1600 -> 1641

Hello,
I can remember writing about this a while ago, but thought i'd ask again as
my minds a bit naff.

I have a 1600cc AB engine (with Engle 110, 1500 g/box and 32/36 Weber dual
Choke). I've seen that you can buy a piston kit to make it 1641cc. Sounds
good as i understand that you dont need to start having things bored
out/machined.

Questions
1) Will i notice a difference in speed/BHP? will a whopping 41cc's make any
difference?
2) Would it be ok with the cam shaft and existing weber.
3) should it be ok, is there anything else i would need to buy? or is
everything in the kit? (kit comprises of barrels, pistons, clips and pins -
ooh yes and the rings)

Money is a bit tight, so as much as i would like twin beefy webers i cant
afford it (other bits needing sorting on car)

Cheers fellow bug'ers - ant
UK - 1966 'Mellow Yellow' Beetle

Ant wrote:
>
> I have a 1600cc AB engine (with Engle 110, 1500 g/box and 32/36 Weber dual
> Choke). I've seen that you can buy a piston kit to make it 1641cc. Sounds
> good as i understand that you dont need to start having things bored
> out/machined.
>
-------------------------------------------------

Actually, in engineering terms it's a terrible idea. Enormously
popular with the kiddies, of course.

The 85.5mm jugs in your 1600 engine started out as 83mm jugs... which
began as 77mm jugs on the stone-reliable 1300 engine; all have the same
spigot-bore diameter. Then the factory bored them out to make the 1500
engine. And over-bored them to make the 1600 engine, which leaks like
a bitch compared to the 1300. Then the after-market people, knowing
that most VW owners are about as bright as a bunch of carrots,
over-bored the already too-thin 85.5's to produce the famous 'slip-in'
87's and sales boomed, since every kiddie knows bigger has to be
better. Of course, the engines fitted with such junk never last last
very long but that's the whole idea -- to seperate the kiddies from
their cash.

-Bob Hoover

> wrote in message
oups.com...
>
> Then the after-market people, knowing
> that most VW owners are about as bright as a bunch of carrots,
> over-bored the already too-thin 85.5's to produce the famous 'slip-in'
> 87's and sales boomed, since every kiddie knows bigger has to be
> better. Of course, the engines fitted with such junk never last last
> very long but that's the whole idea -- to seperate the kiddies from
> their cash.
>
>

..................In contrast, my 1679 with machine-in 88's still has so much
compression after almost 20,000 miles that I have to struggle when trying to
turn it over by hand during valve adjustments. For longevity, I'm thinking
that they're pretty darn good. I wonder whether they have a wall thickness
that's comparable to a 1300?

Tim Rogers wrote:
>
> .................In contrast, my 1679 with machine-in 88's still has so much
> compression after almost 20,000 miles that I have to struggle when trying to
> turn it over by hand during valve adjustments. For longevity, I'm thinking
> that they're pretty darn good. I wonder whether they have a wall thickness
> that's comparable to a 1300?

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

Yes.

Were it not for the untimely death of Heinz Nordhoff in the spring of
'68, VW might well have introduced a new, more environmentally friendly
'1800' engine using a 74mm crank and 88mm jugs, which was cancelled
upon his death.

One of Nordhoff's ideas -- re-introduction of a bare-bones 1300 bug --
was too far along to cancel and the record shows it's sales were far
better than the bean-counters anticipated.

But with his passing, control of the firm fell into the hands of
accountants and away from the 'car men' and engineers. This lead to
further cheapening of the product in order to enhance short-term
returns. While it looked good on paper (sales peaked in the early
1970's) the steady decline in quality and lack of a long-range plan
based on sound engineering eventually drove the Sedan out of the
marketplace.

-Bob Hoover

> wrote in message
oups.com...
>
> Were it not for the untimely death of Heinz Nordhoff in the spring of
> '68, VW might well have introduced a new, more environmentally friendly
> '1800' engine using a 74mm crank and 88mm jugs, which was cancelled
> upon his death.
>
>

...............What are your thoughts on the practicality of a 88x74 type 1
with machine-in cylinders and a counter-balanced crankshaft? I understand
that the heads won't allow sustained power usage past a certain level
without getting too hot but I'm a lead foot and it would be nice to be able
to out-accelerate those pesky SUV's & minivans. I'd like to stay with the
Jetronic FI and stock exhaust system and maybe a mild aftermarket cam grind
like WebCam's 118. I've never read much about a set-up like this and need
some guidance :-)

Tim Rogers wrote:
>
> > wrote in message
> oups.com...
> >
> > Were it not for the untimely death of Heinz Nordhoff in the spring of
> > '68, VW might well have introduced a new, more environmentally friendly
> > '1800' engine using a 74mm crank and 88mm jugs, which was cancelled
> > upon his death.
> >
> >
>
> ..............What are your thoughts on the practicality of a 88x74 type 1
> with machine-in cylinders and a counter-balanced crankshaft? I understand
> that the heads won't allow sustained power usage past a certain level
> without getting too hot but I'm a lead foot and it would be nice to be able
> to out-accelerate those pesky SUV's & minivans. I'd like to stay with the
> Jetronic FI and stock exhaust system and maybe a mild aftermarket cam grind
> like WebCam's 118. I've never read much about a set-up like this and need
> some guidance :-)

bigger heads, bigger exhaust. Don't know about the FI, how to make it
keep up. The stock peashooter exhaust is the worst bottleneck for any
performance upgrades, and is the first to go.

Jan

Tim Rogers wrote:
>..............What are your thoughts on the practicality of a 88x74 type 1
> with machine-in cylinders and a counter-balanced crankshaft?
> I understand
> that the heads won't allow sustained power usage past a certain level
> without getting too hot but I'm a lead foot and it would be nice to be able
> to out-accelerate those pesky SUV's & minivans. I'd like to stay with the
> Jetronic FI and stock exhaust system and maybe a mild aftermarket cam grind
> like WebCam's 118. I've never read much about a set-up like this and need
> some guidance :-)

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

The 88x74 is a very practical engine. The 74mm crank is the largest
that can use stock-length connecting rods, making it less expensive --
and more reliable -- than the more popular sizes endorsed by
Conventional Wisdom.

But you're comparing apples to oranges when you link the 70 year old VW
design to a modern, water-cooled four-banger, some of which are not
much bigger than a shoe box but can crank out an honest 140hp... and
still give you a quarter-million miles of trouble-free service AND
30mpg. Tackle one of those with a bug and you've just been suckered
-- you're playing the other man's game. If you want to win you need to
skew the odds in your favor, such as playing in the dirt. Take any
modern vehicle off-pavement -- including most SUV's -- and all they'll
see of you is tail-lights.

Studying the differences between the early Porsche and the VW will help
you understand the VW's thermal limitations. It should also make it
clear those limitations are inherent in the design. If you need more
SUSTAINABLE horsepower you need more fin area and better exhaust
valves. Of course, more fins won't fit under your tin-ware and better
valves won't fit your heads. You can pull as much PEAK power out of
the thing as you're willing to pay for but only for a couple of runs.


The satisfaction of dusting a suburban housewife in her minivan -- who
probably doesn't even know she's just been blown-off -- will make you a
member of the Engine of the Month Club, which is what all those
after-market retailers are hoping for.

Time to start thinking for yourself. All those wunnerful folks trying
to sell you all that kewl stuff aren't doing you any favors.

-Bob Hoover

> I have a 1600cc AB engine (with Engle 110, 1500 g/box and 32/36 Weber dual ...

AB would have been 1300 originally. So as Bob says, its already up 2
sizes.


not 100% sure on the next bit - corrections welcomed !

Big carbs dont make any difference till you can get more air through the
system (engine). i.e. bigger barrels, longer stroke, higher revs. Which
means you need to plan your engine from the start as one unit, not just
keep bolting things on hoping for a bit more power each time.

Even if its built well as a power engine, it wont last as long as a
stock 1300, if you want to use it like a stock 1300.
High power VW = high maintenance VW.

To the extreme that 'race' VW engine life is measured in minutes - not
miles !

Rich

Don't do it. The 1641 cylinders are weak and will square after time and
lose compression.
BTW an AB is a 1300, unless it has been changed to a 1600. If it is a 1300,
then the heads will be a different bore, so they will need machining anyway.
It's been a while, but there might be 1300 slip in 1641s, but I can't
remember. Anyway, they aren't worth having either way.

My personal favourite is the 1776, as this has the thickest cylinder wall of
any after market, less the 1679 (88mm) machine in, but gains the extra
100cc.

Have you read the article on the Ramva index on building a performance
engine? www.ramva.tk


Gaz


"Ant" > wrote in message
...
>
> Hello,
> I can remember writing about this a while ago, but thought i'd ask again
> as my minds a bit naff.
>
> I have a 1600cc AB engine (with Engle 110, 1500 g/box and 32/36 Weber dual
> Choke). I've seen that you can buy a piston kit to make it 1641cc.
> Sounds good as i understand that you dont need to start having things
> bored out/machined.
>
> Questions
> 1) Will i notice a difference in speed/BHP? will a whopping 41cc's make
> any difference?
> 2) Would it be ok with the cam shaft and existing weber.
> 3) should it be ok, is there anything else i would need to buy? or is
> everything in the kit? (kit comprises of barrels, pistons, clips and
> pins - ooh yes and the rings)
>
> Money is a bit tight, so as much as i would like twin beefy webers i cant
> afford it (other bits needing sorting on car)
>
> Cheers fellow bug'ers - ant
> UK - 1966 'Mellow Yellow' Beetle
>
>
>

Yep, it was a 1300 - but prev owner made in 1600cc.
I just wanted to add a few extra horses as i'm on a budget.

does the 1776 motor go quite quick?


"Gaz Pike" > wrote in message
...
> Don't do it. The 1641 cylinders are weak and will square after time and
> lose compression.
> BTW an AB is a 1300, unless it has been changed to a 1600. If it is a
> 1300, then the heads will be a different bore, so they will need machining
> anyway. It's been a while, but there might be 1300 slip in 1641s, but I
> can't remember. Anyway, they aren't worth having either way.
>
> My personal favourite is the 1776, as this has the thickest cylinder wall
> of any after market, less the 1679 (88mm) machine in, but gains the extra
> 100cc.
>
> Have you read the article on the Ramva index on building a performance
> engine? www.ramva.tk
>
>
> Gaz
>
>
> "Ant" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> Hello,
>> I can remember writing about this a while ago, but thought i'd ask again
>> as my minds a bit naff.
>>
>> I have a 1600cc AB engine (with Engle 110, 1500 g/box and 32/36 Weber
>> dual Choke). I've seen that you can buy a piston kit to make it 1641cc.
>> Sounds good as i understand that you dont need to start having things
>> bored out/machined.
>>
>> Questions
>> 1) Will i notice a difference in speed/BHP? will a whopping 41cc's make
>> any difference?
>> 2) Would it be ok with the cam shaft and existing weber.
>> 3) should it be ok, is there anything else i would need to buy? or is
>> everything in the kit? (kit comprises of barrels, pistons, clips and
>> pins - ooh yes and the rings)
>>
>> Money is a bit tight, so as much as i would like twin beefy webers i cant
>> afford it (other bits needing sorting on car)
>>
>> Cheers fellow bug'ers - ant
>> UK - 1966 'Mellow Yellow' Beetle
>>
>>
>>
>
>