Is it possible to bolt a type 1 engine in? After reading Ray's posts about engines and what not, i figure i can build a type 1 engine with more HP/Torque for the money.
I'm not opposed to building a false floor in the rear.
The only thing I am concerned about is bolting the motor to the trans.
Anyone have any pro's or cons?
Thanks.
type 1-->412
-
raygreenwood
- Posts: 11906
- Joined: Wed Jan 22, 2003 12:01 am
It will be an ugly death in the 412...and other than just motoring along will not have the torque band the car was designed for.
Lots has been written on this subject.
Yes...its easy to put a type 1 engine in.
That being said with the weight and gearing of a 412...especially if its an automatic....it will be a slug off the line. This is part of why they went to the type 4 engine in 1968 when they started designing this car. A much better low end torque band....and the fact that the type 1 engine life in a heavy car with high gearing....will be short.
If putting in a type 1 just gets you motoring around...cool. But I wouldn't stick with it. The type 4 is vastly superior to the type 1. Most especially in this chassis and with this gearing. Ray
Lots has been written on this subject.
Yes...its easy to put a type 1 engine in.
That being said with the weight and gearing of a 412...especially if its an automatic....it will be a slug off the line. This is part of why they went to the type 4 engine in 1968 when they started designing this car. A much better low end torque band....and the fact that the type 1 engine life in a heavy car with high gearing....will be short.
If putting in a type 1 just gets you motoring around...cool. But I wouldn't stick with it. The type 4 is vastly superior to the type 1. Most especially in this chassis and with this gearing. Ray
-
Marc
- Moderator
- Posts: 23741
- Joined: Thu May 23, 2002 12:01 am
It's not hard to get tons of torque from a Type I, either - even the stock stroke is bigger than that of the 1.7/1.8 engines that came in Type IVs. Such talk is considered heresy in this forum, though, so I'll just try to answer the question. The IV has its pilot bearings pressed into the crank rather than the Type I's glandnut, necessitating a longer trans input shaft to reach them. You would need to either extend the bore slightly into the I crankshaft or trim the trans input shaft to keep it from bottoming out.
For an automatic I suspect all you'd need is a Type III flexplate, since the III and IV transaxles are interchangeable.
It'll take a little work to design a rear engine mount system compatible with the combination. Baywindow buses were sold with both I and IV engines in other countries; some of their mount pieces could probably be adapted but considering the rarity of these parts in the US you'd likely be better off fabricating something. Same goes for the sheetmetal pieces to seal off the IV engine compartment around a I engine, you might want to consider using III sheetmetal & fan instead (that'd require a custom air intake bellows, but there'd be no need to close all the gaps around the engine that way).
But should you? I'd have to agree with Ray and say no. If you keep your Type IV all Type IV, at least there'll be someone who'll love it besides you.
For an automatic I suspect all you'd need is a Type III flexplate, since the III and IV transaxles are interchangeable.
It'll take a little work to design a rear engine mount system compatible with the combination. Baywindow buses were sold with both I and IV engines in other countries; some of their mount pieces could probably be adapted but considering the rarity of these parts in the US you'd likely be better off fabricating something. Same goes for the sheetmetal pieces to seal off the IV engine compartment around a I engine, you might want to consider using III sheetmetal & fan instead (that'd require a custom air intake bellows, but there'd be no need to close all the gaps around the engine that way).
But should you? I'd have to agree with Ray and say no. If you keep your Type IV all Type IV, at least there'll be someone who'll love it besides you.
-
DocLong
- Posts: 41
- Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2008 1:27 am
I'm looking at one of AJ Sims 1600T engines ( I think I heard 200/200 HP/TQ) for the car.
What transmission options do I have should I want to swap over to a manual? Bus?
The engine mount issue shouldn't be too hard, using a universal case (type 3's had the rear mount didn't they? as did the busses?)
I understand the type4 is ideal, but to get good power out of one is expensive. One of the 1600T's is less than $5k (turn key)....and given the HP/TQ I dont think it could be done with a type4.
Ray?
What transmission options do I have should I want to swap over to a manual? Bus?
The engine mount issue shouldn't be too hard, using a universal case (type 3's had the rear mount didn't they? as did the busses?)
I understand the type4 is ideal, but to get good power out of one is expensive. One of the 1600T's is less than $5k (turn key)....and given the HP/TQ I dont think it could be done with a type4.
Ray?
-
Chris V
- Posts: 3406
- Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2002 12:01 am
Ewwww - FWIW they make "90-110hp"DocLong wrote:I'm looking at one of AJ Sims 1600T engines ( I think I heard 200/200 HP/TQ) for the car...
A stock 2.0 Type IV will make that with a cam/carb change and a little attention to detail.
My 1995cc Type I has pushed my ~3400lb Baywindow for the last 20,000 miles - as far as torque - I don't need first gear very often... I spent way less than 1/2 of one of AJ's engines.
http://www.joesracing.com/
Son of Marc
Son of Marc
-
DocLong
- Posts: 41
- Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2008 1:27 am
I agree, I could build an engine much cheaper than AJ's....however...it's hard to do that from Iraq. I'm planning on having the car done when I return around Feb/March 09. Thats paint and body, interior, suspension, and of course, engine/trans.
It runs great now...although the throttle won't open all the way up (the only real rust spot is about 2"x2" under the gas pedal) and it smokes a little/leaks a little. I could easily just have my current motor pulled and freshened up, and bolt some carbs on and have a cam thrown in.... but I want something even more different than a 412...so a 412 with a neat type 1 motor would be awesome.
I'm wondering how much $$$ I'm looking at to drop my motor, tear it down and have someone rebuild it replacing only what needs replaced, adding a cam, and tuning it?
Then, like I said in another post, I was offered a 2.0L type 4 that i've found out came from a 914. It's complete minus any fueling, and wrapped in celpphane from the rebuild.... I can get it for a grand and throw carbs on it...and make what??? maybe 100hp?
It runs great now...although the throttle won't open all the way up (the only real rust spot is about 2"x2" under the gas pedal) and it smokes a little/leaks a little. I could easily just have my current motor pulled and freshened up, and bolt some carbs on and have a cam thrown in.... but I want something even more different than a 412...so a 412 with a neat type 1 motor would be awesome.
I'm wondering how much $$$ I'm looking at to drop my motor, tear it down and have someone rebuild it replacing only what needs replaced, adding a cam, and tuning it?
Then, like I said in another post, I was offered a 2.0L type 4 that i've found out came from a 914. It's complete minus any fueling, and wrapped in celpphane from the rebuild.... I can get it for a grand and throw carbs on it...and make what??? maybe 100hp?
-
raygreenwood
- Posts: 11906
- Joined: Wed Jan 22, 2003 12:01 am
Seriously...have you driven a 411/412...or even a type 3 fastback with 100HP? Especially with the stock gearing...the type of performance they are capable of is similar to what you get with a more modern car and 120-140 hp.
That being said....if your car is an automatic....you need to go through the transmission if it has more than 7 years or 70k Miles. Most people think the auto box is a slug. Its not, its just that by the time most people who care...get their hands on either a type 3 or 4 auto...the engine is worn down or poorly tuned....and tthe transmission is slipping or suffering from poor pressure and vacuum signature.
With the high gearing...meaning off the line quick...you need down low torque. Yes...you can build a type 1 to get the same torque....and you WILL end up with a fraction of the longevity. Its just not as beefy of an engine....and does not do as well cooling wise as the tpe 4. Even the type 4 needs cooling tweeks and improvements.
A type 4 can cruise at 70+mph in Texas heat indefinately.
Wit heven a stock 1.7L...the best of the bunch in HP and throttle response short of a 914 2.0....you got 82hp.
If you were keeping the injection...that can be tweeked, a better cam instaleld a bump in compression, larger valves when you redo the heads, decent attention to detail and balance and a decent exhaust...and a 100 HP is reality. the throttle response is excellent....roughly twice that of factory. Its actually a little easier with carbs...though you lose a bit of throttle response...the hp is easier to get.
Add to that...some seals and cleaning and a band tightening, and adjust the main vacuum modulator in the autobox...and a torque converter out of ...a vanagon I think?....and with the higher stall pioint and existing high final drive....and the car will really zip.
Even in bone stock form (when prperly tuned)...the performance and drivability were not even remotely similar to bugs or type 3's.
If money is the key at the moment...I would do a modified stock rebuild on a 1.7, 1.8 or 2.0. Bump your compressiion up reasonably. Since you need a new cam anyway...get one optimized for the carbs and exhaust you select from Jake Raby. Have the heads redone with new springs, seats and slightly larger valves. Tune it carefully. Drive the heck out of it. If thats not enough, save your $ while you are having fun with and build something better later.
Ray
That being said....if your car is an automatic....you need to go through the transmission if it has more than 7 years or 70k Miles. Most people think the auto box is a slug. Its not, its just that by the time most people who care...get their hands on either a type 3 or 4 auto...the engine is worn down or poorly tuned....and tthe transmission is slipping or suffering from poor pressure and vacuum signature.
With the high gearing...meaning off the line quick...you need down low torque. Yes...you can build a type 1 to get the same torque....and you WILL end up with a fraction of the longevity. Its just not as beefy of an engine....and does not do as well cooling wise as the tpe 4. Even the type 4 needs cooling tweeks and improvements.
A type 4 can cruise at 70+mph in Texas heat indefinately.
Wit heven a stock 1.7L...the best of the bunch in HP and throttle response short of a 914 2.0....you got 82hp.
If you were keeping the injection...that can be tweeked, a better cam instaleld a bump in compression, larger valves when you redo the heads, decent attention to detail and balance and a decent exhaust...and a 100 HP is reality. the throttle response is excellent....roughly twice that of factory. Its actually a little easier with carbs...though you lose a bit of throttle response...the hp is easier to get.
Add to that...some seals and cleaning and a band tightening, and adjust the main vacuum modulator in the autobox...and a torque converter out of ...a vanagon I think?....and with the higher stall pioint and existing high final drive....and the car will really zip.
Even in bone stock form (when prperly tuned)...the performance and drivability were not even remotely similar to bugs or type 3's.
If money is the key at the moment...I would do a modified stock rebuild on a 1.7, 1.8 or 2.0. Bump your compressiion up reasonably. Since you need a new cam anyway...get one optimized for the carbs and exhaust you select from Jake Raby. Have the heads redone with new springs, seats and slightly larger valves. Tune it carefully. Drive the heck out of it. If thats not enough, save your $ while you are having fun with and build something better later.
Ray