From what I am reading the 1.9L engine used T4 bearings. The 2.1 uses a strange 3 piece bearing as one of the mains. Now if I decide to have a crank welded and stroked to 82 or 84mm or even bigger, if it would fit easily, would not the 1.9l crank and block be the best bet. If I were to stay with the stock stroke the 2.1l would probably be the best route to go.
Another question I am unclear on is "Does the block require an align bore usually? The T4 rarely requires one and it is about the same setup as far as case material, crank and bearings. I am trying to develop a cost vs benefit. The case has very high potential. I am just poor and I want to get the most bang for the buck.
1.9 or 2.1 as a base for a stroker crank?
-
joe of centorg
- Posts: 374
- Joined: Sun Jun 30, 2002 12:01 am
1.9 or 2.1 as a base for a stroker crank?
The 2.1 and the 1.9 both have Type I journal sizes, the thrust end main journal is Type IV.
The cranks are interchangable between the two
You can off-set grind a 2.1 crank to 80.5 mm chevy journal.
DMS will do a weld-up stroker from either crank to 82 mm, about $350.00 + shipping
The difference in the two cases are the bearings, and the 2.1 has some factory clearancing in the case...
All Type IV's need a line-bore now, just ask someone named Jake:~)
As far as cost, the Oxy is more $$$ than a built up Type I, less $$$ than a Type IV and IMO BETTER than both.
- Joe
[This message has been edited by Type 5 Joe (edited 02-13-2003).]
The cranks are interchangable between the two
You can off-set grind a 2.1 crank to 80.5 mm chevy journal.
DMS will do a weld-up stroker from either crank to 82 mm, about $350.00 + shipping
The difference in the two cases are the bearings, and the 2.1 has some factory clearancing in the case...
All Type IV's need a line-bore now, just ask someone named Jake:~)
As far as cost, the Oxy is more $$$ than a built up Type I, less $$$ than a Type IV and IMO BETTER than both.
- Joe
[This message has been edited by Type 5 Joe (edited 02-13-2003).]
-
Pillow
- Posts: 2940
- Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2001 1:01 am
1.9 or 2.1 as a base for a stroker crank?
Depending on what you want to do the T5 can be cheaper than a hot rod T1 and definately less than a T4.
If you like the 76 crank (bigger stroke = $)and get the core for cheap then it is hard to beat even factoring in the case machine work for the head studs for a couple hundred. Granted since you have access to machine equipment that might be a freebie for you anyway.
------------------
Adrian Pillow
'66 VW Westfalia
'79 Porsche 911 SC - FS
VolkSport Kafer Gruppe
If you like the 76 crank (bigger stroke = $)and get the core for cheap then it is hard to beat even factoring in the case machine work for the head studs for a couple hundred. Granted since you have access to machine equipment that might be a freebie for you anyway.
------------------
Adrian Pillow
'66 VW Westfalia
'79 Porsche 911 SC - FS
VolkSport Kafer Gruppe
-
Type 5 Joe
- Posts: 388
- Joined: Fri Jan 17, 2003 12:01 am
1.9 or 2.1 as a base for a stroker crank?
Actually, for the average guy who has to job-out his machine work, it's more $$$$ to go Type 5.
- Also, it's not just a matter of having access to machines (machine shop).
It's having the skills to apply to the project, and investment in Quality time and $$$ in tooling, fixtures, ect...
All needed for one of these projects... hardly justified for just one motor.
The average guy goes to Rimco, or some other "cheap" source for machine work, Type I's come inexpensive and crappy this way.
- Joe
- Also, it's not just a matter of having access to machines (machine shop).
It's having the skills to apply to the project, and investment in Quality time and $$$ in tooling, fixtures, ect...
All needed for one of these projects... hardly justified for just one motor.
The average guy goes to Rimco, or some other "cheap" source for machine work, Type I's come inexpensive and crappy this way.
- Joe
-
Dyno Soar
- Posts: 120
- Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 12:01 am
1.9 or 2.1 as a base for a stroker crank?
Sorry I fail to understand how a T5 is more expensive to re-build?
The motor is basically pretty good from stock speicifications. In my humble and not so expiericed view.
Having the the 2.1 112bhp engine rebuilt to stock specs yet bluprinted.
its allready got a electronic ignition and feul injection from stock.
DMS type counter-balanced crank offset ground for a bigger displacement. Biggest outlay
Mild cam
Mild head work, 3 angle valves and polished.
Berg Rockers..
Decent extractor exhaust.
I would have thought these mild re-build mods couldn't be that much more expensive to do.
I am completely prepared to stand corrected on any of this. Its just seems to me VW got this motor so right, apart from the head gasket issues.
If you wanted even more power go for a Turbo addition.
The motor is basically pretty good from stock speicifications. In my humble and not so expiericed view.
Having the the 2.1 112bhp engine rebuilt to stock specs yet bluprinted.
its allready got a electronic ignition and feul injection from stock.
DMS type counter-balanced crank offset ground for a bigger displacement. Biggest outlay
Mild cam
Mild head work, 3 angle valves and polished.
Berg Rockers..
Decent extractor exhaust.
I would have thought these mild re-build mods couldn't be that much more expensive to do.
I am completely prepared to stand corrected on any of this. Its just seems to me VW got this motor so right, apart from the head gasket issues.
If you wanted even more power go for a Turbo addition.
-
Dyno Soar
- Posts: 120
- Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 12:01 am
1.9 or 2.1 as a base for a stroker crank?
From the above specs, I am pretty sure 140 bhp is possible. Very useful, and I am sure that due to the tweeks the torque figure would be pretty good also.
With the Turbo addition to this very same engine could propel this setup to around 190bhp
Again I'm using my bench racing dyno, which is not the most of accurate gauges of performance.
With the Turbo addition to this very same engine could propel this setup to around 190bhp
Again I'm using my bench racing dyno, which is not the most of accurate gauges of performance.
-
Type 5 Joe
- Posts: 388
- Joined: Fri Jan 17, 2003 12:01 am
1.9 or 2.1 as a base for a stroker crank?
The Oxyboxer is the version of this motor modified for air cooled use.
The machining involved and some of the other aspects of the conversion are what I was reffering to.
- Joe
The machining involved and some of the other aspects of the conversion are what I was reffering to.
- Joe
-
Pillow
- Posts: 2940
- Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2001 1:01 am
1.9 or 2.1 as a base for a stroker crank?
Just say no to H2O.
------------------
Adrian Pillow
'66 VW Westfalia
'79 Porsche 911 SC - FS
VolkSport Kafer Gruppe
------------------
Adrian Pillow
'66 VW Westfalia
'79 Porsche 911 SC - FS
VolkSport Kafer Gruppe