The Cal-look Lounge

Helping a friend plan out an engine for his car. (Actually my old '71 Cal-looker) He is not looking for huge power, just a little more spunk than stock. Something in the 90 - 120 range. Here are my thoughts.

94 Cimas
Stock stroke cweighted crank.
8.1 Compresion
Stock Rods
Engle 110
40 x 35 mildly ported heads (basic clean up and thre ange valve job)
Dual Kads
009
Extractor exhaust with single Q-pack

Your basic budget build. Any thoughts or input?

Thanks,

--louis

Nothing fancy. This is more of a driver than a racer. Stock dog house with maybe an external oil cooler & a bugpack breather.

--louis

That cam would really appreciate larger carbs, 40 IDF's or DRLA's with update kits would suit it well. Also, wouldn't hurt to up the CR a scosh to 8.5 ;)

Carbs are pretty much set and I want to keep the comp low so he doesn't have to run premium all the time.

--louis

Well, from my experience with my 1600 (110x1.25, 8.5:1, 40x35.5, 1 1/2") the engine turned into a completely different beast after I took off the Kadrons and replaced them with a borrowed set of 44's with 36mm venturies. It became so much more smooth and driveable in the lower rpms, and it picked up at least 500rpm up top, the change was unreal, it felt like a different engine. Bigger cams like one venturi per cylinder.

If the carbs are set and you want to keep the CR on the low side, I suggest an Engle 100 or FK65 and a decent set of ported stock valve heads. It will help that heavy '71 get up and out of its own way, and still make great power over 5,000 rpm. That's what I'm putting together for my father right now for his '72.

Just my .02 ;)

Thanks Zach, I will keep that in mind.

--louis

A French engine builder advices me to put a webcam 218/119 for a daily driver. He says me also that heads need a different work with that type of carburetor.

with the pull of almost 2000cc I think the 110 is too small.

Put some Webers on it and at least an Engle 120. The 110 is going to run like a big stocker in that big of an engine. I know I have driven engines like you've described.
If it were mine, for a mild street motor run at least 44's and a 120. You'll run cooler and have more stumpy torque than with Kadrons. The 110 is a good cam for 1776 or smaller unless you're driving a bus.

I have had two of the engines he describes, and I think they feel like powerful TDI engines... lots of lowdown grunt, and good enough to take anything up to a Honda 2000 at the lights... but I'm not saying that they wouldn't be better with a 120, I have one 1514 on the bench with a 120 so I will find out soon.  :)

Ok, I confess - I don't like kadrons. I can't see why anyone would bother with a single throat carb when better dual throats (eg IDF/DRLA) are available. For the price of a Kadron kit you gould get a pair of DRLAs and the manifolds linkages etc.

A friend had a 1641 in her '72 bug with a 4-1 header, stinger, 1.25:1 rockers, 009/blue coil and kadrons. I had a 1641 in my '71 Ghia, same ignition, 36DRLAs stock rockers and a merged header with twin QPs. Same ratio gearboxes (stock 3.88 R&P)The ghia is what, 50lbs heavier than the equivalent year beetle, and I was a good 130lbs heavier than her, yet my quarter mile times were 18.0 to 18.3's and hers were around 19.2. I put that down to the carbs. With a bigger motor I can imagine the difference would be even greater.

Miles per gallon was better than stock too!

As I said, the Kads stay since he already has them. I think the 120 would be too big for the kads. So maybe a 1776 would be a better motor due to the limitations of the carbs he is running.

--louis

The Kads can supply a 1914, no problem. Stock Kads usually maxes out at about 94 hp. unless radical cams and CR is used.  the use of a W110 cam along with Kads WITH a ½" balance tube (NO hose except for the ends) actually idles reeeasonably OK ::) 

My personal choice for an engine in that range would be Web 218/119. 8,6 - 1 CR Make a set of good flowing heads, the cam likes it. 30 mm venturies or 32 for max power. 1½" header, preferably one of the better on the market.

I have a 1914 set up in my "Kadron line" which is in the neighbourhood of that. The most aggressive one of them pulls 115-120 hp @ aprox. 5700 rpm. The milder version makes 100 - 105 hp @ 5300

- You will not hit 120 hp in a 1914 with a W110 cam, low CR and stock Kads. 90 - 94 hp and that´s it.
T.
T

up your compression, i built a low compression(7.5:1) motor for the same reasons, wasnt much faster than stock, totally disappionted, wasted my money. i upped the compression to 10.5:1, runs on pump gas, 89 octane, and the fucker has come to life and screams. dont be a pussy, build it fast  ;D

I just found the configuration of a 1915 built by Mark herbert for the shit box. Thats really not a mild engine, but it runs with Kadron. Mark Hebert did magic on his engine  :'(

1915
Rod 5.352"
engle 130 + 1.25:1
Heads 40x35.5mm
9.5:1 cr
Kadron with 34 choke
merged 1 5/8"

Gearbox 4/12 -  3.78/2.06/1.48/1.12

Best ET 12.90 sec  8)

Sorry to rip you topic, but what kind of cam do you guys think is good on a hot-street 1915? With SCAT Mini-d's, stock rockers and dual 40 DRLA's. DPR crank, stock rods, 1 1/2 inch merged.

Web 121/125. and 10,3 - CR  Its a killer cam.
T

After giving it some thought I think we are going to go with a 1776 with this combo:

90.5 PCs
8.5 comp
Stock CW crank
12.5 lbs Flywheel
stock rods
Web 119 cam
CBs Los Banditos heads 40 x 35 (Or some other mildly ported heads)
extractor exhaust w/ single QP
Kads
009

I think this will be the best bang for his buck. Not a screamer, but a good daily driver with some more zip than a stocker. Something that can be driven across town or across country. The 1914 looks to add to much to the cost for the minimal improvements we would see with such a mild build.

--louis

120 and 9:1. Sounds similar to the motor we will be building for AssHull's 67.

dont waste your time or money with 8.5, you will be disappointed. might as well build it stock.

And about the 87 vs 91... I could understand building a motor to run on 87 octane 10 years ago when 87 was $1 a gallon and 91 was 1.20. Percentage wise, that's a pretty big difference. Nowadays when 87 is $4 and 91 is still only .20 more, what's the big fuckin deal? You're getting raped at the pumps either way, what is $2 more a tank, really??

Youre getting raped ???????
How about 8,5 dollars per gallon. Then you can talk about getting raped.

- When i build street engines, I normally build them for medium grade fuel. (Around here that is 95 octane) Unless I´m chasing max hp and torque. The more aggressive the cam, the more often I build for 98 octane, because there is often a lot of torque hidden in the last CR.
T

In the Uk we're over $11 per gallon! >:( Getting bent over and ATM at the same time...

$12 pr gallon in Norway...  11.2 CR... most bang for the buck!  :-\

That wasn't my point!!!

Really?  ;)

1915cc with a Web 110/163 a very nice cam lots of torque, nice to drive and still revs all the way up to 7000.... 10.2:1 on Premium with mildly ported 40/35.5mm heads. 1.25:1 RR. (Dual DRLA 40, or 45)

I also used a Web 119 in 1600cc engine with very pleasant results.

Cheers Dom

Sorry, I did not visit the lounge lately, it works with a 1 1/2" but I guess it profits from a 1 5/8" exhaust. I tested an A1 Sidewinder with very good results