1.7L exhaust cutaway pics; I'm shocked!!

farmer · Post by **farmer** » Fri Jun 11, 2004 11:14 am

In the mid to late 90íes, the german "Käfer cup" guys winged 170 -180 hp out of to the limit 2l TIV´s. That meant 72 mm cranks and 94 bore, + all the tricks.
So with 5-8 years of better knowledge, and a couple of determined guys, - I think 200 hp is possible.

BTW. are there no limitations in these E production classes, apart from volume and that they have to be N/A ?

In my HMS 1600 cc. I´m stuck with what was available in that year (1969), exept I can run forged pistons, electronic ignition, whatever exhaust I want to run, + they "see though fingers" with newer carbs.
So I´m hoping for 145 hp out of mine.

Anyway, we will follow this with great interest.
GOOOD thread.
T.

MASSIVE TYPE IV · Post by **MASSIVE TYPE IV** » Fri Jun 11, 2004 11:17 am

I'm doing an E production now.... VERY WILD!

180 HP from a 1800 is easy..

Golde60 · Post by **Golde60** » Mon Jun 14, 2004 4:39 am

thanks for putting the pics back up again.

will use them as a head scratched and a converstation starter with people here until i decide who is gonna do my heads.

(sorry, but melourne is a long way from the good ol us of)

btw, anyone wanna put their two cents worth into my post "Type IV port and polish"?

Racer Chris · Post by **Racer Chris** » Mon Jun 14, 2004 7:11 pm

farmer wrote: BTW. are there no limitations in these E production classes, apart from volume and that they have to be N/A ?

There are lots of limitations, including stock stroke & valve dia. Also 40mm carbs max.

73notch · Post by **73notch** » Thu Jun 17, 2004 5:52 pm

jake, are you saying that the squareports have more potiential than say, the 2l 914 head?

everyone! hurry and buy some squareports before they are 350 bucks a pop used

MASSIVE TYPE IV · Post by **MASSIVE TYPE IV** » Thu Jun 17, 2004 6:00 pm

Absolutely.... Len and I are moving the plug angle on a set soon, and then making a chamber with the same style quench as a 2.0 914 head... Thats called having your cake and eating it too!

raygreenwood · Post by **raygreenwood** » Thu Jun 17, 2004 6:50 pm

Jake, in general, the quench, the chamber volume and the intake angle are the main benefits of the 2.0 914 head. Other than allowing the angle change on the intake.....I don't see and other benefit to that spark plug angle. Other than needing to fit 914 2.0 sheet metal...what else am I missing. Ray

MASSIVE TYPE IV · Post by **MASSIVE TYPE IV** » Thu Jun 17, 2004 7:26 pm

Len can elaborate... I'll let him know the thread is open again.

HAM Inc · Post by **HAM Inc** » Sat Jun 19, 2004 1:04 pm

The plug angle advantage with the 2.0 914 head is that it is moved toward the center of the camber. The plug location of the other type IV heads, tucked into a chamber wall, is about as bad as it gets. All Type IV heads have identical valve angles. (Perhaps Ray was referring to the intake seat angle differences between 2.0 914 and the other heads)

------Just an aside here. At low lifts a 30degree seat angle outflows a 45degree. And it's not as grabby because there's less wedge effect. In limited lift applications I routinely use 30degree intakes------

What has me salivating over the sq. ports is that I can treat them as a sort of blank casting because the O.E. valves and chambers are very small. This allows for a tremendous amount of reshaping. And I love the fact that the ex. port has a lot of possibilities. Yes it is true that the sq.port ex port and all other T-IV heads have a matching cross section until you get to the flange area of the oval ports. The difference is that the sq. ports extend out past this flange meaning there is material to work in new shapes that would otherwise have to be done with the stubs, which is very difficult. Going back to the small valves, because the sq. port has more meat under the chamber (the short side of the ex. port doesn't turn up toward the chamber as the oval ports do) there are real oppurtunities to improve the short side of the port. Over the next year I will be focusing a lot of attention to developing this head and the billet head with T-I exhaust that Jake's been talking about. With the improved plug angle and a lot flowbench development I expect the sq. port to be the most lethal of the production T-IV heads. As for the billet head, that's going to have tongues wagging!
Len

73notch · Post by **73notch** » Sun Jun 20, 2004 3:21 pm

are the 1.8l heads similar?

HAM Inc · Post by **HAM Inc** » Mon Jun 21, 2004 7:03 am

The 1.8 and 1.7 ex. ports are damn-near identical. The 1.7 has an intake port shape and dimensions that are unique to it. The 1.8 in. port has more in common with the 2.0 heads. The plug angles are the same on all of the T-IV heads with the exception of the 2.0 914 head.

dstar · Post by **dstar** » Mon Jun 21, 2004 12:34 pm

HAM Inc wrote:------The difference is that the sq. ports extend out past this flange meaning there is material to work in new
shapes that would otherwise have to be done with the stubs, which is very difficult.------

Now ya talking!

Can you say "Expansion Chamber" ? I just call it my coke bottle design!

Len, you got a website?
What do you charge to fly cut a set of heads minimum?

I have a set of squares that were run with the cyl deck not square,
and one head has a little bevel worn it it.

Oh, it also NOW has a broken fin.

DO I weld the fin on now or after you do the fly?

I'm guessing now, but I don't like to guess...

Don

MASSIVE TYPE IV · Post by **MASSIVE TYPE IV** » Mon Jun 21, 2004 12:37 pm

Len will be getting some space on my site soon.... He'll have his own section till he can get his own site made.

dstar · Post by **dstar** » Mon Jun 21, 2004 1:00 pm

COOL!

I was hoping he would come back *east* and see his Dad on Father's day.......

I could have sent him home wif a set of heads and saved $20!

BUWAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Don

HAM Inc · Post by **HAM Inc** » Mon Jun 21, 2004 2:20 pm

Don e-mail me off site and I'll shoot you some prices. Weld the fin before I flycut. By the way, my dad can fly cut your heads.
Len