mrbeige

How the funk are they just made on a lathe? If they just had a round profile, then maybe, but they're not..

I got a response from the guy, those LBJ extenders were £100 a pair on a group buy :shock:

I dunno, I quite like the dash mount screen, although as arnau says where are the heater controls..

To be fair I need to have a look for some links, I was just browsing CGTI earlier and saw the pic, maybe I should have followed up with some links [EDIT]I've found the thread and asked the bloke where he got them from :grin: Clicky click click click

Found this on another forum, could this set-up be what you're looking for Steve? Note the bottom ball joint extension..

How does the HID beam pattern look through the standard lens then? Good I'd expect..

Which kit did you go for, dude?

Are you running the HIDs through the normal lenses?

Yeah, ditto, I'd love to see a 16v running a rotrex...

All Corrado VR6s were 280mm, it's only the mk3 VR6s that had the 288mm disc, IIRC

Today i generally just touched myself......and minced. A lot

Holy mother of god! That sounds absolutely mental!

You know I was looking for a 'Zed build' thread a few months ago and could never find one! Now I know why :lol: Awesome to see the build from when you got him as a shell, through to now with the creamy cream leather! Bloody good work Nik! Always liked him! 8)

Are you integrating that into your management, or is it for a read back from a dial only?

That makes very interesting reading! A quick calculation shows the follow piston speeds. RPM 92.8mm 95.5mm 1500 913.39 939.96 2000 1217.85 1253.28 2500 1522.31 1566.60 3000 1826.77 1879.92 3500 2131.23 2193.24 4000 2435.70 2506.56 4500 2740.16 2819.88 5000 3044.62 3133.20 5500 3349.08 3446.52 6000 3653.54 3759.84 6500 3958.01 4073.16 7000 4262.47 4386.48 Now I don't see a particularly huge difference there. Both the standard crank and the TDI crank result in piston speeds are just above the limit (as per Bill :) ) of 4000 ft per minute for any engine.

Wouldn't we all, but I think I might have to give it a go to see what happens. Given that the idea is to use standard/OEM parts, then to build a block isn't going to cost the earth, so why not give it a whirl? The tried and tested approach isn't always the best.... I think if you can still utilise the longer rods, then the compromise will not be too great and the longer stroke should improve low down torque. Maybe that combined with the 16v equivalent of schimmel 263s? In fact that's another good question. Camshafts... From what I can gather, ABF cams seem to be the optimal arrangement for turbo applications. They are the same duration as the KR ones @ 254deg, but have more lift, thus aiding the cylinder filling (10,76int/10,73exh mm for the ABF and only 9,2int/10,21exh mm for the KR) They also have less overlap (2deg for ABF and 6deg for KR), again better for the turbo application.

Interesting! I think I'm a bit of a fiddler to be honest :fondle: and the engineer in me is curious to see what can be done without spending shed loads. I like the quick and dirty method. It's not as if I will be driving it every day, more for the tinkering aspect :D

Hmmm, I'm liking the sound of that. So if you are using the 2E pistons, that have a cross-section of ------\______/------ as opposed to being flat like the normal 16v ones, would that be worse for the combustion or would it be better to get some 9A pistons and machine some of the piston crown off as required to get to 8.5-9:1 compression instead, or stick with the 2E pistons and get them valve clearanced

Oooooh, all this talk is making me wet :lol: Anyhoo, After a quick checkeroo of some standard piston sizes from different manufacturers, it seems the closest to 83.5 I'll get is 83mm, but the problem is the wrist pins are 22mm, which is too big, but then that might well be an advantage if offset bushing is required. Also can you over bore the cylinders to 83.5 and just use oversize rings? I suppose that is only desirable when using forged pistons as they expand considerably more than their cast counterparts? Indeed, and wouldn't removing too much material from the crown also give issues with cooling and mean that the top rings would indeed get hotter and thus be more inclined to fail?

The valve reliefs shouldn't add capacity, just combustion chamber volume, AFAIK. I was taking to Mrs B last night about all this, and during the discussion I realised that to get the 2092cc I'd need an 83.5mm piston, soooo, I wonder if there is another engine with an 83.5mm piston and 21mm wrist pin that would work. Doesn't even need to be VAG (to be fair I don't think they have anything larger than 82.5mm anyway). Perhaps Volvo or Saab? A spacer gasket could work, but then you are adding undesirable additional weaknesses into the engine, although it is a possible solution.

You see, this is the problem, as you say, it's one argument against another. I'm not overly convinced that it would actually be possible to use the longer rods from the tall block as this would take the standard pistons above the deck of the block by around 3mm, so with that in mind the shorter 144mm rods would then yield a rod ratio of 1.5, which isn't particularly ideal. As you say, with the lower rod ratio the piston dwell would be less, more stress on the rods and a much faster piston speed. But...does this resultant poorer cylinder filling matter so much when forcing the air into the cylinders?

So, you going to go crossflow then, Si? You'll get less heating of the old inlet manifold, and shorter pipework runs as well by the looks of things?

So the standard 16v is an 'over-square' engine anyway, you are just making it more 'over-square' :D Still, what would you expect to gain then, when clearly you will be losing the engine's natural ability to rev....which kind of goes against the point of a 16v in the first place??

Under or over square what dude? Thought as much about the hampering revs, but as I said, could that be offset by using lighter components?

Absolutely! It'll be good to see it evolve now that it has a dedicated new owner :)