I have not seen final versions of Crower stg 2 or 3. Based on advertised specs, they really aren't on either side. One reason is because the advertised rocker arm ratio as listed on posted cam cards, is not consistent with what we have ascertained through extensive valvetrain geometry analysis and modeling.
IPS-Kme profiles are the max cam you can install in a stock cylinder head that retains full vtc implementation, without any valve-valve or piston-valve interference. So the answer is no. They are not similar in design approach to Crower Stg. 3, nor are they alike in the many other facets concerning, what we feel, optimal K-series cam design.
IPS-K2 and IPS-Kme testing on the same motor was an exercise in validating the specific purpose and target market for the masses. When we isolated the IPS-K2 vs. IPS-Kme high speed lobes, the resultant power graph moved everything over to the right in favor of the Kme's, but we did not exceed peak power of the K2's on the test vehicle. This was primarily due to the limitations of the supporting peripheral components.
The curve of the Kme's is very strong, linear and rate of ascent is much more aggressive than the K2's, but its cfm and fuel requirements exceeded what the test vehicle had that day. At this point, we only have a snapshot of what these cams are capable of producing. Until we can get them paired up with race oriented peripheral components, I'll have to take a "no comment" stance for the time being.
I apologize if my answer wasn't the one you were hoping to get, but it's the honest one. Don't worry though, since Nikos asked for those K24 piston pics - I've decided to repurpose that block, drop in some rods, pistons and see what more displacement does for the IPS-Kme's. We won't have ample induction (ITB's, yet), but the data acquired from this test will be beneficial nonetheless.
-Ron
