VW/Audi 07K (2.5L 20V I5) Swap Thread
09-06-2020, 01:02 PM
#2251
09-06-2020, 01:03 PM
#2252
If you run boost by rpm, to make that 350 tq from 3000 rpm and up, i see no problems
09-06-2020, 01:18 PM
#2253
I would go bigger in your case. We are limited by stock internals on ours. You won’t have that issue and will be able to utilize the additional flow, especially if you throw cams in.
09-06-2020, 03:25 PM
#2254
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
Probably cams more than turbo, but could be a bit of both.
07k with stock cams and HTA3582R with 0.82 housing at 17.5psi has similar power levels to the dynojet (with a little later spool of course) and also has the torque starting to roll off at 6k rpms.
And then with the boost turned up even more the restriction is much more apparent.
07k with stock cams and HTA3582R with 0.82 housing at 17.5psi has similar power levels to the dynojet (with a little later spool of course) and also has the torque starting to roll off at 6k rpms.
And then with the boost turned up even more the restriction is much more apparent.
Last edited by alxdgr8; 09-06-2020 at 03:27 PM.
09-06-2020, 04:03 PM
#2255
Probably cams more than turbo, but could be a bit of both.
07k with stock cams and HTA3582R with 0.82 housing at 17.5psi has similar power levels to the dynojet (with a little later spool of course) and also has the torque starting to roll off at 6k rpms.
And then with the boost turned up even more the restriction is much more apparent.
07k with stock cams and HTA3582R with 0.82 housing at 17.5psi has similar power levels to the dynojet (with a little later spool of course) and also has the torque starting to roll off at 6k rpms.
And then with the boost turned up even more the restriction is much more apparent.
09-07-2020, 12:04 AM
#2257
Team Owner
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: one thousand, five hundred miles north of Ft. Lauderdale for the summer.
Posts: 28,705
Received 212 Likes
on
153 Posts
Honestly the G25-660 is a monster. The car has no business being any faster than it already is. We are waiting for some feedback from Garrett, and potentially TTRS cams could help. Transaxle is fine here but it might not be happy with a G30-660. Unless you are planning on a whole lot of tire and potentially aero i wouldn’t hesitate getting a G25-660, just make sure you go .92 housing.
Is that even going to be a noticeable drop in torque?
That dyno sheet is perfect for the street.
separate fuel/ ECU circuits & big wires.
Everything stays cool (now)....
968 LS ECU shutoff/ relay delete.
09-07-2020, 02:03 AM
#2258
Team Owner
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: one thousand, five hundred miles north of Ft. Lauderdale for the summer.
Posts: 28,705
Received 212 Likes
on
153 Posts
Tony G and others have posted numerous times over the years how
at speeds above a certain point, the 944 makes a lot of front lift.
The cars didn't get much wind tunnel testing. The problem wasn't
really addressed until the 968.
i had my 968 at ~163mph before doing front end mods,
and it was was far better at speed compared to my '87 944S.
To say the difference is noticeable is understating it. .
968 aero **** at the end of the clip.....
The following users liked this post:
333pg333 (09-08-2020)
09-10-2020, 01:31 PM
#2259
Probably cams more than turbo, but could be a bit of both.
07k with stock cams and HTA3582R with 0.82 housing at 17.5psi has similar power levels to the dynojet (with a little later spool of course) and also has the torque starting to roll off at 6k rpms.
And then with the boost turned up even more the restriction is much more apparent.
07k with stock cams and HTA3582R with 0.82 housing at 17.5psi has similar power levels to the dynojet (with a little later spool of course) and also has the torque starting to roll off at 6k rpms.
And then with the boost turned up even more the restriction is much more apparent.
09-10-2020, 01:38 PM
#2260
I contacted cat cams a while ago and saw they had 2 cam profiles for the 07k to suit this application. There is a milder one (part number 7604003) specs (262/259 - 215/211 -11.25mm/10.25mm -0.05mm/0.65mm) if I remember correctly this one was designed for 3000-7000rpm this one should be a drop in fit without needing to machine the cylinders to use vvt. The second one part number 7604004 has a power band designed to be from 4000 to 8000 rpm (specs 270/263 - 223/215 -11.75mm/11.0mm -0.1mm/0.8mm) I was warned that this cam might require machining the pistons up to 3mm for the intake and 1mm for the exhaust. I can't confirm this though because both these cams were designed with the 4cyl fsi engine and the 07k head only. There is no data for the actual valve clearance on either unless someone has dimensions of the stock cam. The cams cost 1295 usd for the cam and 660usd for springs and retainers from iabed
09-10-2020, 02:27 PM
#2261
If you want to use full VVT range then 7604003 (what I'm buying) needs to have 1.52mm cut from the pistons at the intake valves and 7604004 would need even more cut out. Jan at Cat Cams told me with 25psi of boost 7604001 would make 500hp at the crank.
Craig
Craig
09-10-2020, 02:35 PM
#2262
You should make WAY more than that. We were 535 crank on 20 psi with stock cams, assuming a 15% drivetrain loss on the dynojet.
09-10-2020, 02:53 PM
#2263
Agreed! I'm curious how much cam it takes to get 340 foot pounds efficiently at 7800-8000 rpm. That would be nuts lol. I can't even imagine how fast the car already is being that light!
09-10-2020, 02:56 PM
#2264
09-10-2020, 04:16 PM
#2265