Old Library

>I posted this cal for help to the list about 3 days ago but go a limited
>response. So since I am not one to get discouraged I am posting this again.
>I would like to get overall impressions of the Schrick 268 cam and/or the
>270 ABT cam.  I am looking for information on experiences on passing a smog
>test with either one on these cams, drivability, and actual power increase
>( seat of the pants impression ).  

Hey Myron,

I passed the sniff test last week with my Schrick manifold, Schrick 268
cams, p-chip, Neuspeed t-body and Scorpion exhaust.  The technican was
puzzled when he saw the word "Schrick" engraved on my manifold.  He asked
me if it was a VW engine.  I said "yes".

I can't comment on the drivability and actual power increase of the cams
since I put the manifold & the cams on at the same time.  But with my
combo, the drivability has actually been improved, especially between 3-4k
band.  There's no loss below 3k either.  The 5-7k band is also very strong.
 It eliminated the "running out of breath" feeling that I had before.
Actual hp & torque numbers can be found on my website
(http://lonestar.texas.net/~kenneth).

IMPORTANT:  Don't forget to get a big bore t-body if u're getting the
manifold and the cams.  I found minimal power increase when I ran the
Schricks with the stock t-body.  When I switched to the Neuspeed t-body,
the difference was black and white.


Later,
Kenneth
 

It was my understanding that the 268s were a little rough at idle and at 
low RPMs and that's what made the 260s superior. Why they aren't 
available anymore, I don't know. I'm sure you can find one used... Abe?

scott

>Speaking of the cams...
>
>Wasn't it common about a year ago that the consensus was that 260 cams
>were superior to the 268's?  The Europ. car article I have (borrowed)
>for the cam swap stated that up top they were equal, while down low the
>260 was superior.
>
>What's the deal with that?  I've heard they don;t really sell 260's
>anymore!
>
>Could someone please tell me what happened to the cam issue?  Was Euro.
>car wrong?
>
>I just want to be sure before I pay huge $$$ for a cam upgrade.
>
>Thanks in advance!
>
>-Dave

Dave A. wrote:
> 
> > previous post!!  I think the HP rating for those 2 kits is in the 240 - 260
> > range which is where I'm at now.  The difference between the 3 litre
> > upgrades and the 268 cams is that the 268 cams produce the HP at 0 MPH
> 
> Speaking of the cams...
> 
> Wasn't it common about a year ago that the consensus was that 260 cams
> [...]
> Thanks in advance!
> 
> -Dave

Dave,

I've recently been told by Ron Johnson of Denon Parts (used to be Ron's
Parts) that Schrick has discontinued the manufacture of the 260 cams. 
In a couple of months, at the latest, Schrick will export their
successor to the 260 cams dubbed the Schrick 264/260, as such it will an
assymetrical design.  From tuners that I have spoken to the cam of
choice at the moment are the Schrick 268 cams.  There have been some
instances, particularly on early 1996 OBD II VR6's, which are
occassionally prone to lighting up the check engine light due to their
extreme sensitivity.  From what I hear this is a self-correcting issue
where it will be disregarded in a specified period of time if another
fault isn't detected.  On later 1996 and up VR6's the sensitivity of OBD
II seems to have been toned down a bit.    Garrett, who has of late been
tweeking VR6 chips with and without Schrick 268 cams has succeeded in
boosting performance down low as well as decreasing the probability of
tripping off the check engine light.  

Hope this helps,

David Kim
1997 Vento GLX

<<Date: Wed, 28 Jan 1998 16:27:12 -0800
From: "Dave A." &lt;&#115;asakikojiro&#64;earthlink<img src=/i/dn.gif border=0 width=35 height=15>&gt;
Subject: Re: [vr6] vr6 (Vr6 power)

> I've recently been told by Ron Johnson of Denon Parts (used to be Ron's
> Parts) that Schrick has discontinued the manufacture of the 260 cams.
> In a couple of months, at the latest, Schrick will export their
> successor to the 260 cams dubbed the Schrick 264/260, as such it will 
Hrmmm.. does this have the true best of both worlds!?!?!  Maybe I'll
have to wait for those!
I heard asymmetrical cams, when built right, are the way to go.

> choice at the moment are the Schrick 268 cams.  There have been some
> instances, particularly on early 1996 OBD II VR6's, which are
> occassionally prone to lighting up the check engine light due to their
> extreme sensitivity.  From what I hear this is a self-correcting issue

Luckily, I have a '95, Pre-OBD II car, so I don't have to worry about
weird check-engine lights flashing, unless soemthing REALLY goes wrong!

Scott Catlin's idea about the smoothness of the 260's idle is also
probably correct, though the EC article really claims solidly that the
260's outperform the 268's cold.  They DIDN'T show dyno comparisons btw
the two-  jsut between stock cams and the 260's-  I think they gained
like 7-9hp up top, but also gained all along the curve.

Thanks!

- -Dave>>

Hey Dave,
As one who has run both the 260 and 268 profile cams, perhaps I can offer some
insight.
At first I ordered a set of Schrick 268s for my 93 SLC about a year back.  I
installed them and ran them for a month or so and decided they had too many
downsides for my taste.  At the time I was running an Autotech chip.
Downsides were throttle lag at lower rpms and somewhat rough idle (though
nowhere near lumpy).  They had a powerband that constantly required you to rev
it out to enjoy them, which can be tiresome as a daily driver.
I then ordered a set of Schrick 260 copies from Tectonics Tuning.  These cams
were reground on factory billets and featured the same specs as the
discontinued Schrick cams.  Powerband became more linear, idle was factory
smooth, yet they did not pull to redline as strongly as the 268s.  There was,
however, significantly more power above 3500 rpms as compared to stock.
Drivability was somewhat consistent regardless of the software (chip) that was
coupled with the cams (Autotech, TT, Garrett).
We work closely with Garrett, and a few months back he forwarded us a copy of
his latest chip designed to work specifically with the 268s.  He addressed the
problems other chip tuners kept repeating that resulted in poor low rpm
throttle response and rough idle.  I reinstalled the 268s and did a back to
back test with the Autotech chip to reaquaint myself with both chip
characteristics.  Truly, Garrett's chip (with actually less agressive mid
range timing and fueling maps) made the 268s a very drivable cam choice.  All
hints of low rpm misbehavior vanished and idle became very close to stock.
There are others on the list than can confirm this.  Since this discovery, we
have changed our policy of recommending the 260s to pushing the 268s.  They
are, when coupled with Garrett's chip, a very worthwhile VR6 mod.  Search the
archives for a more complete description of the cams' behavior ("268s and the
G-chip").
Since then I have added a worked Schrick VG intake, which has blown another
VR6 myth away in my case.  This mod, contrary to popular belief, is worth
every penny.  A more complete review will be forthcoming.

Todd
Air & Water
VW Tuning
Philadelphia

 Hey all, got back from the Mid Atlantic Dyno Day earlier this afternoon and
I gotta say it was a blast! About 14 guys showed up with a good mix of A1,
A2, and A3 cars. Only a couple from the GTI VR6 list though... where are all
of you?? This is the best deal ever, we ran for $30-$40 a piece and most of
us pulled twice. Anyway I went to see what kind of power Schrick 268's make
and heres how it went. My first run in November 97 was 163.7hp @5700 &
165.5lbft @ 4200 with Neuspeed chip, Autotech exhaust, ported throttle body,
RamAir panel filter in a heavily modded airbox. The run today netted 172.1hp
@5850 & 166.7lbft @ 4300 with Garrett 268 chip, and Schrick 268' cams. These
figures are at the wheels on a Dynojet 248C dynomometer. We also did a coast
down measurement which showed driveline losses to be in the 16-17% range.
Add that to my numbers and you've got 200hp!! BTW I also tried a AMS 268
chip and the numbers were one hp higher, not enough to be conclusive, the
dyno operator said that engine temp could have the same effect. The results
show that NO WHERE, I repeat NO WHERE did I lose any power or tourque. From
2000rpm on the 268 make more hp and torque until the 7300rpm cutoff. So all
you guys out there worried about losing torque and low end power quit crying
and start buying!! Schrick 268 cams rule, dont let someone sell you less
than a 268 cause you are giving up free horsepower. People may feel like
they lost low end but that is just because it pulls so much harder on the
top end. Concerning the valve springs, the stock ones may work but for $60
why chance ruining your motor, I have the deisel inners in and did the
install myself. Its a tedious job but now when I'm running above 7000rpm I
have nothing to worry about besides those blue lights. So the final word is
the 268 combined with the G chip is a no-lose upgrade you heard it straight
from the source, did I mention its fast! hehehehe;->

Jason Whipple
turn2
&#106;awkjn&#64;cstone<img src=/i/dn.gif border=0 width=35 height=15>

> Date: Fri, 20 Feb 1998 15:48:05 EST 

> I just don't see the point, though, since Garrett
> has eliminated all the negatives previously associated with the 268s.  They
> are the same price as the 268s.  The 264/260s have less duration and lift than
> the 268s, and since the 268s are certainly not "too much" of a cam for the
> VR6, the 264/260s are only doomed to making less power.  I could see these as
> a suitable choice if the 268s performed as they do with other people's
> software, but once again, Garrett has eliminated all throttle lag and idle
> problems, making the 268s a wonderfully friendly cam to drive everyday.  Idle
> is factory smooth and power band is very fat with his chip.  Why waste your
> money on a cam that makes less power with no other advantages?  If someone
> feels otherwise, please let us know!

Almost everyone that has 268's seems to have the VG manifold as well. 
How are they by themselves, without the manifold?   Do you lose any
torque on the low end or in the midrange?
The price of the cams is not too terrible, far more do-able than the cam
and manifold combination.  In fact, I'd put a set on my wish list if I
*knew* I wouldn't lose low-end using the stock intake plumbing. 

Also, don't the 268's really "want" better valve springs than stock? 
What's that add to the price?  While I'm asking price, what's an
"installed" price for a set of 268's? 

So I'm wondering if these might be the reasons that the 264/260's exist
- -- better low-end and maybe don't need new valve springs?  

- -Uwe->>

The spring issue is a good one, Uwe, yet I do not know if the 264/260 will
"require" springs, too.  The spring issue is touchy, and my understanding is
that a coil bind condition will not occur even with the 268s *unless an over-
rev condition happens*, such as in a mis-shift.  The Techtonics spring set
eliminates one full coil, which translates to about 1.5mm extra clearance at
full lift.  Stock lift is 10mm, the 268s are 11mm (current Schrick 268s).  I
do not know the lift of the 264/260s.  
Since the results of coil bind are quite drastic, I follow the advice of
Techtonics (and trust that they are unbiased, since they have provided me with
valuable and accurate info over the years) and recommend the springs for all
268 customers.  The spring install is a significant part of the work involved
in a VR6 cam swap.  I charge $225 for the total package installed.  Cams alone
would be a charge of $125.
The 268s with Garrett's chip are a great addition even without the Schrick
VGi.  I drove almost a month on the 268s alone before adding the manifold, and
noticed absolutely no low end loss with the G-chip (other chips are another
story!).  They were a quantum leap above the TT 260s I had in there.  


Todd
Air & Water
VW Tuning
Philadelphia

<<I heard last night that there is a set in the country waiting for a donor 
car to be installed.  They were offered to me, but I don't have the funds 
right now.

- -Dave


On Fri, 20 Feb 1998, Brown, Jeff L wrote:

> Anyone heard the "buzz" on these new cams from Shrick for our VR6s.
> Just curious, the assymetrics in the old solid lifter heads offered
> better power, better idle quality, etc, than the other high performance
> cams.  I'm just curious to see if these new onew will do the same in our
> VR6s>>


Dustan from RPI has been begging us to purchase a set of these in order to
have some honest feedback.  I just don't see the point, though, since Garrett
has eliminated all the negatives previously associated with the 268s.  They
are the same price as the 268s.  The 264/260s have less duration and lift than
the 268s, and since the 268s are certainly not "too much" of a cam for the
VR6, the 264/260s are only doomed to making less power.  I could see these as
a suitable choice if the 268s performed as they do with other people's
software, but once again, Garrett has eliminated all throttle lag and idle
problems, making the 268s a wonderfully friendly cam to drive everyday.   Idle
is factory smooth and power band is very fat with his chip.  Why waste your
money on a cam that makes less power with no other advantages?  If someone
feels otherwise, please let us know!

Regards,
Todd
Air & Water
VW Tuning
Philadelphia

The 268's w/ the G-chip is it!! I've got em along with the VG manifold and
love it. I've also run them with the stock manifold and compared that to a
friends car with the 260/264's who also has the g-chip and destroyed him.
However,if anyone is looking for the 260/264's my friend is taking them
out. He has had them in the car for 3 months with the paperwork to prove
it. E-mail privately if interested. A word of warning... I'll try and talk
you out of it.
Dave

been lurking since 96 and felt i should chime in on the cams.

Cams DO make MORE power. my 95 with basic intake/exhaust/chip/2.9t body made 
164 peak wheel horsepower on a warm day. After swapping to shrick 260/264 
cams, tt valve springs and heavier motor oil, my car made an additional 9 
peak horsepower at the wheels. There was no loss in torque down low and this 
was with a "crappy" p-chip. This was over three years ago and there have been 
no real issues since.

now, three weeks ago i swapped to the CAT 268 cams from trac racing. couldn't 
afford to swap in a set of schrick 268 and the CAT cams were fresh billets 
that duplicated the schrick durations for $375. much more affordable no? The 
car now has more high end power compared to the original schricks i put in. 
the dyno will have to wait till i have another $85. mid range feels fine. low 
end 1000-3000 rpm feel a tiny bit softer. idle is definitely shittier. A 
Garrett chip would fix the idle but the chip does not work well with my 2.9 
throttle body.

Install was straightforward and takes less than a day(8-10hrs). Remember, 
many "mechanics" who you pay don't have any vr6 experience. Often times they 
do more harm than good. The cams are DEFINITELY worth it to me. I drag race 
on the street against anything willing to run. I participate in any kind of 
hooliganism i can find locally. I do drivers events 2-3 times a year and the 
car feels great. The cams do suck up some fuel though. Just needed to let 
those wondering about whether the cams work that yes, they do. Mk3 guys might 
want to run the shrick 260/264 as they are great all around. the Mk4 guys the 
268s might work better since you already have the cool manifold.

bottom line. cams do make more power. enough to justify spending $375 for a 
set NEW. any questions?

edmund

Hi Edmund -

I don't deny that cams make more power; I just never saw the increase with
the 268s.  Perhaps the difference is that my car is OBD-II?  In my
semi-educated opinion 256 or 250/264 are a better choice for a car without
head work (at least according to my OBD-II example).

When I had the 268s in they definitely *felt* faster (since they'd produce
power higher in the powerband than the stock cams) but when I got it on the
dyno I was *extremely* surprised to find that I was wrong.  Check out
http://www.p-vector.com/bob/garage/vw/cams-dyno/10-11-12.gif and compare the
red (stock cams) to the blue (268) graphs.  (BTW the green graph is 268s
with MAF pulled out of the airbox, and exhaust dropped post-cat.  Only 5.4
HP more, which I'd expect to see even with stock cams.)

When you get to do a dyno test of the 268s, I'd be curious to find out how
they rate, and see if your OBD-I car sees better results than my OBD-II car
did.  Hopefully it will.

BTW#1 when your cam install took 8-10 hours, was that the first installation
including swapping valve springs?

BTW#2 If your TT springs are over 3 years old, they are probably from before
TT switched suppliers (due to known quality issues).  If so, you might want
to consider replacing them before you get a broken valve, a holed piston, or
worse.  I know of at least 4 cars (including mine) where a TT HD spring
broke.  (It took about 65k miles on my car, but it did break.)

BTW#3 on my OBD-II car with 268s, the P-chip made as much HP as the 268-spec
G-Chip (within 1HP, definitely within measurement error), so your P-chip may
not be a bad choice to stick with if $$$ are short.

Cheers,
- Bob T.

Oops! wrong graph!  Here's the one with stock(blue), and 268s(red) (and open
intake/exhaust in green).

http://www.p-vector.com/bob/garage/vw/cams-dyno/2-10-12.gif

- b

>From what I have heard/read/seen, 268's are worth it to some people if
you also have a decent amount of money for a Schrick intake manifold
and appropriate GIAC software.  Then, IIRC, you get a big lump of
extra torque in the middle, and more peak hp.

For comparison, Uwe's old car (Josh's new old car) :-)  has this combo
with a TT 2.5" exhaust.  On AWE's dyno, his car made 1-2 lb*ft. more
than my Mk4 VR6, but about +10-15hp (or something like that) extra
on the top end.  My car has the "regular" mods (chip & exhaust).

If I had to make a choice, I'd pick the 264/260 combo because I rarely
rev my engine past 5500.  IMHO, high-rpms are for racing on the track.

-Jason

Another note on the Schrick manifold/268 combo . . . I have also
heard that you sort of have two peaks in the power curve.  One in the
midrange . . . then it kinda flattens out . . . then all of a sudden
you have all this top-end power.

Josh -- do you have Uwe's old dyno plot, by any chance?  I sent him
an e-mail b/c I wanted to take a look at if for myself.

-Jason

Cool beans.  :)

For comparison, here are two links to my dyno plots:

1) Before & (a couple months) after my TT 2.5" exhaust install.
Before/after are both with GIAC, Eurosport intake, and heavy-ass (26#) OZ wheels.  :)
http://mywebpages.comcast.net/jstrauss/images/dyno.jpg

2) UPsolute chip, same heavy-ass OZ's, K&N/airbox, TT exhaust.
http://mywebpages.comcast.net/jstrauss/images/upsolute_dyno.jpg

Looks like Josh has roughly 12 hp and 2 lb*ft on me.  ;-)  Now that
I've got some nifty SSR Comps (13.5# each), my car feels like it
accelerates faster, not to mention the suspension feels much better,
too.

-Jason