Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2008 15:28:30 -0600
Reply-To: miguel pacheco <mundopacheco@GMAIL.COM>
Sender: Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From: miguel pacheco <mundopacheco@GMAIL.COM>
Subject: Re: Neil's motor..
In-Reply-To: <192001c8904e$953b9d20$6401a8c0@DJZL7KF1>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Scott, also, from just looking at it, the SVX conversion appears to have a
severely compromised departure angle due to the two extra cylinders. This is
just eyeballing it, though, and it might be an optical delusion...........
On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 3:07 PM, Scott Daniel - Shazam <
scottdaniel@turbovans.com> wrote:
> Given the overall height of vw inline fours,
> It's easy to see why for the diesel vanagon they did the 50 degree
> install.
> ( a shallow wide oil pan is a disadvantage though )
> Given that the whole van and engine bay were designed for an opposed four
> engine an inline four is not really a 'natural.'
> ..............and, start comparing how far below the bottom of the
> flywheel most engines extend. On a waterboxer it's about 3 inches or even
> a
> bit less.
> On all other 'normal engines' - line inline fours, and subaru's
> too........the bottom of the oil pan as much as 6 or 7 inches below the
> bottom of the flywheel. In subaru's we always have to shorten the pan a
> good
> 2 to 2.5 inches to get it reasonably close to what the waterboxer was, as
> far as how far down the bottom of the engine extends.
> The adapters allow for 22.5 degrees I hear also. Which could help for an
> inline four.
> Shortening the pan a little isn't too bad. On my Subaru conversions I do
> that step totally at the very end of the project - when it's all running
> perfectly, oil pressure is good, cooling system - all that, then last
> step
> I shorten the pan as little as possible to fit the installation just
> right.
> And an oil pressure gauge is a nice thing to have then too.
> If you know what Departure Angle is in off roading..........
> The pan sticks right down in a bad place - so it's not just that it's low,
> it's also that it's low in a bad place. The best place for lowest ground
> clearance is directly between the wheels ( left to right speaking that is
> )
> ......at least that doesn't reduce the departure angle at the rear -
> having
> the pan or something else very low a foot or so aft of the rear wheels is
> not desirable.
> But progress is being made ! there is so much that can be seen in
> hindsight so easily.
> Scott
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Vanagon Mailing List [mailto:vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com] On Behalf Of
> neil N
> Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2008 7:13 PM
> To: vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM
> Subject: Re: Neil's motor..
>
> At this point, getting the engine higher and making the carrier higher
> too, is a "next time" thing. That and actually getting the bottom part
> of carrier level! --- :^) I'll be interested to see just how much
> room is needed for clearance between oil pan and carrier when putting
> the engine under a load. I actually went and watched my nephews' '02
> Jetta just to see how much it moved when revved up. Of course it uses
> much more modern stuff. Mounts included. But it didn't move too much
> when revved up. Maybe after this is running, I'll look into correcting
> the bottom part and moving it up a 1/2" or so. Maybe there's a way to
> shorten the oil pan too.
>
> Actually, while following some kind of passenger car today, I took
> notice of how low the oil pan was. Still more clearance on my Westy
> though. I do go on dirt roads sometimes, but if I can, I make sure
> it's rated at 2WD. Lack of ground clearance or not, I hate the thought
> of pounding my van on pot holes etc. any more than needed.
>
> As for keeping it a "full" 2.0, the main reason was to not dick around
> with swapping the head etc. And as I progressed, I thought it might be
> useful to see just how many stock Jetta parts could be used. This
> might help the next person should they decide to do this. More "one
> stop shopping" using donor parts, possibly introducing less variables
> when trying to get it to run, and potentially saving money using stuff
> like the Jetta air box.
>
> I must say, though a very premature comment, that next time, I'd do a
> 50 degree. (Heck for that matter, I might even do a Suby!) Or, find a
> better way to fab the carrier so I could gain a couple inches.
>
> But I really should wait til' I drive it before officially commenting. ---
> ;^)
>
> Neil.
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 3:15 PM, Scott Daniel - Shazam
> <scottdaniel@turbovans.com> wrote:
> > Neil
> > That's great you are keeping the engine a 'full' 2.0.
> > A common trick is to put a 1.8 gas head on a 2.0 gas block - that's for
> > clearance at 50 degrees on the left side of the engine bay.
> > I think it's great you're doing a 15 degree- and I wanna do one of
> those
> > one of these days too - all my inline 4's have been at 50 degrees, and
> I
> > feel there are real advantages to leaving it like it is, and standing
> it
> up
> > in there.
> >
> > And........whatever your cross bar deal is, and that you are happy with
> it,
> > that's all that matters...........BUT, ......I mean
> AND........regarding
> > ground clearance.
> > I was thinking about it the other night, and I realized in ALL car and
> van
> > installations by manufacturers......the pan is always the lowest part.
> All
> > support bars and gross members go around the pan. You don't have a cut
> out
> > in your pan since it's from a sideways front engine car........but,
> since
> > getting the engine as low as is practical is always desired.......you
> look
> > under any car ......volvo, subaru, american front engine V-8, ......and
> the
> > pan is always the lowest part - just to get the engine low as is
> practical
> > and still have decent ground clearance.
> > I think if it was my installation I'd be temped to make a cut out at
> one
> > end of the pan, flywheel end probably, and run my cross bar through
> there.
> > On Subaru engine conversions, whatever support bar is used, it always
> > goes around the end of the pan, either forward or at the rear, and the
> pan
> > is the lowest part.
> > Anyway ! you having fun is the most important part.
> > Oh......last thought, on 2WD I fudge the whole engine up as much as 2
> solid
> > inches - as long as the shift linkage angle doesn't get too extreme or
> > weird, there's room to raise the engine quite a bit compared to stock.
> > Scott
> > www.turbovans.com
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Vanagon Mailing List [mailto:vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com] On Behalf
> Of
> > neil N
> > Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2008 8:43 AM
> > To: vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM
> > Subject: Re: Neil's motor..
> >
> >
> >
> > Thanks for the tips Don.
> >
> > It's a different set up than a "diesel" type of install. It's a stock
> > Jetta ABA 2.0 mounted at 15 degrees. Much more upright. Plus it keeps
> > the stock 2.0 head and Motronic FI. This changes things a lot over a
> > given VW I4 using a 1.8 head. But, it presents similar needs. Just
> > different locations. That I can see........ so far!
> >
> > Appreciate you telling me what's in your rig. The ducting from air
> > intake plenum to air box may end up being a combination of hard and
> > flexible materials. This would enable me to use the stock air intake
> > boot..... if my plan works that is!
> >
> > I've never seen brake ducting before, but I'll bet there's some kind
> > of residential HVAC ducting I could use for both the air box snorkel
> > and the ducting to the throttle body.
> >
> > Here's a couple of low res pics (less than 50kb each). In one, you can
> > see how I've placed the stock air intake boot.
> >
> >
>
> http://tubaneil.googlepages.com/Aircleanertestfitsmall.jpg/Aircleanertestfit
> > small-full;init:.jpg
> >
> >
>
> http://tubaneil.googlepages.com/Engineroughedin1small.jpg/Engineroughedin1sm
> > all-full;init:.jpg
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Neil.
> >
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 5:46 AM, Don Hanson <dhanson@gorge.net> wrote:
> > > Hey Neil,
> > >
> > > I haven't been bringing up your pics of the engine mounts, etc.
> because
> > I
> > > have this *glacial* dial-up internet connection here at my house out
> in
> > the
> > > sticks, but it sounds like you are well on the way.
> > > A suggestion, as I see you mentioned connecting your air cleaner
> > somehow.
> > > In my inline four, the conversion was done when I got it, but the
> > convertor
> > > used thin-wall aluminum irrigation sprinkler pipe to fabricate the
> > intake
> > > runner from the airbox over to the plenum and it looks like it might
> have
> > > been fairly simple for him. The end result is quite sturdy to work
> with
> > > when you must dink around with it. My air cleaner is in the stock
> > > position(?) and the 'duct work' crosses the engine compartment at
> the
> > front
> > > right along the edge of the access hatch, with another snorkel out
> of
> the
> > > aircleaner, made of brake ducting, going up into the right side
> rear
> > body
> > > vent for cool fresh air.
> > > If your install is similar to the I-4/Diesel one that I have, don't
> > > neglect to connect the engine mounts across under the motor. I came
> very
> > > close to having a huge headache when my right side (the longer one)
> motor
> > > mount sheered off the bolts at the engine block, due to it's
> propensity
> > to
> > > twist without the cross brace to defer some of that force..
> > >
> > > Don Hanson
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Neil Nicholson. 1981 Air Cooled Westfalia - "Jaco"
> >
> > http://web.mac.com/tubaneil
> > http://tubaneil.googlepages.com/
> >
> >
> > --
> > No virus found in this incoming message.
> > Checked by AVG.
> > Version: 7.5.519 / Virus Database: 269.22.0/1344 - Release Date:
> 3/26/2008
> > 8:52 AM
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Neil Nicholson. 1981 Air Cooled Westfalia - "Jaco"
>
> http://web.mac.com/tubaneil
> http://tubaneil.googlepages.com/
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG.
> Version: 7.5.519 / Virus Database: 269.22.0/1344 - Release Date: 3/26/2008
> 8:52 AM
>
--
Gracias,
Miguel
|