TheSamba.com :: View topic - Early Cars and Carbs -What fits?

Sun Aug 23, 2020 9:56 pm

Since I had a long drawn out story of how this all came about and then I accidentally closed chrome...so you all get the short version. To be clear, early cars up to chassis number #221974 (August of 63, 64 model year) have a smaller engine bay as seen below (old pic from when I first got the car)

and the stock single port prior to this removal

One thing to note, is the RHS side of the engine bay has a little more room, presumably to allow for engine movement.

I started looking for more power after reading up on stroker motors running a stock PICT-34, this lead me to some PM's with Alstrup in regards to the early engine bay, stock PHN and larger displacements. he is a wealth of knowledge and advised that the PHN would not really support much more than stock. In order to test what would and not fit, I purchased a used single port engine that I proceeded to strip of its internals and locate a spare set of dual port heads.

For carbs I had on hand PDSIT solex with dual and single port manifolds, ICT's and 40MM HPMX's. Just for fun I also grabbed a stock fuel injection end casting... as a 1600cc megasquirt turbo motor would be fun.

So why do this? First I had a rear main or input shaft seal that was leaking (turned out it is the input shaft seal) so the motor had to come out, secondly, I live in the foothills of Alberta, so any travel west leads a lot to be desired in regards to hill climbing or more lack thereof of hill climbing capability.

First up D-jet end casting...Nope, not going to work, could not get the casting to sit flat on the head.

Then it was on to the stock Solex with Dual port manifolds - with body mods they could be made to fit....but just say NO! to body mods. You will note I didn"t bolt them to the heads as the idle cutoff's were hitting the body.

I tried the ICT's with both stock and Weber manifolds as well, but had the same results as the Solex...So I did not take pics and moved onto the IDF's as my dreams of being able ascend hills in a single bound were quickly fading.

A standard steel ruler just fits.

As you can see the IDF's just fit, but would touch with any motor movement. However, I think they could be made to work. The DP heads have the fuel injection spacers already on them and think adding more would push the carbs out, but I played with raising the transmission about 1/2" and it gave me enough room, but would mean fitting air cleaners would be a nightmare, but it is a possibility, Below was 1/4" raise to see what the minimum raise I could get away with.

Then I dropped the motor and installed a set of SP heads.

Solex -

These look to a viable option with a little mod (grinding) to the carb linkage as they would just touch at full throttle.

Then I mounted up the ICT's on the Solex SP manifolds.... and we have a winner!!!

Enough room that nothing hits, and possibly enough room for air filters or maybe even a modded stock air cleaner assembly.

So this is where my research begins, what motor to build that the ICT's will run that will give me a little extra zip?

Oh and for fun, I have a type IV (914 2.0L) mock up engine kicking around... with some custom short manifolds I made years ago.

and look at all that room!!! I want to keep the car six volt and have found some of the parts if I decide to go to the type IV (6v alternator & fuel pump, 12v starter will need to be rewound)

I have installed the type IV tin and marked on it where it would need to be cut and reworked to fit, but that will only happen if I move forward with the conversion. The stock engine is going back in tomorrow, and the new engine build won't commence until this fall/winter.

Sun Aug 23, 2020 10:38 pm

On D-Jet, there is about a 8 or 9 mm thick phenolic spacer that sits between the head and the manifold that may solve your issue. Doubling up on these and using longer studs may also help. I'd also suggest using a J shaped metal fuel line between the injector and the rail for better clearance (oriented more straight up than angled out as stock), attached close in to the injector with a short rubber coupler.

Make sense?

I think D-Jet may be your best bet.

If you want to go larger displacement than stock D-Jet will work admirably with blue (Mercedes 280SE 4.5) injectors and stock cam on a 1776.

Sun Aug 23, 2020 11:01 pm

Tram wrote: On D-Jet, there is about a 8 or 9 mm thick phenolic spacer that sits between the head and the manifold that may solve your issue. Doubling up on these and using longer studs may also help. I'd also suggest using a J shaped metal fuel line between the injector and the rail for better clearance (oriented more straight up than angled out as stock), attached close in to the injector with a short rubber coupler.

Make sense?

I think D-Jet may be your best bet.

If you want to go larger displacement than stock D-Jet will work admirably with blue (Mercedes 280SE 4.5) injectors and stock cam on a 1776.

Sorry, was posting, then editing so I didn't lose the info again. The DP heads are fuel injection heads and have the spacers. Agreed that changing out the injectors and fuel rail could make it fit, but then it would require changing over to 12v, which I was trying to avoid...unless I was going the turbo/megasquirt route.

Sun Aug 23, 2020 11:22 pm

Jason37 wrote: Tram wrote: On D-Jet, there is about a 8 or 9 mm thick phenolic spacer that sits between the head and the manifold that may solve your issue. Doubling up on these and using longer studs may also help. I'd also suggest using a J shaped metal fuel line between the injector and the rail for better clearance (oriented more straight up than angled out as stock), attached close in to the injector with a short rubber coupler.

Make sense?

I think D-Jet may be your best bet.

If you want to go larger displacement than stock D-Jet will work admirably with blue (Mercedes 280SE 4.5) injectors and stock cam on a 1776.

Sorry, was posting, then editing so I didn't lose the info again. The DP heads are fuel injection heads and have the spacers. Agreed that changing out the injectors and fuel rail could make it fit, but then it would require changing over to 12v, which I was trying to avoid...unless I was going the turbo/megasquirt route.

I forget what the M code was offhand, but 12v was an option from 1963 on on these cars so technically correct. If it's the pain in the ass factor, just run a voltage drop (like a chrysler ballast resistor) in line for the wipers and change your bulbs, relays, gen, fan housing, etc. You can eave the 6v starter and flywheel, it won't hurt anything.

Just options.

You may find OE single port single carb stock is quite adequate, though. Just sayin'. :wink:

Sun Aug 23, 2020 11:34 pm

Hahaha, I’ve been driving the car with the stock single port for the last two years, and have just over 4000 miles on it. I was given the opportunity to drive a friends car with a 1968cc running a stock PICT 34 and if left me wanting that same low end punch in mine. The idea thing would be to fab a new intake that flowed a little more, and find another sidedraft carb that is a little larger. Maybe an S&S Harley carb would fit the bill.

Mon Aug 24, 2020 11:07 am

Jason37 wrote:
Oh and for fun, I have a type IV (914 2.0L) mock up engine kicking around... with some custom short manifolds I made years ago.

and look at all that room!!! I want to keep the car six volt and have found some of the parts if I decide to go to the type IV (6v alternator & fuel pump, 12v starter will need to be rewound)

I have installed the type IV tin and marked on it where it would need to be cut and reworked to fit, but that will only happen if I move forward with the conversion. The stock engine is going back in tomorrow, and the new engine build won't commence until this fall/winter.

That T-4 set up looks like the best for clearance in an early car. Other than your desire to keep it 6 volt, I'd probably go with that combo for the best bump in power. I know my son really enjoys the bump in power in his Roadster from a 1600 dual port Weber ICT combo to his 1.7L t-4 dual Weber ICT combo. Between the slightly larger cylinders, and higher compression, it adds up enough, but he still wants to do a 2.0L someday (using the 1.7 to learn from). That and the cool exhaust set up (ceramic coated bus header).

Mon Aug 24, 2020 11:19 am

Jason37 wrote: Hahaha, I’ve been driving the car with the stock single port for the last two years, and have just over 4000 miles on it. I was given the opportunity to drive a friends car with a 1968cc running a stock PICT 34 and if left me wanting that same low end punch in mine. The idea thing would be to fab a new intake that flowed a little more, and find another sidedraft carb that is a little larger. Maybe an S&S Harley carb would fit the bill.

Just re- jet an original or ream your original jets- maybe venturi too. A machine shop might be able to handle the venturi. A bigger intake may be able to be fabbed, but the ports in the heads are still the same unless you plan to rework all of that as well.

Mon Aug 24, 2020 4:33 pm

1968cc with a 34 pict , that's like a sprinting breathing through a straw

the T4 looks like a good fit

side draft
https://www.thesamba.com/vw/forum/viewtopic.php?t=690787

Mon Aug 24, 2020 7:33 pm

Tram wrote: Jason37 wrote: Hahaha, I’ve been driving the car with the stock single port for the last two years, and have just over 4000 miles on it. I was given the opportunity to drive a friends car with a 1968cc running a stock PICT 34 and if left me wanting that same low end punch in mine. The idea thing would be to fab a new intake that flowed a little more, and find another sidedraft carb that is a little larger. Maybe an S&S Harley carb would fit the bill.

Just re- jet an original or ream your original jets- maybe venturi too. A machine shop might be able to handle the venturi. A bigger intake may be able to be fabbed, but the ports in the heads are still the same unless you plan to rework all of that as well.

The manifold would have to made larger, to support and real increase in displacement. The venturi is integral to the carb and not removable as it is in the PICT series. One might be able to open it up somewhat for a bigger butterfly.

I have the mock motor on the stand so I can play with intakes. One thought was type 1 dual port end castings mated to a new center section. Preheat tube would have to be attached and then wrapped to keep the heat in. The idea of 1791 (78mm stroke with 85.5 B pistons) is enticing as I would have to ship the case and heads to be machined for larger pistons.

Mon Aug 24, 2020 7:38 pm

W1K1 wrote: 1968cc with a 34 pict , that's like a sprinting breathing through a straw

the T4 looks like a good fit

side draft
https://www.thesamba.com/vw/forum/viewtopic.php?t=690787

It’s an interesting motor, has great low end grunt, and is naturally rev limited. It utilizes stock heads, and cam.

I think I’ve searched and read every side draft early car post on here. The side draft DCOE is a neat concept, but not being able to run an air filter would be an issue.

Tue Aug 25, 2020 7:39 am

Blow through turbo with megasquirt with a D-jet intake. Chinese turbos work, the cost of the megasquirt and extras is not that much more than carbs and ignition. Any size engine that you want, no clearance issues, mount the air cleaner anywhere, all the power in the universe-itty bitty living space. It is already different from stock.

OR, use the ICT's. 1760 (85.5x74) counterweight crank, balanced. Keep the cam smaller, like at most a Web 218/119, or stock with 1.4 rockers, or an Engle 100 on 105lc. It won't scream, but it should grunt. Classic dual carb cool

Tue Aug 25, 2020 10:51 am

rosevillain wrote: Blow through turbo with megasquirt with a D-jet intake. Chinese turbos work, the cost of the megasquirt and extras is not that much more than carbs and ignition. Any size engine that you want, no clearance issues, mount the air cleaner anywhere, all the power in the universe-itty bitty living space. It is already different from stock.

OR, use the ICT's. 1760 (85.5x74) counterweight crank, balanced. Keep the cam smaller, like at most a Web 218/119, or stock with 1.4 rockers, or an Engle 100 on 105lc. It won't scream, but it should grunt. Classic dual carb cool

The turbo was one of the plans, but the stock D-jet intakes do not fit, at least in stock form. to make them fit the injectors would have to be moved up the intake track to clear the body, or different injectors and fuel rails.

As for a mini stroker, I am leaning towards a 78.4 X 85.5 with B type pistons. the 4.5 mm longer stroke is countered by the 4.5 mm pin height difference, leaving the motor at stock or at least as close to stock width as possible. Cam choice would be CB 2280 or 2239.

Tue Aug 25, 2020 6:06 pm

I enjoyed reading about, and seeing your various combinations. Hands-on testing for verification instead of just conjecture.

I offer 2 suggestions:
1. DP heads and IDFs: Since you have room to the inside of the manifold, how about grinding the bottom of the manifold where it mounts against the head a small amount (say 1/8") in a taper, then grind the top of the manifold where the carb sits the same amount but the taper goes in the opposite direction? This would make the manifold more vertical and thereby bring the outer face of the carb away from the engine bay sidewall.

Since you're tilting the manifold, the two holes for the head studs at the manifold base would need to be redrilled to match the new angle. Or use a round file such as a chain saw sharpening file. Seems that the flat surface where the mounting washers and nuts sit on the top side of the manifold flange base would also need to be ground to the same angle so that the flats are parallel to the head mounting flange and perpendicular to the mounting stud axis.

2. SP heads and ICTs: You probably remember the HotVWs engine build series for a 1745 cc (85.5 bore x 76 mm stroke)? Yes, they used dual-port heads, though theirs were the Mexican/fuel-injected heads with the smaller valves. First version of the engine started with ICTs. Part 1 is here; others are in the same site. https://www.cbperformance.com/Articles.asp?ID=300
You could vary the build to make an 1800 (88 bore x 74 stroke). Follow basic flow improvements on the SP heads per Samba thread https://www.thesamba.com/vw/forum/viewtopic.php?t=682243&highlight=flow+improvement and use them instead of the series' DP's.

Tue Aug 25, 2020 6:50 pm

Bobnotch wrote: Jason37 wrote:
Oh and for fun, I have a type IV (914 2.0L) mock up engine kicking around... with some custom short manifolds I made years ago.

and look at all that room!!! I want to keep the car six volt and have found some of the parts if I decide to go to the type IV (6v alternator & fuel pump, 12v starter will need to be rewound)

I have installed the type IV tin and marked on it where it would need to be cut and reworked to fit, but that will only happen if I move forward with the conversion. The stock engine is going back in tomorrow, and the new engine build won't commence until this fall/winter.

That T-4 set up looks like the best for clearance in an early car. Other than your desire to keep it 6 volt, I'd probably go with that combo for the best bump in power. I know my son really enjoys the bump in power in his Roadster from a 1600 dual port Weber ICT combo to his 1.7L t-4 dual Weber ICT combo. Between the slightly larger cylinders, and higher compression, it adds up enough, but he still wants to do a 2.0L someday (using the 1.7 to learn from). That and the cool exhaust set up (ceramic coated bus header).

Personally I am T4 biased. If you do go that route, pull out the mixture screws and braze / silver solder some small nuts on them. Otherwise you won't be able to adjust them, especially when the engine is hot. I found out the hard way.

Tue Aug 25, 2020 10:04 pm

Tonight I was offered a set of CB performance fuel injection end castings to try, but I think these would but the throttle body in the wrong location. I’m going to grab them anyways for the next time the motor comes out (driving season will be over here in 6-8 weeks, praying for longer) and then they could be test fitted. The same gentleman also mentioned spacer saver IDF manifolds that flips the carbs around...although they don’t exist for a type three it is something I could fab by cutting and welding the flanges back on. Before I start cutting a set apart, I think I can make a spacer block that would reverse the pattern out of 1/4” aluminum. I would still need to raise the transmission some, but a 1/4 spacer under the stock mounts would probably be enough.

Rome, I like where your heads is at. I could always pie cut the manifold in two spots to achieve the same results. Welding new aluminum will be a treat as most all of the aluminum I have welded is old British motorcycle stuff that has been in service for years and the casting quality is poor at best.

Multi, the type IV is still on the table, not ruling anything out. I have a game plan for it, 6v GM single wire alternator conversion, (really want to keep it 6v, so I can easily swap between the stock and performance) but having trouble locating some to rewind a 12v starter... if that can not be found at a reasonable cost, I will have the 12v gear cut off the flywheel and a 6v gear welded on. There are some lower engine tin and heater boxes I need to source, but all of it is pretty easy after that.

As you can tell I’m still in design/ planning mode and open to any suggestions.

Sat Jan 30, 2021 1:23 pm

Had some spare time in the garage today (waiting on parts) so to occupy the time I thought I would try the ICT’s on a set of dual ports, utilizing the stock dual port manifolds. Long story short...they will fit. You will need to utilize a twist style linkage as the stock manifolds sit closer to the tin and the vacuum port on 3/4 is really close, but it’s another option.

Thu Nov 11, 2021 8:20 pm

You may notice in the pics above I am running the LHS carb reversed. This is because the accelerator pump would have hit the tin. Not wanting to modify early tin I am running it reversed. You may also notice that the angles of the carb linkage is on a greater angle to the RHS carb. To rectify this, I made a new base for the center pull that moved it more towards center.

Sun Jun 26, 2022 8:05 am

Figured I would add the complete and installed motor here.

Using single ports and ICT’s limits the displacement, but built correctly this little 1800 has enough torque to pull hills in forth and cruise very comfortably in traffic.

https://youtube.com/shorts/jGlVYcr-IIc?feature=share

Sun Jun 26, 2022 11:57 am

Damn that looks good in there. Nice work fitting it all in place. 8)

Sun Jun 26, 2022 1:04 pm

Quote: Damn that looks good in there. Nice work fitting it all in place.
x2!

What cam and compression ratio did you use on the 1800?