Piper Camshafts
 

Anyone posted these yet?


http://www.pipercams.co.uk/pipercams...=25&engine=377

Piper is very reputable - this has the potential to be big news.

I just sent the following message to Piper and will report back here when I get a response:

Hello,

I am enquiring about the camshaft that you offer for the FR-S, specifically regarding power gains and changes to drivability. Were you able to see gains across the entire powerband, or only at the top end at a cost to the low end? How do power numbers and curves differ between the three camshaft variations you offer? Lastly, what type of tuning (using EcuTek) is required and have you worked with any specific EcuTek tuners to optimize output and drivability?

Many thanks and I look forward to hearing back from you.

Regards,

R. Jason Klein

Interesting; curious how they dont run interferance with bigger cams. Unless they run their own special shorter valves which would require some head magic.

Subscribed!

@celek someone heard you re cams :D

subscribed

Interesting, can't wait to hear more :)

Can someone post a cam swap DIY? I'm not joking. Do it. Do it.

If the fast road cams were in the states, I'd buy them now since I'm rebuilding my engine.

Hummm

Subbed

Someone on the forum already has a set from piper. He posted them up earlier this year. I also spoke withpiper and their US Distributor. They were supposed to have a shipment coming in two months ago.

In response to my earlier post about someone posting it on the forums earlier this year. Here is the thread.http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showthread.php?t=85734

Hey, everyone - I'm the one who sent a message to Piper in post #3, and I just wanted to let everyone know I never got a response from them. I'll update the thread if I do.

Talked to them VIA FB last week.
Their web page was down the last few days, maybe server problems.

I will see them at PRI in December.

Thanks for the heads up - I'll send them the message a second time.

Don't even have the car yet and I'm excited!

Hey, everyone - here's the update we've been waiting for. I got a response from Piper directing me to Tim Radley at Race Developments, who has been working with Piper while developing several neat items for our platform. I sent him an e-mail and here's the response I got from him:

Hi Jason,

I'm running the soft spec cam in my current build. See attached dyno chart. These drive just as a normal car and i'm running a Motec ecu. In fact with the mapping, it's significantly better than stock and doesn't have that torque lurch at low throttle openings that causes many drivers of these cars to stall at junctions. The graph shows the improvement going from stock car to cams, blueprint and exhaust then mapped on Motec. Also that runs the Piper single springs and i'm running the engine to 8000rpm safely for 1500 miles now.

It actually goes a lot better than the dyno chart would suggest. Here is an in-car video doing a launch on a cold day on stock tyres.

[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FmbyV4EzqI8"]RD GT86 launch control - YouTube[/ame]


Hits 60mph in 2nd gear but on stock rubber the grip is very poor. I've got some new wheels and tyres to go on in 2 weeks and also some new dampers. I'm confident it will do mid to high 5's to 60 as it is with all that.

Next I will try the 3462/3465 spec cam from Piper along with their dual springs. I think these will add 10bhp more on stock setup but the problem with this engine is the intake manifold. The design is bad.

A lot of people are struggling with this engine to get power, even the race guys when NA. I'm confident it can be good but it requires quite a few parts changing.

I've got everything for a turbo build after and will run a sequential box so there will be lots of development coming off the back of this. I don't want to do turbo until i've proven out the NA stuff a bit more first though.

Also will be looking at a dry sump option too.

Regards

Tim

Tim is actually on this forum, so maybe he can jump in and give us more information as he continues his development work. Lastly, he supplied a picture of the dyno chart, so I'll attach it below.

Tim also supplied a picture of a header he's working on, so I'll attach it below.

8000rpm is fitting for this car.

I would like to know what he means by motor build. Like what else does he have in addition to the cams/springs/exhaust/motec. Header?

I stripped the engine and blueprinted it using all stock parts except for the cams and springs. I put the head on the flowbench and fixed some issues there too.

The stock head has way too much flow for the power it's making. Air speed is really bad too. Comparing to some other N/A heads, its making as much flow as ones that do 260bhp so the fact it doesn't make that is down to the combination of other parts.

I've yet to touch the intake manifold and my feeling is that a problem area. Logging what I do in the ecu I can see several issues going on. When i fix them i'll post up details. Just short of time for the project right now.

One thing i forgot to add. The camshafts out of my stock 2014 Toyota GT86 measured up differently to the ones Piper had from a 2012 Subaru BRZ. Lift, duration and pin location were all different. It appears there are variations in stock cams between models.

The valves are also .7mm longer too, I think it was for the 2015. I forgot where I found that at, but it was a new part number.

With due respect it is not the car's fault if the driver stalls it.

*raises hand*
Ummm... the FA20 is a new engine and I'm guessing that the crowd who designed the engine would have had their reasons for designing it the way they did.
(This is not a snarky "designers know everything" post.)
What might the reasons be for making the engine the way it is? I'm guessing there is a trade off in there somewhere.

No idea, but as i've stated elsewhere, I have some evo's making over 1100bhp with the same head flow as this has. So i've no idea why you would want to "design" a port with more airflow than it requires to make your target power. Also why design it with such poor air speed? Same reason so many other manufacturers do, their port designers often are not very good at their job.

Yes but the stock mapping does not help. I mentioned this elsewhere and a few people piped up and said they'd stalled. Sure you learn to drive around it but my view is the initial throttle opening isn't particularly user friendly. It does make it feel nice and punchy on torque when on the road in a straight line but coming out of slow corners on track it slows you down with the torque spike created. Softening it has made it drive better for me.

Just to confirm, was the dyno on the stock exhaust manifold aswell?

I've been noticing some of your posts around the boards, I'm really excited by what you've been doing.

Quite amazing that it appears that arround 200whp on a dynojet is the max you get NA

you can get their with cheap headers and E85
or petrol cheap headers and full exhaust
or ultra expensive headers stock exhaust on petrol
or cams head work and likely headers and exhaust as per @Tim Radley

appears something at that power level is holding it back.

Yes everything was stock on the base run. The dyno was a Dyno Dynamics and the figures are estimate flywheel.

The peak figure i ended up with was not what a few people were expecting. But as always the problem with a dyno chart like that is it is a full throttle run from 2000-8000rpm which is not representative of how it is driven in real life. The transient response of the engine is greatly improved now compared to stock. The OP was emailing me asking about the engines response and idle with these cams. It is a shame its not a bone stock engine though for me to give him a 100% solid answer but the work i've done shouldn't affect idle quality compared to stock.

A couple of people who watched the video said it does not sound nor accelerate like other 200bhp 86's. I don't know myself as only been in this one and when it was stock. It gets to 100mph about 3 seconds quicker than before. I'll dig the exact figures out later. My ecu is logging gps as well as all wheels speeds.

Flows too much?
This is good news for my 2.3ltr build....

As for the cams with a stock engine what kind of max lift do you think we can use with stock Pistons?
HKS states you have to use their pistons with their cams.
But the only way to get the pistons is with the $5k Stroker kit.

When I had my pistons made I allotted room for 1mm Over valves and a 13mm Lift. I may never use it but it is there.

Depends on the cam profile. A 13mm lift cam may have more piston to valve clearance than an 11mm lift cam. Depends on duration and ramp rate. Lift at TDC is a good indicator but not the gospel. Closest point of contact is circa 10 degrees off TDC on most engines.

I completely understand what you are saying here. With the stock power curve, as you accelerate from about 3500rpm, you start coming out of the torque dip. This makes it feel like the engine is dramatically coming to life as you rev it out.

I just flashed to stage 2 with OFT and an UEL header and by the numbers it's clear that I'm getting to 100mph much faster. However the power is much more consistent everywhere in the rev range, so it feels much less dramatic as I row through the gears.

Tim: Do you think a stock car would start and drive with stock Ecu and the mild cams installed? Wondering if the car would make it to a tuner after install.

What advantage do longer valves give you?

Lets keep this discussion about cams and the stuff involved with building this motor. Like you said in another thread. "Stay focused people." :D
And his name is Tim.

Yes it will make it there. Lets be patient and not get ahead of ourselves. Longer valves? Interference/clearance is the short answer.

Any tech articles, photos or numbers to detail this? I would love to read about these differences.

It may reflect those longer valve stems and rocker changes too.