# 8V Turbo cam-AutoTech, Techtonics, Schrick?



## 8-VALVER (Jan 11, 2012)

Hi Folks

I am in the market for a Cam upgrade for my 8v crossflow turbo. Its super punchy mid range and then just completely runs out of steam. after 5000rpm. So the standard cam has served its time.

I see a lot of people use the autotech cams or the Techtonics or the Shcrick cams for the g60 and what not. Can anyone recommend a cam that is going to give me a real nice top end. I don't mind losing some of the mid range. If anyone can please suggest a cam along with a dyno graph to show where the power is made.

The head has already been worked and flowed specifically for turbo and a set of the largest SuperTech valves we could fit. And the turbo is a t4 turbine wheel inside a t3 ar.48 housing and it spools beautifully. The compressor side is a t60-1 in ar.50 housing.

Regards
Reinier


----------



## AJmustDIE (Dec 22, 2010)

This is already getting to be the market norm cam for a primarily "top end" setup. The TT 276 114lc cam, not the regular 276. If you don't see it on their website, give them a call and Collin will be happy to tell you what you like to know.


----------



## Daskoupe (Oct 9, 2006)

AJmustDIE said:


> This is already getting to be the market norm cam for a primarily "top end" setup. The TT 276 114lc cam, not the regular 276. If you don't see it on their website, give them a call and Collin will be happy to tell you what you like to know.


this is what i'll move on to my autotech 270 runs out at like 6200


----------



## AJmustDIE (Dec 22, 2010)

Was that still on c2?


----------



## [email protected] (Oct 6, 2009)

AJmustDIE said:


> This is already getting to be the market norm cam for a primarily "top end" setup. The TT 276 114lc cam, not the regular 276. If you don't see it on their website, give them a call and Collin will be happy to tell you what you like to know.


^^that

if you're interested shoot me a pm.


----------



## Mark Morris (Dec 15, 2001)

I would change your intake manifold and turbine housing to a .63, along with an Autotech 270 cam for your relatively mild setup. 

I made 374 whp with a bone stock OBD1 head and an Autotech 270-- power held to 7800 rpm. I have no problem with big cams (I will be testing some soon), but I don't think your setup warrants one. remember, it's the overall package, not just any one part that dictates the way an engine behaves.

Good luck. :thumbup:


----------



## [email protected] (Oct 6, 2009)

Mark Morris said:


> I would change your intake manifold and turbine housing to a .63, along with an Autotech 270 cam for your relatively mild setup.
> 
> I made 374 whp with a bone stock OBD1 head and an Autotech 270-- power held to 7800 rpm. I have no problem with big cams (I will be testing some soon), but I don't think your setup warrants one. remember, it's the overall package, not just any one part that dictates the way an engine behaves.
> 
> Good luck. :thumbup:


did you use an adj cam gear with your setup?


----------



## Mark Morris (Dec 15, 2001)

[email protected] said:


> did you use an adj cam gear with your setup?


Cam was set straight-up, at "0". Cam timing was on the list, but we didn't get to it that session and there was enough power that go-round, so we left it.


----------



## [email protected] (Oct 6, 2009)

Mark Morris said:


> Cam was set straight-up, at "0". Cam timing was on the list, but we didn't get to it that session and there was enough power that go-round, so we left it.


wonder what was different in the tune that it held it's power so high up compared to mine and many other's with the 270 cam...?


----------



## Mark Morris (Dec 15, 2001)

Here is a thread with the last chart:

http://forum.vwsport.com/viewtopic.php?t=25534

Here is a thread with some videos of the car to back-up the dyno:

http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthre...10.76-130-at-Pittsburgh-Classic&daysprune=365


----------



## Mark Morris (Dec 15, 2001)

[email protected] said:


> wonder what was different in the tune that it held it's power so high up compared to mine and many other's with the 270 cam...?


Manifolds.


----------



## Daskoupe (Oct 9, 2006)

AJmustDIE said:


> Was that still on c2?


yes


And i have a larger better designed intake manifold waiting to be put together

Mark was that dyno cart with the at 270?


----------



## Mark Morris (Dec 15, 2001)

Daskoupe said:


> Mark was that dyno chart with the at 270?


Yes.


----------



## [email protected] (Oct 6, 2009)

Mark Morris said:


> Manifolds.


We had more or less the same manifold designs so that wasnt it:beer:


----------



## Mark Morris (Dec 15, 2001)

[email protected] said:


> We had more or less the same manifold designs so that wasnt it:beer:


 C'mon Q, you don't really think it's that cut and dry.


----------



## 8-VALVER (Jan 11, 2012)

OK so by the sound of it I would be better off with a different inlet manifold aswell? My turbo manifold is a tube mani that I build and I think it flows really well. My options on inlet manifolds here is South Africa is pretty damn limited.


----------



## the4ork (Mar 10, 2003)

im sorry i dont have a dyno graph. 

but back in 2007 I used a large cam for my turbo setup. The head was flowed with larger valves and the mk4 intake just like yours. 

i was running about 20-22psi on a k26/to4e 57trim hybrid with a chopped audi 5000 manifold. 

i tried 3 cams. stock, which had a good mid-range and no top end, a 270 which was just only slighly better and a TT 288 timed at -2 

let me tell you, the 288 was a hell of a cam, i had to take the head back in and shave around the lifter buckets to fit the lift of the cam but it was worth it. that cam screamed up top and my butt dyno said it felt more like a 16vT than a 8vT. it had a more daily drivable torque curve because it was more linear, and had great power all the way up to 7k. 

dont let people scare you about how they cry and complain about overlap. if your compressor is big enough and you have a decent intercooler, and a free flow exhaust the overlap will make more power.


----------



## the4ork (Mar 10, 2003)

Mark Morris said:


> I would change your intake manifold and turbine housing to a .63, along with an Autotech 270 cam for your relatively mild setup.
> 
> 
> 
> Good luck. :thumbup:


 i agree if your on a .48 housing thats your main problem, a cam is only going to make minimal shifts in the power/tq curve. 

the intake manifold is fine if you just want to shift your torque and power curve to the top end side. this will make your car also much more drivable. 

i had this problem on my mk2 1.8t. with the k03s it was near impossible to drive unless the boost was turned down low at stock level. i went big turbo on it mainly to adjust my tq/hp curve to something more linear, tq spikes (albiet fun) are bad for wheelspin and your trans. can make for some fast street cars, but in my opinion, too much work. in the morning i wanna drink my coffee, have a smooth ride, stay out of boost, or maybe just a little. and when my coffee's gone? downshift and pass everyone lol


----------



## jettatech (Oct 26, 2001)

build looks sweet bro. with my 5857 .63 at 0 cam timing(268/260) was loosing boost between shifts with equal legnth header, custom intake and big valves. power fell off 6200 rpms or so. then the fun stopped.


----------



## GTijoejoe (Oct 6, 2001)

Personally, I agree that a .63 would be best to change your curve, but I would rec the larger cam (270) with some neg timing to see if that hits your goals first before changing your turbo. 

Ive ran a .48 50trim and it made power all the way to redline, so its certainly possible to keep climbing the power curve with small exh a/r. 

Do you have a dyno plot of your power? I'm curious if the power is actually falling off or the low end torque is so brutal it just seems that way...


----------



## [email protected] (Oct 6, 2009)

Mark Morris said:


> C'mon Q, you don't really think it's that cut and dry.


 absolutely not  i think most of it was in the tune however.


----------



## Mark Morris (Dec 15, 2001)

The tune is a good one.  

lugtronic.com 

:thumbup:


----------



## [email protected] (Oct 6, 2009)

Mark Morris said:


> The tune is a good one.
> 
> lugtronic.com
> 
> :thumbup:


 yea i'm sad i didnt get to get him to tune my car before i sold it. Everytime i was ready i broke somethin... :banghead:


----------



## GTijoejoe (Oct 6, 2001)

[email protected] said:


> yea i'm sad i didnt get to get him to tune my car before i sold it. Everytime i was ready i broke somethin... :banghead:


 That's because you can't build ****! oooohhhhhhHHhhhhh!!!


----------



## the4ork (Mar 10, 2003)

here is a question that hasnt come up yet 

what stage is your turbine? if you have a stage V turbine i dont think a .63 housing is going to do much for you, if you have a stage I turbine i'd switch asap


----------



## 8-VALVER (Jan 11, 2012)

Its a t4 stage II wheel in a t3 housing.


----------



## the4ork (Mar 10, 2003)

ive only ran stage 3 and 5 turbine wheels before, i still put my $ on the turbine housing


----------



## 8-VALVER (Jan 11, 2012)

the4ork said:


> ive only ran stage 3 and 5 turbine wheels before, i still put my $ on the turbine housing


 OK cool. Will get a ar.64 housing machined up and see what It does.


----------



## OverCaffeinated (Mar 9, 2009)

I'm curious if anyone has ran the TT G60 cam? Says it's specifically for forced induction. It's pretty close to there 266 (aka 270) and there 268. But it is $50 more than the other two.


----------

