You're right about the 085, it's crap.
Even the rod shift was guesswork compared to the 020
That's a nice engine there though!
Even the rod shift was guesswork compared to the 020
That's a nice engine there though!
-
Guest, New Stock alert: Premium CUPRA valve caps now available in the store ? Order now from the merchandise store
reducing capacity of 1.8T
- Thread starter RobT
- Start date
what a great read i know this is a long term project so thought id comment just to read any further updates.
Another interesting twist - looks like the 1800 block might be available in 1423cc form (1992cc with 1.4 turbo multiplier), but in South Africa as fitted to the Citi Golf.
1423cc 8V, 76.5mm bore, 77.4mm stroke
And looks to me to be fitted with an 020 gearbox....and numerous SA tuning places offer a 2L upgrade for the 1400. So my betting is that its the same block family.
A 16 or 20V head will go on this block without much work. Interesting.
Alternative of course is to sleeve an 1800, but its damn interesting to see that a stock VW engine is available and what the bore/stroke measurements are.
Have a few enquiries away to see if I can get hold of one. For research purposes
1423cc 8V, 76.5mm bore, 77.4mm stroke
And looks to me to be fitted with an 020 gearbox....and numerous SA tuning places offer a 2L upgrade for the 1400. So my betting is that its the same block family.
A 16 or 20V head will go on this block without much work. Interesting.
Alternative of course is to sleeve an 1800, but its damn interesting to see that a stock VW engine is available and what the bore/stroke measurements are.
Have a few enquiries away to see if I can get hold of one. For research purposes
Last edited:
Absolute no brainer that one! Biggest bore (biggest valve area) and shortest stroke / longest rod (lowest piston speed / acceleration / thrust load!
Maybe just for cost reasons? So he can use "off the shelf" pistons etc?
yeah, that box-of-tricks uses 4 high speed individual runner MAP sensors, and is PLL'd to the crank sensor, so it high speed samples intake manifold pressure in each runner only over the appropriate valve opening event, then averages those 64 samples to come up with the average intake manifold air density per runner per intake event. Gives you a virtually flawless signal to noise ratio and signal amplitude, even at idle!
yeah, that box-of-tricks uses 4 high speed individual runner MAP sensors, and is PLL'd to the crank sensor, so it high speed samples intake manifold pressure in each runner only over the appropriate valve opening event, then averages those 64 samples to come up with the average intake manifold air density per runner per intake event. Gives you a virtually flawless signal to noise ratio and signal amplitude, even at idle!
Not sure - I would not think it was for convenience. I mentioned the idea of big bores, short stroke, and a long rod to Keith at one of the events last year and he said something along the lines of 'an engine needs to be a good engine as it is, and a turbo wont save it from being gutless'. I have heard this from another reputable source also now. But thats what BMW et al did in the F1 turbo era - BMW even taking stock production blocks for the M12/13 Megatron which ended up as 89.2 bore x 60mm stroke for a 1499 turbo, 11,400 rpm, circa 1000hp.
I guess what he's alluding to is that the engine needs to have a good volumetric efficiency before you use a turbo to increase the manifold air density, and he's correct to say that. However, it's absolutely certain that the best volumetric efficiency is gained by the largest valve area, hence every proper race engine ever being large bore short stroke (like the Megatron F1 engine you mention)
In this day and age of digital engine management, there are plenty of tricks one can use to help move the boost threshold down the rev range, and plenty of tricks to improve torque response to throttle position etc.
You may of course choose to use a port /CC design that trades some of it's ultimate discharge co-efficient for extra charge motion (tumble) or in chamber charge motion (squish), in order to maximise burn rate and hence work transfer to the piston, but generally only if you are in an air limited formula ( mandated inlet restrictor).
The biggest gain for driveability on any engine will be to pick a cylinder head that has varriable valve timing (idealy dual), which might point to a more modern engine?
And of course, if you want real power then you also will want to move to a DI engine, but that still carries a huge cost and compexity with it that the average "aftermarket" racer is not going to want to embrace.
In this day and age of digital engine management, there are plenty of tricks one can use to help move the boost threshold down the rev range, and plenty of tricks to improve torque response to throttle position etc.
You may of course choose to use a port /CC design that trades some of it's ultimate discharge co-efficient for extra charge motion (tumble) or in chamber charge motion (squish), in order to maximise burn rate and hence work transfer to the piston, but generally only if you are in an air limited formula ( mandated inlet restrictor).
The biggest gain for driveability on any engine will be to pick a cylinder head that has varriable valve timing (idealy dual), which might point to a more modern engine?
And of course, if you want real power then you also will want to move to a DI engine, but that still carries a huge cost and compexity with it that the average "aftermarket" racer is not going to want to embrace.
Modified Production class in hillclimbing is still relatively free in the regulations - the only real restriction being that an original block must be used - internals are free, head is free, induction /exhaust free. So I am kind of thinking 82-83mm piston, retaining some wall thickness, allows bigger inlet and exhaust valves, take a few mm off the top of the block, stroke appropriate for piston size, (limit 1428cc), rods to fill the gap. Keep compression fairly high (any suggestions?), use the DTH ITB's I have as they will take some pressure, Badger-5 exhaust manifold and twurbo, 5bar fuel system (limit of injectors). Aim, minimum 400hp. TCS-linked boost control.
What management system would you go for?
What management system would you go for?
Last edited:
RobT - regarding EMS systems? er, no idea really. I've been spoiled recently with an EMS system that has open autocode access from Simulink, so i can just write my own strategy however i want! And once you have done that, going back to a "closed" system which you can only calibrate seems very limiting. So much so that i am currently looking at doing my own EMS.............. That having been said, it seems like some of the newer start up EMS suppliers in the uk are more support oriented, and can write stuff to order to solve issues of improve control strategy. For me the biggest descision if i were to start developing a new high boost turbo motor would be the choice of DFI or PFI. DFI gives massive gains in detonation control and accurate transient fuelling, but currently the limiting factor is sourcing injectors for engines that are making >150bhp/cylinder. I suspect that perhaps the old F1 trick of ultra high pressure "pencil jet" injectors that squirt directly past the intake valves into the chamber might be the happy halfway house.
Bill - Yup, the Bitza is still tucked up in my garage, i've just not had time to actually do anything with it ;-( Technically i'm unemployed at the moment, (having just finished 2.5 years of powertrain dev on the P1) so it hopefully should see the light of day this summer at some point!
Bill - Yup, the Bitza is still tucked up in my garage, i've just not had time to actually do anything with it ;-( Technically i'm unemployed at the moment, (having just finished 2.5 years of powertrain dev on the P1) so it hopefully should see the light of day this summer at some point!
I was just wondering what blocks run with a ladder style bedplate as std. Usually the dirty diesel got them first as they run a high Pmax than the Gasoline versions.
Basically, you need to find the combination of block/head that gives you (in order of importance)
1) biggest bore possible (even if this means custom tophat liners etc, you deffinately will want a "closed" top deck block for mech strength)
2) Ideally bedplate style bottom end (although it is easy enough to make one of these yourself
3) largest valve area - and biggest lifter diameter possible (to accomodate high lift cams with aggressive profiles)
4) ideally VVT (will make low end response / driveablilty a lot lot better
Basically, you need to find the combination of block/head that gives you (in order of importance)
1) biggest bore possible (even if this means custom tophat liners etc, you deffinately will want a "closed" top deck block for mech strength)
2) Ideally bedplate style bottom end (although it is easy enough to make one of these yourself
3) largest valve area - and biggest lifter diameter possible (to accomodate high lift cams with aggressive profiles)
4) ideally VVT (will make low end response / driveablilty a lot lot better
VVT is possible with the 20V heads, but not 16V. Using a 20V head has benefits in terms of accessory parts made for 1.8Ts whilst little (suitable) is available off the shelf for the 16V. But the 20V has small dia lifters compared to the 16V. Ladder bedplates available from US, 16 and 20V block styles. These come with billet main caps too.
Its never easy is it LOL?
Its never easy is it LOL?
Last edited:
VAG 1170 turbo - 370hp @ 10K
Same thinking as above but an 1170cc rather than a 1428cc since in Europe they have a turbo multiplier of 1.7 rather than the 1.4 we have in UK hillclimbing
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zdypa4Ble-c
Looks mega....
Same thinking as above but an 1170cc rather than a 1428cc since in Europe they have a turbo multiplier of 1.7 rather than the 1.4 we have in UK hillclimbing
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zdypa4Ble-c
Looks mega....
Similar threads
