[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: Anyone have a 2117cc 16V
At 01:27 PM 11/1/2001, Brian Haygood wrote:
>Jason,
>So that's six of one and a half-dozen of another, right?
>Your definitions in parentheses of undersquare and oversuqare are
>identical. Just to make sure I have the terminology right, is it:
Whoops!!!
>oversquare - bigger bore than stroke - rev happy
>undersquare - bigger stroke than bore - torquey
Right.... sorry about that!
Jason
>or do I have them reversed?
>
>BH
>
>>From: 16V Jason <jason@scirocco.org>
>>To: "Fry, Larry" <LEF@chem-tronics.com>, Randy B <sirocco@telocity.com>,
>>chris jevens <rocco1987@hotmail.com>
>>CC: scirocco-l@scirocco.org
>>Subject: RE: Anyone have a 2117cc 16V
>>Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2001 11:04:00 -0500
>>
>>At 09:58 AM 11/1/2001, Fry, Larry wrote:
>>>Longer rods are benefitial because they put lower side-loads on pistons,
>>>decreasing friction and wear. Their added benefit of a decrease in piston
>>>speed is a moot point in our engines, since our engines are nowhere near
>>>critical piston speed. They also provide for reduced inertial loads (apart
>>>from loads as a function of pure piston speed) on pistons/pins/rods, but,
>>>again, outside of a pure racing engine, this means nothing to us street
>>>people.
>>
>>Right. And to go one step back, though: Engines that are oversquare (i.e.
>>have a larger bore than stroke) tend to be lower-revving, higher-torque
>>motors. Undersquare motors (big bore, little stroke), tend to be smoother
>>and rev-happier at the expense of low-end torque.
>>
>>...but that's just one of many, many variables.
>>
>>Jason
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>Larry sandiego16V
>>>
>>>
>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>From: Randy B [mailto:sirocco@telocity.com]
>>>Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2001 5:37 PM
>>>To: chris jevens
>>>Cc: scirocco-l@scirocco.org
>>>Subject: Re: Anyone have a 2117cc 16V
>>>
>>>
>>>Chris,
>>>Thanks for the info :)
>>>
>>>Hmmm.....
>>>But wouldn't the taller block create slower piston speed and therfore less
>>>power?
>>>My basic understanding is that with a smaller angle (piston further from the
>>>centerline of crank) the speed of the piston in it's down stroke, at 90*,
>>>and it's upstroke, at 270* would be slower, pulling in less air (or pulling
>>>it in at a slower velocity). There would also be less compression because
>>>less air is being compressed.
>>>Am I even remotely correct in these assumptions???????
>>>
>>>The taller block would be smoother (probably why VW went to the taller
>>>setup) because of less side-load on the pistons and smaller angles for the
>>>movement of the 'system' to overcome. Again does this make sense?????
>>>
>>>Also, isn't rev-ability mainly a function of airflow and/or port velocity?
>>>
>>>Thanks
>>>Randy (wishing he had paid attention in physics class)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> > Randy I have been curious about the same type motor. I have been talking
>>>to
>>> > a couple people from Velocity sport tuning... they have been a lot of
>>> help
>>> > to me in the past, and I have found them to have a lot of truth to what
>>>they
>>> > say. The BS is at a minimum. They recommend the use of a tall block from
>>>the
>>> > later 2.0 8v crossflow motors that seemed to have taken place of the 16v
>>> > 2.0.
>>> > This would be:
>>> >
>>> > -95.5 crank (lightening of course, possible knife edging)
>>> > -160mm connecting rods (check the EIP website they have chromoly,
>>> > forged, and titanium)
>>> > -pistons? I havn't gone that far, but for this application I guess they
>>> > would custom... again Velocity has them.
>>> > As far as the ratio of bore to stroke... I was told by Velocity that
>>> using
>>> > the other older block(9A) from the later 2.0 16v motors of the early 90's
>>> > you wouldn't be able to spool all the way up to red line... how true? I
>>> > havn't had a chance to go any further with it... though they said they
>>>have
>>> > done the combination 95.5/160mm rods/Bore?(didn't ask)/tall block from a
>>>2.0
>>> > 8v, and had great success with it working ridiculously well through the
>>> > whole power band... sounds good to me... $$$ value?? maybe it would be
>>> > cheaper to go to a turbo?
>>> >
>>> > well I hope that helps you in your quest for power/speed...
>>> > chris jevens
>>> >
>>> > >From: "Randy B" <sirocco@telocity.com>
>>> > >To: <scirocco-l@scirocco.org>
>>> > >Subject: Anyone have a 2117cc 16V
>>> > >Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2001 16:45:09 -0800
>>> > >
>>> > >Has anyone built, or know someone who has, a 2117cc 16V (or 8V for that
>>> > >matter).
>>> > >I would like to find someone who has tried this succesfully or
>>>unsucesfully
>>> > >and why.
>>> > >
>>> > >JE (other?) 84mm forged pistons, Carillo (other?) forged rods, and
>>> 95.5mm
>>> > >TDI forged crank (knife-edged to lighten) in a 9A block (16V)
>>> > >
>>> > >I am considering finding a 90-92 GTI and doing a complete
>>> > >motor/fuel/motronic swap.
>>> > >It seems if I can:
>>> > >A. B. Have the head flowed and ported as needed for the proper port
>>> > >velocity.
>>> > >C. Match th correct cams
>>> > >D. Run ~11.2:1 compression
>>> > >
>>> > >I could have a monster of a motor with good streetability.
>>> > >
>>> > >What do you all think, need some advice here :)
>>> > >
>>> > >Thanks,
>>> > >Randy
>>> > >81 Scirocco S "Mars" - needs a bigger motor
>>> > >81 Scirocco S "Cosmos" - will get the TT 1847cc 8V for daily duties
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > >--
>>> > >Email LIST problems to: scirocco-l-probs@scirocco.org.
>>> > >To unsubscibe send "unsubscribe scirocco-l" in the message to
>>> > >majordomo@scirocco.org
>>> > >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > _________________________________________________________________
>>> > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at
>>> http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > Email LIST problems to: scirocco-l-probs@scirocco.org.
>>> > To unsubscibe send "unsubscribe scirocco-l" in the message to
>>>majordomo@scirocco.org
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>>--
>>>Email LIST problems to: scirocco-l-probs@scirocco.org.
>>>To unsubscibe send "unsubscribe scirocco-l" in the message to
>>>majordomo@scirocco.org
>>>
>>>
>>>[Disclaimer]This e-mail is strictly confidential and intended solely for the
>>>addressee. It may contain information which is covered by legal,
>>>professional, or other privilege. If you are not the intended addressee you
>>>must not use, disclose, or copy this transmission. This E-mail is not
>>>intended to impose nor shall it be construed as imposing any legally binding
>>>obligation upon GKN Aerospace Chem-tronics Inc. and/or any of its
>>>subsidiaries or associated companies. Neither GKN Aerospace Chem-tronics
>>>Inc. nor any of its subsidiaries or associated companies gives any
>>>representation or warranty as to the accuracy or completeness of the
>>>contents of this E-mail. GKN Aerospace Chem-tronics Inc. shall not be held
>>>liable to any person resulting from the use of any information contained in
>>>this E-mail and shall not be liable to any person who acts or omits to do
>>>anything in reliance upon it.
>>>
>>>
>>>--
>>>Email LIST problems to: scirocco-l-probs@scirocco.org.
>>>To unsubscibe send "unsubscribe scirocco-l" in the message to
>>>majordomo@scirocco.org
>>
>>
>>--
>>Email LIST problems to: scirocco-l-probs@scirocco.org.
>>To unsubscibe send "unsubscribe scirocco-l" in the message to
>>majordomo@scirocco.org
>
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
>
>
>--
>Email LIST problems to: scirocco-l-probs@scirocco.org.
>To unsubscibe send "unsubscribe scirocco-l" in the message to
>majordomo@scirocco.org
--
Email LIST problems to: scirocco-l-probs@scirocco.org.
To unsubscibe send "unsubscribe scirocco-l" in the message to majordomo@scirocco.org