Cal look 1776 or hotter? [POLL]

[empi67rag]

Hello Guys,

Well, I have this dilemma here, when I started planning, and later started building my car, my idea was clear, and stated for many times in different articles as a true cal-look 70ies engine,  my car would have a decent driving 1776 on 48 ida's. (knowing that the combo 1776/48ida isn't right, but the look is !!)
Now,2 years later everything is getting bigger and bigger, and also the engines are.

So, here my question should a cal-look car of today need to have a 2.0 plus engine or not??

Any comments appreciated!

Thanks,
Kurt.

[louisb]

I don't think engine size is really a requirement for Cal-look status. Many of the early Cal-lookers had warmed over 1200cc motors. As long as your motor is modified for better performance than stock I think it would qualify IMHO. Now if you have the resources and you wanted to get some more power out of your little motor, swap out the 90.5s for 94s. But if you are happy with the 1776, leave it alone and drive it. KISS.

--louis

[empi67rag]

I have most of the parts to build a 2.2 liter equivalent.
Kurt.

[ESH]

I think there's a thread somewhere titled 'huge powerhouses and old school' or something similar but after a quick search I can't find it. Anyway look at the evidence, at the first opportunity Dean Lowry went and produced a massive aftermarket case so the purist / traditional approach is to go with more cc. I missed the series of old magazine articles detailing the pursuit of ever smaller motors celebrating the limitations caused by a lack of aftermarket parts!
 
In all seriousness my thinking on the subject for what it's worth is along the lines of what Louis posted and if you have the parts you should use them assuming they're good quality.
 

[nicolas]

if you want it,build it. but i personally like the car with THIS engine. it is different for todays standards. read through the mousemotor topics and make up you mind after reading those. i almost feel sorry to be building the 2l engine... allmost. 

[carlo]

For me 1776 cc is the best engine for street cal look beetles! 

[67worshipper]

Hello Guys,

Well, I have this dilemma here, when I started planning, and later started building my car, my idea was clear, and stated for many times in different articles as a true cal-look 70ies engine,  my car would have a decent driving 1776 on 48 ida's. (knowing that the combo 1776/48ida isn't right, but the look is !!)
Now,2 years later everything is getting bigger and bigger, and also the engines are.

So, here my question should a cal-look car of today need to have a 2.0 plus engine or not??

Any comments appreciated!kurt on a different note the fuel pump in and out pipes seem to be linked on your engine are you running an electric pump.i noticed this when it was featured in volksworld and wondered?is this a way of blocking off the pump without using the alloy blanks you can buy?

Thanks,
Kurt.

[Zach Gomulka]

So, here my question should a cal-look car of today need to have a 2.0 plus engine or not??

Hell no!!! 

[streetvw]

I used to run a 1776 in a daily driven bug and it was a real pleasure to have but I would say that my ideal STREET motor would be a 1955cc with 44webers a FK8 cam and some descent 40x35.5 heads, it wouldn't break the bank and would have plenty of torque without being to scary for every day use and would still leave the majority of quick production cars wondering what just got em

[Peter]

build a big engine to go fast,
isnt that the only reason?

[empi67rag]

And I forgot to mention, this is a street car, I drive it to every show.

[Mags]

Hey Kurt,
I will got for 78mm crank and 90,5mm bore.
Magne

[besserwisser]

Here we go again, it´s been said many times size doesn´t matter performance does. It´s not the size it´s the way you put it together that matters. A friend of mine built a 1600 a couple of years back that did mid fourteens on the strip in a allsteel car. built another way that motor can be a grocery getter with 60hp. Cal-look in my opinion is all in the way you aproach the motor no matter size. You want to get the most out of it with reasonable lifespan. You actually answered your own question,a hot 1776 or a 1776 motor.I am right now building a couple of big "not very hot" bus engines for some people that want reliability instead of peak performance. As for a daily driver I would go with a 1776 with lots of bottom end as I feel tourqe is more impotant than top horsepower in a daily driver. I am also in the final stages with a 1300 dualport with dual weber 40 idf. That will go up against my 1680 berg motor with dual dcnf 42,s. I will keep you informed how it works out. Hopefully both motors will hit the dyno next fall.

[Black Sheep]

Hey Kurt,
I will got for 78mm crank and 90,5mm bore.
Magne

Hi Kurt   I did just this , was going to put a 1776 motor in my car had all the bits 90.5's 044 heads 125 cam with the appropriate ratio rockers even got a 010 to look the old school part . but Im glad I dropped in the cb 78mm crank , now Ive got all the peace of mind from the cooler running 90.5's with a bit of extra grunt the 78mm affords me .
I would go with the 78mm crank and step up to 2007 .

[Zach Gomulka]

Here we go again, it´s been said many times size doesn´t matter performance does. It´s not the size it´s the way you put it together that matters.

Exactly!

[Martin Greaves]

Or you could do 82x90.5, K8 cam and ida's is nice to.

[Black Sheep]

Here we go again, it´s been said many times size doesn´t matter performance does. It´s not the size it´s the way you put it together that matters.

Exactly!

That go without saying of corse 

[Jim Ratto]

not engine size but how highly tuned it is

[Rick Meredith]

Plenty of us have run 1776cc with 48s and they run pretty well. Any motor is gonna be a compromise.

[Bewitched666]

Empi67rag imo it depends to which period of the callook you wanna make your car to look like.

Like one said here before the first callookers had a warmed over 1200cc engine and from there it went bigger.
Till the end of the 70's i think 2276cc engine where the biggest and most ran 1679,1835,1914 and all in between.

When i started half the 80's 1679cc engines where still hot as where 1835 and 1914.

I think the bigger engines started in the 90's till now.

I would say build an engine which will suite your needs and not an engine becoz the trend is..... or becoz everybody is running....

But thats my 2 cents

Cheers Stanford

[peter - belgium]

Or you could do 82x90.5, K8 cam and ida's is nice to.

That is what I would do as well    Not too big, not too small either, and built for torque and reliability (I want to drive to the shows as well!)

Peter
http://oval57.skynetblogs.be

[1957lowlight]

Yeah, Kurt, the 1776cc motor you got is a real nice one.  Built 10 years ago and still pulling very strong.  It made the difference back then because of the high quality parts used in the building up.  It's all Gene Berg inside and the heads are fully reworked stock vw heads (for strong materials) of Koen De Smet, who did a lot of enginebuilding to drive the 24hours on track with a beetle.  The heads really made de difference on this motor.  When I drove it in my beetle years ago with Dell'orto 40mm carbs, it pulled so strong it spinned the rear wheels in second gear on dry streets all the time.  My 1915cc doesn't have that extra pep, but does the job for me.  If you are happy with it, everybody is happy!!!  On the other hand, the 48 IDA's will give better return on a 2l engine.

[qubek]

Building a 2,0+ engine just because someone says that it’s “more cal-look”, while what you really need and/or want is a 1776, is just as nonsense as building a 1776 engine just because “real cal-looker must have 1776”, when you want (and can) build a bigger engine .
IMO if someone is building a cal-look car, he should look at his needs and resources. All the usual questions like how will the car be used, if its gonna be raced, if it’s to be a daily driver, weekend driver, show special, if you can and want to do maintenance often, how much many can you spend etc. That’s normal. If, instead of this, your are asking “what is a proper size for a real cal-looker” than it’s not cal-look anymore, its more like recreating pieces of history. Like people who enjoy recreating historical battles. Probably a cool hobby and it has educational value, but they’re not really fighting.
I don’t think people “back then” were thinking “what is a proper size”.
Build what you wont

[Peter]

AMEN

[Bewitched666]

I agree with qubek

This is what Jim Ratto once said about alot of guys building the internet engine etc.

[empicolector]

period style engine for me

[rebel]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but Attitude matters more than just size. It may sound funny, but I think that at least in the matter of hot rodding volkswagens and styles beyond that it's best way to do it.
It all depends what you want to achieve. I think that there is a limit for a 'state of tune' for a california look VW. The traditional cal-look cars were street cars, right?
 13 second 1776 would't be really pleasent to drive, whereas an 13 second 2276 would be even comfortable. When a car looses it's streetabillity that it becomes a racer more than a cal-looker. Just my 2 cents...