Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

Building a 1641 - 1679?

156 views
Skip to first unread message

Robb Messer

unread,
Aug 30, 1999, 3:00:00 AM8/30/99
to
I was just wondering (before I start ordering parts for my winter rebuild)
why 1641cc engine seem to be such a popular displacement when you can go
1679cc for little extra money and still no need to machine the case. Are
the larger 88mm jugs know for problems? Am I missing something and would
need to machine the case to get the extra 38cc?

Also, will my current stock 1600dp work ok with a set of dual 40mm solex
carbs? Two single barrels sold by So Cal (among others). My old 34PICT 3 is
worn out (even an old school german vw mechanic thought so) and I may buy
the carbs for my new motor now if the stock engine can handle them.

Any advice would be kewl. (neat word, only ever seen it on this NG)

Thanks
Robb

John Connolly

unread,
Aug 30, 1999, 3:00:00 AM8/30/99
to
88s and 87s are known for problems, as are 92s. Stay away from all except
the MACHINE IN 88s.

John

Robb Messer <rme...@abs.ca> wrote in message
news:7qe39s$822$1...@garnet.nbnet.nb.ca...

TQuan

unread,
Aug 30, 1999, 3:00:00 AM8/30/99
to
1641's and 1679's use thinner walled cylinders. When the cylinders get to thin
they warp and and don't do a good job of sealing and holding the piston square.
Stick with 85.5's or 90.5's. Yes your 1600 will work with a set of solex 40's.

-Terry

Alex Bartonek

unread,
Aug 30, 1999, 3:00:00 AM8/30/99
to
I'm runnin a 1641, and used to run a 1641 on a daily driver w/o problems.
Just take care of the car, and it'll take care of you...
Yep...dual 40's will work fine.

Alex

Robb Messer wrote in message <7qe39s$822$1...@garnet.nbnet.nb.ca>...

Jan Andersson

unread,
Aug 31, 1999, 3:00:00 AM8/31/99
to

John Connolly wrote:

> 88s and 87s are known for problems, as are 92s. Stay away from all except
> the MACHINE IN 88s.
>
> John

And some people, myself included, think that machine in 88mm is a waste of money
and effort, you only get a miserable little 100cc's more. If you are going to
have the case machined anyway, why not go up to 90.5mm, the cost is the same.
Reliability almost as good, very fine difference. (88 machine-in is the thickest
walled, right John?)

Just my opinions, I don't expect everyone to share them. I agree that in some
cases the machine in 88 is justifiable.

Jan


GazMP

unread,
Aug 31, 1999, 3:00:00 AM8/31/99
to
In article <7qe39s$822$1...@garnet.nbnet.nb.ca>, "Robb Messer" <rme...@abs.ca>
writes:

>I was just wondering (before I start ordering parts for my winter rebuild)
>why 1641cc engine seem to be such a popular displacement when you can go
>1679cc for little extra money and still no need to machine the case. Are
>the larger 88mm jugs know for problems? Am I missing something and would
>need to machine the case to get the extra 38cc?

The slip in 1641 and 1679 cylinders are basically 1585s opened up and when
continually heated and cooled (general daily running) they will square to the
four head studs and as a piston is round you'll get a lot of blow by noticed
firstly by the amount of air coming out of the oil filler breather, then by a
lack of power.
A lot of people have had good luck with 1641 and 1835, but there are a lot who
haven't. Stick with stock or 90.5mm cylinders. You can get 88mm machine in,
but for the cost and time you might as well buy the 90.5 and get the extra
100cc.


Gaz
To e-mail me remove the ".nospam"
Visit the RAMVA FAQ index at
http://www.ramva.vwmagazine.com
for all your aircooled VW answers

PEPPE

unread,
Sep 1, 1999, 3:00:00 AM9/1/99
to
Do not use 1679 (88mm) slip-in, they aren't reliable.
Instead use 1641 (87mm) 1776 (90.5 machined) or 88mm machined

dual 40 solex are fine.

PEPPE


0 new messages