1.8 N/A cams in a 1.8t?

that 225g/s at 10psi is obviously on an F23 isn't it Doug? not a stock ko4-023

Still sounds good though :)
 
Yes, it's on a hybrid turbo. But that's unimportant when you consider the modest airflow levels of this testing. A well-sorted K04 can live in the 225g/s range, so these cams might prove suited to stock hardware.
 
Last edited:
oh I'm not doubting that at all Doug, just thought it was relevant, as many people skim read and might suddenly think ''Oh my god, 225g/s on actuator pressure! Get me some cams!''

You know what people are like! My hybrid flows around 220g/s on actuator, and I'm VERY interested to see your results from all this!
 
Prawn said:
'Oh my god, 225g/s on actuator pressure! Get me some cams!'' ... You know what people are like!
Click to expand...

Hehe. Point taken. I'm just being overcautious about seeming "selly" here. Anyway, I've had a productive week with the camshafts I'd organized for measurement. Ultimately, I believe the naturally aspirated cams you folks have there are the inspiration for a good bit of the aftermarket "performance cam" products available. The similarities between the old profiles and the aftermarket are just too strong. Even the lobe separation angles on performance products hew quite closely to the OEM specs...for NA motors. However, no product really just does what Audi and RennSport did. And that's a grind which has a wide lobe separation for a mild personality, but maximal lobe lift on stock valve train parts. Here's my best approximation of the RennSport approach:

1.8TvsRS4-cam_maps.jpg


Note how the lobe center angle on the bigger cam has been pushed back, allowing its opening to time out identically to that of its turbocharged cousin. But this design isn't limited to the lowly NA motors. The RS4 2.7T also shares these profiles and lobe timings. And that's some pretty fast company.

:idea:


 
I have even more info on how the "N/A" cams fit into the larger 20v & 30v product design portfolio. Recently I came across an interesting analysis of the 30v V6's intake cam options. Here it is:

You are looking at European spec cams only. The US spec cams are totally different. Truths: 1) All VW/Audi 30v V6 Euro gas engines (2.4, 2.7T, 2.
cool.gif
use the same intake cams, which are native to Euro emissions. There is no such thing as "RS4 cams" in terms of exclusivity. They are merely Euro spec intake cams designed for Euro emissions testing. They have more lift than US spec units. 2) All VW/Audi 30v V6 gas engines world wide use the same exhaust cams. 3) The US spec 2.8 intake cams are not the same as Euro spec intake cams. 4) The US spec 2.8 intake cams are not the same as the US spec 2.7T intake cams. 5) Bonus: all the 30v heads use the same valves, there are no "special" valves for the RS4 heads. The exhaust valves are all sodium filled. I don't know who the heck dreamed that RS4 valve story up, but it's BS. 6) Bonus #2: all the valves in the 30v heads are really 1.8T valves.
​

So here in America, what we're really looking for are "European spec" cams. Not naturally-aspirated ones. But it gets confusing when we see that all 1.8T motors -- no matter where sold or the power level -- have "American spec" cams. Why that is, I don't know. But to have the same cam layout as a European 2.7T, then (European) 1.8L parts are the ticket.

Given that understanding, I am testing just such cams. If I want to be sexy with them, I can call them "RS4" type. If I want to be a bit more mundane, I would describe them as "European spec". Same difference. Hopefully, I can extract something, anything, interesting from the experiment.
 
That quote is garbage unfortunately.

2.7T, 2.8 and 2.4 all use different intake cams. The RS4 uses 2.4 intakes.

All 30v V6's DO share the same exhaust cams though.

The stuff about valves is also crap. 2.7T and 1.8T engines do share valves, however they're not the same across all the V6's (or the 1.8's either) the inlets are the same across all variants, but the exhaust valves are different between the 1.8T and 2.7TT and the NA engines. The turbo motors all use 058109611E and the NA motors all use 058109611M. I'd imagine M probably isnt sodium filled.

Only takes about 5minutes with ETKA to see this.
 
I'll include some part numbers for clarity (i'll only include the cams for bank 1/cyls 1-3 for simplicity):

ALF, AGA, AJG, APZ, ARJ, APS Engines (2.4L): 078109021B

ACK, ALG, APR, ATX, AQD, AMX Engines (2.8L): 078109021

AGB, AZB Engines (2.7T): 078109021M

RS4: 078109021B

Exhaust cam is 078109022 on all of the above.
 
slappy_dunbar said:
Let's focus on the intake cams, then. Because that's the central question in the thread. My understanding is that the European-engine 2.4, 2.7T and 2.8 share common part numbers for their cams. Are you saying that's not the case?
Click to expand...

Intake cams for 20v's I hope ;P

<tuffty/>
 
My guess is that the confusion about 30v camshafts is owing to the layout of information in the OEM's published documents. If you look at this thread, you'll see screenshots of the ETKA, and lingering confusion about what goes where.

In your list, the AGB & AZB engine codes are for the European-spec 2.7T engines (or at least that's what Wikipedia says:)

195 kilowatts (265 PS; 261 bhp) @ 5,800 rpm; 400 newton metres (295 lbf·ft) @ 1,850 rpm — Audi B5 S4 (AGB, AZB).

So it'd be interesting to know how the "M" variant intake cam shapes up, but for my purposes, I have what I want: something comparable to what went on the RS4.


 
Your quote says that all euro 30v V6's are the same though...

They're not, and TBH i dont believe theres any difference between a US cam and a Euro cam as far as i can see? What engine code did US S4's get?

What we really could be doing with is a US ETKA installation to tell for sure, however googling those "Euro" cam part numbers finds plenty of US sites selling them....
 
Ooh interesting...

The US S4 seemingly got an APB engine, which is used in europe in the A6/Allroad model in a detuned form...

That APB engine (even in europe) uses a different cam to the AGB Euro S4, ending in P/Q


Anyway, that doesnt change the fact that the RS4 uses a standard 2.4 NA intake cam!
 
so would this be a good mod to do.. as from reading it seems right??

As have a gti n/a in a local scrappy awaiting to have these cams taken...

also would it be both cmas from the n/a??
 
Byzan Pics said:
Doug, You can send it here and I'll send it from here( at your cost) if that helps
Click to expand...

if its any help, I frequently send car parts to the US an find that transglobal express cannot be beaten on price for international shipping of this nature! :)
 
Last edited:
that particular unit sold, unfortunately. but I'd sure like to get my hands on another one when it comes up. However, I'm still fairly convinced that the "Generation 1" cam profile that appeared on the 2.6 motor is likely the best. The follow-on revisions were in response to tightening emissions rules, not demands for more power. So the swan song for that cam combo was the RS4.

And I've tested that cam profile a bit more. With the VVT solenoid properly working, and a new timing belt to boot, I am beginning to see a healthy improvement. Here is a time to speed comparison for the prototype "RS4-style" cam set versus a "Brand-X" aftermarket intake cam:

Mardintdale_cams-actuator_pressure-TTS.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: peterg60
I sure wish I could say I've found a spectacular new modification. But for anyone running a stock turbo, I see no evidence of a benefit. And not just from N/A cams. But from a cammed wide-port head. That's right: stock head, stock cams. Just as good.

small_port_vs_cammed_big_port.jpg


Ugh. So for an airflow capacity anywhere south of 250g/s, this is a dead-end modification. Really disappointed.
 
im soon going to be having large port head and inlet then full stage 2 setup on k04 setup..

I did test it on my friend standard s3 it did seem to go better but no logs but felt alot better lower down pulling off
 
Slappy, ive bought some adr cams and posted a thread about their part numbers, can you check them to see if their ok?
 
If there _NO_ gains to be had, then why did Audi/Cosworth bother on the RS4?

In terms of HP/cyl the RS4 is equivalent to a ~250hp 1.8T, well below the 250g/sec limit that you suggest you need to exceed before these mods make any sense...
 
aragorn said:
If there _NO_ gains to be had, then why did Audi/Cosworth bother on the RS4?

In terms of HP/cyl the RS4 is equivalent to a ~250hp 1.8T, well below the 250g/sec limit that you suggest you need to exceed before these mods make any sense...
Click to expand...

I know. When introduced into the 2.7T, the cam profile we know as the 1.8T spec coincided with a reduced power rating for those 30v engines. You uncovered that fact yourself. The only stone unturned in my research is the exhaust manifold. It might be possible that my test car has yet to be fitted with a proper manifold for testing. But I am working with another tester over here who is running the JBS unit. For cams he's currently got an Autotech teamed to the stock exhaust. I have a set of the "RS4 spec" cams waiting.
 
Maybe the 30v just breathes a bit differently to the 1.8T?

I know the RS4 intake port shape is very different to the 1.8T and other 30v ports for instance.

Or maybe the difference was tiny, but cosworth figured a tiny increase for effectively no cost as they were off the shelf parts then they might as well?
 
lol @ doug :p

I liked this comment on your vortex post, which did'nt repeat on the one above..
He's cobbled together some kind of K04-like object using the turbo out of the Audi 2.0L S3.
Click to expand...

2283 inside on the "cobble" ?
 
Yup. The K04-064 is the basis for the majority of the 1.8T hybrids out there. 2283-series compressor teamed to a 50/45 turbine rotor. But in this example, the entire -064 was somehow fitted. So it's got the manifold and turbine housing of that slightly bigger 2.0L K04.
 
slappy_dunbar said:
Yup. The K04-064 is the basis for the majority of the 1.8T hybrids out there. 2283-series compressor teamed to a 50/45 turbine rotor. But in this example, the entire -064 was somehow fitted. So it's got the manifold and turbine housing of that slightly bigger 2.0L K04.
Click to expand...

blimey that must have taken some work...
 
Raised from the dead.
As I am building the engine and everything is in pieces I thought of this thread. Was there a definitive outcome. Has anyone actually done it. As I am increasing cc and cr ratio and also using a hybrid would the stock intake na exhaust cam work in my setup.
 
IrishDave said:
Raised from the dead.
As I am building the engine and everything is in pieces I thought of this thread. Was there a definitive outcome. Has anyone actually done it. As I am increasing cc and cr ratio and also using a hybrid would the stock intake na exhaust cam work in my setup.
Click to expand...

Yep, me and Prawn have done this and come to the conclusion is largely pointless... I documented mine in my build thread...

<tuffty/>
 
Was there any difference at all. Can get a cam for 40quid and seen as its the ideal time to put one in. Not looking for 20hp gains or anything stupid like that. Maybe even better spool, lower egt, off boost driving etc.
Sorry for being a lazy *** but yours and prawns threads are a bit epic to go searching for the info.
 
tuffty recorded some gains on the dyno, up from 389hp to 408 or something, thats with both cams, but thats a big turbo, and all the gains were up top, sacrificing low-mid range power and torque, so despite the nicer figure, it prob felt a little more gash for everyday driving.
If it offered gains earlier on in the rev range all the way to the top end it would probably be worth it.
 
fitted to mine back in Feb, slight differences in delivery, but in truth not worth the effort.

The dyno showed very small losses low down, and very small gains above 6500rpm. On the road the losses were not noticable, and it did feel a little more free at the very top end, but largely I'd say don't bother.
 
  • Like
Reactions: IrishDave
tested in lupo k03 hybrid ~300bhp level of tune..
lost a little early, sustained its torque a little longer but made no discernible difference otherwise.

not something I would bother with again.
 
  • Like
Reactions: IrishDave
It's been a while since I posted information on this question, and while my findings tend to mirror what the others here are saying, maybe a description of the process is worth the kilobytes.

As I indicated above, I did a bit of testing on cam profiles which I dubbed "Martindales" but which were basically identical to the N/A cams you folks over there have access to. On the good side, we observed a distinct improvement in EGTs, a valuable thing when paired to a small, hottish hybrid turbo. But the power gains -- the sexy -- weren't there. But rather than give up, I gave some thought to a concept expressed earlier in this thread:

beachbuggy said:
The whole point of turbo cams is to have less or even no overlap. N/a on the other hand have more over lap to help with delays in air flow. Surely the only thing an a/n cam would be good for is if as mentioned it had more lift? This would then have to be offset by the loses of the increased overlap. I can't think that extra overlap the n/a would give you would increase performance, valve lift, yes I think that would good. I would say stock turbo cams but with increased lift would be the idea option
Click to expand...


Ok, so overlap might be the thing, rather than simply bigger cams. To test the question, I returned to the Martindales' lobe angles graph, but then tinkered with how the lobe angles would look if the cam were "re-degreed" by 1/2 tooth. That's a big change -- it works out to 17 crank degrees -- but I figured why be timid about changes, right? Here is what the resulting graph looks like:

Martindale-half_tooth_retard.jpg



Obviously that 1/2 tooth of delayed opening pretty much eliminates the overlap. So I was satisfied with the spec. Next step was to send a camshaft out for re-degreeing, which is basically nothing more than pulling off the cog and re-orienting it by that amount. Here are the pix from that process:

Martindale_redegree-1.jpg


Martindale_redegree-2.jpg


Martindale_redegree-3.jpg


Martindale_redegree-5.jpg



So now that we had a re-degreed cam, it was time to drop it into the engine.

The keyway is just to the left -- or retarded -- of its registration mark.

wide_lobe_Martindales_install1.jpg



Here's the messy engine bay of our FrankenTT test car. Note the JBS-style Chinese manifold plumbed for EGTs and backpressures.

wide_lobe_Martindales_install2.jpg



Here, a look in the other direction, where you can see a CatCams adjustable cam gear, also newly installed.

wide_lobe_Martindales_install3.jpg



So with all that done, how does the car run? Firstly, a wide lobe separation angle should net some really great vacuum at idle, yes? Well, no. it was unchanged. So how about performance? EGTs? Also, uninspiring. To be more accurate, they were completely unchanged. Have a looksee at the comparative times to speed:

wide_lobe_vs_Martindales.jpg


Unwilling to give up, I tried experimenting with the adjustable cam gear. First, I tried retarding both cams even more. And the car ran terribly. Then I tried advancing them both by 10 crank degrees, nullifying half of the change made to the intake. Here's what that got me:

wide_lobe_vs_wide_lobe_advanced.jpg



Plus, this new cam angle caused fueling issues, resulting in persistent CELs for lean conditions. All in all, a complete bust.

But...there's a silver lining: while tinkering with the cylinder head, ForceFed Engineering's owner was looking over my back-pressure readings. Seeing numbers in excess of 50psi pre-turbine, he wondered aloud:
"I wonder if all that pressure is causing your valves to float."
"Huh?" I said. "What's valve float"?

​
The answer to that question is an interesting one. And worthy of its own thread, if you ask me. I'll get onto that shortly.
 
  • Like
Reactions: wild willy and <tuffty/>
hey Doug,
missing your updates over on the Vortex, always enjoy your slant on tuning your motor. :yes:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

CabbageGT
Piston Ring Compatibility 1.8 n/a - 1.8t
Replies
0
Views
584
CabbageGT
CabbageGT
AGU-TURBO
1.8t N/A cam's
Replies
17
Views
9K
<tuffty/>
<tuffty/>
A
MPG - 1.8 n/a sport vs 1.8T sport
Replies
14
Views
2K
AndyMac
AndyMac
C
A3 N/a 1.8 HELP
Replies
3
Views
583
Dohcwp
Dohcwp
B
1.8t in a 1.6
Replies
6
Views
1K
jojo
jojo
Top
Back