The Cal-look Lounge

Inspired by the old school cal look engine thread and after seeing the Kris Klingaman thread I felt like starting a own mouse engine discussion. OK, I asked in the other thread if it is possible to reach the 100hp/l limit without having to spend a fortune and I have received info that this is impossible to reach - especially if you want a true street engine.

IS IT?

It`s quite obvious that Kris Klingaman`s engine was a pure race engine with a compression of 14.5:1 but what else did he do so correct to manage to push a close to stock weight car into the 11`s with a 1750ccm engine? This is just as fast and even faster than most 2,3`s out there today.

WHY WAS A GUY FASTER BACK THEN USING A MOUSE ENGINE THAN MOST GUYS ARE TODAY?

With the WWW, info available everywhere and plenty of shops offering high power stuff we should be going faster, agree? Or has all the info/parts available made us loose the ability to "think out of the box". Or is not "thinking out of the box" the answer? Maybe we`re heading in the wrong direction and is building engines that is not as close to their full potential compared to what they built "back then?"

And what makes a engine old school? Bolting on period correct parts? For me a truly old school engine is a engine that has been built the way they did it back then. When know how was important, the parts where hard to come by and creativity was necessary to be a little bit faster than your competitor.

Best rgs
BB

 

WHY WAS A GUY FASTER BACK THEN USING A MOUSE ENGINE THAN MOST GUYS ARE TODAY?[/

What tells you this statement is true and proven?

Watch out for 2008...even before we had 1776cc engines reving to the moon and making at least  180hp AND being reliable ...

I'm sure there will be some other guys chime in on this...

"thinking out of the box" the answer  is INDEED the key to succes  ::)


Regards Steve

Two words: grenade motors! Talking with many of the 'old guys' (like I'm young... ::)), we tend to forget that many of the fast mouse-motored cars had engines which lived on (and frequently exceeded) the limit. Catastrophic engine failures were not uncommon.

Don't underestimate the fact that there are far more 11-second true street cars around today than ever before because engine technology has moved on and parts are so readily available. Yes, we could go even faster by building engines that are on the edge all the time, but who wants to be sweeping up parts and rebuilding broken motors every weekend?

One big reason the old motors did produce a lot of horsepower for their size was down to superior head work. When you didn't have a range if aftermarket heads to choose from, there was no option but to extract the maximum from factory 311 castings. Head porters like Fumio Fukaya and Dean Lowry were capable of such work and today there are others, but few people choose to go down that route any more. Why? It's too easy (and far cheaper) to buy some off the shelf heads from someone like CB that will make good hp. I bet if you paid someone like Fumio (or Jeff Denham) the FULL rate (and don't underestimate the number of hours it takes to do a good job) for doing a set of dynamite 311 heads, you'd be amazed at how much you'd get out of a small motor.

Hi Steve,

What tells you this statement is true and proven?

It was meant as a question but that said I have still not heard or read about a small engine going into the 11`s like Klingaman. Looking at certain lists and our All Time Top Racers list I notice that the smallest engine is Ole Endlers 2110ccm with a 11.5 ET.

It`s indeed interesting to read about the 1776ccm making at least 180hp. This is exactly what I want to discuss in this thread - what has been done SO correct with this engine to make it both powerful and reliable? Questions to you, is it a street engine with cooling and running on pump gas?

Best rgs
BB


 

I'm quite sure we can buy parts today that would have blown the Old Guys brains out when it comes to what RPMs they can withstand, Today we can have lighter pistons with lesser drag, stronger and lighter con-rods and so on and the valve train can be lightened like never before. The only thing I can see being the problem with such a engine today is the KNOWHOW, it's hard to come by.. and its the most important ingredients.  ;) 


This is absolutely true... (I guess, I wasn't around :)) But the litre effect is way down, not to many engines putting out significantly more than 100 horse pr liter. If Klingaman stretched his mouse to 8000 (I don't know), he is in the same rpm segment as many other street/strip racers...


If no one supports these guys, we are actually going back in performance step by step as the know-how is lost.
Cal-look/vw tuning has become a spectator sport it seems, thinking inside the box is the norm, and when you think about it, the California look would not have existed if those early boys just copied what guys had done years before. I bet they also heard their fathers saying "don't waste your money boy!"

"The adventure is outside the box!"  ;)
Thats why I like Monkey Boys intiative with his mouse motor quest

 

The internet killed it,its too easy to just copy someone elses recipe now to get a reliable engine that will run 12s and with a bit of work 11s.The fact that it was all trial and error back then,you only read about the succesfull cars & combos,I am sure that to every 11second mouse motor there were a 100 broken ones :o

There are a few hardy people that I know running 12s with less than 1800cc and driving them to the track and back,always on regular pump gas,no fiberglass panels,real steel cars,so it can be done.But i am sure they will keep the specs to themselves as its takes time & effort to achieve this.


cheers richie,uk

"If your not breaking parts your not trying hard enough"

Another thing that helps is the gear box. Kris Klingaman and Mike Smith both used 4.86 ring and pinions and something like 1.70 3rd and 1.31 4th.

This is absolutely true... (I guess, I wasn't around Smiley) But the litre effect is way down, not to many engines putting out significantly more than 100 horse pr liter. If Klingaman stretched his mouse to 8000 (I don't know), he is in the same rpm segment as many other street/strip racers...
More like 9500 rpm.  4.86x1.31x26" tire at 9500rpm is about 115mph.  These weren't street cars, but highly strung race motors in full weight cars.  I remember A/MC and B/MC cars at englishtown as a kid.
(http://www.turbocreations.com/fj20/philske20corolla/ke20karpathioss1b.jpg)
I know it isn't a VW, but does anybody remember this car competing?

I agree richie....thank you for posting this. Every "hot rod" VW featured in the mags seems to have the "internet motor" recipe...94 x 82 or 94 x 84, FK8, CB CNC heads, 48IDAs, MSD everything...etc.

I remember how "amazed" some naysayers were about a few of the smaller motors I helped out with. SODA's pump gas, stock-valved 1679, 14.70 on radials, full stock weight car, stock gears raised some eyebrows. Motor ran 40IDFs with 32mm vents. Roger's guys @ Heads Up did the stock valve heads, very conservative porting, SS valves, Bryan ran tall CB manifolds. Cam was like Engle 120 with 1.25's. If we would have gone something like 125, and 48IDAs and half a point more compression, I think it would have gone 13's. I helped screw together a 1776 built with mostly used extras that were collecting spiders and dust, old FI case, Engle 125, 1.25 rockers, Fred Simpson 40 x 35 heads, 48IDAs, old 1-3/4 header. Went 13.01 off trailer in lightened '66 with slicks. Same car with 1914, FK10, 42 x 37 welded 10.5:1 went 12.81.

As far as motors today, if guys wanted to build 149 cu in motors (2.3+L) on the ragged edge for the street, built to the same tune level as KK's motor...personally I think you'd need much larger valves to squeeze 100hp+/liter, meaning moving valves in VW heads or going route of aftermarket castings and having them modified accordingly. Big 560cc+ cylinders are going to want a lot more mixture than 440cc cylinders to run 8000rpm and make 100/liter. Or go the way some guys have and put a turbo on. No offense to anybody, but to me some guys bolt turbos on instead of finding a way to get air into motor on its own. Please don't kick me off the Lounge!!! ;D

I think KS is right too. Without going to an experienced expert and settling for some mass produced heads for monkiboys idea of a 88 x 69, you'd most likely fall way short of making the power, especially across the powerband. SODA's motor was completely driveable, even though it would go 7 thou. Sure, it was cammy, and needed to be spun to 4K to get the most out of it, but it was crisp off idle, no flat spots or garbling or coughing. I think most of that had to do with heads and not being overcammed.

I think a "ragged edge" car/motor would be fun, but its limited use ability would turn me off. I'm still of the "sports car motor" ilk. Get in it after a few hours of detailing, turn key, go scare yourself for hours.

What i know is that Klingaman had nitrous on the 1776 engine ! I remember the hot VW's articel , i think so . It was the time when Mike Smith did 11 passes with his red 67 street car and 1776 nitrous engine .

Udo

Mike Smith used N2O while street racing back in the pre sanctioned body days...I remeber someone  (I think Dyno Don) telling about the first time he got down to Nabisco and did beat the heavy hitter V8:s with that stock looking VW.........That was the white car.....and then there was the red car and that was more of a street car (I presume)...........Anyway how can it be that Kris Klingamans car weighted 1770 lbs in race trim and 2020 in street trim....more gasoline?.....It took me years to beat the 12.40 of Chris with my car and it was driven to and back from the track.......true 2020 lbs weight and GUESS WHAT!!! I SHIFTED AT 6500 RPM!!!!! AND WENT THRUE LIGHT UNDER 6K!!! That is what I think is the diffrence between today and yesterday.....The low rpm:s power is made at and the longivty that comes from that!!!!

After looking closer at Klingamans 1751ccm engine it`s clear he did not use nitrous. Having punched the numbers in three different ET/HP calculators they all came up with between 186 and 188hp - cool number from a such a small engine. But with a mandatory tear down after 10 passes it was pretty hard core. So that`s the limit using some heavily ported heads from some of the big names in the industry - a little bit over 100hp/litre?

Why? is the old fashion design of our engine the main reason why it`s not possible to get more or is it the way we build them?

BB

I would say it is due to the lack of and unwillings to adopt, newer technologies such as roller cams, aftermarket heads and blocks, cams, light valve trains, FI. and yes even turbos. There is also the limitation of the trans to deal with.

--louis

Boy i like this thread,reminds me of my first 1679cc engine.
My stock heads came from Dave Kawell witt ss valves and dual springs.
With a w130 cam and IDA's the engine made some 100 hp.

When i switched to kawells 40x35.5 heads fully ported and polished
en raised compression (12:1) i ran in the 13's with a 4.86 gearbox with superdiff ;D

I would say it is due to the lack of and unwillings to adopt newer technologies

Now that is a statement I find very interesting! So you think there is potential for more power by trying out new technology and know how? How much more do you think is possible?

Best rgs
BB

I still say guys are not willing to build ticking time bombs.

I don't think guys (on this forum at least  ;D) are interested in going to 52 x 40mm valves and 62mm carbs and so on...to make the big guns spin 9000+

it would be cool to build a sub 1800cc flashbulb motor...somebody do it!

This
You are ofcourse so right you can be.

If you hand over a VW type1 engine to for example a Kawasaki engine designer what could he do with just two valves? With their fancy equipment and sophisticated math, well over 100 horses pr lliter could be expected, but at a lower rpm than you would think... And how about a Nascar engine designer?

But I don’t know anyone like that, but I DO know a road racing tuner that made the front page of a international Road racing Magazine. He took a fully factory race tuned Kawa and got it do deliver more torque and hp than the factory did, still within the class rules...! He is a welder during the daytime and works on these bikes in the evenings... his only weapon is a old Norwegian textbook from the fifties and a casio calculator...  the book is called "CarTuning"

I think if these textbooks were more common place in the days before the "internet" deigns... Could this be a way to go back in time? Or is this what everybody does and I’m just in the dark??  ;D

maybe I am PUI-ing but we need heads with swappable intake port inserts, like carb venturies.  ;D

I think 100hp per liter with this old architecture is asking a lot- especially if you want to drive it often! What I think makes a good powerful street engine is one that makes 1hp and 1 ft/lb of torque per cubic inch of displacement. Like a 1679 that makes 102hp and 102ft/lbs of torque. If you want a little more, try getting that 102hp/102tq to the rollers. Sounds like fun to me ::)

Hi Keith

This is why i still gather 311 heads .  :)

Udo

If I understand your reply correctly you`re saying that we would probably need to rev the engine to the extreme, use big valves and high dollar parts to be able to reach the "next" level? And the engine would still be a ticking bomb due to "stretching the limits"?

JHU and Louisb is in a way turning this thread in the direction I was hoping for; what will happen if we are willing to adapt to newer technologies and use the theories available today? Will we still end up with the same results we see today? If the answer to that question is YES then we know we`re doing something right and has been doing so for many years. But if the answer is NO and we reach the "next level"......well, then we have learnt something new.

Yes - it would be cool to build a small engine with the above in mind and see the result.

Best rgs
BB

Whats your defenition of "the next level"??

In my opinion going for bigger carbs,valves,displacment...etc is NOT the next level, its just pushing the limits of whats possible to put on a type 1 engine. I think this is one of the main reason why we aren`t reaching the next level. Most people just go bigger and hope for the best, bigger isn`t always better as we all know.

To me "the next level" is FINESSE! F.ex take a 2007ccm that produces 183 hp at 7500rpm, if you can make the same engine produce 239 hp at 7500rpm then your taking it to the next level in my opinion. And I dont mean that you should slap on a turbo or EFI, because to me thats not TRUE cal-look.(but that another discussion  ;))

The bigger better route is the racers route I feel, they don’t mind having huge valves, changing springs after one event and so on. That path left on that route is rather short when it comes to the type1 platform, due to the dimensions of the poor thing.

But surely that’s NOT what we are talking about, is it??
I thought we were talking about getting the most out of a mouse engine, sure you could use the same approach to a bigger lump and get more, but that is for the racers.
The reason I was curious about Klingaman was because he must have had super nice heads, and he got high Volumetric Efficiency out of that engine. Sure he used a race cam and high revs, but I think that engine with a lesser cam would STILL be a efficient thing. ?

Thank you for keeping the focus JHU.

Are you saying that you believe it is possible to build a effiecent little thing without adding race thinking in the mix? And by efficient I mean 100hp/litre.

Taylor Walton is building a motor for NHRA ss/fs.  It will be a rollercammed 94x60 motor with Heads Up! heads and a dry sump oiling system.  He's hoping for mid 11's and the record.  They have many hours of flowbench work done.  I sold him the 67 shell he's using to base the project on.

Hi BB!
Yeah, I got off topic, sorry. I kind of misunderstood what guys were getting at. Seems everything today is BIG CC, no matter if it is race or hot street. Which is ok. Not knocking that.
I would be VERY impressed to see a smaller displacement street engine (i.e. 1679, 1776, 1835...) tuned to the level that would get it into the 12 sec slot.....but still be "streetable" (no need to get into a "discussion about what streetable" is....my god, has THAT been over-argued!!!!), however a guy would go about it...it would take brains and patience. I think it comes down to reducing weight of reciprocating parts, reducing drag and windage, and making heads (and matching cam to) that have airspeed and flow characteristics to match bore x stroke and rpm needed (remember hp is a product of rpm). As you all know, you need extreme valve timing to get rpms into stratosphere, along with light stuff, and high CR to get most of cam timing. I keep threatening to build something like this, I have my old 94mm German case, and some other junk laying around..... ::)

I know a 1914 isn't a mouse motor, it is more like a squirrel.. but how about a 1914 with 14:1, FK87, 1.5 rockers, 44 x 37 Super Flows and rest of the usual crap. 6lb Crown flywheel, aftermarket 5.352 rods, lightweight wrist pins, manicured skirts on 'A' pistons, relieved case webs....bla bla bla... I'd have to PUI to think of more stuff.  ;D

Key point is: matching head flow and airspeed and cam profile to get to the rpms you need, without making a slug. And keeping stuff as light and as free spinning as possible.

Bye for now

here's a question for the opinionated and technically minded....

if you HAD to choose one scenario (I know they're neither ideal), which would it be?

"over"-ported heads (ports too large and lazy for cc and use of motor), but with conservative cam timing (like FK8?)

"conservatively" ported heads (maybe cross section is too small for top rpm for cc), but with much hotter cam...like FK87 (275-280' @ .050")?

Which one would you choose?

You could always tune the engine to be liveable at some rpm through cam advance, timing, induction and exhaust. Not much you can do about port velocity on heads that are too big.



I have obviously failed somehow.  ;)

Just my thoughs,

--louis

"The adventure is outside the box!"  Wink
Thats why I like Monkey Boys intiative with his mouse motor quest

Thanks for the props JHU  ;) :)

I am not too sure about 100bhp per litre cos thats 167.9bhp for my planned mouse motor  :o BUT I do think we need to start
 "thinking outside the box" a perfect example was Richies idea about narrowing the Cam/crank gear - Now thats what I'm talking about  ;) :)

Too many people these days listen to those people who say "what you wanna do is........."   or "what you need is......" and copy other  peoples combo's  but never REALLY know how the whole engine is working together - this is just my 2 cents guys  ;) :)

Its all about going back to the true basics of "Blueprinting"  :) 

Mr Ratto,
Why choose between pest and cholera? And how do you know your heads are "over" ported.

Best rgs
BB

The answer to the first part of that question is obviously yes, Formula Vee engines of 1600cc have put out something in the order of 180bhp for years but the answer to  the second part is go try it, Lee/Kalle talk to G.A.C. (I can get you the phone number) who have been building this type of motor for quite a while and let us know how it's doing in 5 years (or let's say 30K miles time). It'll be a interesting experiment and I'm pleased to see someone's going to try it!

 :)

In my experience I find it’s possible to achieve an output of 90bhp/litre on what I regard as a perfectly streetable engine eg 2276cc making 204bhp... i.e. a street/strip motor. That’s equivalent to a 1679cc engine making 150bhp while still retaining a semblance of drivability. Is that possible with a 1679? Definitely, but it won’t be as relaxed a drive as the 2276cc motor.

Stepping up to 100bhp/litre is certainly achievable but will start to stretch the boundaries of what might be regarded as streetable by some, most definitely in the case of the 1679cc motor. All depends on your definition of 'street motor'. If both engines were being built purely for the strip, you should be aiming a lot higher than 100bhp/litre but there’s no way they’d be getting used on the street.

Larger motors will always make for a better street/strip engine because you can build in a good mix of mid-range torque and peak bhp. For best performance on the track you need power rather than torque and the mods required to get really good power out of a small n/a motor (big valves and ports, long duration cam etc) will push the rpm range sky-high, which has the effect of killing torque in the low and mid-range rpm—exactly where you need it for good performance on the street.

The small cc, high hp motors from the ‘70s and early ‘80s mostly came about as a result of NHRA class rules, where permitted engine size was dictated by vehicle weight, which gave a lighter car with a well designed small capacity engine an advantage over the larger engined heavyweights. IMO it’s only when we see a racing class with a well defined set of restrictive rules that great developments take place. It focuses the mind and encourages people to push things to the limit. We saw it again with the introduction of PRA Pro Stock and Super Street. That was the first time VW n/a engines were being built where 48IDAs became the restricting factor and prompted the development of larger carbs and even some alternative induction systems etc etc. Racing technology always ends up trickling down to the street.

As an extreme example, take a look at NHRA Pro Stock 500 cubic inch engines. Normally aspirated, pushrods, two valves per cylinder and a pair of 4 barrel carbs. Working within those restrictions for decades has seen continual development push power towards 1400bhp….. that’s more than 165bhp/litre. That’s equivalent to a n/a 1679cc engine making 277bhp!

Only problem with working within a very defined set of rules is the optimised combinations that work so well on one particular engine won’t necessarily transfer across to another engine being built to a different specification. Take British Formula Vee. They use a 1285cc single port engine, with stock valve sizes and make around 100bhp. They work incredibly well considering the limitations of the rules and are a good example of what continued development can deliver, but bolt one into a road going car and you won’t get very far. Also, apply the bhp/litre formula and you fall well short of what might be regarded as a great performing street engine i.e. approx 80bhp/litre so it doesn't work as a great model for a high powered street car.

Sometimes the focus is too much on the peak bhp figure. The car that performs the best on the track is the one that makes best AVERAGE power in the rpm range it sees through each gear. It's the area under the curve that counts.

This is a VERY VERY good point John!
Alot of people seems to forget this(including me) ::)

First of all, THANKS for a brilliant post!

I'm curious as to why a smaller engine would suffer more from "efficiency" than a bigger one? Surely the weight of the reciprocating parts must be less in a engine of smaller volume? (If this isn't so there must be a optimal size somewhere where the weight of the parts (wear) meets optiamal output?)

What do you think the "next level" is John?

Generally speaking, reducing the weight of components won't make any difference to power output (assuming all parts concerened are capable of doing their job). Lighter parts, such as rods, crank, flywheel, pistons have less rotational inertia which allows the engine to accelerate more quickly from one rpm point to another, so performance on the track is improved while measured power remains the same. That's why one 200bhp engine can be faster than another 200hp engine. Same goes for vehicle weight and aerodynamics. An improvement in either will make for better ETs with no change in engine power.


It all depends on intended use for the engine. From a racer’s point of view I believe a major limiting factor is the VW’s stroke to bore ratio. Look at any serious n/a professional race series (F1, NHRA Pro Stock etc) and you’ll find they use a large bore in comparison to crank stroke.

Increasing bore and reducing stroke delivers two significant benefits to a high rpm race engine…  the shorter stroke reduces piston speed and the larger bore makes room for bigger valves…..

Imagine a theoretical drag race series dictating a maximum capacity of 2276cc (normally 82mm x 94mm). If the rules allow any combination of bore and stroke I’d be looking at say a 101.6mm bore rather than 94mm, and reducing stroke from 82mm to 70mm (2270cc).  A set of suitably modified 101.6mm heads would easily outflow anything you could fit on a 94mm bore engine.

Second major gain is a reduction in piston speed. At 7000rpm, an 82mm stroke motor has an average piston speed of 3766 feet per minute. Reduce stroke, the piston has less distance to travel in the same time and speed falls to 3215 feet/min for the 70mm crank at the same rpm. Therefore higher rpm is on the cards with the 70mm stroke and the bigger ports and valves of the 101.6mm heads can make some serious power, assuming they’re teamed up with suitable cam, induction, exhaust etc

Horsepower lost to friction is also a factor with approx 75% of an engine's friction hp being caused by ring to cylinder contact. The reduction in stroke more than offsets the extra contact area of the larger diameter rings so more power is being used to turn the engine than being lost as heat.

Currently there’s no real incentive to persuade someone to build a short stroke, big bore n/a engine because having a higher bhp/litre ratio isn't going to win you the race if the guy in the next lane has more total bhp. But if you're looking to maximise bhp/litre, IMO this would be the route to explore.

In the meantime max stroke/max bore engines will dominate but at the expense of bhp/litre and unless something comes along to cap engine size, the obvious route is to increase capacity by whatever means practical so naturally people will continue to opt for the longest stroke crank they can physically fit in the block. The fact remains, for a tractable street motor you can't beat an increase in displacement.

If you want an easy route to force more air through your engine, make lots of power, have good driveability on the street and bump up bhp/litre, fit mappable EFI and a turbocharger.  ;)

Wow, there is some great information there. Thanks for posting that.

--louis

Afternoon John :)

So you think that would work :o ;D

cheers richie,uk

 ::) 

Anyone can make a turbo engine go fast.  :P ;) ;D

--louis

Probably would but thats cheating you know  ;)

Thank you for your post John. Very interesting info!

All very interesting this, clearly enthusiasm for small cc engines is alive and well in these parts.

For my part I think you need to have a realistic expectation if you’re going to head down the small cc na rapid street car route. It’s a fairly obvious thing to say but the faster you want to go the more difficult it becomes to keep the car streetable (not that this is unique to small cc engines). That said personally I’ve always thought when I want to drive my car its to go for a raz not just bumble about in it wishing it was more tractable comfortable, quiet etc. Its not that the car is unreliable but you need to want to drive it. As with all things there are compromises to make and we all draw the line at a different point, hence the constant argument about what a street car is.

I for one am keen to chase the na 100bhp per litre mark on pump gas, if for nothing else just for the achievement. Although as John has suggested above it’s not all about bhp. To turn a good ET particularly when you chose a small cc option, maximising other areas is even more important then when you choose a more powerful combination.

Interestingly though I’m not quite sure it’s as difficult as most people might have you believe to get to a point where you can go quicker than most people with a similar combination. I think most people are content with a combination once it’s in the back of their car and running ok. Then there’s the likes of the people that frequent this forum who take a strange fascination in spending lots of time, effort and often money to achieve more with less.

I run a na 1776cc because I like the small engine combination and it’s a common boring old size that most people pass by on there way to bigger and “better” things.

The biggest problem we all face is the lack of R&D as the majority of us developing our combinations do not have hours of backed up results at the track and dyno. All in all though looking at some of the numbers people are turning on here looks like people are doing pretty well.

Just for the record does anyone know how fast people have been with a na 1776cc motor (regular 69 x 90.5 combination) in a race or street car in the past, as it would be nice to know what to aim for.

Glad to see the small motors are still chasing down the big guns!

Still chasing?.... Soon they will be ahead.   ;)

Dam Right  ;) :)

also some very good points Peter - I willbe doing a LOT of research for my mouse motor  :)

This is obviously both right and interesting, but its not really a answer to what I asked about, or rather what I tried to ask about (English is hard). I find everyone saying that a smaler engine would suffer more from being efficient, and by efficient I'm talking about good cylinder filling and thereby realizing the power and the torque the engine size is capable of.


I think this also could be used as a pro "short stroke engine" argument, but what I really is aiming at is the later part of you sentence, the "teaming" up sentence.
As soon as you mention rising the efficency, people reach for the Alarm button, maked drivability/long-livety.

Are we really at the breakpoint for efficiency and longlivety?

Hello!

After following this very interesting thread I have decided to build a "mouse motor" with almost only original parts and by using some simple math and sience.

Engine spec:

Case: original AS41
Crank:German stock
Rods:German stock
Pistons:JE 86mm 24mm comp hight
Cylinders:Stock 85,5mm honed to 86mm
Heads:043 40x32mm valves
Compression:12,0:1
Rockers:Jpm two stud 1,5:1 ratio
P-rods:Manton 3/8" cromoly
Cam:Fk45in/Fk44 ex
Cam gears:Magnum
Oilpump:26mm
Deepsump:1,5lit
Flywheel:180mm stock lightend
Clutch disc:cush lock
Pressure plate:Kennedy
Header:Custom made 1 5/8" tuned length
Manifolds:Custom made tuned length(second order)
Carbs:IDA 48

The most expensive parts in this concept is the JE pistons, but I feel they are nessecery if the calculated power should be optained.

All the parts will of course be inspected and modified(linebored,shuffle pinned,balanced,fullflowed etc..........) to take the higher output.

Heads:

The heads will recive a little welding in some areas and ported to achive as high flow as possible in the limitations of the calculated port size.

Cam:

I will use a cam with split duration, fk45 intake and fk44 exhaust.The less ex duration will give a superior midrange without loosing top end, if the ex port flows enough, a good choise when using a "Hi-Po" engine on
the street.

I have decided to use a 40mm intake valve because of the 86mm bore, and the valve will not be moved to the center of the cylinder,a bigger valve will be to much shrouded from the cylinder wall.

Calculation:

The formula I will use to see how much rpm the 40mm valve will be good for is:

RPM=3300000xPort dia xPort dia/BorexBore xStroke

This formula is based on a mean port velocity at 110m/s or(360ft/s), and the Port dia is the smallest area in the port.

As this engine is going to be used as a street engine the smallest port size I will use is 0,88 x valve dia(0,88x40=35,2mm)

RPM calculation:3300000x35,2x35,2/86x86x69=8012rpm

The teoretical rpm where peak power will be is 8012 rpm.

Now we have the RPM,diplacement but not the Bmep, a realistic Bmep is between 12-13 bar(171-185psi), so I choose 12,5bar Bmep.With this information we can calculate the POWER of the "mouse motor".

Formula:

P=Displ x rpm x Bmep/910

POWER=1,603 x 8012 x 12,5 / 910 = 176,4hp

This is the power that could be expected from the "mouse motor" if everything is properly done.


With properly done I mean everything like heads,compression,cam timing,exhaust length,intake length,friction etc.....................  .

I will start on this project in the next week but as I run a company it will take some time to finish it, probably in mars 2008.

During that time I will keep you updated with pictures and info as the project continous.

When the "mouse motor" is done there will be som serious dyno testing and tuning, hopefully we will see the numbers that i come up with in the calculations above.

To me,this is what I belive is "Thinking outside the box" and "The next level".


With Best Regards

Johannes Persson
JP Motorsport
Sweden

Way to go, Johannes and everyone else who is attempting to build a mouse motor! Everyone, please keep the lounge updated with pictures, specifications, etc. This is interesting stuff. While not trying to sound emotional, attempting to build a mouse motor that will survive is a fitting tribute to our cal-look forefathers who did the same with less technology at their finger tips.

I want to do something like this one day.

WOW, what else can I say? That sounds like a hefty output of such a small capacity!
I just hope you keep us informed when you start building this powerful dwarf. This small/original parts approach has old school written all over it, except for those nice pistons, (BTW how much would one loose by using stock pistons with their fat piston rings? Or is it to avoid "ring flutter")
And it's just what I expected, the big guys use simple formulas to "home" in on the target, but you are the first one that has been willing to show them. I will have a good time checking over my engine with these formulas when I have an night free.


I think you are right Lawrence, another big thing was the lack of over the shelf parts, it will be cool to see all these Mouse motors beeing built, and that makes me wonder about thing John Mahler said about racing beeing one of the most impotant ways to push the limits.
How about a MOUSE class? Alternatively could we design a class that would push forward the "street" engine? Limit both the RPM and the volume?

Like JHU said....WOW!!!!

But where the 3300000 are coming from in your formula?

Johannes, this is for sure one build thread I`m really looking forward to read and study. For us not so familiar with the formulas used could you please take some time to explain them. Thanks,

Best rgs
BB

a great read on this topic...and overall engine tuning techniques.... Four Stroke Performance Tuning by AG Bell. Covers more subject matter than any other book I have gone through. Excellent chapter on camshafts and why we advance, retard, and so on. Seat duration vs. .050", etc. Valve diameter vs. cylinder displacement and use of engine....I highly suggest it.

I`m speatchless!! :o
MAN...I love this tread!  :)
I hope that one day, I also will be able to build an engine without to mutch "swaging" :)



I`m just guessing but 3300000 in the rpm equation and 910 in the power equation is probably constants(a locked number) that gives you the desired term after the answer in your equations(f.ex rpm or hp)

175hp in a  1600ccm  :o
I´m REALLY looking forward to this!  ;D

Thanks, thats a good tip!

Hello,

The 3300000 and 910 are constants created from many other formulas which have fixed numbers in them.

Exemple:

To calculate the area of a circle I use this formula : dia x dia x 3,14/4, the 3,14 and 4 are always there so you could "bake" them together 3,14 / 4=0,785 and there you have a constant,the new formula is: dia x dia x 0,785=area.

Regards
Johannes

OK. Thanks.
Will you put this engine on your blue sleeper and race it this summer?

Hi Johannes,

Is there any smartness behind your choice of compression height? What does it mean if you move the weight of the piston up or down over the rod? I do understand choice of compression height, when you have long stroke, but in this engine is there any gain?

Thanks

Roar Lunde

Hi Roar,

Perhaps you already no about this, but this is the reasons.

1: You do not get that much piston "rattle" when the the piston pin is closer to the rings,means less blow by.
2: It is very important to get as short push rods and cyl studs as possible, when rpm is going up a shorter(stiffer,lighter) is extremely important and the rgidity of the cylinder and heads are improved a lot, (better valve control).You also end up with a narrower engine that fits better in your car , win win situation.

Regards
Johannes

Now we have the RPM,diplacement but not the Bmep, a realistic Bmep is between 12-13 bar(171-185psi), so I choose 12,5bar Bmep.With this information we can calculate the POWER of the "mouse motor".
Is it possible to calulate the Bmep?Whats the reason that you estimate the Bmep to be 12-13bar(why not 10 or 15?)Is it link between CR and Bmep?

BMEP (brake mean effective pressure) is a useful way of comparing efficiency of various engines, regardless of capacity or manufacturer.

BMEP formula below calculates AVERAGE pressure (psi) acting on the piston during the entire four stroke cycle.

BMEP =(2471.174 x Torque) / engine cc

To find torque from Johannes calculations (176.4bhp @ 8012 rpm)....

Torque (ftlb) = (bhp x 5252) / RPM

so....... 

Torque = (176.4 x 5252) / 8012 = 115.6ftlb  i.e 115.6ftlb @ 8012rpm

Plug the torque value into the BMEP formula and you have...

BMEP =(2474.174 x 115.6ftlb) / 1602cc = 178.5psi = 12.3 bar

The maths and physics used to calculate the engine's power potential are sound. Now it's simply a matter of making it reality.

Very interesting project. Looking forward to the seeing the results.

Hi, this calculation above ( I believe) is used to determine the port velocity as compared to a measurment on a Pitot Tube not the actual .55 Mach, or  613 Ft/second that some other caculations use,

 Like this Example

RPM = ( FPS * CA ) / ( Bore * Bore * Stroke * .00353 )

where;
RPM = point of desired Peak HP
FPS = Feet per Second  or 613.975
CA = Cross-Sectional Area in Square Inches (smallest measured)


FPS = ( Bore * Bore * Stroke * RPM * .00353 ) / CA


CA = ( Bore * Bore * Stroke * RPM * .00353 ) / FPS


( I just wanted to point that out in case some folks are confused by reading various formulas...)

Thanks,

We had 1600 cc engines up to 130 hp and 1776 cc up to 150 hp in the mid 80's . That was a lot of fun to race against the bigger cc engines . But at that time we only worked with german camshafts . Today there should be some more power on those engines  :)

Udo

once you get the small cc engine to produce 85 or 100hp per liter, which may equate to 165 hp or so, what about making the hp work in a Type 1? "Work" meaning having a fast street car from light to light, getting on highway, and also getting down the strip faster than your neighbor?

I think things to consider are gearing to make the engine "work" and to take adavantage of torque multiplication of "closer" gears, since the engine itself is going to give up a wide torque spread. I don't think first and second need to be wall climbers, in fact a slightly taller 1st on a 4.37 r/p might be the trick, to allow the car to get some distance through the rpm.

Unsprung weight is a biggie too. Big heavy wheels and tires are gonna slow a little motor way down. ERCOs are a must I would guess.....

Hi,
At the moment I am at the PRI show Orlando Florida and will be back in business 11/12.

Regards
Johannes Persson

Mail us some sun overhere in holland Johannes ;D

From my experience I would say Jim is on the money. As I suggested previously the “combination” of engine, gearbox and car becomes far more important when there is less slack available with the motor. I think I’ve got some decent ratios in the box and have saved weight where I can (within my own constraints) so my interior is more race car than comfy Cal Looker but its drivable to the track and back and has turned a best of 12.44 @ 105mph (without the fan belt and with a stinger and slicks) from a regular 69x90.5 1776.

Winter plans hope to see me going a bit quicker next year but time will tell, as progress has been slow over the years. I remember racing Richie in 2001 (I think), it was my first time out with the car, he ran 12.8ish (his first 12 if I remember) and I ran a 13.0 but here we are 6 years later and he is down to 9.7s and I’m still in the mid 12’s!

It will be interesting to see how people get on with there winter plans and see the numbers from the dyno sessions and more importantly at the track, as the Dyno figures are for the bench racers and mag features, it’s the ET that counts (IMHO).

One thing Jim was wrong about though, the car has gone much quicker with BRM’s than it did with the Erco’s so I’ll be sticking to the mouldy old mags for now!

Just wondered if anyone has had any thoughts on how quickly people have gone with a na 1776 in the past (race and street cars),  I’m sure there has been plenty of quick cars over the years, so if any one can recall a few cars and numbers I would appreciate it.

Happy winter tinkering to you all.

Slightly off target but Brian Hyerstay (not sure about the spelling) runs a 1679 g/dragster into the low nines in the US and is said to produce around 220HP and goes through the lights at 11,000 rpm! Not sure it would be the best engine combination in a street sedan though, but that is a fair dollop of HP from a 1679. Check out the bugin 32 DVD as there are a few runs shown the rail is called superior steel. Needless to say it sounds bonkers! It was also featured in HotVWs in 2000 I think so those who have a back catalogue might like to take a look and post it up here for the record. If I remember rightly there were credits to the Bergs, the Eversons and Mr Klingerman, so there are a lot of proper people involved.

I heard of a nine second dragster (runs at Englishtown, NJ) which has a naturally aspirated motor of around 1900cc but pulling low nines out of a 1679 is quite something. That said I suspect getting that motor to the shops would be "quite something" too!

I think it was no nonsense 9.25 or similar so like you say a major achievement, I think the turning circle and the air shifted trans might present a few problems in the supermarket car park as well!

Just had a quick look at the BugIn 32 DVD, if you have it check out 58 mins and 45 seconds and listen to a 1679 at 11,000 rpm really does sound great! Actually it sounds really good on tick over as well. You guy's building 1679's have a lot to live up to, but I’m looking forward to hearing some little screamers at EBI2.

You need to talk to Mike Ishiko next time round, he has some interesting small motor information. They're retarding the ignition at ten five and then letting it run out some more. Some crazy a$$ stuff and all very clever!  8)

Here's another mouse-motor:

It's Siegfried Volland's Autocross engine, raced at the European Autocross Championship in the early 80's.

(http://blogsimages.skynet.be/images/000/677/333_f7797952d1a529c9cfdabf6363233f76.JPG)

I don't know much about this engine, I was told it's a 1585cc (69x85.5) and that it makes (made) about 160 horses...

It has a Kugelfischer mechanical injection, KRE throttle bodies (IDA-size), Superflow heads, Autocraft rockers and a big dry-sump oil pump.

I hope some day we'll find the time to put it back into service and fire it up again... I can already hear it... ::)

I think all of us would be very impressed with a 1679cc that made 150hp, wouldn't we? In the right car, driven in anger, that ought to equate to low, low 13's, maybe high 12's. Myself, I wouldn't be so worried about the timeslip...if it scares the hair off of you when you push the go pedal, you've done a good job.
I think a Lounge "Engine of the Year" bit would be cool....hp vs. displacement vs. longevity vs...dare I say it, fuel consumption. Kind of like an index of thermal efficiency.

I believe he was running welded 043 Castings, 42 X 37.5 Steve Timms heads at that time,  I will se if I can get him to post some info,
( Wait to you see what he has coming down the pipe.......)  He want's the NHRA record back!

K-Roc,

Ole, Interesting cooling on that auto cross motor, I wonder how long the races were as the SF's are not the best a keeping the temps down, but it obviously worked and when you consider the motor gets a good hammering for the race duration....... I wonder with the cooling effect of bio fuels if the regular squirrel fans would be good enough to control temps on the street? Anyone fancy being the guinea pig?

Jim makes a good point, in all this high octane talk we should not forget the fun. Its not all about the numbers, a good razz in your street car that’s got a bit of a sting in the tale is all you really need to make the world look a bit brighter! 12's with 150 hp is possible I would say, assuming the box has the right ratios and the car has been on a bit of a diet, not to mention the driver!

K-Roc I've just looked at the Bugin 32 DVD and you're right they are stock looking heads (externally). It would be good to hear from Brian on here as he clearly has his house in order and he must be paving the way with HP for a 1679 flat four. If he is prepared to share some information (especially if he is moving on) I’m sure there will be plenty of people on here who would like to listen to what he has to say.

The way this small engine thing has taken off we could end up with 16 car heads up 1679 field at EBI2, I might even have to sling my big bore 90.5's and step up to some 88's! That said if Brian jumps over the pond and enters I think we're all doomed.

Just noticed this thread has nearly reached 1679 views, which is quite fitting given the topic!

I remember Brians 1679 dragster used custom 5" Carrillo rods... 1.84:1 rod ratio...

Yes, and it had welded VW style heads, too.  If I remember right, the G/D record got killed by the "Ladybug" dragster from New Jersey.  It had a much bigger motor by the Aragona's.  Taylor Walton talks with Brian on occasion.

That's the one I was thinking of, it's a 1914cc engine or something isn't it?

 :)

Hello Folke,

About the 56 reply,

The bmep is created from the power,displ and rpm of an engine.
Today there are many dynoed hi-performance VW engines out there, by using thier numbers in my formula will show you what is a realistic bmep to use.
That is the reason why I "picked" 12,5.

To John Maher & K-Rock.

Thanks for good input.

The best way to determine where VE drops off is to use the 0,55 mach index calculation, as K-Roc mentioned.

It is a little bit more "tricky" than using my formula above because you have to know the efficiency of the port(flow/m2 vs crank degree).

This must be done because you can have two ports with the same area but with different flow numbers, the one with the higher flow will reach 0,55 mach at higher rpm.


I can strongly recomend the PRI show, it has been three days of HARDCORE racing.

BTW I recived my JE "mouse motor" pistons today I will post some pictures later.


Regards
Johannes

To get more than 100hp/litre you dosent need to think outside the box, you just have to think... :-)

Of the shelf parts and ideas will get us close with some common sence...

thx
Roar

The good news is that all three of my 1679cc engines will be for sale soon. 220hp times 3 Brian

I'M INTERESTED FOR SURE  :)

I think I'll join the queue as well. I might be interested in you air shift trany as well if you are changing wholesale, or if not if you're prepared to share some info.......... as the shifts sound amazing on the Bugin 32 DVD, I seam to remember it was based on a To#¤ta 5 speed from the Hot VW's feature and it certainly sounded like a 5 speed on the DVD, nice idea I thought with the small cube motor.

Peter

I thought it was a Liberty trans?

It is a liberty trans just like a V8 pro stock car has. The engines will be for sale after the first of the year they come with Dyno sheets or come here and see them make power for your self. I have a dyno at the house.
Thanks Brian

Hi,

"Santa" came early this year.

Now I have all the parts for the "Mouse motor", I have also done most of the machining to the case like line boring,shuffle pins,extra oil grove in the lifter bores etc.....  .
The crank assembly will be balanced after christmas, then the short block is the next step.
The biggest challenge is of course the heads, the flow potential of the intake port has to be in the range of 190cfm at 25"H2O, that could be hard from a 40mm valve at 15,5mm(.613)lift.

Pictures will soon be post.

Merry Christmas
          &
Happy New Year

Johannes Persson

Pic from Johannes:

Can't wait to see the results, that flywheel is a piece of art!  ;D

More pics:

And more:

And more:

And even more:

What 'CC' will it be ? and what size valves? ;D

It will be 1603cc
The strange size comes from Johannes wish to use Stock old VW cylinders, he takes them up from 85,5 to 86 and have pistons to suit.

The heads are 043 with 40x32mm valves...

I love that 180mm flywheel!  8)

Hi benssp,
The valve size is 40x32 and the cc is 1603 (86x69mm).

Johannes Persson

Have you got a better photo of the flywheel.

Spellcheck???????????

Sorry need a new keyboard :) key are not working that good.

Gotta love that flywheel...
cant wait for more progress on this very interesting project

Are the pistons standard pistons from JE or are their individual produce to customers details?? How much cost them...

Very very nice project Johannes...

Bye
Tom

Whats the weight of that flywheel btw? ???

They are custom order thru Johannes (JPM)


It weighs 3.2 kg!

That is a 7 pound flywheel!! Johannes, does that have an effect on driveability? Is this strictly a race motor? Its gonna rev like a dirtbike.  ;D

Damn a 7 pound flywheel,gonna rev over 8000 rpm  with that ;D

I see that flywheel (As cool as it is..)as an effective tool to achieve a high number on the Dyno but not to an advantage on the dragstrip.

Johannes told me that he has tested his other R&D engine with both heavy and super light flywheel.
He got the best time and the highest trap speed with the lightest one. Thats why it's still in the combo.

I'd like to know his launch rpm with that flywheel. 
I also think that flywheel weighs less than 7 lbs.  My own is 8 lbs and it doesn't have the big windows in it.

Hey. Cool project Johanes. I did one 1600 a few years ago with mostly stock parts (10:1 C/R and a 280 deg cam) and we got a 14.6 out of it in a heavy car. My experience, if it has any value, is the small motor, light car equals light flywheel....heavy car and small motor on the other hand can successfully be ran with heavy flywheel....both combos need high 1:st gearing and high revs to move and will eat R/P:s like they eat hamburgers in the US...........So what R/P is going to be used and will it survive the first 20 set up runs on the sticky local track or will it be saved by a lot of dyno time :) .........It’s about time that someone kill Sweden’s "best ET so far with a 1600 cc motor" from back in the early 90's.....13.1 in an oval body car, owned by a guy named "Knutte". Car is still around but has a big (broken?) motor and  lot of bling-bling. Happiness is a Hot VW!!

A light flywheel will give a great throttle response, but explain to me how a light flywheel will increase the RPM and give higher hp readings on a dyno?

I know Johannes has a tranny with really high gearing made for his blue super beetle and the R/D engine that revs over 9500. If he had a "normal" tranny he would do the quarter in only 3 gears.

Hi Again,

Lawrence, the light flywheel will affect driveability, the motor will rew, both up and down, faster which can be experienced like its   harder to "cruse" with.This engine will primarely be built for the "strip", but with a heavier flywheel it will be very streetable.

Bruce, the launch rpm in the car that I am going to use(type 1 -63 1650lbs) will probably be between 7-8k.

K-Rock, There will be time slips the comming summer with this "Mouse Motor", the most objectiv dyno is the dragstrip, is´nt it?.
I am  not trying to "show off" or "brag" about doing this "Mouse Motor" project,I do it because of my dedication to the type 1 engine,learning and understanding the internal combustion engine and shareing experience with you Loungers.

Tom, I will e-mail you later.

SOB, good input.The car to be used with the "Mouse Motor" is a type 1 -63 1650lbs(750kg)at the starting line, it has a low ratio transaxel R/P 4.86:1  close ratio with 1.37:1 on the fourth gear.The rims are Saco five bolt and the tires are M&H 6x26-15.
On a small engine, the weight of the rotating engine parts has to be in relation to the vehicle weight and gearing.
BTW in 1997 I did several 12.50s 165km/h with my 1679cc in my old yellow type 1.

The shortblock is almost done by now.

Enjoy the pictures.

Johannes Persson

Hi Johannes I just want to let you know that I think it is awesome that you are able to make this project happen, I wish I had the means and time to do the same, In my mind I figure that with the flywheel that light that on launch once the inertia is released from the flywheel it would be hard to replace it to keep the car accelrating out of the hole and down the track. However with you old times of 12.50's at 165 Kmh, that would prove me wrong :) and that wouldn't be the first time! LOL!
Good luck with the project and I look forward to seeing some killer results.

K-Roc,

1.
Machining rods to get equal weight in all four rods big and small end.

(http://www.vwnorge.no/JHU/project/jpm/007.jpg)

2.Checking the straitness of the rods.

(http://www.vwnorge.no/JHU/project/jpm/008.jpg)

3.Complete crank assembly on the balancing machine (a german Schenk balancer).

(http://www.vwnorge.no/JHU/project/jpm/009.jpg)

4.Final cleaning of crank.

(http://www.vwnorge.no/JHU/project/jpm/010.jpg)

5.Checking cam to lifter clerances and end play on camshaft.

(http://www.vwnorge.no/JHU/project/jpm/011.jpg)

6.Adjusting intake centerline.

(http://www.vwnorge.no/JHU/project/jpm/012.jpg)

7.

(http://www.vwnorge.no/JHU/project/jpm/013.jpg)

8.Machining cylinder deck.

(http://www.vwnorge.no/JHU/project/jpm/014.jpg)

9.The machining is done on a fixture where the case is leveld on the mains.

(http://www.vwnorge.no/JHU/project/jpm/015.jpg)

A non counterweighted crankshaft?! You are a braver man than I!! ;D

What type of pressure plate is that? Not sure if you already know, but Kennedy offers aluminium versions of their pressure plates that are 3lbs lighter than stock. Something to think about ;)

Good luck!!

The flywheel has no effect on how high an engine can rev.  The engine's breathing, cam, valvetrain, etc. are what affect the max rpm.

If the engine is on a dyno that uses a water brake, you won't see the effect of the flywheel since that type of dyno takes static rpm power readings. 
However, if the engine is in a car which is on an inertial dyno, a light flywheel will show a higher hp reading than the same engine with a heavy flywheel.  The resistance provided by an inertial dyno is the moment of inertia of the rollers the rear tires ride on.  The dyno measures how fast the car can accelerate the rollers.  A lighter flywheel means there's more power available to accelerate the rollers.

Thats the biggest crank pulley that i have ever seen ;D

Nice work though,keep us posted dude 8)

BTW do i need a high pressure plate for such a 1600 with nearly 115lbs? Or is it also possible to take a good Std new Luk plate with cushin grib disc?? Because this combination i have in my 1951ccm...and it functioned,my tires are burning:-))

Bye
Tom

I would upgrade to a high pressure plate Tom buts thats my 2 cents ;D

I believe in the HVW's article, it was a To#¤ta rearend.  I'd bet he has since updated to a 9 inch ford with profiled aluminum spool and rifle drilled axles to save weight.  The car is super tiny in person.  I saw it at the Phoenix national event near the scales in '00.  You can almost trip over it.  It takes huge dedication to make a car like this competitive.  Brian, what are you going to do with the dragster after the motors are sold?

Bruce it depends on weather the water brake engine dyno is computer controled and you can acclerate the engine, Whats called a "power run" not a static test. THe effect of lighter internal components will show during this type of testing. A superflow 902 or a dts dyno can carryout this type of testing.

Description of the pictures will follow:

(http://www.vwnorge.no/JHU/project/jpm/019.jpg)
Welding of combustion chambers, mainly to get the desired comp ratio because of the small displasement.



(http://www.vwnorge.no/JHU/project/jpm/0208.jpg)


(http://www.vwnorge.no/JHU/project/jpm/021.jpg)
A small welding is done on the sparkplug side of the intakeport, the welding is massive to the underside of the head.

(http://www.vwnorge.no/JHU/project/jpm/022.jpg)
Welded and machined intake flange.

(http://www.vwnorge.no/JHU/project/jpm/023.jpg)
New bigger alu bronze seats installed, alu bronze has the same heat expansion as aluminum and it also transfer heat a lot better than for example steel seats.


(http://www.vwnorge.no/JHU/project/jpm/024.jpg)



(http://www.vwnorge.no/JHU/project/jpm/025.jpg)



(http://www.vwnorge.no/JHU/project/jpm/027.jpg)
Combustion chamber,intake and ex port done, note how close the camber wall is to the valve on the none sparkplug side, this is to get the extension of the intake port shaped as a venturi.This boosts the flow from 10mm lift and up it also improves the quality of incomming mixture, in my experience, unshrouding the vale at this side will improve the flow on low lifts but will decrease the power.


(http://www.vwnorge.no/JHU/project/jpm/030.jpg)
The intake port is filled on the long side radius with BELZONA 1111 to get the correct shape and sizes.


(http://www.vwnorge.no/JHU/project/jpm/031.jpg)
Big Beef has become "SMALL STEAK"


(http://www.vwnorge.no/JHU/project/jpm/032.jpg)
I am really suprised of the flow numbers from a 40mm intake valve and 86mm bore.
Flownumbers CFM at 25"H2O.
lift(mm)              Flow(intake)             Flow(exhaust)
2                       42,6                        39,5
4                        81,3                       73,3
6                        111,4                     96,5
8                        136,7                     115,5
10                      159,4                     130,3
12                      177,5                     141,8
14                      188,2                     148,5
16                      194,9                     152,5

The Port velocity(intake) meassured in the center of the port at the flange is 298ft/s this is where the port is the biggest.
Same measurements on the ex port is 324ft/s.The outlet is only 34mm, going too big on the outlet will slow down the speed and the overall power will drop.
First I did some tests with an old head to see what intake flow numbers I could reach, when I saw the unexpected high numbers I had to increase the ex valve from 32mm to 35,5mm.

Regards
Johannes

(http://www.vwnorge.no/JHU/project/jpm/026.jpg)

I think it is fantastic that a professional like you lets us see your "magic". I'm trying to soak up all the info i can so I'll will be tuned for the  duration.
This is going to be one special little engine.  8)

I feel the same way :)  I'm checking this thread allmost every day to see if something new have happend.
Johannes, keep on the NICE work.


/Rolf, DK

Impressive number's Johannes.

Quick question, do you know the max speed of air, where port is at it's smallest?

Thanks
Roar

You use a Pitot Tube to measure localized Velocity on the flow bench,

Johannes, nice work ! I have never heard of Belzonia 1111, is that an Aluminum based Epoxy of some sort? ( I use stuff called Splash Zone from Z-SPar) Reher Morrison sell it.

For your 40mm intake valve, what did you use for the Seat throat ID diameter and Bowl diameter under the seat ? I usually shoot for about 89-90% for the throat and then enlarge the bowl on the High RPM stuff.

Giving away a few secrets there LOL, ie: NOT blowing out the chamber wall to valve seat... I have seen some large increases in Flow bench numbers on heads with heavily unshrouded chambers only to suffer in actual power in real life. one of those areas that the flow bench will lie to you unless you know what you are doing

K-Roc

Man, what a great thread!!!

Hi there,

N2O:The highest speed I recorded was 356ft/s, on the short side radius close to the seat.The velocity is
        meassured at 28" of depression.

K-Roc:I use the pitot tube as a reference tool just to check velocities in different areas in the port.
         The seat ID is 90% of the valve dia and the bowl is a little bigger, not as big as I use to make
         them on an all out race engine.I have also noticed if your engine is valve restricted you can go
         as big as 93% of valve dia with very good results, the seat has then to be cut to a special shape.
         
         The Belzona 1111 is an epoxy that I really do not know wath it contains but it is for me so far
         the best I have tried, no problems to this point.I gues you can find info on the internet.


 Regards
Johannes

Just what I was thinkin dude  ;) :)

I think i am not gonna use my old SF heads 44/37,5 any more. JPM has take them to his flow bench and they had the worse data as the 043JPM heads.
You are a fantastisk man Johannes.
Look forward too see what data the dyno gives.

Tom V K
Copenhagen
 

Really find this thread interesting . Apart from a couple of engines buildt by JMR ,(thanks John), I always
tried to do the work myself . Apart from a 2165 NOS `d engine I felt for going back in time for that
"no worries "1776 cc  engine .
Yesterday I spotted 4 Carrillo rods on sale from Berg`s and that got me hooked .
So it went on with ordering a complete crank assembly, ( welded 69,)balanced and ready.
On top og this 044 heads , p&p by local man ..

As I am hoping to get the most out of this engine powerwise `good adwise on cam choice is paramount ,
I am by no means a proffetional builder but I have gone thrught  a lot of Engle Cams , only to be impressed
with 3 or 4 . Love the FK 89 , W 110 and 130.

So if anyone have any good adwise regarding  cam , compression  choice I would be happy..
I am espesially concerned about material quality these days . I just love what Johannes Person is doing ,
but without his know/how it will always be a case of trial /error for me .

Regards   

       

tell me about this for small powerhouse! 101cu.in.

Welcome aboard, Taylor!
Ya can't just post that without some numbers for us to fantisize about.

And alittle more info wouldn't go amiss  ;) :)

Nice!

I think you may need slightly larger valve springs though  ;D

Nah... that`s the new trend you know - superlight everything. Titanium valves, carbon pushrods + + .... don`t need much pressure to make things work.. Oh, and it saves you lifters they say  :D

Well, back to topic - It`s been a little while since Johannes reported back and I`m really looking forward to see the progress he has made on his engine.

Best rgs
BB

The engine is sitting in the engine stand now, will run in cam, and comment the pictures later.

(http://www.vwnorge.no/JHU/project/jpm/33.jpg)
The cylinders are about 20mm shorter than std length.
(http://www.vwnorge.no/JHU/project/jpm/34.jpg)
The std 85,5mm pistons has a weight of 568g the JE 86mm weights only 388g, 180g lighter.

(http://www.vwnorge.no/JHU/project/jpm/35.jpg)
The pushrods are 254mm long, it is not unusuall to have pushrods between 275-285mm in stroker engines.
(http://www.vwnorge.no/JHU/project/jpm/36.jpg)
"Mouse Motor" waiting for cam brake in, only with the outer valvespring, the dual OTEVA 75 springs has 165lbs in the seat and 370lbs at 15,5mm lift.The weight of the spring is only 64g.
(http://www.vwnorge.no/JHU/project/jpm/37.jpg)
"Beetlbug" the header is tuned to 8000rpm as the rest of the engine, the #2 and #4 tubes will be too long if I place them in the ordonary style.

Thank you for you update Johannes! I`m very much looking forward to hearing the theory behind the exhaust.

Best rgs
BB

higher rews, shorter tubes..

Hi there,
THE MOUSE MOTOR is alive!
The brake in prossedur of the cam went fine and now the duals are on.
Time to do some rpm..........
A small video will be posted very soon.
Everything sounds promising so far.
Regards
Johannes

Congrats with the start up - exciting news!

Thank you for answering my question. I hope you don`t mind me babbling along regarding your header? So the header is tuned to 8000 rpms and if you used a "ordinary" header the #2 and #4 tubes would be too long. But what would be the difference if you compared your custom made header to a "out of the box ordinary" one? Lack of respons? Less hp? Less driveability?

Thanks,
BB / Kalle

"It's alive!!! Moahahahahaaa

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VPVqYRrQBA0&feature=related (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VPVqYRrQBA0&feature=related)

Great throttle respons, cool Johannes!! :)

That thing just snaps! very cool!

Thumbs up!!!!!  Sounds amazing!!

Keep up the great work, it´s so exiciting to follow this build from start to finished engine.

Imagine yourself driving a big V8, stopping for a red light - and then a beetle comes up beside you and starts revving like that ;-) ;-) ;-)   thats why i LOVE hot VW´s.

awesome vid!!
how come it snaps like that? is the flywheel that light?

couldn't have put it better myself dude - sounds AWSOME  ;D ;D ;D

And D I think the light flywheel helps ALOT - I think I might drop Johannes Persson a line about my 1679 mouse motor  ;) :)

Very cool video clip. Thanks for sharing all of the info on the buildup. Johannes, the rocker arm assembly looks like a quality piece. Who makes it?

Awsome sound :o!!!Cant wait to hear it rev past 8000rpm ;D ;D

Thank you guys for your input.

Beetlebug:using a too long header will hurt the top end power, the torque curve will drop earlier in the rpm range.
               If the rest of the engine is tuned at a high rpm a too long header hurts the output a lot.

67-indeed/DVK:It is a combination between light rotating parts and good cylinder pressure that makes an engine snap.

lawrence:Thank you for asking, that is my own product I make those together with my fivestud rockers which fits on the MS230
              heads. 

The final is comming up with this project and that is ofcourse to put the "Mouse Motor" on the "bullshit detector"(dyno) and see what it makes.
Hopefully I will have time to do this in a two week period.

Regards
Johannes Persson 

Awsome Johannes, You do some top work. Very interesting.

Regards

David Gouk

Hello.
Very interesting heads, - among all the other stuff. I´m very interested in seeing how this turns out.
I made a set of heads with chambers  almost exactly like that, 40 X 34 valves though, and with an oval shape intake port a couple of years back, for a 1680 engine. Cam in the same duration range, but with smaller carbs.
Bottom line was that it didnt perform that well. It felt wild on the street, but the BS detector said otherwise. When it was taken apart again, the chambers showed a very inefficient plug side, judging from the carbon patterns.  I may have made a bad intake port shape without knowing it.
Johannes. If you dont mind sharing, what I/E ratio does it have with the small exhaust valve ? I´m guessing rather low.
T

Impressive , but 48 `s must surely be to much , !!!
Rgs

48's are never too much! ;)

Seriously, I'm guessing that they're choked down quite a bit, but this is obviously no ordinary 1600!

Small engines need "big" carbs to breath efficiently when you want the higher revs, more so than lager engines.

This is just something I have heard and seen, but can anyone explain why? 

where can I get those JE pistons,I need 88mm ones. ???

Drop Johannes a line, he can hook you up with the pistons you need..

Nice work Johannes! Looking forward to see the dyno-pull  :D

I still have some 88,5 pistons for sale . They where made by Wahl , a company that makes racing pistond for mahle . Very strong and lightweight . Their are only a view miles on them . Kompression height is the same as the 90,5 x 82

Udo

This is awsome, great job I am a fan of a mouse motor and will follow this closely, I would have really loved to have seen you do this with a singleport.  I see you are using non counterweighted crankshaft.  How balanced were you able to get the crankshaft down too without the counterweights?

Here is something for you singleport fans.

Kevin

(http://images.thesamba.com/vw/gallery/pix/377171.jpg)



 

  Hello all, I'm Anthony and I work @ Heads Up Performance. I've been working with Taylor for "way too long" on this small motor project. The object was to try to run a bug competively in NHRA SS/CC again. Well, they moved the class to Modified Stock and renamed it SS/FS. Same weight break and rules, so we didn't get too bummed. Taylor is using a 1967 sedan, so it will have the Klingamann, Mike Smith look, my all time favorite drag cars.
  The motor is going to be a 94x60, Aluminium rods, roller cam, custom everything 101 inch. The heads are "highly modified" 044 castings with Heads Up/ Componant Development 1.8:1 rockers. I don't even want to think how much time I have in these little babies. They just hit the bench the other day, 250 CFM @.700 @ 25" on our Super Flow 600 bench. The valve are 45x36 with really small chambers. Getting compression is really hard on this motor.
  We are going to fire the motor up on 48 idf carbs first, and maybe run it down the track, but then switch to fuel injection after. I can't wait to finish this motor. I've been thinking about this kind of combo for aboiut 10 years, then Taylor came along. He had the same kind of ideas and want to run in NHRA again, so we kind of pooled our thoughts and hopefully the thing runs good enough to make a good showing for VW's in the door car catagories again.
  More to come later...

                                                        Anthony Chicca    Heads Up Performance

Oh what a great result...i still know what my next project is:-)) it sounds like a high rev. motorcycle engine....if i see these low weights of flywheel and pistons.. wow..i am speechless..

Regards
Tom

Hi Torben,

Sorry I missed your question.

The I/E ratio is about 78%, if you go back in the thread you will find the flow numbers from 2-16mm lift.

Best regards
Johannes

Hello everyone,

I posted this on a thread at STF.
I think Johannes is timid......look what he already did with his 1915 cc. Never did he mention this yet, so I do. It is on the JPM website under movies.
Listen to it and believe him, it runs and stays together. It is used on the street too.

Frallan

http://www.jpmotorsport.se/

1915 cc close to 250 hp at 9500 rpm.
4 Mikuni carburators.
Soon Motec FI and more HP, if I am to believe him.
Just listen to it and anyone who has riden this car ( I havent) says that the car is streetable and has lowdown torque. I dont get it but why not?

You can balance a crank with or without counterweights. Think about it... when counterweights are added, there is 2 put on each "side" of the crank...

Hi Anthony,
I'm curious. What is the reason for the 1" x 1" bar welded along the bottom of that head? And what are going to do for valve covers? 
I like the idea of going to 48 IDF footprint EFI. Much more compact.

Can you get the same tolorance in grams with or without counterweights, or can you balance to a smaller gram with counterweights,  is maybe the way I should have worded the question.


Kevin

Hello Frallan,

Thank you for your nice words.
The dynopull on my homepage made to 9500rpm is the first version of my 1915 project.
It produced 224hp/8400rpm, today the same engine with some more R&D to it produce 246hp/8900rpm
and keeps good power till 9500rpm.It will be equipped with Motec and my F1 roller throttle bodies for this season, I hope.

Sorry for taking a side step.

Regards
Johannes

Any VW crank can be balanced to 0.0000000g of imbalance.  The size of the counterweight has nothing to do with the balancing job.  The counterweight helps prevents flexing of the crank.  The ideal counterweight for a VW crank is much heavier than is physically possible.  In other words, they are never big enough.

That's true, I couldn't have said it better

That is the unfinished valve cover rail. It will be profiled later. We will be running either the Autocraft cast valve covers, or a light-weight sheet metal version. Haven't decided yet. The IDF carb is the "Bastard Child" of the Weber line-up. Properly modified they can flow MORE than a 48 IDA. The only way an IDA can beat it is by boring it bigger. But even an IDF can be bored to 50mm. The manifold package of the IDF is also superior to the IDA. It has a straighter shot. No bends equal more flow. Plus the IDF has a better idle circut. To Many pluses for the IDF, I wish they still made them. With that said, I think the injection will still run better than the IDF. More power under the curve=better E.T.s  Hopefully!

                                                                                  Anthony Chicca    Heads Up Performance

Are these the new style Autocraft rockers ?

Udo

Udo,it meantions in the first post by Anthony they are component devolopement 1.8/1 rockers :)

cheers  richie

Hi Richie

Autocraft has 1.8 i think  :)

Udo

Same rockers. They are Componant Development rockers. They are the company that makes the heads and rockers. Roger @ Heads Up and Mike @ Autocraft are parteners on the progect (put the money up for the project). Both Heads Up and Autocraft sell the same parts. We have heads, rockers (1.55, 1.7, and 1.8) valve covers. Manifolds are coming soon.

These rockers change the geometry of the pushrod in relation to the lifter. The pushrod and the lifter are now straight in-line. I don't think this motor (Taylors 1600) would be so sucessful if it wasn't for these rockers. As you cut the lenghth of the motor down (bring the head closer to the case) this angle on the pushrod gets more extreme.

                                                                                     Anthony  Heads Up Performance

Sshhhheeeessshhhhh Anthony, I never saw those babies over there! How long do build a duplicate set? 1 week? Come on I know you can pull it off! This will be the second time.  ;) ;D. You da man! I'm VERY close by the way. Going in on Fri. Later Casey.

That motor is awesome.When I first got my bug I was asking about possibilities of building a 1600cc in stock bore/stroke form but I was told it would be a waste of time,build a stroker or go home...
I love the fact these motors can rev high.I like that part, but how reliable are they with the new technology?I read this whole thread, and seen that back then they grenaded after a certain amount of time but was that with just strictly racing them?If I was to build or attempt to build one, it would be a daily driver for me so would that be bad or good?I like the idea of a high strung 1600cc with 10:1 cr, capable of reving to at least 7k.Id be happy if it made 110-130hp , after all these are small mouse motors.Would they be as quick as the strokers being they have less torque?Sorry about all the questions I'm just really curious about thinking outside the box since I dont get along well inside the box... ;D

Can you guys tell me what its costing you guys to build a mouse motor?I'd be happy with around 110-120hp out a 1600,1641,1679.High revs sound cool to me..LOL

An engine like this would be not so expensive . 110-120 hp is easy to get . Depends on what new parts you want , case , heads ..

Udo

I was told it would be a waste of time an money, is this true?Also I notice you guys use lightweight parts, Ive looked a few up like Jet rods,7lb flywheels, there really pricey.Can I get away with a 12lb flywheel,lightweight lifters, and whatever else I can get on a budget.

To get 120 horses you don't need a single lightweight part. You can get away with stock rods and a Mahle 94mm cylinder kit. What you do need is a pair of nice heads in combination with a good cam.  8)

I forgot to mention that I was talking about a 1915, or a "non stroker"

That is all !! You are right Jon

Udo

Yup Ive been told many times its all in the heads, but was just curious.Whats it costing on average to build these little mouse motors(ie 1600,1603,1641,1679,1699)?Trying my best to stay on topic (sorry, Im just amazed about these little mouse motors)but from what your saying I can build any of those sizes up to 110-120hp.Also Ive read posts before that these motors dont make enough power to move until after 4000rpms, I hope thats not true because I want one of these for a street motor.Thinking maybe 40IDF's,FK8 cam with 1.4:1 rockers, 1.5" merged header, 044 heads from CB Performance, and some type of ignition.

IMO, you are looking in the wrong direction.
The most reliable hp is displacement.  Getting 120hp out of a 1600 NA is not easy.  Don't believe anyone that says it is.

In my time I have built a couple of these small engine with that hp range. 120 hp out of a 1600 cc for daily use is stretching it, witout saying impossible. 1680 cc. with 117 - 120 usable hp is not a problem. The few extra cc. helps making it driveable at all rpm. There are a couple of solutions. I have my own of course. ::)

I have a 1600 cc 110 hp version that works very well on the street, and a (rpm limited) 100 hp versoin built mainly out of stock parts. The key is to make the engine pull torque soon enough to make it decent in the lower rpm. Its absolutely possible, but you have to think a little different than mainstream.
But from there to JPM´s or Autocraft´s heads & engines is a giant leap.

T

I have modified my post as it was unclear at one point, I was talking about a "non-stroker" (1915) not a 1600.
Thats why I mention the cylinder kit.

Bruce, I guess anyone that has seen this thread understands that "good heads" is beyond regular "good heads".
Nothing is Easy, but a having the help of a head porter makes it easyer, in my opinion.

My daily driver 1600 went 14.8's @ 88mph. The car was light (noisy), and had close 3-4. But it was a simple and relatively inexpensive combo that worked very well. Someday Ill build a "clone" with the new tricks Ive learned :)

I agree with that.
For Project X, if you build a 2110 with really badly ported heads, it will still make at least 100-110hp, and be very easy to build.

Yeah understand a 2L stroker can make that hp easy but Id rather have something smaller but capable of 100hp at least.You know, the little motor that nobody expects to be quicker than it looks, like that 1603cc, what kind of money has that guy put into it, anyone know?

expensive.....Heads and pistons are the most expensive parts...i think within all parts,+ his own working time it will be 4000-5000€ for this engine....

Bye
Tom

For this horesepower it is not woth to build a 2,0 ltr engine . So stay at your 1600 or max. 1776 . It is very easy and cheep to built and both make very good street horepower .

Udo

ok, cool thanks, also anyone know what 4000-5000€ is in American money by chance?LOL

4000 €  to 5000€ is 5700 usd to 7250 USD according to international rates of today.

There's nothing wrong with wanting to do something different.  But when you are on a tight budget, you won't get there.

A 2 liter is gonna cost you $250 more to build than a 1776.  What's the big deal about that?

Why don't you let us in on how easy and cheap it is to build a 1600 that outputs more than double the stock hp.

JPM built this engine to test what could be done with cheap parts in combination with know how. As he does his own heads this has for him been a very cheap, as for the rest of us we have to add the cost of having a pair of head built.

5700 bucks to build a 1603cc to get 176hp? Is that what your saying it would cost to build that motor? JPM is in Sweden right? So if I got heads from him and that exhaust it would cost double since IM in Florida...umm holy crap LOL

Where do you get those cheap cranks , clearance the case ... ?

Everybody has his own experience , i only work with good quality cranks like scat , okrasa , gene berg .

Udo

CB sells a perfectly good forged chromoly crank for $289.

Why don't you tell us how much you would charge for a turn-key 1600 that makes 120hp?

Hard to justify spending $150-200 for DPR or DMS stock c/w crank when you can find cheap Chinese 78-84 strokers for $199.00.
http://www.thesamba.com/vw/classifieds/detail.php?id=388182

A longblock would be something about 3000 euros , depends on what new parts you want . And a 2 liter starts at 4000 .

Udo

Hi there!

Finally I got the time to put the "Mouse Motor" on the dyno and this is what I see.

POWER:138,8kW 188.7hp/7670rpm
TORQUE:192.4Nm/6100rpm(138,7lbs)

The ignition and fuel curve is optimized, the main venturies is 37mm, main jets is 145 the air is 160 idle jets are 65f10 and the E-tubes are F7.I will go bigger with the main venturies, the first step will be 39mm, this will hopefully raise the output alittle bit more and get me closer to the calculated max power rpm(8000).I will post a video later.


Talk to you later
Johannes

Holy crap!!!!!! :o :o :o :o
to me, that is taking it to the next level!
I`m going insane here, I desperatly want to hear the motor run,  please post a clip off the dyno run NOW  ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
I`m speachless!your are making the same power numbers in your tiny little 1603ccm mousemotor as I do with my 2332ccm

That is awesome. I never dreamed you could get those kind of numbers out of 1600cc. Even the torque figure looks very respectable. If you could, Id love to see a dyno graph to show the power and torque curves.

What is the compression ratio??

"your are making the same power numbers in your tiny little 1603ccm mousemotor as I do with my 2332ccm"

Exactly dude  ;) :)

:o AAAALLRIIIGHT !!!!  Impressive numbers. Where does it begin to make power ?
Torben

Johannes told me on the phone tonight that the engine has a very wide power band, in fact he compares it with a Japanese motorcycle.  ;D ;D ;D ;D

I knew from past experiences with JPM that he delivers when he says he's going to do something, but I confess to having thought that this was a far stretch. The man knows his stuff!

Can't wait for that video!!
 ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
 

A little bit of JPM "bragging" ...I like to brag about you Johannes.
I subscribe to some Formula one and High tech racing magazines, in them I could read last year that the supercar manufacturer Koenigsegg are getting in to racing. Not just world record runs but real racing.
It was mentioned about some few companies that would assist them in further development of the car and on the engine company, JPM was mentioned.
I like that.

Anyway, Congratulations Johannes to the new Mouse concept!
Nice move, nice touch to the all of us in the ACVW comunity.

Thats awesome!
Now send it to Or. Florida and I'll be happy to test it in my bug....course I wouldnt ship it back to you  ;D

I think that Johannes build has shown what the modern understanding of flow, chamber shape, compression ratios, part limitations, coupled to engineering and practical knowledge really mean.  The beauty of the build is also in use of original parts that the vw have somewhat rejected as unworthy. The hot roders spirit we admire, is back with such builds. Bravo!

I think you hit the nail on the head with your first post here on The Lounge and I totally agree - congrats with the impressive results Johannes!

Best rgs
Kalle

I´m simply overwhelmed by those numbers! Thanks a lot for sharing so much knowledge with us, Johannes!

Tobi

I can only repeat...AWESOME....117 HP/L.......

Tom

Don't ask why I didn't do this before, but the info and result on this thread is worth a lot! but the least I can do is make this thread a sticky.
Congratulations Johannes with the result (so far)

Trond:-)

Some years back, I read in HotVW about an engine builder contest. This was won by Pat Downs from CB-Performance.

I do not recal the numbers from that contest, but with 117hp/liter (1603ccm) I would imagine that this mouse motor would have been noticed.


Would we see 120hp/liter when the chokes is optimized??

Id love to have a motor like this but I dont think my budget would allow it.MMMM... could you imagin taking that motor in a bug to the strip and beating  a v8 LOL or some japanese car?
So Johannes how long would this motor last?Also when are the 86mm pistons going to be available in America for us to use  ;) ;D

Johannes, congratulations on your accomplishment, it is great to see somebody achieve such a high specific output from a VW, especially one that accomodates so many factory-style parts (like the cylinder heads). I was enrolled in a camshaft-theory class back in 2000, and was working on a project of 2332cc to make 100hp/liter and run on street, but never achieved my goal (I think 100hp/liter with large single cylinder displacement would be too difficult to do with VW-style heads, etc, maybe things have changed...)
If you don't mind sharing, when you se the intake centerline on your motor, where did you set it to? On street motors with 260' + @.050" I have been setting them @ 104 ATDC, because I was taught this increases throttle response and build cylinder pressure faster. I don't have hard data saying this is what to do, only what I was taught. Do you mind sharing your thoughts on the cam in your engine, and where you set it up at?

Again, congratulations.  :)

Jim Ratto

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9868ihgGVk8
The dyno pull is from 2500rpm to 8500rpm in fourth gear (60-190km/h or 37,5mph-118,75mph).


(http://www.vwnorge.no/JHU/project/jpm/039.jpg)
Today I just had to finish the "Mouse Motor" project and changed the main venturies from 37 to 39mm.
The engine responded really good with an improvement from 138,8-143,3kW or 188,7-194,9hp the torque increased from 191-195Nm (138-141lbs).
The attiude of this engine is really something, nice and smoth at idle and kicks really hard if you want it to.

There would probably be some more improvements with bigger venturies but as it is now there is no bog or hassitation between low and high circuit and as this engine is to be used on the street I prefere to have it like this.When using too big venturies you often notice a hassitation between low and high circuit even sometimes with the third progression hole modification.

The purple curve is engine power and the green curve is wheel power.

Thank you guys for all possitive input and if you have questions do not hassitate to ask.

We are lucky to have an outstanding forum like this.

Regards
Johannes

IMFUCKINGPRESSIVE!!!!

Amazing numbers Johannes, congrats.

Super..................

Looking forward to see this one on SCC!!!   ;)

restpect!!!

you are the "head-guru" ;D so much flow with small valves! i think the right combination of all the engineparts makes the "little difference".

dirk zeyen

hi Again, Johannes....

also, aside from your thoughts on cam timing, what did you select for emulsion tubes and jets for this last dyno session?

Thanks,

Jim

I knew these little "mouse motors" could make the BIG numbers  ;) :)

How goes the old saying about displacement?  ;)

I have a question for Johannes (or others) if you don't mind to share. How do you determine the intake and exhaust tuning length (second and third order)? I have tried to use a equation from an engineering book but the numbers you gave in some other post didn't wont to fall out.  I know that the the variables are the cam intake/exhaust duration, rpm-time, gas velocity and speed of sound but i apparently i'm missing something.

Congrats Johannes on the results. Outstanding work!

Awesome just awesome...I love it.Any idea what this baby would do at the track just for kicks?

.....121.58hp/liter...

JHU told me that JPM had done some calculations with the number he had from the first dyno pull where it "only" made 188hp  ;D and with a 730kg car(included driver) the calculation said 11.97 on the 1/4 mile. Thats pretty fast with a 1603ccm!But thats just theory, the only way to find out is to race it 8)

Once again Johannes, just awsome!
Looking at the photo of the power graph, it seems to be two small bumps in the curve. Is this where the rpm is between 1th and 2nd order, 2nd and 3th order? or is there another reason?

Hi Jim,
The camshaft is a fk45@108 and I dailed it 105deg intake centerline, too much advance will hurt the the overall performance because the exhaust changes too in a negative way and at a point the intakevalve will close too early and you lose a lot of top end power.I use to look at the closing point for the intake valve regarding to how good the heads are and the displacement of the engine, too late closing point will hurt the all over performance.If your heads are good you can close the intake valve earlier without losing top end power because the heads will still keep the VE high as the rpm goes up and your midrange will be superior.So from my experience the hardest part in chosing a cam is to determine when the intake valve should close, when you have desided the closing point chose duration so the intake valve does not hit the piston at tdc including the depth of your valvepockets.
Hopefully you see my point.

With the 39mm venturies the mains are 160,air180 and still F7 E-tubes, at low and midrange the A/F is too fat that is why there are small bumps around 4-5k rpm, maybe with F-16 or F-9 E-tubes I can get rid of those.The F-7 E-tube is a very fat tube at low and mid range the F-16 or 9 is a lot leaner.

Regards
Johannes

There is something very appealing with these small capacity engines. This might be optimised far beyond what you can buy of the shelf today, but still I think it opens our minds to see the possibilities out there. First of all the Weber 48 is a HUGE performance carburator to this engine, also the "mandatory" counterweighted crank is stiffer. I bet there is a golden halfway between, cost physical size, performance and COOLNESS, and this engine can't be very far from it.

40x35,5 valves and 195 horses from 1603 cc?!  I want more of these threads!!  ;)   

195hp...very impressive, how much more are gonna go? LOL

For the pistons, if one was to build one similar to this motor or close could the Porsche 356 86mm pistons be used?Also since a 7lb flywheel cost 700.00 here where I'm at, could a 11-12.5lb lightened flywheel be used?
And could any head porter do a 043 head like this with the welds, and the FK45 cam, you have is a engle cam or was it a modified one.I seen on the first page you have a cam with 2 profiles I guess, if I understand that, not sure.
Thanks

Hi Eugene,
I use to tune on third order up to 8000rpm and then the second above 8000rpm.
Using the second order on low rpm gives you very long manifolds which many times decreases the total flow of the intake system.

Third order:2460000/rpm=total intake length(mm).
Second order:3350000/rpm=total intake length(mm).

The length on the "Mouse Motor"s manifold are about 15mm too long from calculation that is one reason it peaks at lower rpm.

Regards
Johannes

Holy crap!

So let me get this straight... is this 195 wheel horsepower??? or is it corrected flywheel horsepower??

And also, whats the compression???

Good work! ;)

Impressive to say the least.
It is corrected flywheel horsepower. The rear wheel horsepower is "only" 180.5!

The original spec list on page two says a compression of 12,0:1. Not sure if this is what it ended up with.

"We are lucky to have an outstanding forum like this.

Regards
Johannes"

No - we`re lucky to have you around sharing you knowlegde with the rest of us. Truly amazing and insipiring - thanks Johannes!

Best rgs
Kalle

Hi Zack,
The comp ratio ended up at 12,32:1 and the power is corrected(DIN) at flywheel(as Roman said) about 1% less than the late SAE hp.
It is thanks to welded chambers otherwise it would be really hard to achive.

Regards
Johannes

ABSOLUTELY!

Johannes,
I am very curieus about the small (gearbox and driveline) loss you have over the flywheel hp: Only 11.4 kW on a total of 143.3 kW! Thats just 8% :o
The 132.4 is at the rear wheel, so with a 'normal' loss of about 15-18% the FWhp would have been (is) even (much) more... ;D

Do you have extremely good gearbox oil or something that explains this?

Tnx,
Walter

Thanks Johannes, interesting way to look at cam timing. I forget the lesson I was taught about cams, but there was a hierarchy of valve timing events that related to the 4 strokes of the motor.... I think # 1 event considered, according to class was exhaust opening, for "blowdown" but I don't remember, so obviously, I don't use that lesson for cam decision. The thoughts behind the intake center @ 104 was to get valve full open at piston position of fastest acceleration. I have noticed something with FK45 (I run same cam in my 94mm x 78mm, 541cc per cyl) that I haven't experienced with other cams, in engine response, and I don't know if it is my timing of cam or the cam itself.

A topic for another thread.  :)

Jim

very nice accomplishment. hats off for you!

I second that, the forum is just the facilitator... Its the people that make it what it is... so thank YOU guys

Hello everybody,
I am a first time poster in the cal look lounge. And I have to say that this forum is awesome. Especially this thread. I have alway been
interested in mouse motors ,and planned on building one in the future. Awesome info guys. Keep it up.

Gabe Scott
Ventura,CA
USA

Hi Gabe and welcome to The Lounge! Don`t forget to keep the rest of us in the loop when you start building your mouse engine.

Best rgs
BeetleBug

Could you explain this for us dummies, Johannes?

Hello there,

JHU, I ment that you should open the intake valve early because you want as much flow available as possible when the piston accelerates down(more flow area under the curve), but there are mekanical limitations you have to deal with(valve hitting piston).
I decided to cloce the intake valve 57deg abdc @ 0,05", then the fk45 became a good choise together with 1,55:1 rockers.
I am close to 6mm lift @ tdc so the valvepockets are pritty deep.
Maybe I am not clear enought ,please let me know.

Regads
Johannes

That helped quite a bit, thanks.  :)

Damn I speechless and that doesn t happen that often.
Very very cool and that with stock parts appart from the pistons..
......
Where can I bring mine 1600............ ;)

Wow... a neighbor...I'm in Simi.

Johannes,

As suggested on here many times already great effort with the motor, and some really interesting insight, but best of all, it’s great to see someone actually doing it, rather than just talking about it.

I was wondering what fuel you were using as I see you will be running the motor on the street with the CR set at 12.3:1, also how do you find the cooling with such a high CR on the street?

Thanks again for you part in a great thread

Peter

Hi Peter,
Good to hear that you like the project.
I use our best pump gas "V-Power" from Shell gas stations, Shell says 99 octane.
When you are using a smaller diameter piston the heat transfer thrue the piston rings to the cylinder are better than with a bigger piston.
The area of a circle increases by the square, the circumference does not, that is why a smaller piston can use higher CR.
I always use the cooling fan from a 1303 bug then you need a really good oil cooler with electrical fan and all your cooling tins has to fit to 100%, no leakage.

Regards
Johannes

Fantastic Project Johannes, Youre a hard working artist !
BTW, maybe you have seen the Topic: Drilling Your Heads (Cooling Fins), by me dummy.  Do You have experimented with this ? Or maybe share your thoughts ?

Thanks,
Harry

Its nearly unbeliveble Johannes
Could sombody go there to witness this , longlivity and torque must be hurting , live in Baastad from time to time ,
like to visit ...
Its more effective than a 1000 RR bike  , like whatch that..
Reg
Erich.
"lot more than impressed"...

how does it cost for a similar motor ??? just simple question  ::)

Yeah Johannes lets have a rough idea of hours/cost involved  ??? ;) :)

I would REALLY like to know how many hours went into those heads  ;) :)

Hi there,

I will soon post a list with the parts used in the "Mouse Motor" and prices.

Monkiboy, I have spent between 40 to 50 hours on the heads from start to finish including flow tests and welding.

Regards
Johannes

looking forward to it! (and many others i think  ;))  a whole week in the heads  :o

Hi Johannes
For German street use i would relocate the spark plugs .  ;) 

Udo

Hello,
Here is the parts list.
Most of the parts are from CB performance but some from CSP in Germany, CSP in Sweden and JPM.

IDA carb kit 1099,95
Heads 043 bare pair 211,9
CB Ti valves  503,6
OTEVA 75 valve springs 185
JPM ti retainer 173
JPM rockers 1046
Push rods 49,95
Push rod tubes 167 CSP
Cam 104
Lifters 22,95
Cam gears Magnum 172 CSP
Bearings 39,85
Oil pump 27,95
Pump cover full flow 28
JE pistons 1206
Cylinder kit 165
Fuel pump block off 4,95
009 dist 109,95
Compufire 63,95
Cables 27,95
Valve covers 12,95
Clips 5,95
Gasket kit 9,95
Oil sealing flywheel 3,95
Clutch disc 29,95
Pressure plate Kennedy 180mm 179
Flywheel bolt 56
Deep sump 105
Lash caps 12,95
Pully 18,95
Pully bolt 4,95
Cyl studs 119
Header S&S 1 5/8 332
Old engine 155


Total parts 6454 USD.

Hopefully I did not forget too many parts.

The time I spent on the total build is aprox 100 hours(night hours).

Regards
Johannes

Nice of you to take the time to come up and share the list... thanks Johannes

off topic, I am sorry, but could you read my thread in Cal Look section about Porsche valve timing characteristics, powerband, etc?

here it is: http://cal-look.no/lounge/index.php?topic=4395.0

Thank you

Wow,there some pricey parts in there for a little 1600 :D    Johannes which lifters did you use at only 22.95?   cheers richie,uk

Hi Richie,
The lifters are std VW part # 1512 at CB.

Regards
Johannes

2,0 ltr and 185 hp is the same we had on our last Käfercup circuit engiens . They worked good and the whole race season without problems

Udo

Are lifters normaly expencive?

In my engines I use STD lifters (made in mexico), and when used with easy cams (nice ramp open/close) like my fk-98, I do not feel the need for anything else. (BTW its a race engine, maybe street engines need other types of lifter)

Thats exactly it n2o, with K800's you don't need to gamble on lifters, sticking to VW's own.... so am I, until I learn  ;D
And a race engine has it easy compared to a street engine...

CHECK out the mouse in the house!!

http://www.griebel.blogspot.com/ (http://www.griebel.blogspot.com/)

how about web cams? i read you can't use std lifters with those... ???

Webcam with SLR treated Lube-A-Lobes works absolutely perfect for me. (Aircooled.net)

Why not?

no idea, that's why i'm asking.
lately i've come to a conclusion that stock lifters aren't that bad after all ;)

As long as you have enough spring pressure I do think every lifter is good enough. To little and every lifter would pit - no matter what.

Best rgs
BB

Having just read this thread while eating my cereal at work , i have a massive grin on my face.

Well done guys !!!

That must have been a big bowl of cereal.. ;D

yeah went soggy at the end :)

Its a great thread , spoken to my engine builder his voice piked up when i said fancy doing a mouse motor :)

I was talking to Johannes on tuesday and he was working on the new car with the mouse motor. He planned to be ready to Bug Run in Sweden next weekend.
Can't wait to see it!

Yes, its going to be some Mouse racing over there!! COOL!!

Cool! Can't wait to see it lined up aginst a big cc car and see how it performs. "Are you a mouse or a man?"  ;D

Wonder how much he can shave of his ET with a piece of cheese at the end of the strip?? :P

He only has one car to fear..

Some pictures taken yesterday at Meca Raceway in Malmö
(http://www.vwcsp.se/Per/DSC_0048.jpg)
Nice interior
(http://www.vwcsp.se/Per/DSC_0049.jpg)
The mouse motor
(http://www.vwcsp.se/Per/DSC_0052.jpg)
(http://www.vwcsp.se/Per/DSC_0056.jpg)
(http://www.vwcsp.se/Per/DSC_0059.jpg)

The mouse is alive!! Congratulations with your new car Johannes!

Congratulation with new Car Johannes,se you this weekend.

Magne

.

.

Now that IS indeed a mouse engine! Congrats with the time slip and the new car!

Best rgs
BB

WOW!! 7.45 that is what... a 11.90 or something?
See you at the track at BugRun!!

Congratulations with car, timeslip and engine! AMAZING! See you this weekend.  :)

Hi there,
Hope you all are doing well.

The day before yesterday I went to Mecca raceway, an 1/8 mile racetrack, with my new car and the Mouse Motor.
First pass 7,56s/144.46km/h(90,28mph) second pass 7,45s/146,7km/h(91,68mph), the track conditions were very good.

I am now preparing for Bug Run this weekend, hope to see some of you there.

BTW I still have a Big Grin from ear to ear in my face.

Regards
Johannes

WOW that is SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO COOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL its really good to see a mouse motor running number like that - is this the engine you built and showed on here resently  ???

I might be dropping you a line soon about building MY "mouse motor"  ;) :)

Hi Johannes!

The big grin is on my face too.
Congratulations!!!
This is fun.
Apart from the engine I do love the interior of your car.  I intend to do the same of putting in some beutifying stuff.
It comes out very good.
I have my Tetra Pak friend with an ugly blue Chevelle runing 10-12 rounds down the strip last Wednesday (503 cui / 550 hp injected daily driver, 7.70s) and he was very impressed with these beetles. I guess it was Niclas in Herbie 53 in the other lane?
He was so excited about it all that he picked up the phone and briefed me long distance.
I am very proud on your behalf.
Good luck at BG.

awesome job....very nice car to...congrats

Well,I guess I'm the first back on the lounge after BugRun.
So here is the news.Johannes made a 11,58s run on saturday!!!!
Just AMAZING!!!
And the car is soooo nice too!!

A very nice car!

In the setup list I see you're using a 180mm flywheel. I'm thinking of buildling myself an engine but everyone advices me a 200mm flywheel. Why did you choose for a 180mm flywheel?

Johannes thanks for MAKING my weekend!!

Case: original AS41
Crank:German stock
Rods:German stock
Pistons:JE 86mm 24mm comp hight
Cylinders:Stock 85,5mm honed to 86mm
Heads:043 40x35mm valves
Compression:12,0:1
Rockers:Jpm two stud 1,5:1 ratio
P-rods:Manton 3/8" cromoly
Cam:Fk45in/Fk44 ex
Cam gears:Magnum
Oilpump:26mm
Deepsump:1,5lit
Flywheel:180mm stock lightend
Clutch disc:cush lock
Pressure plate:Kennedy
Header:Custom made 1 5/8" tuned length
Manifolds:Custom made tuned length(second order)
Carbs:IDA 48

I don't think anyone on here could belive that this was a recipie for a 11.5 engine.... except you!
And it sounds smooth as silk when it runs... :o :o
Mouse motor fans out there, keep the dreams alive!  8)

Thank god you guys are back and give some report fom BG.
11.58s!!!
You do not disapoint. That is for sure.

This thread and specifically you Johannes is so much fun that I added this infomrtaion and link on both STF and Cal look lounge-drag racing. It is for sure worth sharing to a wider audience.

11.58???

I cant melt it. Over breakfast I just did not get it too match.
What have you done?

7.5 on the eighth is just barely in to the 11.99 on the quarter. Now the 92 mph indicates you could cut another tenth at MECA on the eigth.
92 mph on the eight could get you in to 11.8 (maybe 11.7) on the quarter if you have an extremely light car but I think you have mentioned around 730 kg and that is 1600lbs.
Is the 11.58 correct?

Help me understand.
You need another 20 hp compared to the 92 mph so have you lowered the weight or what have you done since a week back?
Now it will be very interesting to see what mph you had?
112 mph / 180 km/h ?

Do you know exact weight of car and yourself? Stupid question. Knowing you, ofcourse you do.

Thanks for the link Frallan!
Awesome info.
Congrats Johannes, awesome times and effort to see the project through.

Love the combo (and 180mm clutch).
 ;)

Please can you re-post the pics of the heads and chambers Johannes?
(from a few pages back are not there any more).

(http://i113.photobucket.com/albums/n216/dangerous_05/New180disc.jpg)

The web server with the pics on are temporarily down, they are working to get them back up. Sorry

That's an impressive time for sure. Looking forward to seeing if you can squeeze any more out of it.

 8)

monkiboy's 69x101 Angle Flow "mouse motor" should be interesting!

 :P

Hmmm 69x101 interesting  :D :D :D I can't wait to see this one run at SCC and have a chat with Johannes ;) :)

Congrats Johannes, really cool!  Both car and motor are good reflections to the JPM brand, its all second to non!

Hello,
Thanks for all "con grats".
It has been a really nice weekend with some good 1/4 mile passees with "The Screaming Mouse".
First pass went 11,79s/174,00km/h(108,75mph), second pass went 11,58s/177,01km/h(110,63mph) which I have some doubts about.
The time seems to be wrong but the speed are correct, it is a pitty because it was my best pass which also shows from the top speed, a realistic time would have been 11,70s.

So far the 11,79s is the fastest but maybe I can squeese a little bit more hp from the engine and do some more adjustments to my new car and hopefully cut a tenth or so.

Best regards
Johannes

great effort. preaty sneeky job on that glass front end it almost passes as a oem one. would like to hear the engine up in the rpm im sure it soundes real good. good luck with it and have a good time. congrats.  UD.

Film, videos :o :o???Someone could post?

Johannes you make a great job:-) It is a great research and developement on really highest level i´ve ever seen..I hope we see us this year....Perhaps i come across to the dynoday..

Bye
Tom

". preaty sneeky job on that glass front end it almost passes as a oem one."

I was fooled for alittle while too - VERY nice work dude  :)

Johannes,

Very impressive work. I have followed this thread from the beginning to your very excellent 11.58 accomplishment! I have learned a lot.

This project definitely sounds fun.

How about this turbo mouse?
1641 cc

I am impressed. I think of Bob Mc Clurgs 9 s beetle from the 70-80s.
The 2007 specs of the Hyper bug-car weight with driver-1835 U.S pounds, 6 inch slicks (not  6-W's)type 1 trans,3.88 R@P

stock 69 mm VW 8 dowel crank with welded counterweights
043 heads with dual springs and 1.25 rockers
single 40 mm idf carb
stock rods
MSD ignition

2008  update -Billet heads ,intakes,and pushrod tubes- designed and made by Adam Badgett, driver of the Hyper Bug.
who also fabricated the new exhaust system as seen in the last video below.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=6oKqSLvbj0M

http://youtube.com/watch?v=d2k-guT9VpA

http://youtube.com/watch?v=wquvC1jeZQ8&feature=related

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=LstJ1c-vi30

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=W5aQXg9orkU&feature=related


http://youtube.com/watch?v=D7mJkqcanuU
(http://i153.photobucket.com/albums/s207/Frallan2/billethead1.jpg)
(http://i153.photobucket.com/albums/s207/Frallan2/billet2.jpg)

Frallan, I am personal friends with Adam and Freddy Bagget the owners of the Hyberbug. This car is amazing. it runs 6.20's in the 1/8. This year they have made some changes and are still working out the bugs. Adam works for a NASCAR team in the US and is a very talented CNC programmer.

The mouse on the track....  talk about a sweet running engine?! Crank the volume!!

http://www.youtube.com/v/v15y0b480GY&hl

I'd really like to know how Johannes car is geared. I'm not taking anything away from his accomplishment (hell it's one of the coolest things I've seen in years), but gearing definitely comes into play with such a small engine.

Also where is the engine being shifted? In the video it sounds out of this world.

From another angle..

http://jeeent.blogspot.com/2008/06/bugrun-2008.html

Damn, I didnt know that was a 'glass front end until UD pointed it out, nice!!

Would love to know the other ratios too!!

Hi there,

The ratios in my transaxel is R/P 4,375:1
                                        First 3,44:1
                                    second 2,54:1
                                       third  1,71:1
                                      fourth 1,35:1

The shift point is 8,5k and it never falls under 6k.
6k is at max torque, with this gearing I use the engine between max torque and max power in all four gears, this is of course more important on a "Mouse Motor" than bigger engines.

Best regards
Johannes

Wow, thanks for sharing Johannes!

Hello Johannes,

Thank you for sharing!

BTW I read that you plan on driving the engine on the street with full tin and cooling. will you be using the red early model or the Super?

Do you shift out of 1st before or after the 60' mark?

Hello,

Oliver Frey:My blue Super is retierd from the race track and I use it on a daily basis with a 2276,10,6:1 cr,fk 46,MS230  heads,JPM rockers two stud,scat 82 crank china,CB race rods,magnum straight cut,Phyton ex from CSP 45mm(very quiet),Keihin 41mm bike carbs making 222 very drivable hp.
My plan is to make the "Screaming Mouse"(red car) street legal for next year and do smaller trips with it , but the priority will be on the drag strip.

Bruce:I really do not know if I shift before or after the 60ft, probably after because a pritty long first gear.


Regards
Johannes

I just ran it in Drag racing analyzer and it comes out a shift right around the 60 ft mark or maybe just after at 63 feet with all whatever variables you might have.
I still miss the real weight of your car Johannes.
Playing a lot with the theoretical tool gives me more hp than what you have indicated, that is if your car isn´t even lighter than what has been indicated.
I also think we have a slightly wrong indication on Mantorp compared to Meca were you have the 60 ft too and reliable timing.
In no way can I simulate and match the Meca performance with Mantorp.

In any case, you have a real mighty mouse and you are very skilled in order to go that fast, first time out with new car AND new engine. Not just any engine either but what most of us will agree is fairly new territory.
Very few will do that.
(No, not that small cc engines did not go fast before but you have a new combo that is exceptional. Let me guess that you have a bunch of other improvement ideas that you are burning to test next year?)
Keep it up. As you must have noticed I am proud to "brag" about your achievements. It is just fun.

Hello Johannes,
Did you modyfy the VW 69mm crank in any way other than 8 dowelling?
I ask, cause I've heard stock cranks are no good for high RPMs...

Counterweighted 69 mm probably.

Original Crank, no counterweights.

I know of an english guys who takes his STOCK VW crank to over 9000rpm ;) :)

Hi,
The crank in the "MM" is a bone stock one, only 8 dowelled and carefully balanced.
Forces created to the crank is from the weight of pistons and con rods, longer stroke and high rpm creates higher G-forces that pulls and bends the crank, and this is no good for the case.
The counterweights helps the crank to be straight.
The pistons and rods in the "MM" is much lighter than stock which means that the need for counterweights are less, I do not say that you do not need them but you defenetly need them less than with 94mm piston and long stroke.

I will show you an example on force created to the crank with a light and heavy piston at the same rpm,stroke and con rod length.

Ex:69mm stroke,8500rpm,5.4"rod and 565g piston(std) F=19276N
Ex:69mm stroke,8500rpm,5.4"rod and 375g piston(JE)  F=12793N

As you can see the created force is 50% more with the heavy std piston.To reach 12793N with the 565g piston the rpm is aprox 6800.

Keeping the weight down will save your engine and make it last longer with more performance.

Regards
Johannes

You make it all sound so simple ;-)

impressive stuff for sure!

I stand corrected ;)

It isn't all that hard if you look into it... Most of it is just common sense...

F=m*a    a is the same for equal RPMs so the bigger the m the bigger the F...


Problem is that the lighter the parts you buy, the lighter your wallet will get as well... :)


BTW. Does anyone know the difference in weight between STD rods and H-beams?

Hey there Johannes,
would you be so kind as to post
some pictures of the chambers and both ports of the heads.
The old ones have vanished,
and I am going crazy with anticipation having ever seen them!
Regards,
Dave.

Johannes you do amazing work!! Amazing results! A friend of mine bought your MS230 heads - fantastic product and great service! Thanks for sharing your projects with us!

I talked to Brian a couple of days ago and the figures above seem to be correct. It is a VERY expensive engine though, SCAT flangded crank, titanium rods etc. No expenses spared!

The Screaming Mouse engine is sold to Greece, but I will make a 1679 based on the same concept to a friends G/Dragster.
As it is a pure race engine the compression will be slightly over 13:1, the cam will be a bit bigger and the intake valves will be 1 mm larger.
Heads by JPM and I will make the rest of the build.
The reson for going 1679 is that re rules for Competition Eliminator G/Dragster says 232 kg/liter and a minimum weight of 386 kg.
386/232= 1663 cc. If we have a 1679 we can weigh in on 390 kg including driver.

Sounds like an interesting project Anders.. Keep us posted. Going to dynoday?

Wow Anders this sounds like a real challenge! I hope you will share your build and theories with us Loungers?!? I just wish I get to go to Dyno Day, but it doesn't look promising >:( Fill Rune with info for me  ;D

Yes, I am going to dyno day.
I will talk to the owner of the dragster and ask if it is OK to share the build, but I don't think there are any problems.

I won't build any engine for Richards Dragster, at least this year. We ended up buying Brian Hyerstays spare 1680 engine, dynoed to 208 hp for a very reasonable price.

i'm sure we'd all love to hear some specs if that's what it's dyno-ed at!!

Berg 69 mm wedgemated counterweighted crank
Berg Thick wall 88's with berg special pistons with dykes rings
Berg Pushrods
Carrillo rods
Stock heads ported by Dick Nuss @ EMS with 42 x 37.5 Del West titanium valves
12.5 compression

Dyoned at Adam Wik's dyno.
197 hp@ 7500 rpm, 198@8000 rpm , 208@8500 rpm, 197@9000 rpm

Best ET 9.28

Nice, sounds similar to what I want to do when I start on my bug again (moms been in the hospital since July, sick since April, so the bugs on hold till December or later)
I still play with ideas though.
This one is the one I do want to do after seeing that 1600cc earlier in this thread.
1600cc
Forged 85.5's
Forged c/w wedgemated 69mm crank
5.5" connecting rods
Engle FK10 cam
Forged cam gear
10:1 Compression
CB Performances CNC Round ported heads
port matched intakes
Dual 40 or 44IDF's
1 5/8" merged header w/ stinger
Pertronix ignition kit

All to be streetable running on 93 octane
 ;D I was told its doable so who knows.

sounds high strung, but i ain't no expert ;)
why wouldn't you go for a few more cc's with machine 88s?

Well I like that 1600cc at the beginning and i want one to :(
Accept I cant afford those 86mm pistons LOL
Is high strung bad?

OHHH no! The most bang for the cc!! is fun!

I don't want to dissapoint you but it won't make any monster horsepower. I called Pat Downs some days ago about a budget small CC engine and he suggested CNC ported Comp eliminators a 1915 and that would maybe be able to do about 210 hp...
There is no off the shelf heads today that can make 123 hp per liter. I know that both EMS and JPM charges about $4500 for these kind of heads.

You won't need any wedgemate either, an 8-dowel done right will work perfect.
Skip the aftermarket rods and spend them on the pistons instead. Go for a 1 1/2" exhaust instead of a 1 5/8".

The Carrillo's in the dragster motor are only 5" long as I remember.

How about if I used slip in 87's with a slip in 74mm crank then, but with the same combo above?

awesome,i like the mouse motor trends ;D

Sounds like a Claude's Buggie's motor from 1985.

Who?

Claudes Buggies. Now known as CB Performance.

How about a small mouse? Actually a very small mouse...  a Quarter Mouse!!
(http://i153.photobucket.com/albums/s207/Frallan2/270920081744.jpg)
Picture by Fredrik "Frallan" Reichel

 ??? :o ??? :o ??? :o ??? ;) :)

a 1/4 mouse, what?  ??? ???

[url]http://cal-look.no/lounge/index.php/topic,6750.msg100845.html#new[/url :)

cool, are they fast or anything?What do they do in the 1/4 mile?

What happend to the mouse motor pictures? Can they still be seen somewhere?

I have now fixed the broken links 8)

WOW!
Thanks for the pics,
nice to finally see the heads.

My new mouse motor

More

Come don't lleave us hanging we NEED some more info on this one  :o ;) :)

looks like twin over head cam, 16V, twin plug motor.

Very nice work...

Have been sketching up a simular item for my motor, although not a mouse motor more like a dirty big rat.


love some more info on it.

1946vw, I will not tell you that engine looks good, actually I think it is ugly.  ::)

But hell, does that monster look lovely or what :o :o

1/4 mouse with cheese, or in metric a royal mouse.  ;D

Better 8 dowel that crank, at least ;)

Will that engine fit? Looks pretty wide 8)

hehe ;D good one Nicolas
reminds me of one of my top 5 best movies. Pulp Fiction 8) 8)

Whatever that is, please let us know more.
My guess is not 4 valves per cylinder but twin plug and 2 valves?

Hi Frallan,
It is an engine for a Comp Eliminator G/Dragster. One of his old engines is in a garage 100 m from me!
Top notch work Brian!

//Roman

oh postman qwit your yapin and build somthing for god sakes. times a ticken ::) ;). UD.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YaKYf0NOMS8  8)

Chris, I must be missing something, so help me out please. What do you mean by "slipper skirt pistons are a very tight fit?" Are you talking about slipper skirts and the width of the assembled engine in relation to fitting into a bug body being "very tight?" The only factor I see here is if your running spacers on the the cylinders, but that'd be with a long stroke rod.

Do you mean to say "very tight" related to the skirt of the piston (barely) coming out of the engine case with those short rods? I'd agree that'd be a concern. With those shorty rods, you'd need to hand grind small windows in the case for the rod stroke, and then match grind (as in carefully have them machined) the cylinders to the case windows. Then you'd hand grind the slipper skirt themselves so they don't hit the case on the return stroke. Those short rods imact calculating your compression ratio, deck height, etc.

You are right on target with the rod lengths themselves, and the crankshaft/rod length ratios as other considerations.

And don't forget that the Modified Compact (A/MC, etc.) and Modified Eliminator (SS/CX) classes all used crankshafts varying in strokes from 78.2mm throught 82mm to meet the weight break rules. Each combo required their own special machine/grind to fit modifications depending ont he parts you assembled. Now, the dual carbs to engine compartment side is tight when you needed to adjust/synching them...

Anyway, our thoughts/input on the discussion....talk to you soon!

Aloha, Frank

Castagnetti Ohana Racing
Honolulu and Hilo

Thanks Vince for posting the video of my Buggy.

Inspirated by this post and by the great job of JPM, we decide to build a small engine also.

We race for the first time (with this engine) in France 3 weeks ago and then all this week end at the EBI 3.

Here is the combo :
AS41 case
66 mm welded berg crank
90 mm autocraft piston & cylinder kit (old from 90's i think).
stock welded heads with 42x37 mm titanium valves
Heads flows 190cfm intake / 150 cfm exhaust at full lift with good velocity
FK89 cam - 1,4 rockers
48 IDA with 40mm venturies
1-7/8 exhaust (too big i know :))
12,5 CR - running with VP racing fuel
No cooling, but alternator is on.

Actually the engine is making 167cv (DIN) HP (perhaps a little more with the changes we made this week end).

This engine is my street bug (you can see it on the video in the message before).

I have always build "big engine" from 2liters to 3liters and i am very surprised and glad of this small one.


This week end at the EBI 3 i ran 12,2s at the beginig and after some different jetting, venturies, exhaust, etc... combo, i finally ran :
20m : 1,60s
1/8 : 7,32s
1/4 : 11,68s
speed : 109 mph

The engine seems to be very strong as we made aroud 20 passes this week end, 9000rpm at each gear, 9200 at burn out.
No leaks, no cooling problems, rockers play have not move.

I think we have still many things to do as the combo is not perfect.
The exhaust is not good, the cam is too big, the I/E ratio is too high, the manifolds are too long, slicks are too big, etc...

So, if someone have ideas or advices, i am really open !!

Special thanks to Mike H. and Greg M. for the gearbox, Steeve, Ian Clark, Paul Shley, Keith S.  for the support and the advices this week end on the track  !! 
Thanks to Vincent (builder and conceptor of the Buggy), Phiphi (for the suspension tuning advices) and to my friend David that helps me a lot on this engine.

Here is the engine :

(http://www.slideperformance.com/photos/P1000883.jpg)

Sweet look at how narrow that little bugger is.

This topic is just insane, Congrats to all that have had success with the mighty mouse cant wait to put mine together 69 x 88 Empi Birals, should be good.
Anyway keep up the great work guys.

1192cc
15.421@ebi
turbocharged though,still counts as a mighty mouse?
(http://blogsimages.skynet.be/images_v2/002/510/702/20090707/dyn002_original_602_494_pjpeg_2510702_e324f37b71b13105bacb2e47c2522925.jpg)
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_rf_mGqIEMGM/SjphsirU1JI/AAAAAAAAAIw/z-jIs3G2W4M/s400/DSC00285%5B1%5D)

go jesse!!!!!

thanx

Yes the buggy ran very nice.
At some point sunday Johannes and I was sitting in the CSP tent grabbing a bite, when you went on the track. - Both of us stopped talking and eating, and listened to the burn out and run. And when it was over we both had a big smile on our faces. Nice engine.
T

Damn what kinda turbosetup is that? ???

Cool little set up - we had a good race  ;)

Monkeyboy,That was the metalflake buggy no? Close call till the end, the best races. Maybe when your done finetuning the result will be the other way round.

Yep thats me and yes that was the FIRST tune and then driven to Belguim  ::) I have had a few problems since but I think I have them sorted now  ::)

Das Drag Day / SCC  ??? ;)

What journal size are you running on your destroked crank and what rod length?

Rick Mortensen

Hi, Everyone.   When I get my car set up for good take-offs from the starting line I will let you know the times.  I don't see anyone doing a legal SS/FS in the USA, except me.  There are rules which do not allow the use of any aftermarket heads and the 044 is an example of a head that is NOT made by VW/Audi and per the NHRA tech people, not allowed in this class. Also, if you only have a roll bar you have to use Stock seats,,,not race type seats and bumpers are also required. The rules for the 2009 SS/FS class are such that I am having lots of trouble getting my car and me down closer to the weight of 1800 pounds with my 1776 cc engine. Why the 1776 cc ?  Because , I have built more of them than any other size during my 30 years working on VW's, do know what to expect.   Looking over the past two years of posts in this forum, I see I am on track with many for my "small" engine.  But, I am only working with springs that allow up to 8,000 rpms,,,at this time, but if the times are not on the index or below it, I will go to stronger springs and pick up another 1,000 rpms. The bottom end is Berg wedge-mated crank and Pauter light weight rods.  I am using many light weight parts throughout the engine, such as Pauter's roller rocker arms and CE light weight cam straight cut gears.  The heads are FF and have been run in the '80's legal down into the 11's, so I just need to work out the suspension problems I have and see what happens to the HP getting to the track.  Thanks to all for the good information.  Building a car to run legally in NHRA or IHRA is not easy, due to the strict rules.   The index is 12.75 for SS/FS and in IHRA, running over 2,000 pounds weight, it is 13.25 for SS/CC.  We did this 10 years ago and ran .75 under the index at that time, so I am just trying to repeat history and have some fun.

George Karacostas, 4886

wanted:  I am looking for a set of nos 041s  they must have a VW logo and the full part number.   No mofoco of auto lina logos.   NHRA is particular ;D

e-mail me p/m me or call me at 562-884-2373  thanks  taylor

Regarding Kris Klingamann's motors, I don't see any mention of the weight break used in AMC/BMC class comp. At the time we started at 13 lbs./ci and went to 19 lbs./ci. I bailed at 15 lbs., since my 1998cc was to heavy/slow to keep up. Kris and others used small efficient motors because they
had to respond to NHRA rules with winning combinations of parts and driver skills. Yes they leaned on the motors and trannys rather heavily, and they paid the price, as well as reaped the rewards. Nowadays, unless you're a class racer there's few reasons to run a motor at the ragged edge, unless you're a glutton for punishment. Kris and I only raced once, i was lucky. I dared not try my luck again. Kris ,if you read this, long time no see!

Well I finally ran the 11 I've been chasng for a while with my 1776cc N/A street car. The interesting thing is having read most of this thread again that I would not consider it to be "thinking out of the box", particularly in terms of the motor. A fair bit more effort has gone into making the gearbox more efficient though.
Ian at WPS who built the motor would be the first to admit its just a development of the street motor he ran in his split, and not a race motor.
The parts in the motor are all readily available but they have just been selected and put together with care. The best and most exotic parts of the engine are certainly the heads, which are Jeff Denham 043's with Ti valves. But again they are street heads a sort of an entry level set for Jeff, as he is certainly capable of something much better.

The car is light for a street car, but not super light (1585 at the last count with my skiny ribs in it, it might be 1565 by now as I have lost some weight in the car since it was last weighed), as its all steel wings and has stock bulkheads and the like, but its stripped out inside with basically no interior except a head liner. Anything I've changed or added to the car I've allways tried to make it lighter, but not to the point of compromising drivability or reliability.

The car was driven to the track (2 1/4 hours) on a hot day with no trouble. It ran 3 11's with a best of 11.915 at 111.41mph but this was with a stinger no fan belt and slicks. The journey home took 3 hours due to a traffic jam and the car sat in stop start traffic on tick over for 45 mins at 80 degrees C no problem.

I'm really pleased with the achivment, but I would not consider it thinking outside the box. Its more like good logic and enginering.

So the big qestion for me is, what can you achive if you do really go for it? It's been said earlier by John (JMR) that unless there are class rules to restrict cc / weight there is no major development on mass, to find out what can be achived today. That said there are people trying, just for trying sake, or just general self entertainment. The good news for all of us is that most of them in Europe and a few from over the pod contribute on here. Also I think things have got a lot easier due to the availability and choice of parts, and this has made us all a bit lazy. But all the time there are people like the Skinne Bros, Johannes at JPM, with there recent achivements, and many others, I think there will be constant improvement, as all these people are committed to making things better. Its just just the progress will be slower than it would be, if we were all racing to class rules, as they were back in the day in the US!

Peter

WOW congratulation Pete - Thats  AWESOME - 3 11's and driven to and from the track - HARDCORE!

I also agree with alot of your points - it would be great to see a cc/weight class in VW racing, But its good to see there are still the few hardcore people doiin it just for the Kicks  ;) Why do you think I am building my 2180 roller crank mototr ;) :)

Well done dude  ;D

By no cooling problems do you mean no temp problems or no sign of heat damage?

Hello guys,

I am happy and exited to tell you that a new, very aggressive," RAPTOR mouse" was born yesterday.

1795cc, mag case, 043 heads and ida 48 carbs.

228,3hp/7990rpm and 231Nm(166.9lbs)6200rpm corrected(Din).

Have a nice weekend.

Johannes Persson

any pictures ???.... ;)

 ;D

Congratulations Johannes! Can you please tell us about the valve train parts used in the build?

8)

JS,
Cam is jpm01005(10mm cam lift 271deg at 0.05" 105 lobe center), ceramic lifters, GB 160000psi pr, jpm 1.55:1 rockers two stud, ti valves, jpm alumec retainers, OTEVA75 valve springs and single grove 7deg keepers.

Alu push rods will soon be installed.

/Johannes

Dual valve springs?   if yes, do you then plan on using single springs when installing the alu pushrods?

Oh, and a big congrats on the impressive results!!!

Yes,impressive numbers  ;)

What's the bore x stroke of that mouse?

Zach,

The bore is 91mm and stroke is 69mm.

/Johannes

Johannes you are crazy .. ;D ;D You should try to sign in the guiness book of records for highest VW aircooled HP numbers/liter.....


I am speakless...

And we are waiting for pictures and videos....


Nice weekend too...
Greetings from Germany
Tom

Rasser,

The valve springs are duals but has increased installed height, pressures at closed valve is 100lbs and about 250lbs at 15.5 mm.
The pressure is good for 9000rpm+.
/Johannes

Johannes: remember the type4 heads you did for Thomas from MIB?  He just had his 2366 engine on the dyno today, and guess what -  233nm/6200rpm    233hp/7400. almost similar numbers (except the ccm)  :D

Please post the dyno results after you change the pushrods. Very impressive work!

JS,

The engine is for a customer in England and is delivered.
The alu push rods was not done when we started the dyno tests but has been tested before with small performance improvements.

/Johannes

Congrats to the owner and to the builder.

I heard Mr Takanobu Ito is on his way over to Sweden, will he get there before Bernd Pischetsrieder :)

127hp per litre! Easy to say but just think about it for a while, how do you achieve such a result with a normally aspirated, 2 valve per cylinder, flat tappet pushrod engine which was designed back in the dark ages! Compare these figures to other normally aspirated flat 4 engines that run on super unleaded fuel and you can begin to understand the scale of this achievement. The only motors that run close to these figures that I can find are Johannes’s old 1603 mouse motor and his 1915cc motor which was in his blue car.

We are undoubtedly all very lucky to have Johannes in the AC VW world moving the game on, and sharing his knowledge with us and developing products for us to use. But for me best of all is that he is a really nice guy, and is very humble and almost embarrassed by his achievements, and would certainly never boast about any of his work. But perhaps this is the way of people who really are right out there, and know exactly what they are doing.

The truth is, he really does operate at the “next level”, and the proof, if there is any doubt, is right here on this thread.

The really interesting thing is that I’m sure this is not the end of the road for JPM and Johannes, as there will be more developments, and more figures which us mere mortals struggle to comprehend, it’s just be a matter of time!

Hat’s off, as it’s another amazing result!

Peter

I know exactly what you mean dude - I have been thinking and re-reading this thread since the post from JPM, Its just AMAZING!!!!!!!  ;D

The best G/D  motor makes 275hp + or - and is a 120 cid or 2000cc. 137.5 hp per liter. My best made 220hp at 1680cc or 130hp per liter. Thanks Brian

I just loooove people that throw out A and not B.

Looking at the pictures you have posted earlier I would guess that your engines use overhead cams and twice the amount of valves?

 

69 x 88 steve tims heads 42 x 37.5 it was in Hot vws a few years ago. Brian

Johannes,

What was the static compression ratio on this motor?
Amazing results, Congratulations!

Tom

Tom,
The comp ratio is 12.8:1.Dynoed on pump gas with muffler.

Regards
Johannes

why not build a mouse engine ms230 heads fit on?
but nice numbers

Hi,
It is like comparing apples and oranges, but Brians 220 hp engine is not a OHC. The pictures were on his new engine, not the 220 hp one. I know some of the details of the 220 hp as I was offered to buy the old one a year ago. A lot of nice stuff like titanium rods, roller cam etc, in other words: A pure race engine.
The big difference is that JPM's engines makes about the same power/liter at lower rpm's with less extreme parts and on pump gas.

//Roman

Thanks for filling in Roman.

Hello Bang,

The customer did only want to use VW castings.

My own 1915 producing 242hp/8600rpm has MS230, it will be updated with my new valve train and EFI for this season.

I have another "Mouse motor"(1735cc) going on for my self that will be designed for peak power at 10500rpm, it will also have my MS230.

Where do you guys put the cc limit for a "Mouse Motor"?

/Johannes

ahh okay.

by the way. sent you a mail.

Those are some serious numbers dude  ;D

And I would say "mouse motors"  would be Sub 2 ltr  (2000cc)

Its really funny when I start talking with my "watercooled" friends they are just in SHOCK when I start showing them this thread  :D :D :D

"what! all that power from an 1600, 8 valve!!!????" or  "and Naturally aspirated WTF!!!!"

Under the 2,5l is a mouse motor!!!  ;D

You guys are talking about rat size engines, not mouse engines...
anything below 1776 is small enough to be a mouse :-D

Yeah your probably right dude  ;)

anything with a stock stroke crank is a mouse

strokers are for strokers! ;)

My 69 x 88 motor sounds alot like his "street motor" 12.7 to 1, .600 lift ,VW lifters, 48 idas, vw heads, 5.400 rods, mag case, and it makes 131 per liter. And it is 10 years old. Brian

x2 very nice words Peter, for a very deserving bloke..........Props, JP.





Also some awesome #'s there Brian, well done, any special coating on the internals or tips you can share, cam, chamber design, etc?

The heads from Steve Tims made all the difference. 208 to 220 Brian

At what RPM do you see 220 hp Brian? Great achievement!

And Peter S, thanks for taking the chance on a dark horse like JPM! ...he delivers!
We Scandinavians know, but this spring the Outlaws will know too!

It starts making 200 at 7000 and goes up to 220 at 8400 and down to 200 at 9000. Thanks brian

Johannes: Could You please post some info on Your new Raptor cams? I would like to know:

- cam data
- which valve springs they are made for (or which are needed)
- which engine characteristics they are made for (incl engine size)
- pricing

BR

Jens Kristian, Norway

PM for speed-demon.  ;)

I've been following this thread for some time now
and I am very impressed with what I have seen
Even before the thread started I ran a 1776 with K-roc 043 heads and an Engle 130
it made good power and was very driveable
but it wasn't in this league

anyway, I am now building a 1914 motor
not really a mouse I know, but definitely along those lines
I have weisco pistons, H-beam rods, very light flywheel, mag case with sleeved lifter bores etc
but I am unsure about which heads to use

so, who makes heads with the necessary flow figures, titanium valves, springs which are good for 9k and acceptable street cooling?  ???

I have always liked Steve Tim's work but even his signature series heads don't fit the bill
these look interesting: http://www.thesamba.com/vw/classifieds/detail.php?id=828811

any suggestions would be greatly appreciated

Gareth,

You're right, there are some amazing things and information in this thread!

What are your goals (horsepower & torque) and use for this engine? Will it be street driven? How much? Carburetion?

These questions should be asked/answered in order to lead you to the heads (and cam) for your engine.
I've had better luck with combinations knowing this beforehand; Bigger isn't always better.

Good luck with your project!
Tom

Hello Tom
thank you for your reply
I will be running 48 IDA carbs
and I will be driving the car on the street
but it most certainly won't be my daily driver
I would like to achieve 180 hp at 8000 rpm
whether or not that is a realistic aim remains to be seen
as regards the cam, I bought an FK46 for this motor about 6 months ago
however, a JPM raptor cam may well be a better option...

Gareth, you may want to search out Pete Shattock's 1776 spec - he's run 11.9's with that motor. I think theres more info on here about it!

I'd say under 1800cc.
The smaller it is than that, the mousier ...  ;)

so a 1914  is a rattier motor?   ;D

Gareth, I'm sure you could manage 180 at 8k my 1776cc made a best of 186hp at 7300. There is a full spec of the motor in the for sale section. I suspect Andy Marriot's engine spec is on here somewhere as well. He runs a 1914cc which must make a very similar amount if not a bit more. Both motors are similar in spec as are our cars and Andy has run a string of 12.0's, but I would bet on him seeing 11's next year.

As you will see I ran an FK87 which was a good cam for the combination, but does not have the modern thinking Johannes has put into his Raptor cams, and I would say there is a performance advantage with one of his cam's. Put it like this if I were keeping the motor I would buy a JPM cam, lifters springs and pushrods.

As others have said you need to consider your induction, head and cam combination first. If you could provide Johannes head flow details I'm sure he could recomend a cam package to make the most of them, but you need heads that flow well and have good air speed before you go anywhere.

Good luck with the project.

Peter

Hi Peter

what is the weight of the cars ?

Udo

Peters car is 1340lb ( or was, probably lighter now ) and mine was 1376lb, both without driver,

andy

Hi Udo,

My car at race weight is about 1500lbs with me in it. Andy's is a little heavier I think, (I think the exact weights are on the weight saving thread on here) but there is not much in it in terms of weight and power difference. Basically both cars are very similar all round.

I think both cars are a great compromise between race car and street car, or street car and race car depending on how you like to look at it. We have both driven as far as EBI in them and drive the cars to the track when we race over here. Both cars turn some respectable times for small engined N/A street cars on the track, and they are certainly plenty quick enough on the street!

Peter

That is very lightweight . My car has 1460 lbs without driver .
But with your weight the times are ok   :)

Udo

Thanks for the advice Peter  ;) PM sent

I am left speechless with JP motorsport.

Is that the Berg Overachiever?

I have plan to built 64X90.5. the engine will be run on 1641CC clas.

64 crank from old bug crank
90.5A mahle
Eagle 5.352 rods
CB044 round port 40X35
Engle 120 with 1.25 rocker
weber IDF44 or 48
1-5/8 merged
comp 10:1

will my engine potential making power comparing with 69X87 with same configuration?

the 40 hp crank that has the 64mm stroke,
has wider rod journals by about 1mm than the 1300-1600 crank.
Same diameter, just your rod side clearance will be excesive.

Owhh....I did't notice that.  Is it posible to use 40HP Rods into my set up?

Thanks for that info's

Regards
Muz

since we're on the subject of mouse motors

and this thread is filled with tasty info, 

i was wondering ,  on an 85.5mm bore , whats the biggest intake valve that could be run "ideally" 
JPM's mouse motor is 86mm  , if im not forgetting , its running a 40x35.5 head , 

sounds interesting,

i wonder , on a 83mm bore ,  is the 40mm too big? maybe a 37mm intake is ok?

i have both my beetle's needing motor rebuild and both have planned motors already (rather mild compare to most )

this idea is on the drawing board, but it sure as heck makes me excited

83x74  (83mm 40hp big bore kit.. mod to run on as41 case and 040 head)  not sure what is needed to be done to it
            crank, the usual 74mm crank

puts it nicely at 1601cc   kinda like the porsche super90

, cam etc still having fun with it (aka thinking LOL)

myt be fun for a lil' autocross beetle

40 horse bigborekit has short cilinders for 64 mm crank so shims wil be required when using stroker crank.
The 64 mm crank is stronger than people say with the neceserey mods. The weak link is the crank at the 3rd cilinder. For short burst , no pronlmes but use the power for some time and add some heat.... bearing eaten away.

nothing that can't be done but you have to know how. I would tell you if I knew but this is all they told me.
I got this from kristof at steves vw shop.
seems that he has the secret and will do the work, but no kiss and tell.
jesse

Johannes,

I really would like to know how that stock crank spins that high? I know everything is balanced but......not even counterweighted?

Can you fill me in on your choice as opposed to a DPR or CB performance crank?
 :D

i think Johanes  mentioned way back

the reason for counterweight.. is to aleviate the weight thrown by the rod journal,rods,pistons, etc

the lighter those parts are, the more reasonably counter'd  the crank is

ofcourse  being counterweighted as a crank would always be better,
but im sure Johanes has matched every aspect of his motor, including weight of individual components to rpm relation..

his JE pistons are quite short as far as compression height goes,  and its well.. almost half the weight of cast pistons or even less

plus the overall width of the motor is narrower.. 

anyways... im also still learning alot from these guys.. so i hope sum1 could clarify my words if ever im misunderstanding anything as far as JPM and overall engine techniques hehehe

Ralf

Very Good Points. all of them. I'm curious about the rpm limit of using a stock forged crank that has been balanced? Better than say a cheap $200 cast crank or maybe just a s good as a 4140 CB 69mm crank.

I'm in the process of building something like this but don't want to throw expensive parts at a semi-grenade motor  ;D

well i think its fine  ( i hope haha)

im doing 2 motors (still gather parts)

1679cc thickwall88s
69mm cb4140 crank
engle 110
kads

1800cc thickwall88s
74mm cb4140 crank
engle 120
kads

well after watching the dyno video again and again. I just cannot believe that crank holds up to 9k rpms, even with the light reciprocating parts........

I wish someone else could chime in  8)

I don't have the time to find the exact post or mail, but Johannes has shown me how the forces working on this crank a 9k is LESS than you will find in a normal 2332 setup @ I think it was 6 or 7k.
Light and small parts helps a lot, some choices were also done to keep the total down.

its sumwer in the early pages of this thread,
johanes  noted the figures of weight.. 


from my understanding.. its like doing the "hammer" throw..

shorter hammer of the same weight (mouse motor JPM)
longer hammer of the same weight  (usual motors)

the shorter one will have less acting force on the thrower <-- crank   

vs the long one..

add the light parts (JE pistons of JPM)    i think its sumthing that is indeed possible and doable

just not viewed or seen thru the "common" eye  i guess..

or not tried cuz sum1 already said "meh  stroke that bish..  or  big bore it "  LOL

Thanks JHU!

Yea your right RF, thats what I'm trying not to do. Not do the most 'common' thing.  As soon as one person says "that cranks limit is 5k rpm' everyone starts believing it even though it could essentially turn 7k all day long and the person never tested it at all. Damn internet sometimes is the cause for mis-information.  ::)

I've since found a set of JE 85.5 that weigh 335 versus the 418 grams of my oem KS pistons. that equates to 12 ounces less reciprocating weight just from the pistons. I'm thinking that is what Johannes pistons weigh in around.

re these the geers one? (or sachette)  oh well one of th prostock guys LOL

JE 85.5 ?  very nice.. 


i made a post  in the cal look section and recieved ZERO feedback


asking about..  the givens like wiseco 94mm forgeds have gone down to sub 400$  mainly cuz some one had it done already and the fixtures and tooling and or cnc prog have been done at wiseco  and so they can keep making them at a lower price
(i know this is how it is fr another brand we specifically use for inline4's we order customs from) 

i wonder how many people would actually like.. or is it juz not sumthing worth a bean

aftermarket (wiseco or other makers like JE)  kind of 90.5mm  B and A   

thats lighter than the "off the shelf" products


that should sprout a sick lil 1776  haha
or a big rat 1904 
or a big farm rat 2007cc

still within the mouse family?  ;D

Here is a small motor thats really cool. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rm7J-3lkrBo

Clyde

When i started building engines in 1980 i did some 1600 cc engines for street use up to 130 hp and 7000 rpm . We had no problems with the original cranks . BUT , there were no conterweight cranks avaliable in Germany . We had some okrasa cranks which were too expensive for us ....
Today i would use a conterweighted 69 mm crank over 6000 rpm's, but an original with welded conterweights on , so you can be shure it does not bend too much.

Udo

thats cool to know Udo..

btw do u stil have that old 88.5  or 89 piston set? LOL



clyde berg.. thats a nice smallie!!!

I have advertised the parts and did not get them sold . so i built an engine with all parts i had , made some nice 311 heads for it and got an 78,4x88,5 engine together . I want to dynotest it the next weeks  :) I drove it on the street in our black 67 and was much fun ...

Udo

pm me how much u would have sold them...


maybe u can remove them for me.. HAHAHA


i have a set of 88mm thickwalls.. i think having a set of 88.5s as extra is nice..  could use my barrels and bore n hone .5mm more  when needed

so whats the rpm limit on my new in 88' BERG CW crank....  8)

I love ebay. My karma came by to pay a visit tonight. POTL mahle pistons, CW crank, all bearings , rods and pressure plate........for cheap.

Better late than never, but here is a video clip of the moment the Raptor mouse was born.
 
Enjoy!(assuming it works)

Peter

(http://i384.photobucket.com/albums/oo284/petershattock/th_RaptorMouseedit1.jpg) (http://s384.photobucket.com/albums/oo284/petershattock/?action=view&current=RaptorMouseedit1.flv)

1795cc raptor mouse 1 minute and forty seconds old.

(http://i384.photobucket.com/albums/oo284/petershattock/th_RaptorMouseedit2.jpg) (http://s384.photobucket.com/albums/oo284/petershattock/?action=view&current=RaptorMouseedit2.flv)

Ahh.. so refreshing to hear a mouse scream with fresh lungs. Thanks for posting!

the smile of the man "sound" better than the motor!! :)

amazing...

wish to hear on the car too.

Andreas

how good does that sound! can't wait to hear it at the track

ok im experiencing a lil brainfart
 :D



how do u get 1795cc ?  bore ? stroke?

hehe

Probably 91x69 (bored out 90.5 cylinders?)

yeah thats the only value i got to reach the 1795cc number..

interesting.. would that be a JPM/JE custom piston?

Yes it is 69mm x 91mm, the same trick JP used with the 1603, to make sure the barrels are round and straight and honed correctly.

Yes again, the pistons are JP's spec from JE.

I will try and post a dyno run as well but given it took me this long to post the engine run up, don't hold your breath!

Peter

thanks peter,

very interesting,

i guess now i should start saving some used 85.5 barrels, and if i find some 90.5s

never know when an 86 or 91 become handily available  ;D

it can't be that the trick is in the pistons right? are those JE pistons that much lighter or something?

I think you'll find its actually a large combination of things that makes the difference, with small improvements made in all areas that amount to something more significant when combined. That said the pistons are lighter than standard, but more importantly in combination with the barrel size shape and surface, ring package pin height, and the like it does produce a good performance advantage over a stock combination, both in terms of maintaining good cylinder pressure and reducing friction.

JP would be the best person to answer in detail, but this is the basics as I understand them.

Peter

i think ,  its juz like running standard 94s  vs 94mm wiseco's

the weight, and ring package alone should help a few ponies strut along..


thats 1 small factor.. in the whole "system" of an engine..


seeing JPM work hsi engines.. im sure theres like atleast 50dff factors working together to make the "system" scream...


i really wish there was demand for 90.5mm forged aftermarket pistons,   im sure one of the companies like wiseco or CP or JE wont mind opening up an OTS offering for them..

and we can always buy 90.5 barrels too!

You can get 90,5 JE pistons that fit to the mahle cylinders ...
Udo

from who ? and how much are they Udo ?

btw  have a pm for you.. regarding old german racing... wondering if u can help me out hehe

I have some 95 JEs in 95mm mahles For sale

You can get it from every company that sells je pistons as a special order . I also orderd some specials like 95 , 103.1  ....

Udo

while you're right Udo..

but tat costs  "custom" prices lol

wat i meant was.. if we had more demands.. the wiseco 94s are around 350-400$ now since they actually offer it OTS (off the shelf)

we should have some in 90.5s  that would be fun..

example, we use Arias pistons on our honda's for racing.. we order mostly custom stuffs, they told me we can get a custom set  , if we order 5  sets  and get it for the price of normal shelf pistons at 450$  , but then again.. i cannot afford 5 sets one time LOL

The 90,5x82 mahles are light and do their work . I think normaly there is no need for pistons like that except you want an engine like Johannes did. You can get them if you want , that's the main thing

Udo

yeah that does makes sense..

prolly xplains why we dont have  that option in "forged"  just custom orders

looks like the mahle's are more than up to the task


btw Udo  thanks for the info regarding the rennkafer bug.. hehehe  loved that bug!

Sorry it took so long again, but here is one of many dyno pulls made.

Peter

(http://i384.photobucket.com/albums/oo284/petershattock/th_MVI_0046.jpg) (http://s384.photobucket.com/albums/oo284/petershattock/?action=view&current=MVI_0046.flv)

That sounds healthy!

You should post this clip in the turbo thread ;D

Nice Feature on Pete Shattock's car in the new VolksWorld ;D

Cracking feature, Motor sounds awesome!

long time nothing new..so i will post the first startup of my mouse engine...a real tiny mouse ;)

36HP
1192cc
singleport
singlecarb(harley CV)
in the video 1/4-1/3 throttle max. because engine needs some brake in first.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HHScA1WVBeA

and my daily driver mouse
1192cc 36hp with blower.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eUuDKGd1mVE

is it a pepco  ???

no.
aisin + pci34 carb
up to 1 bar of boost. ::)

is it possible to have closer pictures from the supercharger ???
i never seen before one like this , who made them ???

thx
fabs

for sure, i will make some new during the days, here an older one:
http://img16.imageshack.us/img16/8278/motor3n.jpg
the rest is bedder per pm because i don't want to spam this brilliant thread any more.
all build at my own but for sure in memory to old pepco just way more boost.
the other engine is also build as supercharged engine...carb is just for breakin time.
don't find a good pic so fast:
http://img3.imageshack.us/img3/2076/80512876.jpg

Mymedusa,

Congratulations, I do really like those installations. Well done!

Yesterday a friend here in Turbotown took his 1641 turbo engine to the dyno. 354 rwhp at 1.9 bars. Not too bad  :)

Realy nice motor, love that's Too !  ;)

Not bad at all. More info please.

Specen:
single relief case.
Orginal crank,8 dowels, not balanced
CB h-profil
Mahle forged 87mm pistons
Camshaft, well nothing exotic FK something...
Scat 1.4:1
Cromolypushrods
Original heads, welded and ported, BUT original valves 35/32,5
 
HX-35 turbo 56mm in
1600cc injectors
Double 984 pumps
E85
Autronic SM4

New motor 60x95 238.78 so far, It will be on the dyno for days. Brian

Brian,

I like the bore to stroke ratio! Nice to see you using a good quality thick wall stable cylinder too.

If your prepared to share the information, what is your peak torque figure and RPM and max power RPM?

Good luck with the HP hunt, but its a great result to date.

Will you be running this in your G dragster?

Peter

Damn I love that sound! ;) It makes me thinking of my old little engine! ;D

What's with the spider humping your motor Brian?   :D ;D
Good power though. Taylor

Well, I've had my first few drives in the car with the new motor, and I have to say it is amazingly smooth and very well behaved around town, with very good throttle response from low RPM, in fact it feels more like an EFI engine than a IDA motor. There is none of the small engine light parts issues which some people talk about either! All in all my initial impression is that its drives very well and street diving to date has been fantastic and needless to say it’s just great to drive the car again.

The air temperature is still cold here and I’ve only been on short (15 minute) runs so far but all signs look good with oil temp at less than 80 degrees still! The heads certainly seam very cool if the temperature of the tin ware is anything to go by (I don't have cylinder temperature gauges).

I've driven to work today as it’s a nice sunny day so I can enjoy a drive at lunchtime so there's not much chance of getting much work done today!

As for the performance it certainly feels very quick but to be honest the same could be said of the old engine after the 5-6 months off over the winter driving a diesel Polo. That said the low rpm pick up is significantly different, as you had to keep the old motor on the boil for it to fly but this one is raring to go right from low RPM.

I have a couple of weeks now before the first race of the year so I hope to get some good street miles in between now and then to check all is well over longer distances and generally get the hang of driving the car again. Needless to say there are a few other little jobs to attend to as there always is, which I hope to do over the next couple of weeks, if I can stop driving the car!

Its all to easy to forget that's what its all about, having fun and driving the car, and it certainly is fun, so perhaps those little jobs can wait!   

Peter

Please elaborate...

Hi Zach,

I was meaning that I know a number of people earlier in this tread I think, suggested there may be problems with running light parts, particularly flywheels, in terms of drivability. Needless to say I'm sure this is true at some point. You just have to look at F1 cars trying to get out of the pit box, but I think the combination would need to be genuinely extreme if this new engine is anything to go by. I think by most peoples standards this engine would be considered, as fairly extreme by n/a VW street car standards, but in this combination in my car which is admitidly light (1500lbs when I'm in it) there is no problem at all (stock ratio first and second gear on a 4.25 rp). To be honest its ridiculously drivable.

I went for a longer drive today and temps wise it certainly looks good, but as I said in my last post its not too warm here!

But following my little lunchtime razz around I can definitely confirm one thing. Happiness is a hot VW!

Peter

sunny day, fast bug, ida's, brms, can't imagine why you didnt get much work done!

Your new motor sounds fantastic Pete! I can't wait to see it race at Shakey in a couple of weeks. Congrats on a seriously cool project 8)

Dean, your bang on! I had the Ida's ringing in my head all afternoon, and I don't mind the Erco's but you can't beat rolling on BRM's.

Thanks Matt although its Johannes we need to thank for the noise, I know I'm bound to be biased but I have to agree it does sound a bit good!

Mind you whilst we are doing a bit of back slapping I dont supose I'm the only one looking forward to seeing your car run in a couple of weeks with 600+hp!

Peter

So COOL ;D ;D the sounds of both engines is awesome!!! these little 36HP monsters!!!

a bit more spam...more blown 36er..without fan because it need new bearings.(preA porsche 356)
(http://img695.imageshack.us/img695/4570/dsc0457o.jpg) (http://img695.imageshack.us/i/dsc0457o.jpg/)
(http://img69.imageshack.us/img69/2236/dsc0456o.jpg) (http://img69.imageshack.us/i/dsc0456o.jpg/)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YbJr_zlifeM
its not really shown in the handy video, but the throttle response is pretty good.


@TomG
it is time that your tiny monster is ready ...come on.

Well what a weekend! I’ve finally got to run the car down the track with the new motor. But first of all the drive to the track. Its just under 110 miles to the track from home and the drive there was all fine, and I’m not joking when I say the only temperature problems were getting the oil temperature up as driving at 4000rpm the max oil temp I got on the gauge was 80 degrees. Better still I turned up at the gate moments before Andy Marriott did in his hot 1914cc n/a street car so we drove into the Outlaw pits for the weekend in formation.

Given the gearbox in the car was designed to suit my old engine I was a little paranoid about breaking it, so I ran for the first day on MH street tires which netted me a best of 11.87 at just over 113mph which I was very pleased with as it beat my previous PB on slicks and all I did when I arrived was change the oil check the valve clearances, take the fan belt off and the deck lid so I could film what was going on of in the engine bay off the line. At the end of the day I ran one 1/8th mile pass with slicks as there was a big cross wind and there had been a few incidents earlier in the day, which netted me a promising looking 1/8th mile time to build on the following day.
Day 2 of racing I ran with the slicks and ran a number of 11.6…. second passes with a best of 11.60 again just over 113mph. that’s over 3 10ths of my best previous ET. I had a number of problems with the car, and my driving over the weekend, so I’ve got a list of things to do now before I race again in July.

The drive home again on the Sunday night was great, as it was a nice sunny evening and again the car was just running really sweet, and I got home in good time with no problems. For those of you who drive your cars to and from the track, you’ll understand there is a great feeling pulling on to the drive at home and clicking the motor off having had a great weekend with the car and a bunch of mates, there really is nothing much better!

I have to say a big thanks to Johannes, as true to his word (as ever), the motor has been fine on the street and even better on the track. I just need to get my self and the car in order to really do it justice now! 

Peter.

Well done Pete/Johannes, I'm sure there's a lot more in it plus it sounds awesome ;D

Second what Ben says! The car sounds absolutely amazing and is a credit to both of you! Pete's motor is the closest I have ever heard a VW motor sound like a sports bike! Simply aural sex ;)

I'm from Brazil, we are discussing about these engines, are sensational congratulations, here in Brazil has no engines of this type, usually only put crankshaft stroke and piston MAHLE great big (and heavy). the power drawn from these engines are really impressive'm crazy for vw bug especially by our dear aircooled.
aware of our forum and www.forumfuscabrasil.com.br www.fusca4ever.com.br

Sorry for my English, whom you write is the google translator: P

Take care everyone.
Adriano.

I see that Mr Shattock has just run a 11.33 @ 119mph at bug jam with his mouse motor, good work!!

andy

Hello Peter,

I got to say what an exceptional time by any standard for a naturally aspirated car!!

Regardless of taking into account that it's driven to the track and is 1798CC !

Superb job Peter and all others involved!

Paul

Feels great indeed! Disadvantage is that i'm usually deafend by the engine sound on such long drives  ;D

Well I've just had another great if slightly shorter than planned weekend of racing this last weekend to see if my tinkering over the last few weeks had resolved the problems I had with the clutch and suspension last time out.
Unfortunately it was clear after the 1st run that the clutch was still not up to the job, so it was only a matter of time before it gave out. Worse still it was also clear that I had not resolved my suspension problems either. Fortunately I had enough options at the track with the parts I'd taken to resolve the suspension issues, which gave me the chance to see what difference the new gearbox ratios had made, whilst I still had a clutch!

With sorted suspension and the new gearbox ratios the car ran 3 consecutive 11.3…. quarter miles with a best of 11.32 @116mph (not 119mph as stated earlier). 

Needless to say I was very happy with this, and once again have to say a massive thanks to all of those that have helped me, particularly Peter at Cogbox in this case (who didn't go to the Brit F1 GP to finish my gearbox so I could race this weekend), Ian and Lee for the help and advice at the track and of course Johannes, for a little 1795cc engine which defies belief! I had several people come up to me at the weekend and say they could not believe a flat four could make that sort of noise!

I left the track on Sat night once I knew the clutch was finished for racing but still drivable, and had a great drive home with next to no traffic and got home in record time, unlike the journey to the track in torrential rain and horrible traffic. I took a little de tour on the way home as there's a nice straight road with a few sets of traffic lights close to home, just so I could use up the last of the clutch centre plate, but as ever pulling up on the drive at home and clicking the motor off was a great feeling after a weekend of racing I wont forget for a while!
 
I took the motor out on Sunday and the centre plate was almost 2.5mm thinner than it was when I put it in there before the race, but I have a possible solution to try at the next race at the end of August, so fingers crossed it will work this time!

Lee has some film footage of a couple of the runs which I will try and post but as ever it will no doubt take me ages so don't hold your breath.

Tanks Andy and Paulfor the encouragement and Corally ear plugs are definitely the way forward!

Peter

Nice catching up with you again at Bug Jam Pete, impressive stuff coming from your car with the little motor.  Oh, and earplugs are an essential item on the street i reckon  :)

Ok this may have been mentioned already but the best of the formula bee boys are squeezing up to 130-140 bypass from a 1300 single port and engines that can last a season putting out 110. And they have too keep a lot of vw parts

Sorry that was supposed to be formula vee and bhp not bypass. Stupid predictive text

A brief update. My last visit to the track with the new motor did not exactly go to plan, as I was still struggling with clutch issues, but did run a couple of 11.50's (which amazingly feels slow now!), the best being a 50 flat, so there was no improvement on my previous speed or et. The clutch center plate let go on the 3rd pass on Saturday, but thanks to Ian WPS for an express road trip to Cogbox and Peter's help to make up a new center plate we made it back to the track with the bits to fix the car for Sunday.
Adele and I ran on the Sunday as the first pair after the rain in the morning, and I'm sure most of you know what happened next, but as the others have said the main thing was that Adele was OK.

My next and last outing this year is DDD8, which I'm hoping will be a lot less eventfull than the last race! I'm not going to drive the car there, but hopefully I can have my fun on the track and perhaps a quick razz on the roads around Bitburg.         

Peter

Well this is the final instalment from me for a while. DDD8 was a great weekend and to be honest I don't think I've had such a good weekend before running at best 2/10ths of my et, and it took me right until the last run of the weekend to get that close. As has become the norm the clutch gave up on Sat afternoon, but thanks to Ian (WPS) we got the motor out, clutch sorted, and back in, just in time to catch the last of the DAS barbeque hospitality that evening. After chasing a good set up for a few runs, the car ran from 11.8 something to an 11.52 last run.

So the car ends the year with a best et of 11.315 at 116mph (no fan belt on slicks, with a muffler on super unleaded pump fuel) from around 25 passes and just over 1000 street miles. Needless to say 1000 miles is not much for a street car, but unfortunately my time for regular street miles is limited, due to other commitments. The only problems I have had, have been clutch related (one centre disc per meeting), but fingers crossed the last set up we tried for Sunday at DDD appears to be holding up well, so we may have found something which works  now. I hope to put some more street miles on the car now that the years racing is over for me, and just enjoy buzzing round some of the nice local country roads before the weather really turns for the worst.

Suffice to say its been a great year and the car has been fast and reliable on the street and track, its sat in traffic jams and not got hot, done 500-600 miles of motorway driving and knocked 6 tenths of a second of my previous PB, it even gave between 25 and 30mpg on the drives to the track, so it really has done everything I could have asked for, and all from 1795cc.

So that just leaves me to say thanks to all those who have helped me this year and in particular Ian at WPS, Peter at Cogbox, Dave Dinning, Lee Maynard, and of course Johannes at JPM for what has proved to be a ridiculously good little motor for the street and strip.

Peter

Excellent summary Peter, roll on 2011.

Long live the mouse motors !!!

peter, it was realy impressive to see you running at ddd8! your new small mouse motor sounds and run great.
cool that some members from the outlaw's are coming again to bitburg.

didi

 ;)

 ;)

 ;)

Awesome work as always Peter....

Awesome car - glad I had a chance to have a quick chat with Pete and Ian on Saturday night (sorry if I was a little drunk!) Loving the tinware by the way pete  ;)

Thanks for the kind comments all, DDD8 was a great end to a great year of racing for me, I just have my fingers crossed the event will run again next year. I think there might be a few more Outlaw's there next year, but it does clash with an event the same weekend in the UK as a general rule, which is why we haven't attended in greater numbers over recent years. I think its fair to say this years event sparked a flame for a few of us though, as its a great hardcore VW event with like minded people from all over attending, and the quality of cars as well as the quantity is as good as I've seen in one place.

I know there are a few other small motors being built out there, so hopefully there will be more updates on this thread over the winter and next year, with others flying the flag for the mouse motor, and needless to say I'm sure those that are out there allready will be thinking about winter tinkering plans. Roll on the 2011 race season!

Peter

Hello there,

Just a dyno pull of my 1915.
69mm Demello
JE pistons
5.4" rods
MS230 46x36 valves
11.2:1C/R
Raptor valvetrain
F1 throttle bodies
Motec M4 ecu

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v0o4Yt6ew1M

Will soon be updated with raised c/r, top shot injectors and new header.

/Johannes Persson