Hitech stage II cams?

Discussion in '1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk-' started by scupking, Sep 30, 2008.

  1. I was thinking of going with cushman stage one cams but was reading that alot of guys with the hitechs stage IIs are all running 300+ N/A with full boltons. Anyone on stangnet have any experience with hitech?
  2. I had them on my 2000GT. Also ran BBK LTs w/ catted H, Cobra catback (for irs), 75mm plenum/tb, udps and tune. Car ran great once tune was finished. Pulled very strong from 3200+ and no loss down low. Didn't make it to the dyno before selling. However, very very noticeable seat difference and tire slip while shifting high end.

    Very nice guys to deal with also.
  3. Did you have to run new valve springs with them?
  4. I've ridden in a car with them. It was an auto with 3.73's, MAC LT's, and a prochamber. Definitely pulled hard above 3000 RPM and didn't really lose anything down low. Also good because they don't require new valve springs.
  5. That's good that you don't have to use new valve springs. So are the Hitech stage IIs more like Cusham Stage I or a stage 1.5? I don't understand all this lift, duration or LSA stuff.

    Cushman Stage I
    540/550 lift, 224/226 duration, 110 LSA

    Cushman stage IIs
    .560/.575 lift, 225/235 duration, 108 LSA

    Hitech Stage IIs
    .550/.500 lift, 234/230 duration 111 LSA
  6. i've seen these before - not sure what they do to get the weird cam specs i see on em, but look at their dyno results their quite an odd curve. Looks almost almost like a high horsepower NPI set-up based on the curve.
  7. I wish I had heard of HiTech when my Big-Bore was being built. Off the Shelf I don't think you can get a better N/A cam than those. In fact I would go as far and say that those are the only properly spec'd N/A cam off the shelf. I would have had a set of HiTech Stg 3 installed in my car but I am happy with my Crowers.
  8. That's what I keep hearing from people. They say if they new about HiTech they would have went with the stage II or III cams hands down. Seems that everyone that has the stage 2 love them and always say how they don’t lose any low-end tq like other stage II cams. I have seen a few videos on youtube of 99-04 stangs with the HiTech stage IIs and I’m impressed on what kind of power they make and how they sound. I think I found the cam I will order. I think when paired up with the HPS hardballer intake and LT's I should be around 290+ rwhp from the auto. Most of the manual guys seems to be at 300-315 rwhp with the HiTech Stage IIs and boltons. It will be nice to think my car would be faster then lightly moded 96-01 cobras, 03-04 machs and even S197s. Until then I have to keep my mouth shut.
  9. a stage II cam on stock stall?
  10. With HiTech's yes other companys no. They don't even recommend needing gears for the HiTech stage IIs as other companies do.
  11. Don't you think you should be asking why?
  12. That is the difference between a properly spec'd N/A cam( HiTech ) and a not so good one( VT )...

    Seriously though, yes the HiTech have more low end power than other cams like VT so you can use the HiTech cams with the stock TC and stock gears, but it is not the ideal circumstance. They do work better with a 3500 RPM Stall TC and a minimum of 3.73 gears like other cams do.
  13. I have the 3.73 gears, down the road I can go with a 3500 Stall or 4.10s
  14. What are you even talking about? Cams on most every car require or are benefited by the same mods - including every other mustang cam (they must all be wrong right?). Plus these stage II's don't require aftermarket springs, meaning they don't need higher seat pressure to close the valve as quick as possible at high rpms, how is that a good thing?

    How about instead of a Cam A > everything thing else ever thread people people use their brains and try to argue this or explain why. With the amount of time these have been out it's like saying Victor Jr intake > everything without even trying to explain it.

    And BTW - needing a stall has nothing to do with cams not making a lot of low end power. VT stage I's see 3-6rwtq loss before 3000 - that'd be like taking off your underdrive pulleys and being like "oh, crap - now i need a stall".
  15. I haven't seen their lift schedual posted online at all - so all i can base what i see a difference in is the lift and duration difference from every other cam on the market.
    Look at the dyno graphs they post:
    stage 1:

    stage 2:

    Do these look normal to you guys? the I's peak at around 3900 then drop off drastically, the stage II's peak at 4100 then drop off - plateau - drop off. Generally with more lift and duration you should be making great gains up top over the stock cam, look at 5500 over the peak power for the stage 1, or 5500-6000 vs the peak power for the stage II. This is where you car will be shifting guys (especially an auto), you even short rev to 5500 and with the gear change rpm drop you still wont be dropping low enough to hit the peak power again, only the down slope. I can see why everyone talks about how great it is to not lose low end with these because that's basically what they are - low end. They look like really high output NPI car on the dyno. Plus the gains in the stage I comparison include LT's.
  16. CobraRed, good post. A better comparison would be comparing those dyno graphs of Hitechs to dyno graphs of Cushman, Comp and Crower cams, and comparing power curves to rpm.
  17. Good point, here are what VT stg 1's look like:
    Product Review: VT Engine Stage 1 NA Cams

    There are others, just havent bookmarked them.
  18. I'll try to post my dyno graph tonight for comparison.