1776 Build Cam Question CB 2280 vs 2239

[luedtkec]

All,

I am rebuilding my 1776 on a limited budget for my baja I used it sometimes on the street but mostly offroad, for now see below for my plans:
009 Distributor
AA pistons and Jugs (were given to me)
Total Seal rings
D shaped hand ported heads and manifolds to match
Stock crank
Lightened flywheel
Full flow
CB performance 31 mm bigfoot lifters
Weber progressive 32/36
New rod bearings and main bearings

I would like to keep my stock rocker arms (cost) with medium duty springs but would like to go to a bigger cam and am looking at either the CB performance 2280 or the 2239. I have read a lot of positives about the 2280 but can not find much on the 2239 grind.

Should I go with the 2280 or step up to the 2239 and risk valve float and inefficiency due to not having higher ratio rockers and heavy duty springs.

This is the first time I have attempted to do a full rebuild. If there are any pointers or other things I should consider let me know. I would like the get the most out of the build while keeping it reliable.

[vwracerdave]

If you are on a tight budget you do not need the total seal rings.
_________________
2017 Street Comp Champion - Thunder Valley Raceway Park - Noble, OK
2010 Sportsman ET Champion - Mid-America Dragway - Arkansas City, KS
1997 Sportsman ET Champion - Thunder Valley Raceway Park - Noble ,OK
Featured in Dec. 2001 HOT VW's Magazine page 63

Watch my racing video's http://www.youtube.com/user/okvwracer/videos

[DeathBySnuSnu]

Not a fan of the 009.
Not a fan of total seal on a mild motor. Grant's are fine.
Not a fan of the heavy big foot lifters.
Not a fan of the progressive.

Those cams are for a milder head combo.
What do you have for heads? Valve sizes? Port volume? Chamber size?

A 1776 with mildly ported stock heads, a 2280 cam, and a center mount carc can make a good pepped up stockish engine that dont take a whole lot of hot rod parts or re-engineering the engine.

If those heads you list are ported and larger valves..... then you are into more aggressive cam and dual carb territory.
_________________

[luedtkec]

I got the total seal rings from a buddy of mine who also gave me the jugs and pistons.

If not the big foot lifters would you recommend stock replacement lifters or just keep my used lifters?
Valve sizes are stock, I haven't measured what I ported the heads to but it is mild.
I do not like the 009 either but my only other option is the stock vacuum advance, SVDA distributors are pricey.

[modok]

I may take some FLAK for saying this....
but it's LIKELY the cb2239 is a copy of an engle 100 circa 1980something.
it seems to lack lash ramps

IMO put a fk41 in there.
I share the feeling that the top end of that motor might CHANGE, and no matter what you end up with that'll be a pretty good choice.

i don't really like the idea of a gapless second ring. Total seal BRAND rings are generally very good, but they will make any kind of ring you want.
Lets put it this way.....in the QUEST to make their patented gapless ring work, they became experts in machining rings to close tolerance. Because if they aren't machined just right, they don't work worth a crap.
if they are conventional rings, or gapless top rings, go for it.

[Pruneman99]

[ekacpuc]

[ekacpuc]

[modok]

Yeah, it's not necessarily more terrible than some others.

He's just wanting more info about what kind of cam it is, and I can say, it'll run almost the same as a engle 100 with the lash set a few thou loose, because it measures exactly like that.
... and the resemblance is so similar...
it might be exactly that.
Or it might not.

[Brian_e]

I have used both in similar engine's, and I prefer the smaller 2280 (better yet the 2232) in a bus, and the more peppy 2239 in a bug. The 2280 works great with a stock carb.

I built this 1776cc reusing as many stock parts as possible, and it runs awesome in a bug. It was about as cheap as you could get still using mostly decent quality parts, and correctly rebuilding it.

Ported 113 35x32 heads, 130ish cfm @ .450", single HD springs
stock rockers and adjusters on solid shafts
stock push rods cut down
stock reground crank, 8 doweled
cheap cast 12.5lbs flywheel
stock style sachs clutch and disk
stock rebuilt rods
CB2239 cam, cheap regular CB lifters
swap meet rebuilt Kads, scat linkage
all stock tin, stock pulley
1 3/8" CB hideout header and muflfer.
.040" deck, and 9.0cr.

If you are stuck on the progressive, make sure you read and follow ALL of John's AC.NET "How to make a progressive work" article. If everything is done correctly, it should run real similar to the Kads.

Brian

[mcmscott]

[FreeBug]

Ok, I think the consensus is pretty clear:

CB lightweights instead of 31 mm lifters.

I also would be worried about the TS rings, too, I'm one of those guys who only got them to work right once.

Solid rocker shafts is a must. Can cost as little as a couple tanks of gas (wee, maybe not where you are. But still...), and I would't want to anywhere remote with a cam + stock rocker shafts.

I also would be dubious of stock-valved heads with d-ports..I just don't see how you would port the intake into a mini D, without making a volume that could be detrimental to performance. 1600 to 1776 is not that much bigger.

I, too, hate the progressive, but if you use aircooled.net's well-heated manifold, you could probably get a result.

The progressive has provided what's needed for vacuum advance, use it.

Of the cams mentioned, I've only used the 2280, and the W-100 (and webcam 119, FK-65) in that sort of range. I'm thinking about using the 2239. Here's my take, from what I've tried and what I've been able to glean here: The 2280 works great with a well-heated manifold and single carb. The 2239 can also get good power from a single carb, but my fear is that you might have to be Alstrup to get it to work right. Maybe not.

The Engle 100 idled less well, and power came on stronger and higher up than the 2280, which feels like it has a torque curve pretty much like stock.

It makes for an engine which is easily controlled , at low rpm, don't know how much of that is something you would want. Having the torque come on strong at a certain rpm can be tricky for traction (at least in snow), but again, I don't know how much that interests you.

You can get away with the stock crank using the 2280; it hardly revs high enough to pose a risk. How heavy is the baja?

But if you don't want to inject any $$$$, just build it and go like that. It will run, maybe not optimum, but still more power than stock.

[Brian_e]

No need for the expensive light weight lifters. The CB1512 for $22 work great with CB's smaller cams.

The intake ports really only need some bowl blending, slight un-shrouding in the chamber, a good 3 angle valve job, and a back cut on the intakes. Don't get all crazy with a silly intake flange shape. You will do more harm then good.

Stock VW cranks kick ass. Way underrated. No reason to spend extra money on a CW crank for this engine.

There....I just saved you enough money on lifters and a crank to be able to afford a set of Kads now!! Toss the progressive and save yourself a bundle of time and headaches.

Keep it simple.

Brian

[Alstrup]

From a driveability point of view the 2239 is MUCH better than the W100 or the FK41 with a stock or progressive carb.
Heavy wheels, a lot of wind resistance etc etc. I would go for the 2280 w. split 1,25/1,1 rockers. Done right it can support a lot of power for what it is.

I don´t mind the progressive. It takes a little more to dial in, but that´s it. Especially along with a decent SVDA distributor and proper manifold preheat it can work well.

T

[StefansBus]

I can only speak to the 2239 in my 1776cc bus engine (conceived by Torben Alstrup) with a modified Solex 34. It idles like stock just at slightly higher RPM (1000 RPM), it pulls fine just off idle and reaches max torque (143NM/106 ft lbs) at approx. 2500 RPM and max power (79hp) around 4500.

For reference, the stock 1600 dual port engine has a max torque of 106NM/78ft lbs. at 2800RPM. Mine reaches that number at 1800RPM.

All this means that it drives better than stock starting at idle and much, much better than stock as soon as you hit 2500.

Most of my driving is between 2500 and 4500 so right between max torque and max power. It's ideal. And that's in a bus.

I wouldn't hesitate to choose a 2239 again. Having said that, the 2280 would probably pull even better (slightly) just off idle, but would produce a bit less max power

Stefan

[ekacpuc]

[within.1]

I have run both the 2239 and 2241 in a 1776 my pick is the 2241 it works fine with a cenermount progressive.i have also had good luck with the real weber 32/36 progressive without heat but i only run it in the summer on buggys

[modok]

[FreeBug]

[luedtkec]

Next question, if the stock crank is so questionable, would it be worth the money to step up to a 74mm counterweight crank? (If this is a good idea should I go cast or forged?) I've read you can keep stock rods and A pistons with little to no trimming and some shimming, so it could ideally be a fairly affordable upgrade.
Obviously I would need to step up to dual carbs to optimize my performance with this setup. I was planning to do this work on the next rebuild and do it right with more money. Sounds like this setup wouldn't be smart with stock valves either. Thoughts?

Thanks for everyone's help