The Cal-look Lounge
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 29, 2024, 06:50:08 am

Login with username, password and session length
Thank you for your support!
Search:     Advanced search
350646 Posts in 28563 Topics by 6811 Members
Latest Member: Bren
* Home This Year's European Top 20 lists All Time European Top 20 lists Search Login Register
+  The Cal-look Lounge
|-+  Cal-look/High Performance
| |-+  Cal-look
| | |-+  Bare minimum requirements for a Web 86C?
« previous next »
Pages: [1] Print
Author Topic: Bare minimum requirements for a Web 86C?  (Read 3265 times)
Matt Tobias
Full Member
***
Posts: 101


« on: November 28, 2015, 22:39:15 pm »

For a good street engine with no strip time.
Thinking 42x37 DRD heads, 2276, 10.5:1, 48 IDF's with 40 vents, 1x5/8" exhaust
Logged
neil68
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 538



« Reply #1 on: November 30, 2015, 02:40:43 am »

I ran a Web 86C with CB 044 Ultra Mag Plus oval-port 42 x 37 (looked similar to your photo), Weber 48 IDA's, 42 vents and 10.5:1 CR and 1 5/8" header.  It was an excellent hot street Beetle, but required 91 octane (94 when at sea level).

(Later, I elected to have 44 mm intakes installed and moved up to 1.75" exhaust, but that was done in order to race at our Friday night Street Legal drags).
Logged

Neil
Der Kleiner Rennwagens
'68 Beetle, 2332 cc, 204 WHP
12.5 seconds @ 172 KM/H (107.5 MPH)
Dynojet Test:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M9B_H3eklAo
jamiep_jamiep
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1587



« Reply #2 on: November 30, 2015, 10:19:23 am »

For a good street engine with no strip time.
Thinking 42x37 DRD heads, 2276, 10.5:1, 48 IDF's with 40 vents, 1x5/8" exhaust

I ran virtually that exact same spec, only with a 1 3/4" exhaust and it was a really nice drive. Heads were 42x37 044's (hand ported), and I had 10.6:1 - previously had an 86B at IIRC 9.5:1 and it felt so much better with the 86C and the extra compression. Very drivable, I used it daily for a 45 mile commute when my every day car broke.
Logged

Matt Tobias
Full Member
***
Posts: 101


« Reply #3 on: November 30, 2015, 15:51:21 pm »

Thx guys!  86C it is!
Logged
BeetleBug
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 2836


Snabba grabben...


« Reply #4 on: November 30, 2015, 18:29:02 pm »

previously had an 86B at IIRC 9.5:1 and it felt so much better with the 86C and the extra compression.

What would you say was wrong with the 86B? I consider using a 86B in a street driven 2165ccm engine.

Thanks!

Best rgs
BB
Logged

10.41 - 100ci - 1641ccm - 400hp
jamiep_jamiep
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1587



« Reply #5 on: December 01, 2015, 17:29:02 pm »

previously had an 86B at IIRC 9.5:1 and it felt so much better with the 86C and the extra compression.

What would you say was wrong with the 86B? I consider using a 86B in a street driven 2165ccm engine.

Thanks!

Best rgs
BB

To be honest nothing at all BB, the car was great with it in there, but the block was apart for a bearing change and I had the parts so thought I would try the change. Definitely quicker (as you would expect) with the more aggressive cam and CR, and not just by a little bit, it seemed a whole different engine.
Logged

Matt Tobias
Full Member
***
Posts: 101


« Reply #6 on: December 02, 2015, 06:14:53 am »

Thanks guys!!! Great info!  I'm really looking forward to trying this cam out!
Logged
Pages: [1] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!