Impression of Mexi longblock vs prev. 1776

Previous engine was a 1776 w/ 110 Engle cam. Dual Kadrons. SVDA dizzie. Engine was a piece of rubbish poorly built by local VW "performance" shop (VW Paradise, San Marcos, well-known to local old timers as purveyor of crap engines). It blew up about 5,000 miles into its life.

New engine is stock Mexican (Puebla factory) 1600DP w/ stock cam, new 34 PICT-3, same SVDA dizzie. Proper carburation adjusting ongoing.

In both cases, dizzie adjusted to full advance (42 degrees @ 3700 rpm per John at aircooled.net).

My main impression is that the new engine is just less unpredictable than the old. With the old engine I never knew how it was going to run. The second impression is that the new engine has less torque in the low end (2000 to 2500 rpm) than the old. Need to rev higher before upshifting when climbing hills than I needed to with the old.

-- Mike "Rocket J Squirrel" Elliott

71 Type 2: the Wonderbus 84 Westphalia: "Mellow Yellow (The Electrical Banana)" KG6RCR
Reply to
Mike Rocket J. Squirrel Elliot
Loading thread data ...

That's no surprise, the extra displacement does just that for you, even if the rest is out of tune or built poorly.

Jan

Reply to
Jan Andersson

This is a surprise! 1600 DP (actually 1585cc) is only 9% less than 1776.

Reply to
Mike Rocket J. Squirrel Elliot

When you find the time, try the Kadrons on the otherwise stock engine, should be good for another 2-5hp and might increase MPG...

J.

Reply to
P.J.Berg

You can have your cake and eat it with some dual carbs (I recommend dual 40 IDFs), and when you feel up to it a set of properly ported stock size valve heads, our L3s

formatting link

1.4 rockers are also a nice move, these and other improvements are covered in the
formatting link
article John Aircooled.Net Inc.
Reply to
John Connolly

..............When Rocket insisted that he wanted a completely stock set-up with his new engine, I kept quiet but it would have been good advice to get him to jet those Kadrons for it. They would have given better power and probably better mileage and like John Connolly suggested, the 1:4 rockers would have been an easy upgrade as well that would have complemented the Kadrons.

Reply to
Tim Rogers

Yup, stock is what I want here.Reliability and long-term use is the goal. I'm going to trust that the engineers at VW designed this engine as a system, meant to work well. I offered my impressions of the (nearly) stock 1600DP vs 1776 because I promised I would. I've spent plenty of time dorking around with the old engine, trying to get it to run well, and plenty of time tearing it down, doing what I could to try to rebuild it, realizing that it was not in the cards to rebuild it, getting the new Mexi long block, building it back up, obtaining all the parts I was missing to make it stock, and getting it all running again. I have a list of honey-do's nearly a year long here that have been back-burnered while my attention was diverted to the Wonderbus's being out of order or disobedient. I want to swing into a more relaxed scheduled maintenance routine so I can do the household things my patient wife needs having done. I think that all that is missing from stock now is to mount the air preheat stove up and re-charge and re-connect the fuel tank emissions e-can. Then I can start learning about brakes and wheel and steering stuff.

Reply to
Mike Rocket J. Squirrel Elliot

Problem is you can't just stop there. You then must invest in a performance exhaust system, right? Which from what I understand are much louder than the stock exhaust system, plus they usually hang out the ass end of your car like inflamed hemmoroids. I know there are a lot of guys out there who like dual carb setups but I have also talked to a lot of guys who find them to be a nightmare to adjust proper. Guess that is why I have always gone with the stock setup. If I wanted an aircooled performance car I'd buy an early Porsche...which I am seriously considering at this juncture btw.

--Dan E

Reply to
Braukuche

Reply to
ilambert

Dual carbs are easier to adjust than singles! I have went as much as

59,000 miles on my personal car with only toiuching my carbs once die to a clogged idle circuit. They would still be on the car if we were not working to test EMS systems with my car!

The hottest running engine on the planet is a 100% stock 1600D/P. I have tested engines with double the power than run 75 degrees cooler. Its all due to efficiency- something the VW engineers were not concerned with. Their camshaft choise was indicative of that.

The stock engine was designed when speedlimits were not 70MPH, when we had leaded fuel.

Any stock engine I build for myself is always a single port! They run smoother, have better usable power and have much stronger chambers. Better MPG, cooler running and When set up at 7.7:1 with a camshaft from a 2.1 wasserboxer and 1.25 rockers they run very nice.

Reply to
Jake Raby

Damn, I had a serious case of Type Os in that last post- sorry!

Reply to
Jake Raby

Not sure if you were aware of it or not, but the Mexican 1600DP for carbs has 6.6:1 CR. This makes its power and torque curves very similar to the old 1500 unit (but you can run it on 83 octane gas). In your Type 2, this engine will get a little 'breathless' at times. The Mexican hydraulic long block (intended for their FI models) has 7.7:1 CR, but then you might have been forced to use dual carbs on that unit.

Reply to
Peter

Peter -- I was wondering what the CR was for this long block. 6.6:1 is pretty darn low, but I sure can use some crappy gas, I reckon! How did you come by this information? Is it pretty much common knowledge?

Where does lower CR show up on the dyno charts?

A lot of the mods and upgrades that folks have been suggesting (dual carbs, etc.) probably have a greater effect in the upper rpms -- like

3000+ -- and not much in the low end, unless I am missing something.

-- Mike "Rocket J Squirrel" Elliott

71 Type 2: the Wonderbus 84 Westphalia: "Mellow Yellow (The Electrical Banana)" KG6RCR
Reply to
Mike Rocket J. Squirrel Elliot

Tunning the carb properlly will improve the bottom end torque.

You may want to check the jet sizes on your carb (main jet, idle jet, emulsion tube) with the specs on a Bntlley manual for a 1600 single carb engine for a bus, with 6.6:1. Generally, a smaller emulsion tube (air correction jet) will produce more bottom end torque. Using a smaller emulsion tube requires smaller main jet too, otherwise you will be running too rich. The emulsion tube (air correction jet) is the jet you see when looking down the throat of the carb from the top, between the throat and bowl, bellow the chock butterfly. You have to remove the top of the carb to access it. Check it's size. I think it should be 80Z for a bus engine. Otherwise the carb is jetted for a beetle. (I might be wrong with jet sizes, you have to look up and find the factory specs for your engine combination).

Bill, '67 Bug.

Reply to
Bill Spiliotopoulos

I am not sure how 'common' the knowledge is for VW Mexico specs, but then I have been reviewing data from that facility for nearly 20 years. The 'carb' long block (non-hydraulic) is from the AF series engines and was also fitted to the Mexican Type 2 up to the 1987 model year. However, those vehicles were fitted with mountain ratio boxes (5.86:1 & 5.83:1) to over-come the lower power. Similarly, AF fitted Bugs used the 4.37:1 ring & pinion, rather than the 4.12 or 3.88.

Rated in DIN, the AF units are either 44 or 46 bhp, depending on which VW data source you use. The standard 1600 units would be either 50 bhp for the

7.5:1 CR units or 48 for the 7.3:1 engines (except the AJ fuel injection, rated at 50 bhp).

You have the small 33/30 valves, so this may (or may not) be the limiting factor to what carburetion you put on the engine. However, the small valves mean that you are set-up to exploit as much low end torque as is possible. You did say you want to keep things 'stock', so I am not sure where you would want to go from here. I remember Gene Berg used to like the AF engines. He said, matched with the right transmission, they were one of the best engines VW ever made. He was referring to the unit in a Bug, though.

Reply to
Peter

Yesterday I drove 125 miles in my bus with 800 lbs of horse feed in it. It drove close to the same as empty. Lots of power, gains great on hills etc. Change your carb and dizzy in my opinion to dual s and better dizzy set up. I got 23 mpg last check with about 1300 miles on the engine and sythetics in the trans. Dennis

href="

formatting link
">Den's1977 Puma

Reply to
Dennis Wik

And the low end torque is good, exhaust is stock VW pointless electronic

009. I like it.

href="

formatting link
">Den's1977 Puma

Reply to
Dennis Wik

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.