Your Dream 1776CC
Nxqzablesk8er
your nice new engine. Not the brands, but the sizes, and what do you think you
could push out of it?(hp)
Im looking to build a new engine...money is somewhat of an issue, im having a
REALLY hard time deciding on parts, and it actually is very confusing, i've
read alot of articles, and tried to do as much research, but im so undecided.
Lets say you were looking for about 100hp or so, but it was a daily driver, and
would be nice if it lasted for a reasonable mileage. WHAT SHOULD I DO!!!
I was thinking 90.5 pistons, ported and polished heads (what valve sizes would
be best??)
Counterweighted crank, (i don't know what size)
Probably a mild cam, don't want to go too high in rpms (durability) What size
would you reccomend?
what should i do for rockers, springs, tubes??
What piston rods would i want to use if i was to stroke it? (haha, that sounds
bad)
Im just looking for insight on a good engine, PLEASE HELP!! I want it to be my
spring/summer project
Have fun with this one, hehe ~Peace~Justin
Jan Andersson
The key factors are heads and cam. Then of course carburation, but "the
norm" here would be Dellorto or Weber 40mm and they would work well.
The cam can have more duration if you get an adjustable cam gear and
time it a little advanced, then the powerband would drop down to a lower
rpm range. What you'd end up with is a "high rpm, high power" cam that
would kick in earlier, at the same rpms as a "milder" cam would.
(I'm simplifying things here).
Stroking: up to 78mm stroke, you can use stock lenght connecting rods.
Assuming you are still sticking to your plans of staying at reasonably
low rpms. This, together with timed cam, could result in a VERRRY
torrrrrquey engine that could easily support a "freeway flyer"
transmission...! Haven't tried, but sounds like it could be a sweet
engine. This is something I would build for a bus btw... ;)
</scratch surface>
Jan
BergRace
"Jan Andersson" <bug...@rocketmail.com> wrote in message
news:bv02gh$m39cg$1...@ID-72729.news.uni-berlin.de...
For normal everyday use go for a 1915 (94mm pistons/cylinders) instead, same
price, higher output and easier to tune correctly..
J.
Anthony
would use 90.5 P&C, 78 MM counterweighted crank, heads with polished
exhaust, not intake (what size valves, not sure), 110 cam, heavy duty
valve springs, 1.25 ratio rockers, chromoly pushrods, dual webber
40's, eight pinned flywheel, full flow oil system with filter...and
I'm sure I've forgotten something. What do you gurus think? I'm
hoping for at least 90 HP, but estimating, with the right heads and
port work, somewhere around 100-105. Sound possible?
~Anthony
nxqzab...@aol.com (Nxqzablesk8er) wrote in message news:<20040125041650...@mb-m27.aol.com>...
Joey Tribiani
around screaming and yelling:
>If I were to build a streetable 1776 that I were to drive every day, I
>would use 90.5 P&C, 78 MM counterweighted crank,
with the 78mm crank it is no longer a 1776...
J
Max Welton
> If I were to build a streetable 1776 that I were to drive every day, I
> would use 90.5 P&C, 78 MM counterweighted crank, heads with polished
That will be a 2007, not a 1776.
Max
Jan Andersson
Jan
Ilambert
"Anthony" <ant...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:9ca84d59.04012...@posting.google.com...
Ilambert
Nxqzablesk8er
stroke? Or would just using larger pistons, really good heads, 110 cam, stock
rods etc? Or what would i be looking at? Also, with 94mm will they last as
long? What CC range would i be in? ~Peace~Justin
Nxqzablesk8er
every day, I
would use 90.5 P&C, 78 MM counterweighted crank, heads with polished
exhaust, not intake (what size valves, not sure), 110 cam, heavy duty
valve springs, 1.25 ratio rockers, chromoly pushrods, dual webber
40's, eight pinned flywheel, full flow oil system with filter...and
I'm sure I've forgotten something. What do you gurus think? I'm
hoping for at least 90 HP, but estimating, with the right heads and
port work, somewhere around 100-105.
But instead of 90.5, i used 94mm pistons, what would i be looking at?
Tim Rogers
"Nxqzablesk8er" <nxqzab...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20040125171016...@mb-m02.aol.com...
>
> What if i used this If I were to build a streetable 1776 that I were to
drive
> every day, I
>
>
...............OK Justin. As stated in another post, a 1776 has a standard
stroke of 69mm. So does a 1915, an 1835 and a 1679. Your proposed
combination of 90.5mm bore & 78mm stroke would give you a displacement of
2007 cc's. For me, a 1915 or 1776 would be a good performing but still
affordable 'driver' with maybe a 118 grind webcam, ported heads, dual 40
webers or Kadrons, merged header exhaust system, counter-weighted crank, HD
single springs with 911 style adjusting screws, heavy pulley & lightened
flywheel, pulley-crank-flywheel-pressure plate dynamically balanced, full
flowed new case and probably some other important things that I can't think
of right now. This would be a 'good bang for the buck' 100 hp engine that
would surprise the crap out of quite a few 16 valve civics & jettas. The
SUV's & Silverados wouldn't have a chance in hell of keeping up with you on
a twisty road. The highschool guys would sell you their sisters for a ride.
Bill
ago. I never used the engine and it sets wrapped up in the garage. It
had 90.5 stock stroke, engle 110 cam, full flow, dual port heads.... I
would have to dig out the paperwork to make sure of all the stuff,
machine work, etc..
Due to many circumstances, I was unable to finish the project car. Now
(a few years later) I must get out of the busniess (VW business that
is ((:_( I had purchased a berg full flow set up and some other
things.
I'm willing to sell this for what I have in it. Tha's gonna be about
$1300. + plus shipping & handling. I'll prove what I have in it will
documentation, receipts, etc..
Since it has been sitting, it may need to be torn down and inspected.
It was oiled good and every year or some I would open the wrapping and
give it a turn.
If someone is interested, drop me a note. If you want something for
nothing, please don't contact me. I'm selling my VW junk on a web
site. http://www.macs-stuff.com . I've already sold my '67 beetle.
Thanks, and good luck...
bill
On 25 Jan 2004 09:16:50 GMT, nxqzab...@aol.com (Nxqzablesk8er)
wrote:
Anthony
becuase it used 90.5 P&C that it was a 1776...but I COMPLETELY spaced
the fact that a longer stroke creates more Cubic Centimeters!
Gosh...once again I feel like a complete idiot. What's the deal with
the 2007's? Good, bad?
~Anthony
Joey Tribiani <Jo...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:<0v48105tic6a73tea...@4ax.com>...
Nxqzablesk8er
stroke of 69mm. So does a 1915, an 1835 and a 1679. Your proposed
combination of 90.5mm bore & 78mm stroke would give you a displacement of
2007 cc's.
Tim- I caught that, i just copy and pasted wrong. So what about durability, and
longevity. 90.5 vs 94?? And how do you save money, it seems that the P&C sets
are the same price, maybe by not stroking the 90.5? saving money? Is there
anything wrong, or would and engine not last as long with 90.5 stroked to 78?
But the same thing arises, 90.5 and 94 mm cost the same, why not 94, hah.
Tim Rogers
>
> Tim- I caught that, i just copy and pasted wrong. So what about
durability, and
> longevity. 90.5 vs 94?? And how do you save money, it seems that the P&C
sets
> are the same price, maybe by not stroking the 90.5? saving money? Is there
> anything wrong, or would and engine not last as long with 90.5 stroked to
78?
> But the same thing arises, 90.5 and 94 mm cost the same, why not 94, hah.
>
>
....................Somebody else will correct me on this as they should but
I'm guessing that a stroker engine is at least $500 more expensive than a
comparable engine with a 69mm crankshaft. I've never owned a stroked type1
engine but I know that there are conflicting opinions about whether
durability suffers with a bigger crank. I'd think that a well built one
that's configured by someone who knows their business like John Connolly or
Jake Raby would be good for a lot of miles. The conventional theory that
94mm cylinders don't cool as well as 90.5's may not be true enough to make
that much difference in longevity. This is a contentious issue. The 94's
have a little less fin area but it's the heads that overheat on a type1.
Wall thickness doesn't determine how hot a cylinder gets but instead helps
the cylinder maintain its shape when it is hot. I have a brother who runs a
1915 in Florida who says that it has logged several thousand miles now
without developing any compression or blow-by problems. I think that he
commutes about 250 miles a week in it. The PO used machine-in 88mm cylinders
in the engine in my '77 bug and I will say this, after about 12,000 miles,
this engine has enough compression that it gives me a hell of a workout when
I try to turn it over by hand.
Nxqzablesk8er
>I'm guessing that a stroker engine is at least $500 more expensive than a
>comparable engine with a 69mm crankshaft. I've never owned a stroked type1
>engine but I know that there are conflicting opinions about whether
>durability suffers with a bigger crank. I'd think that a well built one
>that's configured by someone who knows their business like John Connolly or
>Jake Raby would be good for a lot of miles. The conventional theory that
>94mm cylinders don't cool as well as 90.5's may not be true enough to make
>that much difference in longevity. This is a contentious issue. The 94's
>have a little less fin area but it's the heads that overheat on a type1.
>Wall thickness doesn't determine how hot a cylinder gets but instead helps
>the cylinder maintain its shape when it is hot. I have a brother who runs a
>1915 in Florida who says that it has logged several thousand miles now
>without developing any compression or blow-by problems. I think that he
>commutes about 250 miles a week in it. The PO used machine-in 88mm cylinders
>in the engine in my '77 bug and I will say this, after about 12,000 miles,
>this engine has enough compression that it gives me a hell of a workout when
>I try to turn it over by hand.
>
Thanks for the insight, $500-800 (based on my research) sounds pretty right on.
Im not too worried about cooling. Worse comes to worse, external oil cooler? I
run with my decklid off anyways. I don't see how a larger crank would mess with
things, as long as it is REALLY balanced. Even a slight misbalancing will screw
up alot, considering how fast, and the circle that the makes.
My question would be, if everything is the same on an engine, the normal 110
cam, 42x37.5 heads, what is the HP diff from a 90.5, and a 94mm engine? How
much hp can you get from a 90.5mm, 78 stroked, 42x37.5 heads, equivalent of a
110 cam and all the other nicknacks. How much hp?? And then, same thing, but
94mm p&c
~peace~Justin
Joey Tribiani
ran around screaming and yelling:
>My question would be, if everything is the same on an engine, the normal 110
>cam, 42x37.5 heads, what is the HP diff from a 90.5, and a 94mm engine? How
>much hp can you get from a 90.5mm, 78 stroked, 42x37.5 heads, equivalent of a
>110 cam and all the other nicknacks. How much hp?? And then, same thing, but
>94mm p&c
>
you are too big on your valves...you will lose port velocity, and that
in turn loses "bottom" end....
diGoliardi
nxqzab...@aol.com (Nxqzablesk8er) wrote:
> [...]
> Im not too worried about cooling. Worse comes to worse, external oil cooler? I
> run with my decklid off anyways. [...]
Your forgot to say "Hey, y'all! Watch this!"
Nxqzablesk8er
>in turn loses "bottom" end....
With the 90.5mm? Or as well as with 94mm? Any guess as to HP with each one?
Joey Tribiani
ran around screaming and yelling:
>>you are too big on your valves...you will lose port velocity, and that
>>in turn loses "bottom" end....
>
>With the 90.5mm? Or as well as with 94mm? Any guess as to HP with each one?
well in *MY* opinion the valve sizes are too large for either....you
are wanting a street motor, so a 2007(78x90.5) or the 2165(78x94) with
a mild port job with 40x35.5 valves would have some great torque with
the right cam(keeping the duration below *about* 280 degrees)....pop
on some webber 44 idfs and you would have a very nice "street" engine
that could still impress you when you "mash" it....Large valves, huge
duration cam, big carbs, and huge exhaust make for great HP up top,
but at the expense of low end power....no naturally a 2L+ engine will
have good low end torque because of the size of the engine, but the
lager valves and such move the "power" band *up* the rpm scale...But
also realize i am NO engine builder(have built quite a few that were
great and some where i *missed* it on the combo) and this is just one
mans opinion...you are doing the right thing by asking questions and
"researching" *before* you bolt it together....two final
suggestions:1) don't skimp on important parts(pretty much *all* of the
parts are "important" 2) have the entire rotating assembly
balanced...money well spent...
J
Nxqzablesk8er
>well in *MY* opinion the valve sizes are too large for either....you
>are wanting a street motor, so a 2007(78x90.5) or the 2165(78x94) with
>a mild port job with 40x35.5 valves would have some great torque with
>the right cam(keeping the duration below *about* 280 degrees)....pop
>on some webber 44 idfs and you would have a very nice "street" engine
>that could still impress you when you "mash" it....Large valves, huge
>duration cam, big carbs, and huge exhaust make for great HP up top,
>but at the expense of low end power....no naturally a 2L+ engine will
>have good low end torque because of the size of the engine, but the
>lager valves and such move the "power" band *up* the rpm scale...But
>also realize i am NO engine builder(have built quite a few that were
>great and some where i *missed* it on the combo) and this is just one
>mans opinion...you are doing the right thing by asking questions and
>"researching" *before* you bolt it together....two final
>suggestions:1) don't skimp on important parts(pretty much *all* of the
>parts are "important" 2) have the entire rotating assembly
>balanced...money well spent...
>J
Thanks for the pointers, but from what i read on aircooled.net, the more air
the better, and since it's stroked, the rpms are already low down. Your points
are very valid...i guess i just need more opinions hehe. Any GUESS as to HP
ranges??
Thanks ~peace~Justin