438 Cams - what's the downside?

[Rob669]

Ok, so it's looking like good gains of about 15% are achievable with 438s on 1*2s. I'm tempted, but I'm not going down the mythical road of matched inlets again (waste of £50 in fuel driving to the Flat Lands to give a Man called Ben and his angels some money for no noticable gain). So is there a downside and what is it - worse low down torque, a big drop in fuel use, expected engine life decreases, hub bearings, drive shafts, tyres and you need a healthy engine to start with?

 

[mitch1503]

youl only have a huge drop in fuel usage if your giving it the beans everwhere tbh

 

[Chip-mk1]

Engine life in terms of time before the rings start to not seal as well significantly decreases as revs used increase, hotter cams means you will want to rev it more.
Economy at full throttle will be worse.
You increase the chance of a piston breaking up, a valve head coming off or a rod bolt failing.

If its a car you do 30k miles a year in, it's probably not ideal, if it's part trackday toy it's a very good idea.

 

[Silent_Scone]

You'll lose a little down low and gain it up the rev range, so like Chip says if you're using them how they're meant to be, you'll be revving it more. He just makes it sound as if it'll kill your engine because he's bleak lol. He's right in a sense but the likely hood is you won't have the car by the time thats an issue. Unless you're a hooligan

 

[Brett]

The downside is that for a road car its probably not worth it. Enjoy it for what it is.

 

[p@blo]

You'll lose a little down low and gain it up the rev range, so like Chip says if you're using them how they're meant to be, you'll be revving it more. He just makes it sound as if it'll kill your engine because he's bleak lol. He's right in a sense but the likely hood is you won't have the car by the time thats an issue. Unless you're a hooligan

You running these now Michael or you have freds GT cams?

 

[Cub.]

The downside is that for a road car its probably not worth it. Enjoy it for what it is.

So how do you figure that? It's made a more than noticeable difference to mine.

 

[Chip-mk1]

You'll lose a little down low and gain it up the rev range, so like Chip says if you're using them how they're meant to be, you'll be revving it more. He just makes it sound as if it'll kill your engine because he's bleak lol. He's right in a sense but the likely hood is you won't have the car by the time thats an issue. Unless you're a hooligan

If you had to guess, saying it will halve the life of your engine if you are frequently revving it harder is probably not far wrong.
Thats still big miles on one of these though of course!

 

[Chip-mk1]

So how do you figure that? It's made a more than noticeable difference to mine.

1000 pound car that's great on the road
Spend same again on cams, it's now only slightly better.

If its mainly a commuter don't bother, if it's for fun though it makes sense.

 

[Cub.]

The op asked for downsides to getting 438 cams, he didn't say 'is it worth modding my car'. The cams in question make a noticeable difference to performance (hence my post above) and have few downsides. I was wondering on what basis Brett felt that the cams in question made little difference, not whether the value of the car + use = to mod or not to mod.

 

[Toastfrenzy]

Fuel - round Mallory (last race) brimmed the tank, 42 laps later just under half left, it's 1.2 miles long and full throttle 85% of the way round (fast circuit). So, say brimmed to half full is 30 ltrs divided by 4.5 = 6 gallons, 50 miles dividing by 6 = 7.5MPG

(the only real way to know how much fuel used at Mallory is to brim tank from where it is now)

Before 438 cams I could get 3 laps of Snetterton 300 out of 4.5 ltrs (1 gallon), 12 miles.

Of course my application isn't road with some track use- but you will see an increase in fuel usage.

But, they're worth it.....

 

[Silent_Scone]

You running these now Michael or you have freds GT cams?

No I've got 428s, didn't see the point in changing them tbh. They're still a damn sight better than the standard cams and I already had them sitting there

 

[Wick]

Does anyone run them solely on their daily driver?

Simply because the main reason I strayed from the 182 was that I got bored with the power. I can't help but think 195+ bhp would help keep me entertained.

If I came back to Cliohood (which is looking more and more likely when considering options) and I needed cam/aux/deph change, it's almost a no brainer to me for an extra £500 to chuck a set of 438's in if you intend on keeping the car.

 

[meves]

I run 438s on my daily driver, not that I do huge mileage. The change from the standard cams is definitely noticeable when the rev get over somewhere around 4250rpm but below that I would guess that any increase or decrease in power and torque is negligible. They do make the car more fun when you are off for a bit of a drive but in day to day commuter mode I would doubt that you'd see too much from them which is what Chip is on about.

If you use that rev range a lot (4250+ rpm) then expect your mpg to drop into the 33-34mpg range.

My car to give you an idea is:

Clio 172 cup
Matched inlets
438 cams
on almost 80,000miles

 

[Silent_Scone]

I can't see cams alone giving you the kick you need mate really. See straight away you've said 195bhp as that's what you've seen on paper from them. But it's the drivability you need to think about. On a road car - if you're in the midrange a lot for the most part as a daily you're not going to see a lot of difference, in fact depending on how the map is it might even be worse.

ITBs or in the case of a daily possibly the RS2 give you a lot more useable power and torque where the F4R really needs it. I'd never go back to one on the standard inlet now, there's just nothing there (unless there is boost involved)

 

[Cub.]

Mine is a daily driver at the moment. Behaves perfectly - if I want to 'pootle' about in the commute I just change gear at 3k. If I feel like pressing on, I change at higher revs and keep it in the power band more. I've averaged 33mpg on a daily 15 mile commute, including times I decide to drive it hard.

If you're ever at a south central meet or trackday, or in Reading and want to see the car / how it drives then let me know / pm me. More than happy to take you out.

 

[Silent_Scone]

Stick it in 5th at 30 and we'll have a ickle race

 

[Cub.]

Stick it in 5th at 30 and we'll have a ickle race

Dont worry, I'm not brainwashed into thinking the 438's improve power or response at low rpm, and agree with the posts above that unless it's above 4.5kish you get little noticeable difference, unlike rs2 or ITB's. But at the moment that is ideal, as unless I'm on track I want to burble along in the mundane commuter traffic as if it was standard. When I am on track I change the way I drive it and it gives me the 'fun' element I need. Bit like Jekyll and Hyde.

I just think if you are planning on keeping the car, and have to do belts, just like I did, they are a good balance between performance increase and cost.

As an aside, I am planning on ITBs next year, but want to track the car more before I go for that final additional power increase. Wanted to see yours at Llandow part 1 to sniff about the ITBs, but you bailed :rasp:

 

[Silent_Scone]

Yeah my jobs faggy . Was just as well though as my top mount had seized.

Sure i'll be able to take you out in it soon!

 

[Cub.]

Yeah my jobs faggy

You doing the next one? I'm on honeymoon which I'm gutted about...

If there is a chance to see it, I'd jump at a passenger ride. Maybe the next SC meet, quite a turnout last time, even DK appeared in his lovely new merc.

 

[Silent_Scone]

Im booked in, I'm trying to re-arrange as technically I'm meant to be in Florida that day lol.

 

[Advikaz]

I personally Wouldn't Cam my everyday road car. Learnt from experiences... not sure if it was just mine tho to be fair but my first C2 vts I had, I cammed it amongst other bits & bobs. It didn't idle particulally well & was only nice to drive when giving it the beans.

That as said is my personal experience tho & we are all different. It was a great laugh at full chat.

 

[Laine_16v]

I personally Wouldn't Cam my everyday road car. Learnt from experiences... not sure if it was just mine tho to be fair but my first C2 vts I had, I cammed it amongst other bits & bobs. It didn't idle particulally well & was only nice to drive when giving it the beans.

That as said is my personal experience tho & we are all different. It was a great laugh at full chat.

438's dont give either of those problems, the idle is smoother than stock cams, and it has plenty of grunt low down.

First thing i noticed when going back to stock cams was that the idle was lumpier, madness!

 

[Cub.]

I personally Wouldn't Cam my everyday road car. Learnt from experiences... not sure if it was just mine tho to be fair but my first C2 vts I had, I cammed it amongst other bits & bobs. It didn't idle particulally well & was only nice to drive when giving it the beans.

That as said is my personal experience tho & we are all different. It was a great laugh at full chat.

The joy of the 438s though is the minimal difference to standard idle, you can hardly tell its cammed to be honest. I agree though, lairy cams, with rough idle, would be annoying on a daily.

 

[Chip-mk1]

I personally Wouldn't Cam my everyday road car. Learnt from experiences... not sure if it was just mine tho to be fair but my first C2 vts I had, I cammed it amongst other bits & bobs. It didn't idle particulally well & was only nice to drive when giving it the beans.

That as said is my personal experience tho & we are all different. It was a great laugh at full chat.

That just sounds like mapping issues TBH

A set of 438s well mapped should still drive factory smooth (all be it with a slight loss of bottom end) and idle well etc.

 

[Chip-mk1]

Flol at 3 identical replies in a 1 minute span.

 

[Brett]

So how do you figure that? It's made a more than noticeable difference to mine.

Ok I'll rephrase. For an upgrade on a road car it is not really great value for money. To spend 50%+ of a cars value on an upgrade that will gain say 10% peak power doesn't seem worth it to me.

I considered getting cams for mine and that was what I concluded when I did some research.

 

[Advikaz]

Like I said that was my personal experience & granted I took the risk when fitting wild profile cams.

 

[Cub.]

Brett - fair enough, you're right - unless I was specifically looking to modify / improve the performance of my car to use on track, then you could argue any additional spend on it was pointless.

 

[Silent_Scone]

It's a mugs game, but am I bovered

 

[...]

mod a road car - better off buying a better faster car

mod a track car that sees part road part track -then yes, but not too wild ,and mod to gain reliability first

mod a totally track car -there are much better value for money track cars (if we are talking lots of modding) than a clio anyway .


Just an opinion ...... but each to their own as different people do things for different reasons .

 

[bozothenutter]

what type of cam would give a nice lift all over the rev range, or is that a pipe dream?

 

[Wick]

I can't see cams alone giving you the kick you need mate really. See straight away you've said 195bhp as that's what you've seen on paper from them. But it's the drivability you need to think about. On a road car - if you're in the midrange a lot for the most part as a daily you're not going to see a lot of difference, in fact depending on how the map is it might even be worse.

I know I know! Hahaha.... That's the thing I miss most about the Clio though. Rev happiness!

Turbocharged cars give no incentive to hang onto the gears (supercharged on the other hand....meh different kettle of fish). Peak Torque is very low down and peak power is at about 6k in my current steed. It's plenty fast enough, more than enough to get you in big trouble on the roads, and boost is fun to an extent... But, and it's a big but. In my mind.... NA cars are just more fun in general. They bring out your inner hooligan... make you want to drive.

It's effortless to make progress in the VX. For example... On the A40 the other night I pulled out to overtake in 3rd @45ish mph behind a queue of slow traffic. I saw the top of 3rd plus half of 4th (you can do the math if you want lol) and comfortably overtook a line of 15 odd cars. Now whilst this is somewhat satisfying there was no drama, no effort, no clinging onto gears like your life depends on it. Great for day to day drivability, great for all out power and speed, great for an ego boost.... but fun, hmmm that's open to interpretation.

Granted ITB's solve this problem, but as a daily car doing the best part of 20k per year.... I don't know if I could live with the mpg.

mod a road car - better off buying a better faster car

Hmmmm.... Not always as enjoyable though. I've come to the conclusion that speed doesn't always outweigh characteristics. Also it's not like you're spending enough to get something significantly better. eg. 2k clio 1k cams = 3k.

For 3-3.5k I could buy a dog of a Leon cupra R, a ropey type r, a fast but boring diesel with better "drivability" day to day, a pov spec meg 225....

All of the above sacrifice one thing or another, especially if you like the clio you already have and it provides a good all round package..

Anyway, I'm just rambling. Not sure if any of that makes sense. All IMO of course. Blah blah blah, standard disclaimer here lol!

 

[Silent_Scone]

If mapped efficiently ITBs won't see you in terrible economy tbh, depends entirely on how you drive it on a day to day basis though It's definitely hard not to put your foot down lol.

On a sensible run down to the cost I saw high 20s I reckon, then on the way back probably sub 20s I'd imagine lol.

 

[Chip-mk1]

what type of cam would give a nice lift all over the rev range, or is that a pipe dream?

To increase torque and power low in the rev range, you need a low lift short duration cam with advanced timing, to increase torque and power at the top end you need a high lift long duration cam with retarded timing.

Honda VTEC cam does both, cant think of another one though!

 

[Wick]

If mapped efficiently ITBs won't see you in terrible economy tbh, depends entirely on how you drive it on a day to day basis though It's definitely hard not to put your foot down lol.

On a sensible run down to the cost I saw high 20s I reckon, then on the way back probably sub 20s I'd imagine lol.

Stop tempting me lol! DAT NOIZZZZZE!!! :evil:

Hmmmm....

Sensible?... Does that mean sub 70 on a cruise. Realistically 30+ at 85 would be more ideal for my needs.

My 182 used to return 34 average... Town, motorway and hoon.
Now I see about 32 on the motorway but this can plummet very significantly with more right foot.

 

[Silent_Scone]

I'd say if you sit at 70 and don't do any spectacular overtaking you could hit 30s, at least with mine anyway. Averaging 80-85 would be a push. Stupid gearing. No changing down required though, just pull out and let the engine do the work. Unless you're showing off lol.

 

[Wick]

Cheers. Useful and honest insight.

and...

taken from my geek spreadsheet...

MPG > 22k miles p/a > Total L used > Yearly cost to fuel with 99 unleaded @1.37/1.38

26​

22,000​

3847​

​

5305​

34​

22,000​

2942​

​

4056​

So for big mileage ITB's would cost me £1300 a year more to fuel lol!

Sorry for straying off topic OP. Didn't mean to turn this into an ITB vs Cam's discussion.... Again.

 

[Chip-mk1]

Our RS2 car does 40mpg at 80mph

I'd go that route for a road car not ITBs personally having had both.

 

[Silent_Scone]

RS2 is a good shout on a daily road car yeah, definitely. ITBs aren't exactly problematic but you still have to balance them every so often, and cost of management.

Horses for courses.