New combo for the 2316!! 3 bolt 914 heads with a squareport?

[Ephry73]

That is exactly what I need to hear.


Now, on the plugs, what type of plugs are these? Been trying to pigure out about the 12mm plugs since I first heard of you and Len using them



E

[MASSIVE TYPE IV]

They are used in a Ducati motorcycle primarily.. Same heat ranges as what we use in VWs... work great.

[Ephry73]

Nice

[BergRace]

They are used in a Ducati motorcycle primarily.. Same heat ranges as what we use in VWs... work great.

And Suzuki's and ..... You get the idea....
NGK DPR8EA-9 is a fairly standard motorcycle plug.

I have not got the NGK catalogue in front of me but iirc :

R = resistor, not needed.
-9 = pre set plug gap, not needed.
And I think the A is for 16mm hex(For tight instalations like the Ducati), not needed on a VW head.(Or it's for copper electrode)

So in short you could get by with a DP8E or DP8EA I can check tomorrow if anyone is interested, or you can log onto the NGK site and check their legend.
DPR8EIX-9 is the same plug with Iridium electrode.

For Denso Iridium plugs:
IX27B = 12mm Thread, 18mm Hex and tripple ground electrode.
IXU27 = 12mm Thread, 16mm Hex.



J.

[Guest]

The address will be haminc.biz
Stay tuned.

I already bookmarked your site, Len. Woo hoo!

[Cloudbuster]

My wanker question of the day is:

"Why go with 3-bolt intake ports, when there are so many more 4 bolt intake manifolds from 1.7, 1.8 and bus motors?"

[MASSIVE TYPE IV]

Its not just the bolt spacing on the 3 bolt heads... The 3 bolts indicate the 2.0 914 head and the 2.0 runners are made only with 3 bolts.

In this application, this doesn't matter but in most cases it does. The 2.0 914 head was in its own league with the chamber, and p[lug location.

We are coupling the most superior chamber, with the most superior plug location, with the most superior exhaust port..... as you can see, the results sound promising- and they will be!

[factman]

so the square port flows better than the round port in stock form or only when its modified? and if so, does anyone sell square port stub pipes for the exhuast that i can weld onto my header? yeah i know its been a while since i have posted on here but i will try to be better about chipping in my worthles 2 cents lol. all this new technology is really exciting me to get started on my motor again. thanks guys.

SAM

[HAM Inc]

Sqport flow in stock form is awful. The only port that performs worse in stock form is the 1.7 exhaust. However, the exhaust port offers real potential when prepped properly. I've seen some incredible #'s on the flow bench. And I don't feel like I've tapped into the full potential. The modified intake will do anything the 2.0 914 will do and better. I can make a 42mm sqport intake outflow a 42mm 914 2.0 intake. Put it all together and move the plug angle and you have the best of both worlds.
Tangerine sells stubs for sqports.

[Ephry73]

All in all, the reworked square with the optimal plug location gives a better burn and better flow than any of the standard heads, Correct?

Have you guys tried that idea with a Squishie type piston? Just curious. I am loving this thread, as I may get the 2316 instead of a 2270. Money wise is not tha tmuch more, but the gains are there. longevity is a bit less than the 2270, but I doubt it would be worse than the same size type 1.

Jake, how many combos do you have so far for the 2316? ANy listings on the website soon?


Thanks a million guys.



E

[Plastermaster]

Ephry, Reguarding the longevity of the 2316, personally, I think Jake is being consevative on the issue. His 914 is doing pretty well so far. It really does have alot going for it compared to the T1. It is a T4 and has the Cryo treatment as "not an option". The way I look at it is multiply HP times expected miles, and divide that by the cost. The 2316 looks pretty good, but then again, Jake has some pretty nasty 2270s also. I'm not a real lead foot, so I figure a 2316 would last me a long time, but I also want at least 30 MPG, which puts me in a 2270 from what I know.

Ron

[Ephry73]

Absolutely Plaster. I am sure jake is just being conservative on the longevity for many reasons. I do not have a heavy foot(per say) but I do love the feel of the engine just keep pulling! Once i switched to a type 4, it made that experience even better.

As time goes by, I am sure the 2316 combos will just get better and "carzier". Right Jake?

2270 is a sure winner. No doubt, but for the extra 20 to 25 HP and the added torque, hmm, I will go for a 2316. Of course, this is without even testing one.



Ephry

[Plastermaster]

One other thing on the 2316 as far as cost goes is the Tangerine Header. I don't know if anyone has used the BAS with the 2316. I'm guessing the $1000 extra is for the engine minus the header.

Ron

[Ephry73]

I completely forgot about that. I heard somewhere that BAS is not making their 42mm full race version anymore. Just that 42 header and that 40mm 21152. Then again, if one goes to that extreme, mind as well build a custom exhaust for the configuration of the engine. Be it tangerine's system or Garage built unit.




E

[HAM Inc]

As a general rule I'm not a big fan of pop-up's, or domes, for wedge type chambers, unless it's absolutely required to get the compression ratio up. The sq.port chamber is small, stockers cc at around 50cc's. Add the relocated plug boss and it gets even smaller. For this application I would like to see a dished piston. That said, squishies may pan out in testing with the right cam and port combo. But there's a long history of experimentation with this style chamber on many different engines over the years that indicates that flat tops are best and dishes are better if C.R. is equal on all.