
kent 286 cam - worth it on my engine?
#1
Posted 14 February 2007 - 05:05 PM
I'm trying to decide on what bits to buy for my engine build. Let me give you a quick run down so far...
Its a 1275 Mg metro block & head, the head has been modified slightly - standard size valves, but gas-flowed, etc. Its having a SCCR gearbox on the bottom and SC drop gears too, as well as an AP racing clutch kit. Finally, it's also going to have a 45 DCOE on the back. That spec is what I've decided on, for sure, so far...
However, I am really tempted to change the cam for something hotter. A Kent 286 springs to mind, I've driven a couple of Mini's with this cam and its awesome. I love the lumpy idle too!
But, would that cam be too hot for my standard-ish Mg metro head? Would it be going to waste and actually losing torque & bhp?
I don't care about fuel consumption, noise, or the fact it'll be difficult to drive in traffic. Infact, that's a good thing - a challenge! However, I don't want to spend out too much more money on other things (eg, better head, overbore, etc)
Thanks in advance.
#2
Posted 14 February 2007 - 05:28 PM
#3
Posted 14 February 2007 - 06:47 PM
#4
Posted 14 February 2007 - 06:48 PM
#5
Posted 14 February 2007 - 07:01 PM
i have all those parts spread out in a couple of engines and in spares, i might build one to similar spec
#6
Posted 14 February 2007 - 07:04 PM
Yep, I'll also be interested in BHP/torque figures. Anyone fancy giving a rough guess?

#7
Posted 14 February 2007 - 07:12 PM
#8
Posted 14 February 2007 - 07:17 PM
#9
Posted 14 February 2007 - 10:43 PM
#10
Posted 14 February 2007 - 11:13 PM
i'd prefer the sw10 and a decent SU on a road car. not a big fan of webbers on a roadie either....
sw10 is far more up to date design - like the 286 but better.., less lift at overlap gives a smoother idle, better economy (if used with a SU), and delivers the torque.
really: high hp figures are nothing if the torque curve is pants...
imho,
Dave
#11
Posted 14 February 2007 - 11:15 PM
#12
Posted 14 February 2007 - 11:18 PM
other way?hmmm u got a point. but the other way is alot cheaper?
#13
Posted 14 February 2007 - 11:33 PM
#14
Posted 15 February 2007 - 01:13 AM
really? i thught the su etc wuld be pricey? this not the carse?
nar a single hif44 would work - twin 1 1/2 will be pricey but would be marginally better.. SUs have a lot of tuning potential, and sadly not often utilised.
webers are ok, but not variable choke so its more of a 'compromise' setup...
ttfn,
Dave
#15
Posted 15 February 2007 - 04:55 AM
sorry for hi jacking this thread :S
2 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users