TheSamba.com :: View topic

Thu Aug 11, 2011 3:41 am

Hello all!
Iam wanting to build 2110 engine for my bus(71). Not something for ultimate top speeds, but something with lots of torque.To get the bus going.

I already have build a new 1600 in the bus, and i want to keep then engine as a whole to a have a spare motor. I want the 2110 to be a fun project, that id build slowly over time. Project on getting the rimco super case, bored for 90.5 or 92 and clearanced for stroker crank from cip1 with 90.5*82 pistons.
Ive read different engine combos, and some technical info aswell and still have some questions.

First of all, what type of cam should i choose? Keeping in mind, torque, reliability, good engine life, with still the possibility of getting decent speed on the highway.
What type of rockers to go with that cam?

How do i choose the right compression and how do i set it?

As for the pushrod length, is there a way to calculate it, or its a question of getting an ajustable pushrod and finding the right length.

I know a heads will be a big part of the budget, how i choose what will unleash the best of my engine without breaking the bank. I was looking at the aircooled.net level 5.5 heads but it seems like they do not ship them outside the us...
Any good heads suggestion around 1k a pair?

As for carburetion system, iam thinking of going with kaddieshack rebuilt kadrons with the vacuum port to use the svda.
Is this a wise choice? Also, my bus has the brake booster system where will that connect on the new engine?

For cooling, i already have a external oil cooler on the bus with a filter aswell. My 1600 does still have the cooler in the fan. What about the bigger engine, keep the doghouse cooler?
Stock cooling tins without the heater box system is good enough?

I know this is alot of questions, iam still new to all this. Hopefully i can get the right kind of help and input from you all!

Thanks in advance!!

Thu Aug 11, 2011 7:04 am

To pick a cam you have to decide on how high you want it to rev.
5000 rpm redline- Engle W100 with 1.25 rockers, FK65 or FK41 with 1.4's. Target compression- 8-8 1/4:1
5500 rpm- W110 (again with 1.25's to get enough lift to make use of the ported big valve heads you'll be using), FK7 or FK42 with 1.4's. 8 1/2-8 3/4:1
I'm quoting Engle cams because I know them. There are lots of other cams that are suitable.

The important detail with cams is to look and compare the duration @ 0.050" figures. You also want the cam/rocker combo to give up around 1.2" lift for good power throughout the rpm range with ported heads. For example, using a W100 or W110 with 1.1:1 rockers only nets .420-.430" lift, leaving power on the table and not utilizing that expensive porting you worked so hard to pay for. The FK41 and 42 would be good choices, having probably the best low end torque because of the fast lobe ramps, but because of those same fast ramps they are known to be hard on lifter bores. The solution is to have the lifter bores sleeved with bronze bushing material (Brothers and Rimco do this in the U.S.). I believe it's 150-$200 + shipping. I don't know of anyone outside the US that does it.

Pushrod length will have to be decided as you trial assemble the motor with an adjustable pushrod. Steve and Greg Tims (Performance Workshop- I think they advertise here) will ship heads anywhere I believe. I'm sure there are others. Some 40mm Webers or Dellortos would be a bette choice than the Kadrons for a big motor such as this. By the time you do the necessary mods to them (bigger throttle plates for starters) you've spent enough money to buy the dual dual throats. Keep the doghouse cooler (and thermostat) and all the tin. The external cooler will be insurance. Make sure there is a thermostat for it and of course use the filter. A blueprinted 26mm oil pump will be more than enough.
Any more questions, just ask.

Just my 2 1/2 cents (I'm Canadian eh). Al

Thu Aug 11, 2011 9:41 am

http://www.aircooled.net/gnrlsite/resource/articles/t1hpeng.htm

Thu Aug 11, 2011 10:31 am

ALB's post is a good guideline so read it carefully. I would stay away from high ratio rockers for the greatest engine life. Stick with about a w-110 cam or equivalent Cb or Web cam. 8:1 compression, dual 40 webers, good exhaust, SVDA distributor. Use ALL the sheet metal on the engine for proper cooling.

RC

Thu Aug 11, 2011 12:23 pm

I installed a 2110 in my 1972 bus years ago.
I got about 18-22mpg when cruising at 3600-4200rpm

You may want to install a Tachometer on your current set up and note at what RPM range you spend the most time in and choose your combination that way. I found that the Bus can rev up pretty quick and cruise about 1000 rpm higher than a bug.

NOTE: My engine was a tuned down version of what I had in my bug. I changed the heads from Performance Technology stage 7's to stage 5's, lowered the compression from 10.5:1 to 8.0:1 and replaced the 48IDA's to 40DCNF's. The 407S is very similar to an Engle W125. If I was to do that over again, I would choose a cam that was a little quieter. Other than that, the power was very good.

2110
RIMCO case .020 line bore, thrust cut, lifter holes rebushed.
82mm Demello crank
12lb FW
1700 Kennedy
Stock Sach disc
90.5B Cima
RIMCO Super Rods
40DCNF14’s 32mm venturis
Norris 407S (notched for stroker)
Solid shafts Claudes Buggies
1.25 rockers Claude’s Buggies (Porsche adj screws)
Berg POTL lifters.
Manton Pushrods
40X35.5 Stage 5 Performance Technology
8.0:1 compression .055 deck height
Fourtuned 1.5” merged exhaust single muffler
Berg Full flow System
1.5QT sump
1971 Super Beetle shroud and oil cooler

Hope this helps 8)

Thu Aug 11, 2011 1:18 pm

You're on the right track for sure.

Don't worry so much about heads just get a nice off the shelf set of 40x35.5 heads with single HD springs.

I'm a big fan of the FK-41 w/1.25:1 street style rockers.

I would move up to the 2275cc using a set of fitted 94s as there is no replacement for displacement!

I have been dishing my 94s as well to add 10 CCs of chamber which allows me to get .040" deck hieght while maintaining mid 8:1 compression ratio.

Because you are going 82 crank your engine will be 1600 width if you use the "B" pistons. This will allow you to use the stock aluminum pushrods which have worked great for me in the last 10 engines I have put together.

Use a 3.5qt deep sump and all the correct tin and you will have years of use out of your torque monster engine.

Gary.

Thu Aug 11, 2011 8:41 pm

Do not overlook the dynamic balance of the entire rotating assembly.Smooth running, less heat all around good money spent and it is relatively cheap too!

Fri Aug 12, 2011 3:53 am

Wow! Lots of good info!
ALB, you mention the cam/rocker combo need to give 1.2'' lift, how do you calculate this?
Some say FK41 with 1.4s others FK41 with 1.25.
Wich one will help me devlopp the most out of the engine while keeping longevity.

Carb, Dual 44 IDF, good enough? do they have the vacuum port for the svda? i know aircooled give you the option to add the brake booster port.

Other then cb performance, aircooled.net and cip1, where can i look online for parts?

Thanks alot for all the help!
I think i will go and read(again) the camshaft chapter of the how to hot rod a vw book.

Fri Aug 12, 2011 6:32 am

To calculate the at the valve lift- multiply the cam lift by the the rocker ratio. For example; The cam lift of an Engle W110 is .392 That figure multiplied by 1.1 (stock rockers) = .431 Subtract valve lash (.006) and valve lift is .425

Take the same cam and use 1.25 rockers and now the formula is .392 x 1.25 = .490 Subtract valve lash and the lift at the valve = .484"

When you set up the motor if you measure the valve lift it may not be exactly as calculated; the fact that the pushrods are not exerting their force in a straight line and the rockers may change ratio slightly (everyone has their own idea how to build the perfect rocker) as they swing through their arc can do funny things to the lift you think you should be getting. A few thousandths lower (or higher) is not a big deal.
Time for work; gotta go.

Fri Aug 12, 2011 7:42 am

Ok here I come from way out there!! If this was a Bug you would not be hearing from me.

It is a Bus, VW put all their engineers to work to make an torque monster for the heavy 73 and later buses. Why take the much weaker T-1 case that was built for a 1700 lb car and put it in a two ton vehicle. History tells us the average T-1 in a Bug needs a valve job at 80k. You are trying to put your hard earned money into a Time Bomb. Logic will tell you if a T-1 in the light bug is going to have problems the Heavy bus will have to have them sooner and it can be much sooner.
A Stock 1700cc T-4 will out torque the 2110 T-1 and you have 1800 and 2000 stock engines people want to give away. Most come with dished pistons to keep the compression down and engine cool. I can't believe the supermarket list of parts the guys listed to make an engine that already exists and will last. The only thing to do is convert it to an Upright and that including the engine will be much less then the T-1 engine build. No issue with a T-4 going to 100k in a bus. Talk to some guys that have done it.

Fri Aug 12, 2011 8:38 am

nextgen wrote: A Stock 1700cc T-4 will out torque the 2110 T-1
I have nothing against Type IV engines and think they are great bus engines, but I have to call BS on that claim. Type IV engines are great, but they don't defy the laws of physics. :P Torque is primarily a function of displacement and a 2110 Type I engine will likely produce significantly more torque than a stock 1679 cc Type IV. In fact, if you look at the rated hp and torque of a 1700 Type IV from a 1973 Bus and compare it to a 1600 DP Type I from a 1973 Beetle (like years used to ensure that both are rated using SAE net hp and torque figures, unlike pre-1973 ratings, which were gross hp/torque), the torque difference is only 9 lb-ft.

1600 DP from 1973 Beetle: 46 hp @ 4,000 rpm/72 lb-ft @ 2,800 rpm
1700 Type IV from 1973 Bus: 63 hp @ 4,800 rpm/81 lb-ft @ 3,200 rpm

Even a mild 2110 hp Type I, i.e., W110 cam, ported and polished stock heads, dual Dellorto 40s, etc., likely puts out around 120 hp and 100+ lb-ft of torque. Those figures are probably easily and reliably met with a mildly warmed over 2-liter or 2,056 cc Type IV engine running the same induction, but not a stock 1700.

Fri Aug 12, 2011 8:52 am

nextgen wrote: Ok here I come from way out there!! If this was a Bug you would not be hearing from me.

It is a Bus, VW put all their engineers to work to make an torque monster for the heavy 73 and later buses. Why take the much weaker T-1 case that was built for a 1700 lb car and put it in a two ton vehicle. History tells us the average T-1 in a Bug needs a valve job at 80k. You are trying to put your hard earned money into a Time Bomb. Logic will tell you if a T-1 in the light bug is going to have problems the Heavy bus will have to have them sooner and it can be much sooner.
A Stock 1700cc T-4 will out torque the 2110 T-1 and you have 1800 and 2000 stock engines people want to give away. Most come with dished pistons to keep the compression down and engine cool. I can't believe the supermarket list of parts the guys listed to make an engine that already exists and will last. The only thing to do is convert it to an Upright and that including the engine will be much less then the T-1 engine build. No issue with a T-4 going to 100k in a bus. Talk to some guys that have done it.

Hmmm. I would like to see that one. I installed a set of dual 40 IDF's and a header on my 1700cc T-4 bus and did not gain more torque than my 2110.

From my personal experience of installing a T-1 2110cc in a 1972 Bus:
My list is what I installed. I did not imply that my combination would out last a T4 or run untouched for 100K. My combo was a daily driver for 6 years 50,000mi until I removed the engine and swapped in a Mazda Rotary engine.

You bring up very good points for the durability and design of the T-4 engine. But, that was not the question. When I build another Bus, I am going to see Jake Raby.

Fri Aug 12, 2011 10:06 am

sactojesse wrote: nextgen wrote: A Stock 1700cc T-4 will out torque the 2110 T-1
I have nothing against Type IV engines and think they are great bus engines, but I have to call BS on that claim. Type IV engines are great, but they don't defy the laws of physics. :P Torque is primarily a function of displacement and a 2110 Type I engine will likely produce significantly more torque than a stock 1679 cc Type IV. In fact, if you look at the rated hp and torque of a 1700 Type IV from a 1973 Bus and compare it to a 1600 DP Type I from a 1973 Beetle (like years used to ensure that both are rated using SAE net hp and torque figures, unlike pre-1973 ratings, which were gross hp/torque), the torque difference is only 9 lb-ft.

1600 DP from 1973 Beetle: 46 hp @ 4,000 rpm/72 lb-ft @ 2,800 rpm
1700 Type IV from 1973 Bus: 63 hp @ 4,800 rpm/81 lb-ft @ 3,200 rpm

Even a mild 2110 hp Type I, i.e., W110 cam, ported and polished stock heads, dual Dellorto 40s, etc., likely puts out around 120 hp and 100+ lb-ft of torque. Those figures are probably easily and reliably met with a mildly warmed over 2-liter or 2,056 cc Type IV engine running the same induction, but not a stock 1700.
a built 2110 will definitely have more tq and hp then a 1700 type 4. Id be willing to guess that that same 2110 built would be close maybe even more than a type 4 2000.

Fri Aug 12, 2011 11:16 am

I think I will clarify what nexgen was trying to say. From the perspective of numbers, the Type 1 2110 will have higher torque numbers. And the torque curve will also match close to what the HP numbers will be. A stock type 4 1700 has a much higher torque curve starting at a lower rpm...something that a bus can use more readily to push 2 tons of weight.

There is no point in having lots of HP and torque, if it is only available in an 800-1000 rpm power band. With a lighter vehicle, such as a beetle, this matters a lot less. In a 2 ton bus, it makes all the difference in the world.

Fri Aug 12, 2011 11:36 am

Csaba wrote: I think I will clarify what nexgen was trying to say. From the perspective of numbers, the Type 1 2110 will have higher torque numbers. And the torque curve will also match close to what the HP numbers will be. A stock type 4 1700 has a much higher torque curve starting at a lower rpm...something that a bus can use more readily to push 2 tons of weight.

There is no point in having lots of HP and torque, if it is only available in an 800-1000 rpm power band. With a lighter vehicle, such as a beetle, this matters a lot less. In a 2 ton bus, it makes all the difference in the world.

The question was "I want to install a T1 2110 in his 1971 Bus." A 1971 Bus is a T1. So enough about the T4 engineers.

The 1971 and 1972 bus are nearly identical in weight and size. the 1972 had a T2 1700cc engine. My engine was hurting at the time so I installed a T1 2110 and resealed the engine compartment and went from there.

I actually installed and lived with a 2110 in my bus. I am relaying real experience to this thread. My 2110 ran head and shoulders above my "stock" 1700cc T4 regardless of what the "engineers say."

As for a "narrow" powerband, think again. I could take off in 2nd gear and shift to 4th with no problems.

I am very aware of the benefits and merits of a well built T4. Like I said my next bus with be Raby Powered.

Sorry for the thread jack.

Let's get back to real experiences with a 2110 in a T1 bus.....

Fri Aug 12, 2011 11:57 am

The point was to offer an alternative. You have made your point with your experience, and it is very valid.

I hope you can pay others enough respect to extoll the virtues of their recommendations, without dismissing them out of hand as invalid.

Fri Aug 12, 2011 12:46 pm

Csaba I was not getting into the data sheets, so I like to thank you for explaining were I was coming from.

Jfats808- I had no idea of your knowledge of T-4 engines, so it was a suggestion . There a alot of guys that only know T-1 and say ok I will look into it. I was just trying to help, I take no offense, you say it is a T-1 bus and you want to run a T-1 engine.
Do what you please with your money. Cool it's good you made up your mind.

Fri Aug 12, 2011 1:12 pm

Csaba wrote: The point was to offer an alternative. You have made your point with your experience, and it is very valid.

I hope you can pay others enough respect to extoll the virtues of their recommendations, without dismissing them out of hand as invalid.

I am by no means a cyber-bully and respect these opinions very much. I am paying respect by relaying over 30 years of my VW aircooled experience by offering my experience to the question about installing a 2110cc in a T1 bus.

I did not see where he asked for an alternative.

Where am I dismissing any recommendations and opinions as invalid?

I agreed that the T4 is much more durable but in stock trim will no way outpower a well warmed over 2110.

I have owned and driven both so I do know this is not true.

As for durability I cannot say for sure because I had a lifter and cylinder head fail in my overhauled 1700cc T2 which caused me to have to install my 2110. The lifter issue aside the T4 has alot of potential and is by design more durable.

I have even offered a credible source for quality T4 knowledge and parts. (see Jake Raby)

Fri Aug 12, 2011 1:59 pm

67beetle, all is cool, I should have not tossed in the 1700 without explaining what I was trying to get at about the torque curve.

T-1 and T-4 are two completely different engines when it comes to getting and feeling torque and power. T-1's rev faster and are better for dragging with a light car. T-4's have constant torque and are highway monsters, especially above 60 mph. Known for full torque through out the range. Due to in part the much larger crank, rods and pistons and strokes. 2.0's have stock 71mm stroke. Great for cool running engines at highway speeds of 75 all day. That is why it was used in the Porsche 914 which had a top speed of 120 mph. Taking a stock 2.0 T-4 and putting just a cam in it and everything else the same on a 2.0 T-1, both engines will be completely different. Maybe even the same hp but both will have power and torque at different time and torque patterns.

Fri Aug 12, 2011 2:30 pm

nextgen wrote: 67beetle, all is cool, I should have not tossed in the 1700 without explaining what I was trying to get at about the torque curve.

T-1 and T-4 are two completely different engines when it comes to getting and feeling torque and power. T-1's rev faster and are better for dragging with a light car. T-4's have constant torque and are highway monsters, especially above 60 mph. Known for full torque through out the range. Due to in part the much larger crank, rods and pistons and strokes. 2.0's have stock 71mm stroke. Great for cool running engines at highway speeds of 75 all day. That is why it was used in the Porsche 914 which had a top speed of 120 mph. Taking a stock 2.0 T-4 and putting just a cam in it and everything else the same on a 2.0 T-1, both engines will be completely different. Maybe even the same hp but both will have power and torque at different time and torque patterns.

No worries

I agree about the T4. I used to take my bus on fishing trips where I would have to drive over 400 miles to get to the lake. My brother, my buddy and I would pile our stuff in the bus on a friday after work and litterally have the throttle to the floor for 5 -6 hours at a time. Top speed was about 80mph but not a peep out of the 1700cc.

That is one thing I have not tried is to actually build up a T4. My experience with the T4 ended in 1985 when my lifters and cylinder head burnt up due to a crappy overhaul and less than standard lifters. This was the time I started seeing poor lifters in both T1 and T4.

From 1985 till 2004 I had T1 engines in my bus.