[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]
Re: Schricky testing
I'm not sure that it's the stock cam in the Ur-q that makes it "peaky", I think
it's the oversized stock K26 turbo that only develops suable boost >3000-3500
RPM. The stock cam wimping out at 5000 RPM makes it even less peaky in my book.
It's the worst of both worlds! The oversize turbo kills the low end and the
US-spec smog cam kills the high end. :(
Lookin' forward to trying an agressive cam with the S4 turbo in the
The stock cam/turbo come alive at 3000, and are pure molasses (that
wasn't my first choice of terms, but as this is a "family" forum...)
A "S4" turbo on a stock cam gives the engine "some life" below 3000
(which, while not much by itself [you still won't be embarrasing
clapped-out ole Nissan pickup trucks; I *swear* that the Nissan Pickup
Truck Club stalks me so that they can blow me off at every consecutive
traffic light! Bloody frustrating!], is still a vast improvement over
"no" life -- kinda like molasses-in-May versus molasses-in-January).
At 3000 (and full 10PSI boost) the stock cam slams you back in the
seat (OK, OK, "slams you back in your seat" and Audi don't really mix,
but at 3000 the stock cam does switch on very suddenly and noticeably).
To me that is the first half of "peaky".
At around 5000 with the stock cam, the engine starts seriously la-
boring and wheezing, and only grudgingly gets to redline (it'll do it
in third gear, but it ain't happy about it). I consider a 2K useful
rev range on a 6750-redline engine "peaky". My old normally-aspirated
Lotus Europa 1550cc (1580? sub-1.6L) 4-cyl twin-cam pulled strongly
from 1500rpm, and screamed past 6500 redline begging to go faster
Faster FASTER! This on technology a decade prior to Audi's World Class
Flagship Technology Car.
With the Schrick cam, you (well, "I") have the same 3000 start point (all
the same molasses-like allusions apply), and the engine pulls strongly all
the way to redline -- so strongly in fact that the first 3rd-gear run I
tried took me completely by surprise as I slammed (and yes, "*SLAM*" is
the operative word here) into the ECU's rev limiter. (The *ONLY* change
was the substitution of the Schrick cam onto the S4-turbo-equipped new
ported-and-polished head'ed engine. The difference was night and day!)
So, not to mince words, the stock cam is a piece of shit, and should
never have been made, let alone actually shipped with the car. The
Schrick cam is emminently worth the money, and contrary to other
opinions, I think it is in fact one of the better bang-per-buck deals
you can do for the 5-cyl engine. In fact, I opine that turbo mods
($800 ECU mods, whatever) are kinda, well, not "pointless", but cer-
tainly "silly" with the stock cam, considering how much the Schrick cam
opens up the rev range of the engine.
Enough soapbox for one day . . .