Re: Autotech 16v cams better than Schrick?

["Ian Overholt" <ioverholt@hotmail.com>]

I have trouble believing their claims.  Their data does not show the huge 
gains that they decribe in the text.  The graph shows 5 ft/lbs diff between 
the two cams where they are describing 8 ft/lbs.  Add to that an autox buddy 
who put the Autotech cams in his 2.0 16v caddy did not like the cams one 
bit.  He said they ruined his low end torque and gas mileage.  So I wouldn't 
trust these cams even though Ron Wood claims they are great.

Ian Overholt
'88 16v
'78 Champagne Edition

----Original Message Follows----
From: Scott Williams <sfwilliams@home.com>
To: scirocco list <scirocco-l@scirocco.org>
Subject: Autotech 16v cams better than Schrick?
Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2000 20:17:47 -0500

I'm a very disturbed person all of a suddden, guys. I was perusing some
of Autotech's propaganda and came across their comparison of their own
16v camset verses the Schrick 260s. Here is the pitch:

 > our new Sport 16V camshafts achieve power levels higher than the 
benchmark
 > Schrick 260 with far better low-end torque and drivability. Great idle
 > characteristics with 8 more peak HP and up to 12 more ft.lbs. of torque
 > than the 260's.
 >

I don't know about y'all but thems is fightin' words -especially since
I'm about to plunk down the greenbacks on a set of the Schrick 260s.
Check out the dyno graph:

<http://www.autotech.com/dyno-16Vcam.pdf>

Could this possibly be true? I just can't believe Autotech most of the
time with this kind of thing. Their data says that even the euro 16v cam
beats the Schricks (narrowly) until about 5300 rpms. What gives?

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com


--
Email problems to: scirocco-l-probs@scirocco.org  To unsubscibe send
"unsubscribe scirocco-l" in the message to majordomo@scirocco.org