50mm intake, was Re: ebay link

[sciroccojunky at gmail.com (Lance LaPrarie)]

Hey Don,

I'm waiting on a build sheet for my motor. All I have is the break down of
parts from my bill. Not sure of all the actual measurements that they did.
NW Connecting Rod did all the block work and did a full stage three on the
head. I got Techtonics valve springs, JE pistons, Autotech cams, all
balanced.  The crank was balanced, polished and knife edged. Lightened
flywheel and a sport clutch. It says Sachs on the bill. Got to get more info
on that. My guy mentioned I'll need a heavier duty clutch to compensate for
the added power. Not sure if a stock 16v Sachs clutch can handle that. Gots
to check on that. I asked the shop to do all APR fasteners and they said
that stock stuff is built really well and not to spend the money. That's
pretty cool since I'm sure they'd take my money if they thought they would
help. That is one thing I really like about Fine Tuning is that you ask them
stuff and they shoot you straight. They will tell you what is good and what
will work. If you want to put something cheesy on or something overkill
they'll tell you what's up. Most shops will just say yes sir and go to town,
whether you actually need it or not. So, trust is a huge factor with me. The
motor pulls really stong and runs great. I'm happy with the work.

The purpose of the motor was to give me as much power but with the ability
to pass emissions without having to swap out stuff. I almost bought a 16v
off of a guy about 5 years ago and the guy had some Schrick cams in it that
were really aggressive. The problem with that was to to transfer title in
Washington you have to pass emissions. Kind of sucked since I would have to
scare of some stock cams and swap them out. The car was awesome. Started out
8v but did a Kamei body kit, awesome suspension, wheels etc.... I didn't
feel like spending the money at the time. Not like I'm going to be selling
my rocco anytime to anyone but don't want to have to go through the hassle
for tabs. I'm pretty handy with a wrench but don't want to switch out cams
every two years. So with that said I chose as agressive a cam you can get
without having to sacrifice emissions. Other than that my motor is basically
all race.

I'll let you know what all the perticulars are hopefully today. My chip
comes in today or tomorrow and I'll get the info then.

Thanks!!!


On 7/7/06, Don Walter <dswalterwi@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>  Lance,
> Your setup sounds similar to mine.  What Autotech cams do you have?  Which
> forged pistons and what size are they?
>
>
>  On 7/7/06, Lance LaPrarie <sciroccojunky@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hey Dan,
> >
> > I just got through the break in period last Sunday. My guy that built
> > the
> > motor told me to keep the car under 3500RPM for the duration of the 1500
> >
> > mile break in. So I didn't have the ability to really gauge the
> > difference
> > from my stock 1.8 with cams and CIS. However I did notice that going up
> > steep hills and acceleration were much better to the 3500 shop imposed
> > limit. Sunday I started wrapping it out to see where the power comes on.
> > With my E36 M3 the power comes on like a sledgehammer around 4000RPM.
> > The
> > same can be said of any VR6 car but more like a mallet relatively
> > speaking.
> > On my 16v 2.2ltr it comes on very linear. There isn't a big rush of pull
> > at
> > any real RPM like my other car. I was kind of worried that my motor
> > wasn't
> > set up properly. One thing though is with the forged pistons it seems to
> >
> > take about 15-20 minutes of driving time for them to heat up. Driving it
> > cold seems kind of lopey with the AutoTech cams. Not too much power
> > difference. It is better than my older motor but isn't as dramatic under
> >
> > lower RPM. When it is totally warmed up like half way through my drive
> > in to
> > work which is about 30 miles. Power is really evident when I'm around
> > 5k-6k.
> > This is with basically the same setup as the guy on Ebay selling his
> > 2.2ltr.
> > I moved to Motronic for idle stability. Was going to go the megasquirt
> > route
> > but didn't have the extra dough for all the doo dads required for the
> > swap.
> > The shop that did my motor charged me $150 total for the Motronic swap.
> > That
> > is a phat deal for sure. Monday I'm getting the TechTonics chip made for
> > my
> > setup. That should add quite a bit for the $100 it cost. Much better
> > than
> > $500+ for an intake.
> >
> > I dig the motor and seems to run extra smooth. The idle is kind of rough
> > but
> > my guy mentioned that it is the cams that make the idle that lopey.
> > Before
> > WaterWagens I'm getting my ceramic coated SuperSprint header installed
> > to
> > replace my aging header. Funny how these things crack so often. They
> > used
> > half a reel of wire to repair the latest round of cracks. It really
> > sucks
> > bad that SuperSprint has discontinued all Scirocco related products and
> > replacement parts. Their gear is top notch in my book.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On 7/7/06, Dan Bubb <jdbubb@verizon.net> wrote:
> > >
> > > I don't have any hard data either, but some peripheral data seems to
> > > indicate the 50mm ought to work well on a 2.0 or 2.2L.
> > > Of course, the 50mm originally came on the European 1.8L. That, the
> > > addition of a cat and the Euro intake cam, which is still nothing to
> > write
> > > home about, raised power from 123@5800 to 139@6100. The maximum torque
> > > speed went from 4250 to 4800 although the max torque value didn't
> > change
> > > much (conflicting numbers from my research). And, of course, the
> > breadth of
> > > the torque curve is probably very much in favor of the US engine.
> > > Anyway, the bigger intake manifold seems to be integral to the higher
> > > power of the Euro 1.8L.
> > > I'd can't think of any reason why that wouldn't translate to a bigger
> > > engine that will have an even higher airflow capability.
> > >
> > > My experience with 16V engines isn't extensive, but I do know that the
> > > difference in midrange power going from a 1.8L to a 2.0L, with no
> > other
> > > changes, is really dramatic. I'd expect the 2.2L would be another big
> > step
> > > up. So, much in fact that I doubt you'd miss the comparative lack of
> > > midrange of the 50mm.
> > > Typically, increasing an engine's displacement without other changes
> > will
> > > increase torque and low end power, but will also reduce the peak power
> >
> > > speed. So you end up with a comparative torque monster that needs to
> > be
> > > shifted at a lower maximum RPM. Making changes to bolster the top end
> > would
> > > seem appropriate to me.
> > >
> > > Check out the pictures here:
> > > http://www.scirocco16v.com/gallery/16v_abfengines_index1.htm
> > > The 2.0L European ABF looks to have a hell of a big intake manifold.
> > > Well, at least it looks that way to me!
> > > Anyway, nothing definitive, just a bunch of sort of related facts and
> > my
> > > opinion.
> > > Dan
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Lance LaPrarie" < sciroccojunky@gmail.com>
> > > To: "Dan Bubb" <dan.bubb@gmail.com>
> > > Cc: "alex porter" < alexporter_14@hotmail.com>; <
> > scirocco-l@scirocco.org>
> > > Sent: Thursday, July 06, 2006 5:51 PM
> > > Subject: Re: ebay link
> > >
> > >
> > > > Hey Dan,
> > > >
> > > > I don't have any hard data to back that statement up. I did a bunch
> > of
> > > > research when deciding to get the best out of my buck on my current
> > > motor.
> > > > I
> > > > was going to buy a 50mm intake and read somewhere that it really
> > doesn't
> > > > do anything for you on larger motors. I also asked the shop that
> > built
> > > my
> > > > motor and they said it wouldn't do anything benefitial for me and
> > not to
> > > > spend the money. From what I gathered it's like the 1.8ltr head on a
> > > > 2.0ltrblock. It helps if you don't port it out. Once you port it out
> > > > you lose the
> > > > advantage over the 2ltr head ported. Porting a 1.8 and a 2.0 head
> > there
> > > is
> > > > really no difference between them. So if you know something that I
> > > don't,
> > > > I
> > > > stand corrected. Also, top end power really doesn't matter to me
> > since
> > > I'm
> > > > not going to be racing my car. I'd rather have the power in a usable
> >
> > > spot
> > > > which is the midrange. My personal preference though.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On 7/6/06, Dan Bubb <dan.bubb@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> Lance,
> > > >>> Have any data to back up this statement?
> > > >>> I think the common knowledge is that the 50mm intake boosts top
> > end
> > > >>> but hurts the midrange some, at least on the 1.8L.
> > > >>> I'd think with the additional airflow of the 2.0 or 2.2L engines
> > it'd
> > > >>> be a benefit everywhere.
> > > >>> Dan
> > > >>>
> > > >>> On 7/5/06, Lance LaPrarie < sciroccojunky@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >>>
> > > >>> > I opted out on the
> > > >>> > 50mm intake since it actually robs you of power on 2.0 16v's or
> > > larger.
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> > Check it out.
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> >
> > > >>>
> > > >> _______________________________________________
> > > >> Scirocco-l mailing list
> > > >> Scirocco-l@scirocco.org
> > > >> http://neubayern.net/mailman/listinfo/scirocco-l
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Scirocco-l mailing list
> > > Scirocco-l@scirocco.org
> > > http://neubayern.net/mailman/listinfo/scirocco-l
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Scirocco-l mailing list
> > Scirocco-l@scirocco.org
> > http://neubayern.net/mailman/listinfo/scirocco-l
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Don Walter - Waukesha, WI
> 1986 8V Black Scirocco (Daily Driver)
> 1984 8V Audi 4000s (RIP 2/14/2006)
> 1986 2.0L 16V TEC 2 Black Scirocco (see progress at
> http://www.cardomain.com/memberpage/708939)
> 1986 2L 16V Toronado Red Scirocco (Ben's Car)
> 1988 1.8 16V Toronado Red Scirocco (sold on 3/29/04)
> 1984 1.8 8V Pewter Scirocco (sold years ago)
> 1971 Karman Ghia (sold)
> 1969 Karman Ghia (sold)
> 1969 Beetle (sold)
>