SoloRacer

Anyone using these on their 951? If so, what performance gains did you notice? John says around 20 hp and I am considering getting the 1st level cam as a mild upgrade. Of particular interest would be anyone using both a k27/8 and this camshaft.

Also, does changing the camshaft mean the timing has to be changed as well?

86944turbo

I've used 4 different Milledge camshafts. Cannot tell you how much the power increase is with the cam since they came with the motors. However, in as close to back-to-back as you can come with a turbo on a dyno, my new camshaft (only slight change in overall lift) gained 22 H/P over the previous Milledge cam. The ramping was refined to eliminate the minute bouncing. Easier on the springs too. I still have 2 Milledge camshafts, all but new, carefully wrapped and stored. If you're interested, E-mail me. I'll then give you the exact specs on the cams. All of these cams have been extremely driveable aroud town. The idle is smooth. Very street-able. I will not be able to get you the over-lap, as Jon holds this close to the vest.

Konstantin

hello
which kind of camashaft do you have?
Miledge list three diferent in his site.
Tell me more about them
I am interested

Konstantin

drsimon

drsimon

Hi 86944 turbo

Just read your post regarding the Milledge cams.

I have a 1988 951S and wish to have more preboost low-end grunt than what the stock cams provide. I use my 951S as a daily driver and hence would like to keep the idling and the ride as smooth as possible(ie as near stock-quality as possible). As you have used 4, which would you recommend? How much did it cost? I have e-mailed Mr Milledge before about his cams but he has yet to reply. I read somewhere in our Rennlist forums that replying to e-mails is not his forte!

Thanks

rage2

[quote]Originally posted by drsimon:
<strong>I have a 1988 951S and wish to have more preboost low-end grunt than what the stock cams provide. I use my 951S as a daily driver and hence would like to keep the idling and the ride as smooth as possible(ie as near stock-quality as possible).</strong><hr></blockquote>

I'm no cam expert, but I think the stock cams already provide as much low end grunt as it possibly can. When you're off boost, a low compression 2.5L engine isn't going to make much torque. The cams that Milledge makes are made for better breathing at high rpm so the torque curve doesn't drop as much at the top of the revband. Other than smaller turbos (don't think that's even an option) I doubt there's anything that can be done on the low end. Other than 2.8L or 3L conversions of course =).

Konstantin

buy a dual port wastegate and an electronic boost controller.
that makes boost at 1700 upm.

also check for leaks on the vacuum system.

Konstantin

KLA

Can I throw in my 2 cents worth. Last week I drove a 86 951 that had a normal NA cam installed. This was not planned but was put in by accident. It also had stage 2 chips but nothing else. This car had great bottom end and almost no turbo lag. It was so much better than the normal 951 that it was instantly noticeable. The down side was that it ran out of poop at about 5800 RPM. This car would be a great short track racer or autocross car as long as you dodn't want to have top end above 5800.

Danno

I'm no cam expert, but I think the stock cams already provide as much low end grunt as it possibly can.

Yes, that's right on. At low-rpms, exhaust-pressure is very weak and turbo spool-up is limited by that. The stock cams also have very little overlap to make the most low-end torque and exhaust pressure possible. Since the stock wastegate has no problems controlling exhaust-pressure at low-rpms, upgrading the wastegate does nothing for your low-end response (yes at high-RPM & high exhaust-pressure).

Last week I drove a 86 951 that had a normal NA cam installed.&lt;snip&gt; It also had stage 2 chips but nothing else. This car had great bottom end and almost no turbo lag. It was so much better than the normal 951 that it was instantly noticeable.

Well it depends upon the 944NA year. The early 944NA uses the exact same cam as the Turbo car. Check out my "camshaft diagrams" on my <a href="http://members.rennlist.com/951_racerx" target="_blank">951 RacerX website.</a>

As you can see, there's minimal differences between the later 944NA and the Turbo cam (same lift and timing, slightly different duration). Compared to the aftermarket cams whose specs are easily 50-times the difference between the 944NA and Turbo cams.

Since that car got the cam and Stg.2 chips at the same time, I reckon that the difference you feel is from the chip upgrade. Chips will typically give a 35-40hp increase; almost twice the improvement from the Milledge cam at one-quarter the cost.

And the deal with the drop-off at 5800rpm is due to the stock K26/6 turbo running out of steam. No cam whatsoever can help that. In fact, installing chips makes that drop-off even more dramatic. Instead of a boost curve that drops from 11psi max to 10psi at redline, now you've got a boost curve that maxes at 15psi and drops down to 10psi at redline.

It's similar to how the torque curves of these cars behave with chip upgrades. Here's a dyno comparison of <a href="http://www.novustelecom.net/~fkassam/dyno/apevsstock.jpg" target="_blank">APE v2.7 chips vs Stock on 89 944T</a> from <a href="http://www.novustelecom.net/~fkassam/dyno/dyno.html" target="_blank">Farzaan's dyno day</a>.



An '86 951 using k26/6 would show similar curves, just lower numbers. As you can see, the Stg.2 chips provides a dramatic torque increase in the mid-range (light-blue vs. pink), but it trails off even faster than the stock curve. Instead of dropping off at 5800rpm, it starts at 5000rpm.