82 or 84 Stroker Crank?

[Bill Tucker '76 BUG]

Hi Gang! Greetings from sunny Florida! I want to build a dream street
screamer stroker engine.
Have got a 1600 Type 1 full flowed block that has been machined to
accept 90.5 cylinders. Want to build a back up engine for my 1776
powered 1976 Bug. Would prefer not to build an exotic tune up every
other day machine but something that will get me out of the way of a
speeding tractor trailer! Anyone had any experience with running a 82mm
or 84mm cw crank? Problems? Suggestions? Which cam (street
application),heads, Kadrons or ? Just curious about other peoples
ideas.
Wild Bill

'76 Bug- 1776cc Under Major Overhaul
'57 Oval-Awaiting Repairs

Rare Air VW Club Website:
http://devoted.to/RareAir/

[ANT The Monarch of Menace]

>Anyone had any experience with running a 82mm
>or 84mm cw crank? Problems? Suggestions?

Stroked engines will empty your wallet faster than a liberal democratic
congress. <G>

A 1914 probably gives you the most poop for a devalued buck. This is the
largest (?) stock stroke you can build--or at least the most durable anyway.

Make sure whatever you build that you use a counterweighted crank.
-ANT

Check out the late great DALE 3 wheeled car
http://hometown.aol.com/daleautomobile/

[John Connolly]

build an 82, they are cheaper ($300 cheaper) and easier to build. Spend the
extra $300 on headwork!

John
Aircooled.Net Inc.

"Bill Tucker '76 BUG" <stl...@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:25245-3B...@storefull-166.iap.bryant.webtv.net...

[Randy in Alaska]

I can tell you that an 82mm CW crankshaft, Webcam 86b, Performance
Technologies worked heads (level 6), straight-cut gears and 94mm cylinders
is a GREAT engine. Talk w/ John C. at Aircooled.Net (www.aircooled.net), he
is recently in the business of building not only serious but drivable engine
longblocks. He'll also sell you anything you need (crank, cam, heads,
whatever) if you want to DIY. Only problem with my 2276 is I am running
dual 40 Dell's and that's really not enough carb for the engine. Still
holds you to the back of your seat though. you can go 60 to 80 right
now.....

Good luck on whatever you decide to build...just GO BIG! 8)

--
Randy in Alaska
http://home.gci.net/~randyinalaska/vwpage.html
'65 RHD Sunroof Bug
'68 Bug in progress (Baja?)
'94 Ford F-150 Ext Cab Flareside 4x4
'84 S-10 Blazer piece of Chevy

[RSMEINER]

OK, Lets chat about this for awhile. I get a little confused.
I have heard not to go with a 1835 motor as the cyl walls are thin.
What about 1914 ? Wouldn't they be thinner ?
I need something that is going to be reliable and can withstand heat.

Randy

[Max]

I think the 1835 is 69x92 and the 1914 is 72x92. They have
the same bore.

There is a Berg tech article (GB-801 Pistons & Cylinders)
dealing with Ps&Cs that has some good information. Berg
recommends going no greater than 90.5 for a long-lived
street motor in a type-1 and 88 in a type 2 or 3.

Dunno about the 1914 being the most durable on a stock
stroke, ANT. Other than stock displacement, the 1776 is said
to be very durable. With a CW crank of course.

Max

--
Max Welton
67 Karmann Ghia Coupe
Home Page: http://www.crosswinds.net/~maxwelton2k/
Wolfsburg Pacific Club http://www.wolfpacvw.itgo.com
Gene Berg Memorial Cruise Site
http://63.230.74.177/gbcruisesite/

[Earle Horton]

Gene Berg (http://www.geneberg.com) said that 90.5 mm cylinders are good, 88
mm better for longevity and resistance to heat. This gives you 1776 cc or
1679 cc. He didn't like 92s (1835) or 94s (1914). You can read about why
on his company's web site. If what he says is true, then 92s and 94s must
truly suck (please forgive this strong language).

My 1977 FI bug uses 88 mm (1679), and it's been running great for five
years.

Earle Horton
http://earleh.tripod.com

"RSMEINER" <rsme...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20010801192117...@mb-mh.aol.com...

[ANT The Monarch of Menace]

>OK, Lets chat about this for awhile. I get a little confused.
>I have heard not to go with a 1835 motor as the cyl walls are thin.
>What about 1914 ? Wouldn't they be thinner ?
>I need something that is going to be reliable and can withstand heat.

I understand that the 1835's suffer from too thin a cylinder, but the 1914's
have thicker walls--they are larger diameter overall.

The early 94mm (1914) cylinders and or pistons did suffer from overheating/loss
of ring seal but apparently this is no longer a problem. To cover my dierriere
I went with gapless #2 compression rings.

[ANT The Monarch of Menace]

>I think the 1835 is 69x92 and the 1914 is 72x92. They have
>the same bore.

Well, my 1914 (or izzit a 1915??) is 69X94

What you say about a 1776 outlasting a 1914 may very well be true, but I cannot
totally belive Berg on his dislike of the 94's as his tests were done several
years ago (at least) and these slugs and jugs in this size have improved quite
a bit since then.

Either way, from what I know, a 1914 is mucho morer durable than a 1835.

[Ronald Terrence Bullard]

1914 is 69x94. 94's bore out the case a bit bigger, and the walls are
thicker than on 92's. Because of that, they're more reliable - however,
the larger amount of surface area is greater on 94's resulting in the
so-called cooling problems. 90.5's are great, 88's are better but good
luck finding them.
_____

Ron Bullard
rbul...@gladstone.uoregon.edu

"What happened to TECHNICAL ECSTASY sales wise?"
"I think it entered the Mongolian chart at 301" Ozzy - 1978

[Max]

Hmm. 69x94 is 1998; basically a 2 liter.

Max

--

[Max]

Ack! Spreadsheet boo-boo. You are correct.

[Max]

ANT The Monarch of Menace wrote:
>

> >I think the 1835 is 69x92 and the 1914 is 72x92. They have
> >the same bore.
>
> Well, my 1914 (or izzit a 1915??) is 69X94
>
> What you say about a 1776 outlasting a 1914 may very well be true, but I cannot
> totally belive Berg on his dislike of the 94's as his tests were done several
> years ago (at least) and these slugs and jugs in this size have improved quite
> a bit since then.
>
> Either way, from what I know, a 1914 is mucho morer durable than a 1835.
> -ANT

Whyzat? Just curious.

[John Connolly]

94s have the same wall thickness as 85.5s, so throw that argument out the
window.

The only truth to the "fact" that they run hotter is the fact that the OD of
the cylinder fins is the same, but the ID of the cylinder is larger, so
there is less fin area on the cylinder. That and a larger bore mean they run
hotter.

I run them, and run away from the guys that run 90.5s. :-)

John
Aircooled.Net
"Earle Horton" <earleh_...@doglover.com> wrote in message
news:Yx%97.399$DO5.77...@twister1.starband.net...

[ANT The Monarch of Menace]

>> Either way, from what I know, a 1914 is mucho morer durable than a 1835.
>> -ANT
>
>Whyzat? Just curious.

On accounta the 1835's wafer thin cylinders.

[Max]

Berg did testing of how much blow-by each piston size showed
at various lifecycle points. In the tech article he says
that the 92/94s showed as much loss in power at 15,000 miles
as the 90.5s did at 85,000 miles.

But, as ANT points out, those tests were done some time ago
and hardware might have improved since then. It would be
nice to see some of that testing brought up to date.

I've been thinking about a bigger engine myself recently and
would be quite interested in some current data.

Max

--

[Randy in Alaska]

Eric Allred could give some testimony to the daily driveablity of the 94's
(82x94, 2276cc) in heat. Being in Nevada and driving to Aridzona he never
ran into a heat problem. But I'll let him give more details.

--
Randy in Alaska
http://home.gci.net/~randyinalaska/vwpage.html

'65 RHD Sunroof Bug <Jewel>

'68 Bug in progress (Baja?)
'94 Ford F-150 Ext Cab Flareside 4x4
'84 S-10 Blazer piece of Chevy

> ok, I live in a friggen hot area of the country or at least it is during
the
> summer. Will they last on a daily driver ?
>
> Randy

[RSMEINER]

ok, I live in a friggen hot area of the country or at least it is during the
summer. Will they last on a daily driver ?

Randy

>

[ANT The Monarch of Menace]

>Berg did testing of how much blow-by each piston size showed
>at various lifecycle points. In the tech article he says
>that the 92/94s showed as much loss in power at 15,000 miles
>as the 90.5s did at 85,000 miles.
>
>But, as ANT points out, those tests were done some time ago
>and hardware might have improved since then. It would be
>nice to see some of that testing brought up to date.
>
>I've been thinking about a bigger engine myself recently and
>would be quite interested in some current data.

Yup yup. I was gonna originally build a 1776 but it was suggested to me to go
with a 1914 instead. More cubes at the same price. Longevity (compared to the
1776) is the only question in this equation, at least in my mind.

[John Connolly]

I believe so. Eric Allred's 2275 screamer runs them in 120 degree Las Vegas,
ask him. NO PROBLEM.

John

"RSMEINER" <rsme...@aol.com> wrote in message

news:20010801204257...@mb-mh.aol.com...

[Eric Allred]

I went through John C. at Aircooled.Net when I went to build my 2276.
After I finished it (damned near the same combo as RandyinAlaska, except
different carbs 48IDF's) I daily drove it almost 40 miles a day for a
year here in 100 degree heat Las Vegas. I also drove it round trip to
Phoenix and won my class drag racing too. I kept my CR to a low 7.8:1,
but was still able to click off a 14.093 in the quarter mile with it.
It still ran like a top when I pulled the engine, and when I yanked the
heads, the cross-hatch was still in all four cylinders.

I sold my intakes, exhaust, muffler and heads to Randy, and from what I
gather, he's rather pleased.
Let's just say, I'm 'upgrading' before I put the engine in my 64.
;-)

Eric
64 bug
http://www.geocities.com/eaallred

[Eric Allred]

John Connolly wrote:
>
> I believe so. Eric Allred's 2275 screamer runs them in 120 degree Las Vegas,
> ask him. NO PROBLEM.

A full year and over 10K miles on this sucker! It still ran like a top
when I pulled the motor. When I pulled the heads on this motor, ALL the
cylinders still have plenty of cross-hatch on them, still look new.

And even when it was 120 peak here, I drove with my decklid closed (vert
lid), or my solid lid propped out at the bottom a couple of inches. I
even drove around with the teeny-tiny dry sump pulley without problems
(No long distance stuff like the drive to Phoenix). During the Phoenix
BOR this spring, I drove around town in Phoenix with the drysump pulley
and still did fine. I think I might of been one of the only racers that
didn't open my decklid the entire day.

94's work fine for me. I do however use EVERY SINGLE piece of the stock
cooling system tin, and I DONT use the 'cool tin' that were factory on
TypeIII's.

I'm running 94's in everything I build from now on.

[Max]

I would really like to see the results of a leak-down test
next time you freshen the heads. That would give the
conclusive data points (sealing efficiency as a function of
miles). Since the valves would be fresh, any leakage would
have to be rings.

Does anybody here have 50,000 on a set of 92s or 94s? 10K
doesn't seem enough to tell much. That's not much more the
broken in.

Max

--

[Earle Horton]

Berg should have 88s. The part number is GB 003.

Earle

"Ronald Terrence Bullard" <rbul...@gladstone.uoregon.edu> wrote in message
news:Pine.GSO.3.96.101080...@gladstone.uoregon.edu...

[TQuan]

Same here, planned on building a 1776 but ended up with a 1914. I here
good things happen with larger bore. At 30K I plan on having the heads
rebuilt, so if the cylinders still look good fine. If not swap the P&C's
with the rebuilt heads and keep going.

Going to start it up soon, I'll let you guys know how runs.

-Terry

ANT The Monarch of Menace wrote:
>

[G.W. East]

As others have mentioned technology has changed since the Berg test data was
written. I don't have many miles on my 82 X 94, around 6K but it is working
on it's second summer. I only drive the car during the summer. Alaskan
summers are at best 4 months long, sometimes shorter when you consider I
have no "Heat". I'd guess that our temps are around mid to high 60's, with
many 70 degree days and an occasional 80 degree day. I drive it on an
average of 2 days a week during this time. So if you do the math, I'm
averaging in the neighborhood of 185 miles per trip. Absolutely no
overheating problems. There is a catch to this statement, I don't do parades
with the club and I try my best to stay out of rush hour stop and go traffic
with it. It does get warm when put under those conditions but never so hot
that I've began to panic. So I do my best to just try and avoid those
conditions. I have had zero mechanical problems to date with the engine, but
due to my driving style I have went through one stock tranny ;-0

--
Till The Next Time..........,
G.W. East
http://www.gwsvws.com
G...@gwsvws.com

"Max" <max_we...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3B68B95C...@yahoo.com...

[Earle Horton]

My daughter's stock 1600 needed a line bore and had cracked heads when I
pulled it apart at 110,000 miles. The pistons and cylinders were still in
great shape. Anyone have a similar story about "big bore" pistons, any
size?

People say that Gene Berg's data are outdated, but he drag raced his Bugs,
and put something like 230,000 miles on a Type 1 engine in a work van.
People claim that they have better data because they put 10,000 miles on a
set of 94s in a Bug, with normal street driving. I don't think that Gene
has been proved wrong yet.

Earle Horton
http://earleh.tripod.com

[Searoy]

> Hmm. 69x94 is 1998; basically a 2 liter.

69x94 is 1915

72x94 is 1998

84x94 is 2332

90x103 is 3000

Questions?

--

*** Teach a Man to Fish ***
Searoy
San Diego, CA

66 Sedan 1600dp (SPARKY)
70 Fastback 1600 dp (Tex)
65 Notchback (Frankenstein)
T4 EFI-T powered imagination (X4)

2 car garage MOVED IN!

home.earthlink.net/~searoy

danm tpyos

[Searoy]

> Berg should have 88s. The part number is GB 003.

Aircooled.net has them too (not the slip in kind).

88s are best used on Type 2s and Type 3s, since the cylinders are so much
thicker and those Types are heavier...make more heat.

Some find it odd, but a 74 or 76 x 88 would be a great little heavy duty
engine for daily driver heavy VWs. Bolt on a single Weber DFEV Progressive
and some Stage 3 heads and you're all set.

[John Connolly]

I have a number of customers with 90-100K miles on 10:1 engines with 94s,
with no problems (pump gas).

John
Aircooled.Net inc.

"Max" <max_we...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3B68B95C...@yahoo.com...

[John Connolly]

he also tore the engine down for "inspection" probably 6-8 times in that
period, I suppose that doesn't count since he's only "inspected" parts,
right? You believe that if a part was worn he wouldn't change it? I'm just
curious what your opinion is.

John

"Earle Horton" <earleh_...@doglover.com> wrote in message

news:Cjca7.690$Ub3.97...@twister1.starband.net...

[Max]

Any leak-down test results? I'd really like to quantify this
if possible.

Max

[Max]

Searoy wrote:
>
> > Hmm. 69x94 is 1998; basically a 2 liter.
>
> 69x94 is 1915
>
> 72x94 is 1998
>
> 84x94 is 2332
>
> 90x103 is 3000
>
> Questions?

Yeah. How do I get Excell to do what I wnat, not what I
type? :-)

[Earle Horton]

My opinion is that if you want an engine to last a real long time, then it
pays to be conservative. I also know that if people invest money in a part,
whether that is 85.5, 88, 90.5, 92, or 94, then they are going to have a
desire to believe that that part is performing better than alternatives that
they could have chosen. This is called "wish fulfillment" or "denial." I
may be guilty of this with my 88s, but maybe people with 94s are too.

Gene Berg maintained that "rigorous testing revealed many failures in less
than 5,000 miles of street driving" with 92 and 94 mm piston/cylinder sets.
This "rigorous testing" included dyno testing for power output, leak down,
and parts inspection. I don't know that the piston/cylinder sets available
today are any higher quality than was available when Gene did these tests.
I also don't know that people who claim 94s are OK now are doing any better
testing than Gene did.

Note that Gene said that many people achieved "reasonable results" with 92s
and 94s. It's possible that "reasonable results" for you might not be the
same as "reasonable results" for me.

Earle Horton
http://earleh.tripod.com

"John Connolly" <jo...@aircooled.net> wrote in message
news:9kc193$3s0kr$1...@ID-61523.news.dfncis.de...

[ANT The Monarch of Menace]

Hurk Whoreton defecated the following:

>People say that Gene Berg's data are outdated, but he drag raced his Bugs,

Your logic, as usual, is flawed. Why does drag racing somehow make OLD data any
better?

As has been said before (by me and others) Berg's tests (which at the time were
probably valid and correct) are OLD. Five PLUS years OLD.

The construction of the 94's has changed for the BETTER since THEN.

Are you really this dense or are you trying to start a flame war AGAIN?

MAN I wish I could killfile this maroon moron.

[ANT The Monarch of Menace]

>69x94 is 1915

>Questions?

Yep, why are these so often called both 1914 and 1915? Too weird. I suppose the
exact number is somewhere in between (too lazy to calculate it, and I keep
spilling my JD on the keyboard)

[ANT The Monarch of Menace]

>I don't know that the piston/cylinder sets available
>today are any higher quality than was available when Gene did these tests.

You state the obvious. YOU just DON'T know. Try LISTENING and then MAYBE you
WILL.

Sheesh.

I guess he's too busy preparing his Federal Defacation suit against me to
understand.

SUE ME BITCH HAHAHAHAHAHA

[Max]

Put the pin back in, ANT.

I for one would be interested in how and why todays 94s are
better that the ones Gene tested.

Sheesh!

ANT The Monarch of Menace wrote:
>

--

[ANT The Monarch of Menace]

>Put the pin back in, ANT.

Which one? <G>

>I for one would be interested in how and why todays 94s are
>better that the ones Gene tested.

Metallurgy, piston top thickness, and like that. I heard that the very early
cylinders definitely did suffer from distortion--due to poor heat treating
and/or metallurgy.

[Earle Horton]

Me, too. I would buy 94s for my next project, if they really are better.

Earle Horton
http://earleh.tripod.com

"Max" <max_we...@yahoo.com> wrote in message

news:3B699A8C...@yahoo.com...

[John Connolly]

I do know the newest 94s have one problem; the pin boss area has been thnned
out, and you risk pulling the wrist pin OUT the bottom of the piston if you
rev over 8K, the older 94s didn't have this problem.

There's nothing wrong with 94s ona street car, though I don't recommend them
for DAILY DRIVER use in a bus or T-3! Sedan, no problem.

John
Aircooled.Net inc.

"Max" <max_we...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3B699A8C...@yahoo.com...

[John Connolly]

consider that one of them is leading the Australia Hill Climb championships
with his car he DRIVES over 500 miles to most events, competing against
trailered cars. If leakdown was over 5% he'd be out of the running.

I'll try to get #s.

John

"Max" <max_we...@yahoo.com> wrote in message

news:3B698AA7...@yahoo.com...

[ANT The Monarch of Menace]

>I do know the newest 94s have one problem; the pin boss area has been thnned
>out, and you risk pulling the wrist pin OUT the bottom of the piston if you
>rev over 8K, the older 94s didn't have this problem.

"ONLY" Eight Thousand RPM? What flimsy garbage they are. <G>

If only more "stock" parts were that "weak" Ha!

[G.W. East]

I can't and won't argue for or against the Berg writings, I'm no where near
qualified to do that. I'm just relaying the performance/durability I've
achieved so far with the 94's and my style of driving. Heck, I didn't even
select the parts in my engine nor did I build it. I did as you are doing now
and did ask around about reliability/performance and made the decision to
purchase this engine. Lets just say a little birdie told me if I didn't buy
this engine he would. Time will tell, even though the mileage will still be
low considering my choice of only driving it during the summer season.
Speaking of my engine...., I don't know if Dean has posted a link to his new
2332 Turbo he built but I have a pic of it available for viewing here:

http://www.gwsvws.com/images/manx_engine2.jpg

If anyone is interested, I'm sure he'd be glad to talk about it, you can
find a link to his site from my "Butch" page in the URL below.

--
Till The Next Time..........,
G.W. East
http://www.gwsvws.com
G...@gwsvws.com

"Earle Horton" <earleh_...@doglover.com> wrote in message

news:pnfa7.783$ez1.14...@twister2.starband.net...

[ANT The Monarch of Menace]

>http://www.gwsvws.com/images/manx_engine2.jpg

Helles Belles! Even if that sucker didn't scream at least it sure looks like it
will!!

[Eric Allred]

> http://www.gwsvws.com/images/manx_engine2.jpg

I'm not the biggest fan of Manx buggies, but I have to say, I LIKE that
one!

[G.W. East]

Here's another pic he sent me of the buggy itself.

http://www.gwsvws.com/images/manx_side1.jpg

--
Till The Next Time..........,
G.W. East
http://www.gwsvws.com
G...@gwsvws.com

"ANT The Monarch of Menace " <s2...@aol.computer> wrote in message
news:20010803000153...@ng-fc1.aol.com...

[Bill Tucker '76 BUG]

Thanks everyone for your most excellent
posts. I'm really leaning toward the 1914cc setup. But who knows
..It depends on my finances and if I still want to live up to my
nickname...
Wild Bill

BTW Just when I get locked into what I want Eric drops this Turbo
Monster photo!!! Looks like a real mechanics/engineers Nightmare. Oh
well dream on.

'76 Bug- 1776cc Under Major Overhaul
'57 Oval-Awaiting Repairs

Rare Air VW Club Website:
http://devoted.to/RareAir/

[RSMEINER]

Yep, thats what I'm looking at/for. Need motor in our 72 ghia. Wife
would like to do a little stoplight racing against the kids in their rice
burners.

Randy

Never trust a man who needs a bra.

[James W. Lindsay]

On Wed, 1 Aug 2001 17:32:16 -0500 (CDT), Bill Tucker '76 BUG wrote:

>
> Hi Gang! Greetings from sunny Florida! I want to build a dream street
> screamer stroker engine.
> Have got a 1600 Type 1 full flowed block that has been machined to
> accept 90.5 cylinders. Want to build a back up engine for my 1776
> powered 1976 Bug. Would prefer not to build an exotic tune up every
> other day machine but something that will get me out of the way of a
> speeding tractor trailer! Anyone had any experience with running a 82mm
> or 84mm cw crank? Problems? Suggestions? Which cam (street
> application),heads, Kadrons or ? Just curious about other peoples
> ideas.
> Wild Bill

82 vs 84? Well, the larger the stroke, the wider the engine is likely to
become. This can make things "interesting" when shoehorning such big
motors in early Beetle bodies.

----------------------------------------------------------------
James W. Lindsay Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
Website: http://members.home.net/jlindsay ICQ: #7521644
----------------------------------------------------------------
I can tell you are lying. Your lips are moving.
----------------------------------------------------------------

[James W. Lindsay]

On Wed, 1 Aug 2001 14:46:06 -0800, Randy in Alaska wrote:

> Only problem with my 2276 is I am running
> dual 40 Dell's and that's really not enough carb for the engine.

That's not your bottleneck, unless you're running great big honkin' valves.
The 40s just need to be "tweaked". Gene Berg once claimed that many of his
customers were using *stock* carburetion on big 2.0+ litre motors to get
around smog checks in SoCal, and they had plenty of extra non-stock power.

[Searoy]

> Searoy wrote:
> >
> > > Hmm. 69x94 is 1998; basically a 2 liter.
> >
> > 69x94 is 1915
> >
> > 72x94 is 1998
> >
> > 84x94 is 2332
> >
> > 90x103 is 3000
> >
> > Questions?
>
> Yeah. How do I get Excell to do what I wnat, not what I
> type? :-)

Cyberdyne "Brainwave" (tm) neural interface V0.1b.
Neuro-Netix "Socket I" (tm) synaps translator V0.34a.
Microsoft Windows NT "Wired" (tm) patch 0.0.1b

[Searoy]

1915.3787754112 cc according to my spreadsheet.

> >69x94 is 1915
>
> >Questions?
>
> Yep, why are these so often called both 1914 and 1915? Too weird. I
suppose the
> exact number is somewhere in between (too lazy to calculate it, and I keep
> spilling my JD on the keyboard)

[Searoy]

Plus the 1915 is an awesome turbo car. The large pistons and sort stroke
are perfect under boost, provided you use i-beam rods at LEAST and run a
short duration cam (with a little extra exhaust porting or time). Early
open is a good thing.

[John Connolly]

I'm fitting a 88 X 94 into a 59 T-1 soon enough. You can do it, it's just a
matter of how much work you are willing to put up with!

John

[ANT The Monarch of Menace]

>1915.3787754112 cc according to my spreadsheet.

Your spreadsheet has bread crumbs and mysterious stains of unknown origin.

[BugMan]

>>>>> I'm fitting a 88 X 94 into a 59 T-1 soon enough.

Heh, and those arent even the 'specs' on THIS engine that make you go
"WOW"!.........

--Eric
E-Mail: Bug...@sisna.com
Visit My Web-page: http://www.angelfire.com/nm/GoPed/VW.html

___
/___\
(o\ | /o) 1974 ORANGE SUPER BEETLE "Baggins"
U """ U

"John Connolly" <jo...@aircooled.net> wrote in message

news:9kekcn$3rsn6$1...@ID-61523.news.dfncis.de...

[Eric Allred]

"James W. Lindsay" wrote:

> That's not your bottleneck, unless you're running great big honkin' valves.

Level 6 heads from Aircooled.Net seem pretty 'big honkin' to me, for a
street car at least.
;-)

[Eric Allred]

ANT The Monarch of Menace wrote:
> Your spreadsheet has bread crumbs and mysterious stains of unknown > origin.
> -ANT

I believe the correct term is 'Protien stains'.
;-D

[junobug]

Eric Allred wrote in message <3B6AF562...@lvcm.com>...

DNA!

Ken
71 Super
Juneau, AK

[Randy in Alaska]

> On Wed, 1 Aug 2001 14:46:06 -0800, Randy in Alaska wrote:
>
> > Only problem with my 2276 is I am running
> > dual 40 Dell's and that's really not enough carb for the engine.
>
> That's not your bottleneck, unless you're running great big honkin'
valves.
> The 40s just need to be "tweaked". Gene Berg once claimed that many of
his
> customers were using *stock* carburetion on big 2.0+ litre motors to get
> around smog checks in SoCal, and they had plenty of extra non-stock power.

Oh, I don't know....those Level 6 Heads from Aircooled.Net w/ 40x35.5 valves
and intake ports hogged out to respectively be "Big Honkin'". I am planning
on having the Venturis bored a little and grabbing a pocket full of jets and
seeing if I can't get the Dell 40's to perform a little better. If not,
It's Weber 48's....

--
Randy in Alaska
http://home.gci.net/~randyinalaska/vwpage.html
'65 RHD Sunroof Bug
'68 Bug in progress (Baja?)
'94 Ford F-150 Ext Cab Flareside 4x4
'84 S-10 Blazer piece of Chevy

[Taylor]

"Searoy" <sea...@aircooled.net> wrote in message
news:%Aza7.1404$cd1.1...@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net...

> Cyberdyne "Brainwave" (tm) neural interface V0.1b.
> Neuro-Netix "Socket I" (tm) synaps translator V0.34a.
> Microsoft Windows NT "Wired" (tm) patch 0.0.1b

Tee hee! I visited Cyberdyne Systems once. They got this cool metal hand in
a display case there...
--
Tim
'73 Bug (ol' blew)

[Jim]

I WANT ONE!!!!

Jim

"G.W. East" wrote:

--
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Check Out My 1966 VW Bug!
And My 1970 Drag Bug - 12.55 e.t. @ 104 mph! - FOR SALE!!! - $5200
http://204.169.29.251/vw/my_66_vwbug.htm
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Check Out My Custom "Muscle Machine" Pictures
http://204.169.29.251/custom_mm_pics/custom_mm_pics.htm
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[G.W. East]

Check out Dean's site if you like buggy's, he's got some great pics of his
and friends of his rides. Dean is a really good guy, loves to talk air-cool,
don't hesitate to email him and ask a few questions.

http://www.vdubn.com/index.html

--
Till The Next Time..........,
G.W. East
http://www.gwsvws.com
G...@gwsvws.com

"Jim" <jce...@charter.net> wrote in message
news:3B6B9A0F...@charter.net...

[Rick Herrmann]

difference is how much rounding off you do with pi. 3.14 gives the 1914
and 3.14159 gives the 1915!

[ANT The Monarch of Menace]

>difference is how much rounding off you do with pi. 3.14 gives the 1914
>and 3.14159 gives the 1915!

Yep. It's like gov't work, good enuff. <G>

[Taylor]

"Rick Herrmann" <rher...@suffolk.lib.ny.us> wrote in message
news:3B6C0338...@suffolk.lib.ny.us...

> difference is how much rounding off you do with pi.

*Rounding*? Don't be silly.. everyone knows that Pi are square!! ;-)

[RSMEINER]

Finger farts while typing in 1915 can also give you 1914.
Thats how it got in the thread to begin with.

Randy

[ANT The Monarch of Menace]

>*Rounding*? Don't be silly.. everyone knows that Pi are square!! ;-)

Only Sicilian pies are square.

[Max]

Or typing 72x92 ... 1914 and change.

--
Max Welton
67 Karmann Ghia Coupe
Home Page: http://www.crosswinds.net/~maxwelton2k/
Wolfsburg Pacific Club http://www.wolfpacvw.itgo.com
Gene Berg Memorial Cruise Site
http://63.230.74.177/gbcruisesite/

[Rick Herrmann]

no, pie are round, cake are square!

[Gianni]

I'm no expert on this, so I'm asking to make sure. We are talking about
millimeters here, correct?.
82mm vs 84mm? Does the engine get 4mm wider, and harder to fit into the
engine compartment?

John

[ANT The Monarch of Menace]

> I'm no expert on this, so I'm asking to make sure. We are talking about
>millimeters here, correct?.
> 82mm vs 84mm? Does the engine get 4mm wider, and harder to fit into the
>engine compartment?

Yes to MM, no to 4MM wider. The stroke gets longer inside the case--but the
engine does get wider in some extreme cases, especially when you add shims
under the cylinders.

[James W. Lindsay]

On Sun, 05 Aug 2001 04:17:35 GMT, Gianni wrote:

>
> I'm no expert on this, so I'm asking to make sure. We are talking about
> millimeters here, correct?.
> 82mm vs 84mm? Does the engine get 4mm wider, and harder to fit into the
> engine compartment?

While the engine doesn't exactly get 4 millimetres wider, you will want to
install taller cylinder shims in order to keep your compression ratio in
check. But big stroker motors are indeed quite a bit wider than stockers.

My engine has a CB Performance turbo kit on it. I had to widen the custom
turbo exhaust manifold a whopping 7/8" in order to span the exhaust ports
of my 7.75:1 CR 84mm stroke motor! My dual throttlebody linkage likewise
is almost at its outermost limit of adjustment. And my engine tin doesn't
fit very well either.

----------------------------------------------------------------
James W. Lindsay Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
Website: http://members.home.net/jlindsay ICQ: #7521644
----------------------------------------------------------------

Dijon vu - the same mustard as before.
----------------------------------------------------------------

[Jerry & Melissa Jess]

Another perspective
1776---Declaration of Independence or Barmaid Betsy Flanagan mixed the 1st cocktail when
a drunk waved at the tail feathers pinned to the wall behind the bar and asked for a
glassful of "Those Cocktails"

1835--Hans Christian Anderson publisded the first of his 168 fairy tales--

1914--Edgar Rice Burroughs published his 1st novel--"Tarzan and the Apes--on a lesser note
June 28th WW 1 broke out--Archduke Ferdinand was assassinated by Gevrilo Princip

Max wrote:

> I would really like to see the results of a leak-down test
> next time you freshen the heads. That would give the
> conclusive data points (sealing efficiency as a function of
> miles). Since the valves would be fresh, any leakage would
> have to be rings.
>
> Does anybody here have 50,000 on a set of 92s or 94s? 10K
> doesn't seem enough to tell much. That's not much more the
> broken in.
>
> Max
>
> Eric Allred wrote:
> >
> > John Connolly wrote:
> > >
> > > I believe so. Eric Allred's 2275 screamer runs them in 120 degree Las Vegas,
> > > ask him. NO PROBLEM.
> >
> > A full year and over 10K miles on this sucker! It still ran like a top
> > when I pulled the motor. When I pulled the heads on this motor, ALL the
> > cylinders still have plenty of cross-hatch on them, still look new.
> >
> > And even when it was 120 peak here, I drove with my decklid closed (vert
> > lid), or my solid lid propped out at the bottom a couple of inches. I
> > even drove around with the teeny-tiny dry sump pulley without problems
> > (No long distance stuff like the drive to Phoenix). During the Phoenix
> > BOR this spring, I drove around town in Phoenix with the drysump pulley
> > and still did fine. I think I might of been one of the only racers that
> > didn't open my decklid the entire day.
> >
> > 94's work fine for me. I do however use EVERY SINGLE piece of the stock
> > cooling system tin, and I DONT use the 'cool tin' that were factory on
> > TypeIII's.
> >
> > I'm running 94's in everything I build from now on.

> >
> > Eric
> > 64 bug
> > http://www.geocities.com/eaallred
>

[Jerry & Melissa Jess]

Another perspective
1776---Declaration of Independence or Barmaid Betsy Flanagan mixed the 1st cocktail when
a drunk waved at the tail feathers pinned to the wall behind the bar and asked for a
glassful of "Those Cocktails"

1835--Hans Christian Anderson published the first of his 168 fairy tales--

[Jerry & Melissa Jess]

Clare--according to my "records" Yes!! that was the start of a "Cocktail"--uj

Clare wrote:

> On Wed, 15 Aug 2001 17:07:33 -0700, Jerry & Melissa Jess <vws...@qwest.net>
> wrote:
>
> ~ 1776-- Barmaid Betsy Flanagan mixed the 1st cocktail when
> ~ a drunk waved at the tail feathers pinned to the wall behind the bar and asked for a
> ~ glassful of "Those Cocktails"
>
> Hehe, is that true??
>
> Clare