MK6 2.0 8v Camshaft

[MaxVW]

I'm looking to install a new cam in my mk6 2.0 since i already have it. I don't know much about cam measurements. I just want to make sure I don't loose any tq over stock and gain a bit int the top end

7650210

INTAKE EXHAUST
clearance [cl] 0.00mm 0.00mm
duration [0.1mm+cl] 262° 262°
duration [1.0mm+cl] 231° 231°
valve lift [cl=0] 11.20mm 11.20mm
cam lift - -
peak angle 113° 113°
timing [1.0mm+cl] 3/48° 48/ 3°
lift at TDC [cl=0] 1.35mm 1.35mm


Thoughts?

[911_fan]

WHo is the cam manufacturer? Not aware of anyone making 2.0 262's cam these days.

Also, whats your engine code?
Does it have VVT?
You will need software for a cam.

[911_fan]

Wait...I remember having this conversation with you last fall.

I want to see pics of the cam gear. This 2.0 is a bit different, I think, and Im not sure normal 2.0 cams will mount.

[MaxVW]

no vvt, the cam is made by catcams

the car is wide band controlled I assume with the negligable gains the ecu will add the tiny bit of fuel required

the engine code is CBP


I'll get a pic of the cam gear

[Anony00GT]

These are very new, I haven't seen too many yet, but you're going to need software to take full advantage of any cam. Without it, you're probably more likely to throw a CEL than see a gain with the wideband O2 sensor(s). Does this car have a MAF, or is it a completely wideband controlled mixture?

[911_fan]

Nothing against cat am or anything, but why? They are expensive. Also, you will require a valve spring upgrade, and at that point, why not just get a 270* cam?

This, of course, is if any cam will fit, and if you can find software.


€

[MaxVW]

Me and a friend bought out a vw shops inventory and it was in the mix. So I just sort of ended up with it.

trying to figure it its worth tossing in or not. I thought there were guys running a tt 276 on stock single springs? I know this is dangerously close to coil bind and not a good idea... I thought maybe the 262 would be OK because it has less lift. I think you mentioned a TT260 would be ok?



Anony00GT

this version of the 8v does not have a maf it is map and wide band o2 based. I would be surprised if it threw a CEL from the slightly increased airflow. the systems can trim fueling up to 25%( I know it will throw a cel way before it trims 25%) and with this cam you might see and airflow increase of something like 4%. Given that a map based system I think it will be fine because atmospheric pressure changes drastically from day to day as it does elevation. Even if it does throw a CEL it will still trim the fueling to "Idea" AFR's


here are some pics of the cam gear sorry i didn't have time to completely take the cover off

[MaxVW]

I just called my friend who works at vw and he confirmed that the camshaft is the same for all 2.0 8v's except the ones with vvt. exactly the same as AEG.

[911_fan]

You need to run dual valve springs on cams with lifts above .432".
A .441" lift on that 262 is too much.
the .450" lift on the 276 is waaaaay too much.


€

[Anony00GT]

Do we know that the valvesprings on the new 2.0 are the same as the old BEV? They probably are, but can anyone confirm?

That cam gear does look like all the previous 2.0 engines. I'm surprised, considering BBW (with VVT) was a SULEV engine, I figured that's the one they'd go with. I guess they really wanted to keep costs down to unload these things at Hyundai prices. Talk about moving downmarket. Anyway...

I agree that in theory it should not throw a fault code, although the stock software probably won't give you the gain you'll see with aftermarket software as it's optimized for the factory cam. I'd talk to some tuners before proceeding anyway. I don't think many people have put bigger cams in these engines yet, it's pretty much uncharted territory.

[Hurt]

You need to run dual valve springs on cams with lifts above .432".
A .441" lift on that 262 is too much.


€

Who makes a 262*? I have never heard of one, except for VR6's.

On my second thought - MK6 8vs are being modded already?! I just don't see the point. Get maybe a 260* TT cam or a 260/256 autotech cam so you don't have to change your valve springs (max lift is 432" on obd2 springs), If you want a better cam, you'll need to upgrade valve springs.

If I were you, I would get the autotech 270* cam and HD spring kit. It costs 450 dollars on MJM, comes with lifters (~120 dollars), the cam (~150), springs and retainers (~250). With exhaust, a ECU flash, and an intake. You'll see about 120whp, and it'll increase the drive-ability of the car. It's so heavy, that's the real problem with the MK6. It's about 500 pounds heavier than a MK3/MK4

If you want to upgrade the springs, get a 276* cam. More power than the 270* by a lot. Adjustable cam gear to +4 = more low end without loss of top end.

[MaxVW]

like i said I already own the cam I didn't buy the cam for the car i just happen to have it fall into my hands

the cam is made by catcams

[Glegor]

like i said I already own the cam I didn't buy the cam for the car i just happen to have it fall into my hands

the cam is made by catcams

you either gotta spend the coin on springs to make work what you have.

or you gotta spend the coin on a different cam that will work with your springs..

[MaxVW]

yep looks like it, oh well at least has been figured out that you can actually upgrade the cam anyone want to trade for a tt 260 ?

[vento86]

Why buy a mk6 with an 8v? Enjoy the gas mileage, it will never be fast


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[911_fan]

yep looks like it, oh well at least has been figured out that you can actually upgrade the cam anyone want to trade for a tt 260 ?

New, in-box CatCam = $200
Used 260 = ($100 including shipping charges)

SELL that cam in the forced induction classifieds. It would make a perfect turbo/blower cam. THen you can buy a used cam AND have lots to put towards a spring upgrade.

[MaxVW]

yeah you are right cheaping out never results in anything good.

I know the 8v will never be fast but i would think with a tt270 it would be a decent upgrade.

the mk6 jetta isnt nearly as heavy as the mk5 jetta, it actually weighs less than the mk6 golf by a couple hundred lbs

Lets not turn this into a why didn't you just get the 2.5 thred... someone has to start figuring out what you can and cant do to these engines

[AJmustDIE]

someone has to start figuring out what you can and cant do to these engines

Pioneer status... kinda.

[A1rabbitracer]

Lets not turn this into a why didn't you just get the 2.5 thred... someone has to start figuring out what you can and cant do to these engines

amen. I am doing exactly that. look for some threads soon regarding some research im doing.

Keep it up!

[2.slowduo]

I know quite a few people running 268 or 270 cams on stock springs with no problems
for many miles and years
Just sayin

[911_fan]

I know quite a few people running 268 or 270 cams on stock springs with no problems
for many miles and years
Just sayin

Yea, because if you think .008" of wiggle room is perfectly acceptable, then go for it.
Just sayn.

[Anony00GT]

I know quite a few people running 268 or 270 cams on stock springs with no problems
for many miles and years
Just sayin

OBDI yes. OBDII no.

Every single cam manufacturer specifies that a spring upgrade is required for larger cams. See 911_Fan's link above for an explanation.

[MaxVW]

I just have to ask why exactly do you need "wiggle" room? all of the valve train components are precise. its not like the lobe on the cam will get magically taller. I am no valve train expert here I just can't understand why it matters as long as the springs don't bind at maximum lift there shouldn't be an issue i would think.

the only possible thing I can think of is if the cam lobe some how flings the lifter down to the point where its not touching the cam and even if that happens the coils binding in the spring shouldn't matter because there is nothing pushing the lifter down so nothing should get damaged as the lifter will probably have almost no inertia....

these are just my thoughts please correct me if i am wrong

[911_fan]

No, you misunderstand. There is about .008" left before full coil bind if you ran a .449" lift cam. That is way too close to binding. When you raise the rpms up high, those single springs are not stiff enough to deal with high lift. All that info is in that thread I linked.


€

[MaxVW]

I must be missing something here, If the spring doesn't bind, what is the issue? I know its really really close but as far as I can understand it doesn't matter as long as it doesn't bind. is it because the valve may float a tiny bit upon coming back up from maximum lift? The car has a 6500 rpm redline too so you cant actually exceed that rpm aswell

I'm sorry I'm really not trying to be a PITA I just would like to know why you actually need more space between the coils, as long as they aren't touching I don't see the issue unless you are revving over redline

[AJmustDIE]

It's just a bad practice man, it's been the norm in the crossflow world forever. It's not something you should dabble in IMO, those newer 8v's might be different one way or the other, but I would stick to doing it the right way.

[Anony00GT]

I must be missing something here, If the spring doesn't bind, what is the issue? I know its really really close but as far as I can understand it doesn't matter as long as it doesn't bind. is it because the valve may float a tiny bit upon coming back up from maximum lift? The car has a 6500 rpm redline too so you cant actually exceed that rpm aswell

I'm sorry I'm really not trying to be a PITA I just would like to know why you actually need more space between the coils, as long as they aren't touching I don't see the issue unless you are revving over redline

Are you going to measure your coils to verify? AFAIK, no one has even taken apart a MK6 2.0 to see what springs are in it. They're probably the same as BEV, but why not be sure before proceeding?

Secondly, that 0.008" could very well actually be 0.000 or worse due to manufacturing tolerances. They're ONLY thinking about the stock cam and redline at the factory. If you install a cam, chances are the software that goes with it will increase the redline and move the power curve up.

[MaxVW]

yeah 0.0137 isnt much room for error. I would run it if i could be sure that clearance IS there.