Chris,
If you take a look at the link in the post from yesterday at 2:16pm, you will see that the M462 has a very flat torque curve that you are looking for. This is the only chart that I has found, so I would like to see more and see documented sources. It is less impressive than the claim Andrews is making. I am seriously looking at the TTS100. Did you check out the elaborate and very informative thread from Steve Cole and Stonecold? They did a cam study and posted their results. An excellent review and critique of camshafts. Basically, we are seeing that most all of the bolt cams available perform similarly; however some of the minor differences in them are big enough to me to stay away from them. Such as, how the cam behaves in lower RPM. Check out the thread and I will get back to you after I speak with the tech at Andrews today.

 

​​​​​​
I did see their thread. Partly what has me more curious on my Cam choice. I wanted the 475C however my friend has it. He wishes he went with something milder for fuel comsconsump.

 

I will have the 475 installed this week.

 

Keep us posted on your thoughts on the 475 cam. I've been eyeballing this cam along with some others.

 

I as well will be looking forward to hearing about the performance of the 475. It looks like it comes on a little later that the 465, but lasts a little longer. It looks like a great cam for those who like to live up on the higher end of the curve. I have decided to go with the Andrews M462; however, I don't expect quite the perforce claimed by some dyno reports. The grind specs are what lead me in this direction. It seems that all of the bolt-in cams for the M8 are very similar, with the execution of a couple that are not well behaved enough in the lower RMP range for me to be comfortable with.

 

Absolutely I will make a video