bore vs stroke

[Bewitched666]

Wow,this is deep.
Now you guys got me confused 69 c/w crank with 94 or 76 with 90.5,hahaha

[louisb]

Wow,this is deep.
Now you guys got me confused 69 c/w crank with 94 or 76 with 90.5,hahaha

Unless you just into oddball engines like Zach and I are, then if your going to stroke it go 78 or larger. Build the biggest engine you can afford. The 69 x 94 would be a good engine if you can't afford a stroker or already have a 69 c/w crank. Then you can step up later to a stroker crank and have a 2165 (78 stroke) or a 2278 (82 stroke).

Switching gears, did anyone else read the article in the new Ultra VWs about the garnnet split originally built by Mike Gagen? Engine specs:
82 X 94
w120 /1.25
44 X 35 heads
5.352 Rods
1 3/4 header
8:1 compression
Stock geared tranny

Best time of 13.2

That sounds like a really nice setup engine for the street. I would probably bump the compression up a little and go with slightly smaller heads 43 X 35. Though that short rod probably helps with the 44 intakes.

--louis

[The Ideaman]

I was part of the initial bunch of folks who were involved with Mike on the buildup.  Got him the crank back in 2001.  Under the red paint is some ups brown.  Have a pic of it somewhere in one of these discs.  Sure do miss that guy sometimes.  He's now playing with roadracing Porsches.

[Zach Gomulka]

hey mail me some more info on that engine if you will; i have a 1641 and it only runs 17. 56 so there is room for improvement! 

Thats pretty much it. Its simple and it gets the job done. A couple things I forgot... tall CB "Big Beef" manifolds, and an 010. I would put a 4.12, 3.78, 1.26, .89 trans behind it on 205/70's. Keep the car as light as possible!
When my car ran the 14.87, it was very light (1630lb with me, race weight), and it had 1.48 3rd, 1.04 4th. I think with more seat time I could have whittled that down to mid 14's, my 60' times were horrible! But I still drove it everywhere, it was my only car. I have no doubts that the combo I listed above would still get into the mid to low 15's, and be a much more comfortable car to drive with stock gears and a few more pounds of insulation.

[Zach Gomulka]

The middle ground. More expensive since I don't have IDAs. Still a reasonable engine to build. This is right out of the HVW engine book. Maybe 14s with this engine?
78 x 90.5 or 94
w125 (Actually probably a web 110)
40 x 35 heads
IDAs
140/150ish hp
1 1/2 header
stock geared tranny w/ welded 3rd & 4rth

This doesnt sound like a bad motor, but might as well go for the 94s. And if you go 94's, take advantage of the big bore and use some 42x37.5 heads with a 1 5/8" header. There is nothing wrong with the 125 cam, but I think the big motor would benifit from more lift. You could use 1.25 rockers, or go the FK8 route with 1.4s. Its much gentler on your lifter bores. Or the FK45... its a rampy cam, but that helps it make fantastic torque. Just get your lifter bores bushed! Sorry for keeping it all Engle, its what I know! I think that combo would be good for over 150hp, and get you into the low 13's in 3 gears on radials.

[Zach Gomulka]

I just hate the idea of being locked into a head porter. 

Then Steve Tims is your man. Fast turn around, great heads, and affordable too. His heads are on my friends 1915 that runs 13.8's, in 3 gears, pump gas, radials...

[JS]

The middle ground. More expensive since I don't have IDAs. Still a reasonable engine to build. This is right out of the HVW engine book. Maybe 14s with this engine?
78 x 90.5 or 94
w125 (Actually probably a web 110)
40 x 35 heads
IDAs
140/150ish hp
1 1/2 header
stock geared tranny w/ welded 3rd & 4rth

This doesnt sound like a bad motor, but might as well go for the 94s. And if you go 94's, take advantage of the big bore and use some 42x37.5 heads with a 1 5/8" header. There is nothing wrong with the 125 cam, but I think the big motor would benifit from more lift. You could use 1.25 rockers, or go the FK8 route with 1.4s. Its much gentler on your lifter bores. Or the FK45... its a rampy cam, but that helps it make fantastic torque. Just get your lifter bores bushed! Sorry for keeping it all Engle, its what I know! I think that combo would be good for over 150hp, and get you into the low 13's in 3 gears on radials.

My engine 82x94, ida´s, fk8, 1,4rockers, original unported 40x35 heads, 1 5/8 header made 154hp@5400rpm w/o cooling. Best time 13,6/159kmt.
I´m exited to see what results i will get next summer with head porting, 44mm inlet valve and match ported intakes.

[Rune]

My engine 82x94, ida´s, fk8, 1,4rockers, original unported 40x35 heads, 1 5/8 header made 154hp@5400rpm w/o cooling. Best time 13,6/159kmt.
I´m exited to see what results i will get next summer with head porting, 44mm inlet valve and match ported intakes.
[/quote]

Who is doing the heads for you Johnny? Have you gotten the car through the tech inspection yet btw?? Sorry for the off topic...

[louisb]

Sorry for the off topic...

This thread has a topic? 

--louis

[louisb]

I just hate the idea of being locked into a head porter. 

Then Steve Tims is your man. Fast turn around, great heads, and affordable too. His heads are on my friends 1915 that runs 13.8's, in 3 gears, pump gas, radials...

I have looked at his stage 2 heads. (The sig heads are a little out of my price range.) The other option are a set of DRD's L6+ heads. Looks like a good head for the price. I will probably end up with something between the 2nd and last engine. 82 x 94 w/ a smaller cam than the 86c. I will have to look at the FK line. I don't know to much about them. Hopefully I will be able to start getting the parts together right after the first of the year.

--louis

[Bill Schwimmer]

Just like my 2275 was the prototype for the modern Cal Look/ Hot Rod VW motor when i built it 15 yrs ago... J

Not only is your motor the prototype for most of the modern Cal Look / Hot Rod VW motors, but your car is pretty much the prototype for the current trend in Cal -look style with stock trim, brms & 48s. Mason's black car would be the other car I would credit with kicking off this movement that has sort of culminated in the DRKC cars of today. I am curious what you would build today if you were starting off with a blank sheet of paper.

--louis       
   If I were to do another car, I would'nt mind a early vert or a ghia vert or hardtop. Paint & polish Fuchs, stock ratio 4 speed IRS and a BIG motor that I could drive anywhere. No more expensive tranny parts  ie swing axle LSD's ,5 speed r/p's  or fragile mag wheels that I have to polish alll the time. Maybe I am just getting old.   Bill

[pupjoint]

i agree with bill. these 94 bore is small. any idea or info on jeff and steve´s 3 litre monsters?? hope they are not confidential.

how much to put in a motor like 3 litre??

[Steve D.]

So before rumors start flying, here's the beans.  I don't have a 3-liter, it's not even a 2.8- but it is darn close.

86mm crank by my man Jose at DPR (2" chevy/buick journal)
101.6mm P&C (4" for Yanks like me)
             =2789cc      =170ci
CB h-beam rods 5.5"
FK45
9.7cr
Angle-Flo heads
1 3/4" -> 1 7/8" -> 2" step header because the flanges I had were only 1 3/4, otherwise I would have just gone straight 2"
Header was hand built by me for better or worse.
2 1/2" flange
3" Walker Dynomax Superturbo muffler (actually really quiet)
48IDA's w/ borrowed 45mm venturis (thanks John!)
Bugpack 10mm headstuds
old Scat 1.4's
blah
blah
blah
chrome pully bolt

What else do you want to know?  Like I said, the car drives super boring and mellow until you drop the hammer- then it just pulls and pulls.  I don't know how much it cost to build because I don't really care, however I did write down everything in a little black book and will add it up someday- but not today.

Realistically there are 3 hurdles to build one of these:
CASE- Wasserboxer or Bugpack/CB aluminum (both have pros and cons but that's more of Jeff's territory)
PISTONS/CYLINDERS- they aren't your mama's 190$ Mahle's, but when you compare the price of 94mm Wiseco's and a set of long barrells, it's not all that much more for a hell of a displacement upgrade- especially considering the 4" stuff I got from VeeDub Parts Unlimited in Huntington Beach, CA came with really nice finned long barrells and Venolias (i.e. quality sh1t)
HEADS- so once you clap your barrells on your 2.7/2.8/2.9/3.0/3.1 you really haven't spent all that much more than you would a quality 2332/2387.  The catch is, do you really want to put a 200hp set of heads on it, or do you really want this thing to romp.  There are a lot of really talented cylinder head guys that can help you decide on what casting to use, punch out the bore, move the stud holes, and make some serious HP.  Personally, I went with Jeff Denham for my cylinder heads and I couldn't be happier.  Whichever direction you go, you are going to need a set of heads that are going to move some CFM, unfortunately that's usually where the $$$ start to burn when you build a healthy motor.

Hmm, maybe during the winter I'll drop the thing out of the car and do a cam change and add some snap to the compression- or maybe I'll just keep driving the wheels off it month after month... yeah, I like that plan better. 

[louisb]

Sounds like a really nice engine. Other than the P&Cs & heads sounds like a fairly normal two liter. I bet the heads and all the mods would set you back a pretty penny though. But after reading up on it a little more I age with Bill S., this will be the next step. How do you like that FK-45 for the street?

--louis

[Bill Schwimmer]

I forgot about the chrome pulley bolt...

[louisb]

Finally found the Desert Dyno post.


Naturally Aspirated Class
Sponsored By: SO CAL IMPORTS
Steve Dalton - Garden Grove, CA - 69 Beetle --198 hp / 188 torque


Holy cow, look at that torque number. I would like to see the full dyno readout on that. Where did it start to make torque? where did it drop off? And the FK-45 seems a bit small for that engine too. I wonder what it would do with a larger cam. Those kind of torque numbers you wouldn't really need a five speed to keep it in the power band. Bet it would pull stock gears nicely. That thing is a beast.

--louis

[Steve D.]

Other than the P&Cs & heads sounds like a fairly normal two liter.  How do you like that FK-45 for the street?

Funny you should mention that, my now retired 2276 was almost exactly that:

82mm vw journal crank by DPR
FK45
9.5cr
94mm Mahle p&c
Steve Timms 42x37 non-welded heads
1 3/4 exhaust

I rolled over 50 thousand miles in the 4 and change years I had the motor in my car and I drove it EVERYWHERE!  It was my first 2-liter and it will always have a place in my heart.  It even made 186hp with 44idf's with muffler/no belt at the flywheel on pump gas.  I stuck with the 45 because it just drove really nice.  It didn't buck and fart down low and pulled hard from 3500 up to whatever.  Now in the new motor it pulls as hard below 3500rpm as the 2276 did at full steam, and once it hits 3500 it comes on like a madman.

[Steve D.]

Part 2

Finally found the Desert Dyno post.


Naturally Aspirated Class
Sponsored By: SO CAL IMPORTS
Steve Dalton - Garden Grove, CA - 69 Beetle --198 hp / 188 torque

Holy cow, look at that torque number. I would like to see the full dyno readout on that. Where did it start to make torque? where did it drop off? And the FK-45 seems a bit small for that engine too.

It made more.  I went down on the mains and put it back on the rollers and it put down 204.60 HP and 189.01 TQ- all on pump gas, with REAL muffler, fanbelt on, at Vegas altitude.  I have the graph here but no way to post it that I know of, however, it made peak HP at 6,000rpm and peak TQ at 4,500rpm.  The silly thing was making over 150 ft/lbs of torque at 2,500rpm.

As for the cam, it really was a complete guess.  It drives really nice and pulls my stock geared box just fine.  And the best part, it's not a beast at all- just a lame pump gas motor with a peanut cam and stock IDA's.

[louisb]

Part 2

Finally found the Desert Dyno post.


Naturally Aspirated Class
Sponsored By: SO CAL IMPORTS
Steve Dalton - Garden Grove, CA - 69 Beetle --198 hp / 188 torque

Holy cow, look at that torque number. I would like to see the full dyno readout on that. Where did it start to make torque? where did it drop off? And the FK-45 seems a bit small for that engine too.

It made more.  I went down on the mains and put it back on the rollers and it put down 204.60 HP and 189.01 TQ- all on pump gas, with REAL muffler, fanbelt on, at Vegas altitude.  I have the graph here but no way to post it that I know of, however, it made peak HP at 6,000rpm and peak TQ at 4,500rpm.  The silly thing was making over 150 ft/lbs of torque at 2,500rpm.

As for the cam, it really was a complete guess.  It drives really nice and pulls my stock geared box just fine.  And the best part, it's not a beast at all- just a lame pump gas motor with a peanut cam and stock IDA's.

I didn't mean a beast to drive. I just meant those numbers are crazy. It sounds like a really cool motor. I doubt it is in my price range but I may check into it some more.

Thanks,

--louis

[Roman]

4" motors are the future. It is't hard to build either. I built mine in two weeks spare time and I am not any pro engine builder.
If CB made some minor changes to the case and heads it would't be much more expensive than a 2276.
I have more compression, cam and carbs so it is more on the hi perf side, but still fully streetable and on pump gas. It made 286 hp, just over 100 hp per litre.

[Bewitched666]

So Louisb stroker cranks like 74 and 76mm are not recommended?

If not really why?

[Diederick/DVK]

i think there are 2 general arguments against:
- it's more difficult to attain the desired deck height.
- you might as well go bigger.

[The Ideaman]

Turbos? Bahhh. IMO, the VW engine is reaching its peak in evolution. Think about it, its design dates back to the 1930's and its been hot rodded (first by Porsche) since the late '40s. Its been tweaked and tuned for almost 60 years! There isnt much left to do that already hasnt been done. I dont mean to piss on your campfire, but thats just the way I see it. I dont think that many of us are here because we want the latest and greatest in technology
I think there is more power to be found in valvesprings, cam design, and heads... Multiple valves per cylinder.

I disagree with the thought about end of evolution.  4 inch bores, roller cams, and beehives are all fairly new develpments for street engines.  That being said,  i really want more info on building a 4" bore motor.  Must it be done with Comp eliminators or angle flows?  I wonder if it could be done with 044's?  I don't care about power at 7k, but torque is what moves a street car.  Sounds like Jeff D is the man to talk with about such a build.

[louisb]

So Louisb stroker cranks like 74 and 76mm are not recommended?

If not really why?

There is nothing wrong with them. Just for the same price you can get a 78, 82, 84. There is also the thought that later, when you want something else, it will be easier to sell a 78+ than a 74 or 76 since that is what is in demand these days. The only reasons to use a smaller crank are, you already have one, you can get one for a killer deal, your building some sort of period engine, you just want one for whatever reason.

--louis

[louisb]

Turbos? Bahhh. IMO, the VW engine is reaching its peak in evolution. Think about it, its design dates back to the 1930's and its been hot rodded (first by Porsche) since the late '40s. Its been tweaked and tuned for almost 60 years! There isnt much left to do that already hasnt been done. I dont mean to piss on your campfire, but thats just the way I see it. I dont think that many of us are here because we want the latest and greatest in technology
I think there is more power to be found in valvesprings, cam design, and heads... Multiple valves per cylinder.

I disagree with the thought about end of evolution.  4 inch bores, roller cams, and beehives are all fairly new develpments for street engines.  That being said,  i really want more info on building a 4" bore motor.  Must it be done with Comp eliminators or angle flows?  I wonder if it could be done with 044's?  I don't care about power at 7k, but torque is what moves a street car.  Sounds like Jeff D is the man to talk with about such a build.

I was looking at the heads last night. I think a set of CEs of SFs would work. They already come with 48x40 valves too. Not that I am thinking of building one or anything.  Is Denham on this forum?

--louis

[louisb]

4" motors are the future. It is't hard to build either. I built mine in two weeks spare time and I am not any pro engine builder.
If CB made some minor changes to the case and heads it would't be much more expensive than a 2276.
I have more compression, cam and carbs so it is more on the hi perf side, but still fully streetable and on pump gas. It made 286 hp, just over 100 hp per litre.

Well, post your specs man. Don't be shy. 

--louis

[louisb]

I just had an email from DRD. He can do his level 8 port to a set of CE heads w/ 4 inch bore for $2300 out the door. Not a bad price but a little more than I would want to spend right now. I think for this type of motor to be more common place, some manufacturer will have to step up and produce an off the shelf head with a four inch bore and the correct head stud pattern.

--louis

[Fasterbrit]

I used to run a 82x94 motor with an FK 87, 42x38 valves, 1.4 ratio rockers, 5.4 rods and IDAs with 40 chokes and third progression hole drilled.
The motor made 194 hp on a Stuska dyno at just over 6,500 rpm. The car would sit at 2,000 rpm in top, no bother. Drop the hammer and it would pull like a train when the power came on strong at approx 3,500 rpm.
Having run turbo motors on the street before, this engine almost converted me to the sole path of the IDA/big CC combo. I say nearly, as I still believe the turbo is way forward for real horsepower and drivability. But, hey, you can't preach that on this forum and not expect some flak

[Rune]

4" motors are the future. It is't hard to build either. I built mine in two weeks spare time and I am not any pro engine builder.
If CB made some minor changes to the case and heads it would't be much more expensive than a 2276.
I have more compression, cam and carbs so it is more on the hi perf side, but still fully streetable and on pump gas. It made 286 hp, just over 100 hp per litre.

Well, post your specs man. Don't be shy. 

--louis

http://cal-look.no/lounge/index.php?topic=1250.0

[j-f]

What an interesting post.  I will asked you some advices because I don't know what is the best to do

I'm planning to build after my 1600cc (yes only), a second engine but more exciting 
I've talking with a French specialist about building a 78*90.5 ou 94. My goal is to have an engine that could be driven on the street and have fun on the strip. I hope make time like 14sec. I was planning to use a cam as a 86B with 1.4 or so.

But, after some talks, he advised me to build a 1915cc. According to him It's a better way to have a very strong short block for less money and use this money in better heads.
He gives me  3 choices of cams. A w125, classic and multi purpose. A webcam 86B with 1.4 or a Custom made cam of 295° with 1.4. This one will give more power than a 86B at 3500rpm but less at 6000rpm. Always compromises.... I like the W125 because it is a classic choice, it was designed in 1971!! but, cam with 1.4 will give me a better power band. Exact?

Heads will be 40*35.5 or 42*37 CNC with big beef or CSP manifolds. Carbs are 44IDF. I will run stock gear box with a superdiff. I can have 8*31 or 8*35.

Is it a good combo?