where your big 16G has already started wheezing.
Will you make a higher power number on a dyno? Probably, but both your peak torque and your powerband will be from 5000-6000 RPM which means it will be a complete slug below that. To give you an idea about drivability, bouncing off the 7500 RPM rev limited in first, shifting to second will drop the engine back down to about 4500 RPM. If you short shift when the turbo starts wheezing at 6000, you'll be bogging the engine at 3500 RPM. So with the 280's, your car will be a complete dog unless you're bouncing off the rev limiter
Here's a dyno of a
Big 16G DSM. As you can see, the stock cams hit peak torque at 3200 RPM when the turbo comes on and starts dropping off at 4500. At Up at 6000, the turbo is starting to choke off and blow hot air.
Here are some more
Evo plots with HKS 272 and 280's on the stock Evo 8 turbo. Keep in mind that the stock Evo 8 turbo supports significantly more flow than a Big 16G (Its very close to an 18G if you were to compare it by flow potential)
Its questionable whether you even need 272's. A 264 or 264/272 are a much better match for that turbo if you're willing to fiddle with cam gear settings. Your current turbo and cams simply are not a good match.
Cams behavior overall is pretty much independent of boost level, turbo choice, and pretty much everything else except some effects from head porting, and of course increased displacement.