Forgive me if I'm posting in the wrong forum, but I'm trying to decide what cams to go with for a turbo setup. Being a n00b when it comes to FI, most people just say to use either the stock GSR cams, ITR cams, or even the CTR cams. I don't doubt these suggestions, seeing that many people run these in their setups, but I would like to explore other options, specifically the JUN camshafts. I found some cam duration/lift specs on an old forum, but here's some anyways:

(@ 1mm)

Integra GS-R
Int-230 dur. / 10.6mm lift
Exh-227 dur. / 9.4mm lift

JUN Type 1
Int-265 dur. / 10.9mm lift
Exh-268 dur. / 10.0mm lift

Civic Type-R And Integra Type-R
Int-243 dur. / 11.5mm lift
Exh-235 dur. / 10.5mm lift

Skunk2 Stage 1
Int-252 dur. / 11.6mm lift
Exh-249 dur. / 10.8mm lift

Skunk2 Turbo
Int-230 dur. / 9.7mm lift
Exh-225 dur. / 8.9mm lift

I would assume that the lower the lift, the better for a turbo setup? If so, is the slight difference between the GSR cams and JUN Type 1 cams enough to make a difference with forced induction? I'm all new to this stuff, so feel free to call me out on anything I might be missing or be incorrect about.

 

It's not just about lift, but the cam overlap and duration are also important factors in a good turbo cam and how the engine responds to boost pressure.

I've never worked with JUN cams, but know many people are fond of them. Skunk2 Tuner 1 cams are a great entry to mid level turbo cam, similar in profile but slightly more "aggressive" than the CTR or 98+ ITR.

Someone who knows more about the nuances of camshaft profiles & JUN cams can probably elaborate more.

 

Thanks for your input! I appreciate it!

I heard somewhere that the JUN Type 1 is supposed to be very similar to the Skunk2 Tuner 1, and that it was also supposedly designed for turbo applications. Unfortunately, JUN's website doesn't give much information, and what little information there is happens to be poorly translated. Most people typically go for the Skunk2, Toda, etc. stuff, but I just want to try out something a little different.

 

Then use a turbocharger camshaft and not one designed around NA builds and were an older source from the early 2000s. These selections revolve a lot around the size of the turbocharger itself. You need to take a look at the GSCT1 camshaft or the Kelford 176-T . Those are designed for turbochargers with the correct duration and lift.

Check the GSC T1 Camshaft forum. search via Google.

 

Since the dawn of FI time, the school of thought has been that a turbo car cannot have a camshaft with much overlap because the boost pressure/cylinder air volume will be lost to the exhaust system. Essentially, the theory then was the lift should be increased but the overlap should be very mild and limited. Over the last ten to twelve years, this theory has been proven to be quite false. A moderate level N/A camshaft will make MORE power than a "Turbo" camshaft with similar lift and less overlap. There is a point where the overlap is too much, but that point is much further away than ANY "Turbo" cam grind and even most Stage 2 sized N/A camshafts.

I have a friend who had a moderate B16 Turbo car... it made 421 HP @ 18psi on the stock cams, and 483 HP @ 17psi on Skunk2 Pro 1's.

Welcome to 2019.

 

Not in every position or platform. I've found a significant difference in an actual turbocharger camshafts than the NA mild camshaft. the difference was mainly in torque creation for smaller displacement engines.

So no, I've found that the theory is rather true.

 

Any of the cams you list in your first post except the Skunk2 Turbo cams have been proven to work (the Jun are a bit of a unicorn camshaft though). As JRCivic1 and The Shodan have said, proper large- duration turbo cams or similarly sized NA cams are far superior to any of the B-series "Turbo cams"

I should have some data on B16A vs Skunk2 Turbo 1 vs Skunk2 Pro 1+ cams pretty soon. The application is a 84x89mm, PR4 head and 6262 on E50 fuel.