Hi Guys Im going to be getting some cams in the next month or so, I know there are a fair few threads on duration etc, and from reading gather that 272s are highest lift you can go with kjet, i may be wrong. But what i want to know is what peoples experiences have been on a similar setup, its an standardish abf, slight head work, ports matched and a four branch. I do like revvy cars but dont want to lose any low down grunt. So what cams have people tried, how did they make your car feel? Thanks Dan.
I had 272 Newman cams in one 16v and it made no power more than with KR cams. Newman did have issues with their cams having the keyway cut in the wrong place which put the cam timing out, could have been the issue with mine though. Generally 'sporty' cams in a VW 16v on kjet can be a bit of a minefield, well documented on here over the years! Schrick 268 inlet 276 ex was used by some to good effect, but when I tried them, the car was as flat as a fart low down, struggled to do 30 mph in speed limits without shaking about, so I sold them after 2 weeks! There still could be unanswered reasons why certain people 'got away' with running proper lumpy cams with no ill effects.... The old trick of using an exhaust cam as an inlet was a good one, but it needs the chainwheel modifying which is a job to get done these days I hear.
Factor on needing an inter cam adjustable chainwheel to get the inlet cam timing correct. Without it being within a couple of degrees of where it should be, you may well not get the expected/hoped for results Jon
Back in the day, Stealth racing used to do the mod with a KR exhaust cam. As I say, the cam isn't an issue, its having the chainwheel recut for the keyway thats the issue.
Im going to be putting my autotech 260 cams in my 2.0 6a in next couple of weeks, had decent results with them in the 1.8 kr so hoping for similar results
One of the issues is compression...its lower than you think...article coming. So fitting cams much over std can reduce mid range power for little top end gain unless the c.r is matched to them. The other issue is cam timing...verniers are a must to phase the cams together and time them to the engine. I usually spend several hours setting them up on a stand...the internal chain pulley isn't at all nice to adjust and chase the last few degrees from...it's even less fun in the car! So combine incorrect cam phasing/timing/low c.r and dissapointing results are the norm.
will you not get similar results fitting ABF cams to doing the exhaust can mod Gary Fitting cams was always something I had planned to try at some point Jason what kind of result would you get with the right compression and can timing And what cams would you suggest
If you just want to fit cams to a std engine without lifting the head to give it a decent skim then ABF cams are going to be hard to improve on by much...certainly in duration terms...more peak lift could be had along with more at tdc. Im currently working on a track day profile for an ABF, but they need more c.r from a few cc chamber reduction...then your chasing available lift at tdc in terms of valve to piston clearance. Once I've finished those I'll take a look at cams to suit a std engine, but to be honest I can't see the gains will be huge for the cost. I'd prob look at a simple valve seat job and good skim and leave the std ABF cams in.
This was the results i got from the autotech 260's on my 1800, head was never skimmed but was port n polished, it give a decent enough improvement top end. Year inbetween but only difference was cams and adjustable cam pulley http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y186/Gambit001/RR_Compare2.jpg
I hear Kent 1602r cams are a good choice. Keithmac on here got 10hp and 10lbft on a standard engine iirc.
