TheSamba.com :: View topic

Fri Feb 27, 2004 11:36 pm

Am wondering if I can be brought up to speed. :shock: I am looking at building an engine for my 66 bus and am unsure as to the reliability of 94's. I am feeling like 90.5s are the way to go. However, I am hearing that my thinking is old skewl. I want to use this bus in the summers and drive to the coast which means a killer stretch of hilly highway for approximately 3 hours. Am I correct in my thinking... Or have times changed for chronically overheating 94s?

Fri Feb 27, 2004 11:56 pm

Buses weigh more than bugs so people usually go for the 90.5's

They need more torque, and the 94's do heat up with the higher weight. If you had a little bug, I'd say 94's easy...

Best is a small stroker motor, those are the best in a bus (if you can afford it).

DON'T go 92's. That's old school :)

Sat Feb 28, 2004 8:10 am

Machine in 88s or a 90.5.... Add some stroke and KEEP IT A SINGLEPORT! Headwork does wonders.

Sat Feb 28, 2004 8:48 am

"KEEP IT A SINGLEPORT!"

Yes! You just inadvertantly answered a question for me!

Sat Feb 28, 2004 9:31 am

Why a single port????? don't dp's breathe better????

Sat Feb 28, 2004 10:03 am

Yes dp's breathe better but you aren't looking for top end horsepower. In a bus you want torque and a set of sp's will do that better.

Mike
59 single, 69 bus, 73 super

Sat Feb 28, 2004 10:13 am

88's are not worth it.

You're gonna do all that machine work, $$$ for a few more measly cc's? I would only go 88's if you're later gonna stroke it. Just save your cash and go 90.5 or 94.

The thing is a 94mm has just as wide cylinder walls as 85.5, but the same fin area for cooling. So they do tend to run a bit hotter than 90.5's (because of fin/heat ratio).

BUT, I've seen lots of people swear by 1915 on thier buses. And you'll notice a very different ride than in a 1776.

.02cents.

Sat Feb 28, 2004 10:56 am

blessbuss is right
if your on a budget
single port is the way to go
a 1776 single port with a 34 pict carb
with all stock parts will be a low end power beast
and you can just beat on it and it will just keep on goin

Mon Mar 01, 2004 7:12 pm

everyone on their own.

Wed Mar 03, 2004 6:19 am

I too vote for the 1760 with single ports, stock or mild carbs and mild cam, full flow oil system with filter for a reliable bus motor, but I don't have a machine shop or training for my hobby to brag about, and I worry about $ so do as you wish. Your bus will be limited by the trans gearing, unless you are swapping that out for t1 so much over 1760cc won't be of a lot of use.

94 cylinders have the same thickness as 85.5's? That don't sound right to me. I know for sure that the 92's are thinner and I've seen them split and warp too. I know the case gets cut bigger for 94's than 92's but would someone confirm the cylinder wall thicknesses?

Wed Mar 03, 2004 8:30 am

The 94 IS thicker than a 92! The 92 is the thinnest available and is basically a bored out 90.5(they have the same OD)

There is NOTHING wrong with a 94 bore, the Blue book tells you NO, but maybe someone wanted to buy and sell 90.5s by the crate load (its all about marketing)

I would not say that 94s are optimum for a bus, but any lightweight application likes them.

Wed Mar 03, 2004 9:02 am

i had a buddy with a 65 deluxe bus running a 1915 motor, that thing hauled a$$. he was running a 3.5 sump and dual dell 45s. I asked him what he thought about the whole, busses suck with bigger motors thing and he laughed. he had that motor 3 years as a daily driver and never had an non "normal" vw problem with it. He worked at a custom rice tunershop and said he would blow the doors off of em, i believe him. I rode in that thing and it zoomed. I wonder who of these guys responding a) ever had a bus and b) ever run a bigger then 1600 motor in one. I trust Jakes "advice" but not sure how much time he has spent in the seat of a real vw...LOL!!

Wed Mar 03, 2004 8:29 pm

Maybe somebody wanted to buy and sell crate loads of 90.5's?? Nice!
You spend more time pimping 94's than he did the 90.5's.....[/quote]