TheSamba.com :: View topic - Impressive small displacement combo (chassis dyno eval)

Thu Dec 23, 2010 7:16 pm

spencerfvee wrote: hay rock crusher who the hells jake raby? is he some gear head or something lol lol i kind of like him because he likes single dellortos too lol spencerfvee................................................................................ He's a guy I listen to very carefully......one of the guys on my list of top 3 people in the VW world to shut up and listen to. He may or may not have done more total engines than me in his life (most likely many more) but he has far more VW experience than I do. :)

RC

Thu Dec 23, 2010 8:49 pm

Its not how many you do, but rather how much better each one performs than the last...

At any rate the car drives great.. It has plenty of power for a winter driver..

Thu Dec 23, 2010 9:59 pm

Jake Raby wrote: Its not how many you do, but rather how much better each one performs than the last...

At any rate the car drives great.. It has plenty of power for a winter driver.. That was a given.....didn't think it needed to be said. :)

Fri Dec 24, 2010 5:56 am

hi rock crusher thanks for info on jake raby i just see his name all over samba and i never herd of him befor .just .wanted to know who he was .you have a great X MASS and NEW YEAR spencerfvee.................................................................................................... RockCrusher wrote: spencerfvee wrote: hay rock crusher who the hells jake raby? is he some gear head or something lol lol i kind of like him because he likes single dellortos too lol spencerfvee................................................................................ He's a guy I listen to very carefully......one of the guys on my list of top 3 people in the VW world to shut up and listen to. He may or may not have done more total engines than me in his life (most likely many more) but he has far more VW experience than I do. :)

RC

Fri Dec 24, 2010 10:49 am

RockCrusher wrote: spencerfvee wrote: hay rock crusher who the hells jake raby? is he some gear head or something lol lol i kind of like him because he likes single dellortos too lol spencerfvee................................................................................ He's a guy I listen to very carefully......one of the guys on my list of top 3 people in the VW world to shut up and listen to. He may or may not have done more total engines than me in his life (most likely many more) but he has far more VW experience than I do. :)

RC

I just say "Semper FI" nuff said!!

Fri Dec 24, 2010 1:16 pm

As always, nice job Jake! 8)

Mon Dec 27, 2010 12:07 pm

Gariack wrote: Could you please post the cam card for the FK-41?

ear 8)

Mon Dec 27, 2010 6:41 pm

Thats it.. Mine was altered due to the 112* lobe separation I chose Vs. the standard 108 thats advertised on this card..

Its a nice cam for a low revving daily driver with a flat torque curve. I haven't used an Engle cam in one of my engines since 1996, it really performs well.

Mon Dec 27, 2010 6:58 pm

How does the 112 lobe separation alter the valve timing opening, and closing events?

Tue Dec 28, 2010 3:24 am

I think that you need to reread your Gene Berg Blue Book, because all engines with 39 x 32 valves will overheat and with that stratospheric compression you will require pure race fuel....although if you used semi hemi chambers and 45degrees advance you might be alright. :D (pure sarcasm for those that don't know)

Tue Dec 28, 2010 8:28 am

Ive been thinking about the "hot running" 041 heads. Ive heard the same about 044s too. I wanted to see what is similar in these heads that would make this statement true and I think I have found it.

Both the Brazil 041 and the 044 have additional material above the combustion chamber for added strength. This material is also around the spark plug as well. With the CHT sensor at the base of the plug, the added material will heat soak and give a higher reading over a stock head with minimal material which allows it to cool faster. The 041 and the base 044 castings seem to be based off the same casting, added material in the combustion area, larger cast in intake ports, missing middle full cooling fin. The only differences seem to be the valve sizes.

I will be using the 041s on my 2.2 bus engine, I will do some dyno time and log CHT and report back to see how much power is left on the table and how hot the heads get.

Tue Dec 28, 2010 10:29 am

I thought the 041 has the original spark plug depth, whereas the 044 have the larger (type 4 length 8) ) plug depth?

Tue Dec 28, 2010 1:09 pm

The differential in valve sizes doesn't appear to have hurt this engine combo..
I don't care, it was all used parts anyway and all it needs to do is get me 90 miles a day on those days when I don't want to drive my 912E because its too nasty.

If it blows up tomorrow, I'll laugh my ass off.

Tue Dec 28, 2010 9:55 pm

Jake Raby wrote: The differential in valve sizes doesn't appear to have hurt this engine combo..
I don't care, it was all used parts anyway and all it needs to do is get me 90 miles a day on those days when I don't want to drive my 912E because its too nasty.

If it blows up tomorrow, I'll laugh my ass off. now thats my kind of thinken, the bigger the bang the bigger the laugh. I poped a 250 elsonore years ago and almost pised on my self from laughing so hard,(throttel stuck, on a 1972 mt 250)

Wed Dec 29, 2010 11:24 am

I have the most fun with those "sweep the floor" type of motors! 8)

Thu Dec 30, 2010 6:02 am

[email protected] wrote: How does the 112 lobe separation alter the valve timing opening, and closing events?

In general, wider LCs contribute to a wider operating range.

I can only guess by looking at the dyno chart that Jake retarded the
cam 2 degrees to put the cam back into the *sweet spot* of it's range
after having it ground on the wider LC...

Jake, wanna give up any secrets today! You still laying on the couch?
;)

Don

Thu Dec 30, 2010 8:01 pm

DStar wrote: [email protected] wrote: How does the 112 lobe separation alter the valve timing opening, and closing events?

In general, wider LCs contribute to a wider operating range.

I can only guess by looking at the dyno chart that Jake retarded the
cam 2 degrees to put the cam back into the *sweet spot* of it's range
after having it ground on the wider LC...

Jake, wanna give up any secrets today! You still laying on the couch?
;)

Don

Yeah, I was kind of wondering about that. My main interest is the valve events to do some calculations on the dynamic compression. Jake mentioned earlier that he was running a static compression of 9.6:1. He seems to know the tricks on getting engines to run on higher than average compression ratios. I'm guessing the .035 deck helped with this also?

Thu Dec 30, 2010 8:34 pm

One of the ways I've been successful with CRs that were only believable a decade or so ago by me, John C and a couple others has been closely related to camshaft selection..

Now, with this engine there wasn't any calculations, no targets, no huge desires and I put all of about 20 minutes of thought into the design of it. I basically wanted to run the Engle Lifters with an Engle cam to get some oil samples to see how my Snake Oil products would jive with Engle products. This is for the future, at some point I'll start selling the oil to the public and as always, I want to know exactly how it works with as many components other than my own as possible. Basically I had Engle fax me timing cards on every cam they had for a T1, I looked at them and say the FK 41, decided to open up the lobe centers based on my experience with tight deck and higher CR on pump gas.

The cam was ran straight up and we didn't even take the time to degree the cam. The engine was assembled just the way that most people reading this thread would build it- my Nephew simply bolted it together and it was what it was..

Other than being balanced super well and having equal decks and +/-1cc on all the chambers nothing special was checked, and that work was from 2000 or so when I first built this engine for my friend.

I honestly don't know how the engine will respond to this CR and camshaft in hot weather and I could not care less. Based on my previous experience I'd say that the engine has a little too high of static CR for this camshaft. Thats part of R&D and in my world that "R" stands for "risk" and not research.

How would the engine have responded to a standard 108 L/C?? Well, I'll never know... We pulled the cylinder shims out of the engine that it ran before, flycut the heads a bit and the CR came in at 9.6:1, I was hoping for 10:1... remember, I want this baby to build some heat since I'll be driving it mostly in winter.

If the combo runs hot in the summer, it'll just melt it's self down and we'll see what melts first and slap it back together. Hot oil temps?? Great! That means I can use the engine to further develop oils that maintain their pressures at elevated temperatures.

As far as why I chose the 41 grind, and how I chose it for the engine with these positive results, I'll not divulge.. What I have learned can't be explained and even if it could I wouldn't do it. Could I go on some tech babble filled paragraph saying how it all works? Certainly, but no one would understand it. The school of experience, trial and error, risk and development and plain old paying attention has taught me and everyone under my roof well.

Now, what I consider to be a true accomplishment is that we are able to have a civil conversation about an engine thats running 9.6:1 static CR on pump gas, no matter what cam is installed. John C and I fought tooth and nail at the turn of the century with people all over that said this could not be done.. Those readers of the "Blue Bible" either shut up, went underground or finally realized they were wrong...

That said, this thread has been more popular than I ever would have thought when I posted it. My time for forums is near non-existant these days (two growing businesses and diversified focus) and my posts on forums other than my own won't be occurring from this point forward. Its good to go out with a positive thread thats been popular.

Fri Dec 31, 2010 4:20 am

kinda related but diffrent, i live in virginia and sand rail use is more in the mug buggy thing, crawling through heavy woods looking for hills to shoot or holes to dig through, me and a friend built a couple ( CHEAP ) buggy motors for off idle performance ,,,,,,, 88mm slip ins ( mud buggy not for longevity) lightend flywheel ,stock crank (youll never get to spin it up anyways) stock cam (off idle performance,never rpm anyways) ..>>>>> THE TRICK >>> single port heads flycut as much as your machinst dares with single hi rev springs and single port kadrons ( for the accelerator pump shot prettymuch) now this combo wont pull past 4000 for crap but at 800 to 3000 or so will flat out snap your neck!!!!!!!..........im shure theres a better cam for this but we did em on the cheap .................................fabricator john

Sun Jan 02, 2011 11:40 am

Here is the recipe:
69X88
DPR 69mm CT/WT crank
Stock 311B rods
FK 41 cam, 112* LC
.035 deck, 9.6:1 CR static
Single Dellorto 40 with 34 vents
Genuine 041 heads, no port work, competition valve job, port fluffing only
1.4 ratio rocker
Manton pushrods ... :wink: This is an excelent post, thread!! Yes there is something to throw the book out! and wing it! I too have found that CR depends on cam design , and its how a combo applies the power , torque to the ground that counts!