Budget 100x71 Build

This is the place to discuss, or get help with any of your Type 4 questions.
User avatar
Clatter
Posts: 1882
Joined: Sun Apr 28, 2002 3:01 am

Re: Budget 100x71 Build

Post by Clatter » Sat Jan 09, 2021 2:55 pm

Man, love this build.

Can't wait to see if there's a difference with stack height on the dyno.
Running a type 4 in a type 3 the height has to be so limited,
i always wondered how much power i was giving up.

Something else i always just thought,
But was maybe brainwashed by the advertisers,
That stock pushrods are too flimsy for bigger springs.
is that just with beetle motors?
How much spring to you dare run with stock pushrods?

FWIW,
Len at HAM has some old posts on this site where he did heads the same with and without the 914 2.0 plug mod.
Because the AA castings weren't available yet, he used AMC castings.
With no other mods, all things similar, it supposedly made around a 15% difference in HP having the plug protrude as with the 914 2.0.
They do tend to crack around the plug hole, but mother VW decided that it was worth it for the extra power i guess?
What's that Noise??

Beginners' how-to Type 4 build thread ---> viewtopic.php?f=1&t=145853

cal 67
Posts: 253
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2009 7:03 pm

Re: Budget 100x71 Build

Post by cal 67 » Sat Jan 09, 2021 4:11 pm

They do look pretty nice, don't they? Bought some flow equipment, so I'll get to see how well my whole induction system fares...

914 AA castings have this weird area where the rocker box vent interferes with my CSP intakes. Rather than modify the heads, I modified the intakes on a belt sander.

Gonna drop the crank in. I forgot the 1st cut bearings have an O/S thrust that needs chopping-down. Great idea on Silverline's part. Just machine the bearing instead of making two individual bearings. I added a slight bevel to ease installation.

Image

Image

Image

Image

cal 67
Posts: 253
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2009 7:03 pm

Re: Budget 100x71 Build

Post by cal 67 » Sat Jan 09, 2021 5:39 pm

Clatter wrote: ↑
Sat Jan 09, 2021 2:55 pm
Man, love this build.

Can't wait to see if there's a difference with stack height on the dyno.
Running a type 4 in a type 3 the height has to be so limited,
i always wondered how much power i was giving up.

Something else i always just thought,
But was maybe brainwashed by the advertisers,
That stock pushrods are too flimsy for bigger springs.
is that just with beetle motors?
How much spring to you dare run with stock pushrods?

FWIW,
Len at HAM has some old posts on this site where he did heads the same with and without the 914 2.0 plug mod.
Because the AA castings weren't available yet, he used AMC castings.
With no other mods, all things similar, it supposedly made around a 15% difference in HP having the plug protrude as with the 914 2.0.
They do tend to crack around the plug hole, but mother VW decided that it was worth it for the extra power i guess?
Maybe with that stock sunken plug ground, but run a DTC plug and give it some CR, and I doubt it's much of a difference. Those Nords in Bilcross are making silly power with Bus heads. If I didn't already have these 2.0s, I'd run some modded 1.8s just to prove a point. Plug angle is a 1% thing, not a 15% thing. I'd need the heads in front of me to pick the two test heads apart...

cal 67
Posts: 253
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2009 7:03 pm

Re: Budget 100x71 Build

Post by cal 67 » Tue Jan 12, 2021 12:56 am

Phew! Got it on the stand.

Had to install new mounting studs in. Who knows where the old ones went πŸ€·πŸ½β€β™‚οΈ. Love my Snap-On installers

Q cam is ready. Look at the lobe profile compared to stock (left)

Oooooold stock bearings going in. Only the best πŸ™‚

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Ol'fogasaurus
Posts: 16282
Joined: Tue Nov 14, 2006 1:17 am

Re: Budget 100x71 Build

Post by Ol'fogasaurus » Tue Jan 12, 2021 1:59 pm

The need to replace studs is for the same reasons you replace bolts... over time fastener metal stretches due to loads or over tightening just like bolts do. Sometimes loosing fasteners is a good thing.

Lee

cal 67
Posts: 253
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2009 7:03 pm

Re: Budget 100x71 Build

Post by cal 67 » Wed Jan 13, 2021 1:17 pm

Shag Leone helped me with some retainer/keeper samples. The keepers come in a STD height and .050" higher, with helps with install height. I was going to opt for the titanium keepers, but they're too expensive for this build. I'll just have steel locks and titanium retainers.

The heights are virtually identical after factoring-in that the retainer can still be choked up higher, and the carbon build-up on my stock valve's face.

Retainer shown with just a Stateside Tuning outer spring:

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

cal 67
Posts: 253
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2009 7:03 pm

Re: Budget 100x71 Build

Post by cal 67 » Wed Jan 13, 2021 1:21 pm

Checking how far the lifter will come out of the bore: wish I would've cut less, but I had planned on using a bigger base circle πŸ˜•

Kinda want to drill out the threaded side and put a through bolt to make the valvetrain more rigid. What do ya'll think?

Image

Image

Image

Eddie010
Posts: 135
Joined: Sat Dec 19, 2009 4:27 am

Re: Budget 100x71 Build

Post by Eddie010 » Thu Jan 14, 2021 1:40 am

I cut the case with the berg lifter boss tool, that advises you, you should have 1 mm clearance at full lift between lifter and Cam lobe.
Went with that, cause I did not know how much to cut. Thorsten (Pieper where I bought the type 1 inserts) suggests to machine 7mm of the boss, but that is not related to the lift of your cam, which I found strange.

That trough bolt would be nice.... do it fast before I close my case, hahaha

cal 67
Posts: 253
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2009 7:03 pm

Re: Budget 100x71 Build

Post by cal 67 » Thu Jan 14, 2021 5:53 pm

Eddie010 wrote: ↑
Thu Jan 14, 2021 1:40 am
I cut the case with the berg lifter boss tool, that advises you, you should have 1 mm clearance at full lift between lifter and Cam lobe.
Went with that, cause I did not know how much to cut. Thorsten (Pieper where I bought the type 1 inserts) suggests to machine 7mm of the boss, but that is not related to the lift of your cam, which I found strange.

That trough bolt would be nice.... do it fast before I close my case, hahaha
That bolt, other than holding up the pickup, makes the valvetrain more rigid. A good alternative to installing a through bolt is installing a large diameter threaded insert. Then you could bring the torque up higher.

Measured lobe lift yesterday. As expected, it was less than advertised: 405 at the lobe. Advertised lift was .430". I NEED to use my 1.4s now just to gain my lift and duration back.

cal 67
Posts: 253
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2009 7:03 pm

Re: Budget 100x71 Build

Post by cal 67 » Fri Jan 15, 2021 3:55 pm

Meh.... Lifter doesn't look that bad on the base circle. Not ideal, but I'll run it. Inquired about a welded cam to run a larger base circle - $400 for a just the welding labor! 😫. I would be $700 into a cam! No way. I'll run my 1.00" base.

Chamfered the bearing saddles and dropped the bearings in for crushed main measurements.

Image

Image

cal 67
Posts: 253
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2009 7:03 pm

Re: Budget 100x71 Build

Post by cal 67 » Sun Jan 17, 2021 12:31 am

I'll run the bore gauge through the tunnels tomorrow. Ditched the stock through bolts for straight bolts and my special .250"-thick oversized washers.

Image

Image

Image

Image

cal 67
Posts: 253
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2009 7:03 pm

Re: Budget 100x71 Build

Post by cal 67 » Sun Jan 17, 2021 11:34 pm

Got some flow equipment. Guess I'll be making my own bench. 😁

Image

cal 67
Posts: 253
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2009 7:03 pm

Re: Budget 100x71 Build

Post by cal 67 » Mon Jan 18, 2021 12:07 am

Got a lot of measuring done. Funny, I've paid for all these nice tools over the years, and I get the same numbers with my very basic tools. Just for kicks, I measure with a cheap 8" Amazon caliper before checking with my mics. I always get the same numbers. I'm positive that if you know how to use a caliper well, that there's not much need for very precise equipment. Now, if you're measuring something that has a very tight tolerance in tenths, then of course finer tools are required.

Crank tunnels measured, mains measured, rods torqued to 30 lb-ft with bearings installed and measured, rod journals measured, cam tunnels measured, and cam journals mic'd. The rods were only brought up to 19 lb-ft for mocking on the crank. No need to stretch them anymore until final assembly. They had a couple hundred miles on them before I got them.

It's not important really -- splitting hairs. If you really care, it's free insurance. Face all the AA rods' length stamp facing the pulley side. That will have your #1 and #2 rods with tangs up, and #3 and #4 with your tangs down.

I think it's ready to go together for the deck height mock-up and cam timing.

Image

Image

Image

Image

Eddie010
Posts: 135
Joined: Sat Dec 19, 2009 4:27 am

Re: Budget 100x71 Build

Post by Eddie010 » Mon Jan 18, 2021 1:39 am

Hope you know, but you switched nr 1 and 2. Rod nr 2 is cilinder nr 1

cal 67
Posts: 253
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2009 7:03 pm

Re: Budget 100x71 Build

Post by cal 67 » Mon Jan 18, 2021 7:09 am

Eddie010 wrote: ↑
Mon Jan 18, 2021 1:39 am
Hope you know, but you switched nr 1 and 2. Rod nr 2 is cilinder nr 1
Lol! They're just laid out that way to show the stamps on the rods! Still though, all the stamps should face the pulley side.

Post Reply