# My 1984 Rabbit GTI build thread: Haldex + 2.1L + GTX3584RS + Methanol



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

After carefully researching and collecting parts for almost 4 years, I finally contacted Bill Schimmel (spturbo) about doing a Haldex conversion into my Mk1. I have known Bill since 2009 when he did my first BT install into my MK4 daily driver (currently 2.1L + GTX2867R + E85). That car is an absolute blast to drive especially with my built 02J G-Force transmission. However, there is one thing missing - traction.

That is why I decided to purchase an 02C transmission 4 years ago from a 1993/94 Passat syncro wagon (Canada only). My original intention was to find an R32 rear floor pan and drivetrain and install into my MK4 daily driver along with the necessary components to make it work (FEX center differential, etc). However, I couldn't bring myself to cutting up such a nice car. Fast forward to last January when I jumped on the opportunity to purchase a 1984 Rabbit GTI from a fellow vortexer in Lancaster, PA. The car is almost perfect for being more than 3 decades old. After seeing the Boba Motoring MK1 video, I decided that I want to build an _American_ version of that car using the MK1 Rabbit GTI built right here in Pennsylvania ('Merica man. LOL). So, it will retain the square headlight and DOT front and back bumpers.

I decided to weigh my MK1 Rabbit GTI on an industrial scale last week before the project started (see below). Even with all the American-only extra parts, it still only weighed 1,980 lbs! That included the spare tire and tools which I forgot to remove from the trunk. Those weighed 17.2 kg's or about 38 lbs. I also plan to use a lightweight Lithium battery same as in my MK4 daily driver. Removing the spare tire, tools and heavy OEM battery brings my weight down to about 1,900 lbs.










With the added Haldex drivetrain, bigger brakes, roll cage etc. I am hoping to come in less than 1000 kg's or 2200 lbs. That is about 1,200 lbs. lighter than an MK4 R32 or MK1 Audi TT quattro. I will try to post more details about all the parts I collected along with some graphs and analysis. I will also try to post some progress pictures as the donor Audi TT quattro is already at Bill's shop in Warminster. Please feel free to comment here as your feedback will help guide this project.

EDIT: Build details

*ENGINE*

BOTTOM END
Audi TT 225 engine block
Eurospec 4340 billet 95.5mm crankshaft
IE Tuscan connecting rods
IE Ultimate Crankshaft Girdle Kit
IE Dowel Pin Kit for TDI Crank
IE Billet Timing Belt Drive Gear
Fluidampr Crank Pulley
Mahle PowerPak+ 9:1 CR pistons
Mahle Race Main Bearing Set
ARP Hardware

CYLINDER HEAD
AEB largeport head
Ferrea Complete Valvetrain Kit (valves, springs, seats, Ti retainers)
Catcams 3660 Intake/Exhaust camshafts with adjustable sprocket
PPT Adjustable Camshaft gear
PPT Manual Timing Belt Kit with Gates Racing belt
SEM largeport intake manifold
Custom short-runner unequal length divided exhaust manifold (Pat @ Pitt Soundworks).
Dorman VVT solenoid
ARP Hardware

*DRIVETRAIN*

TRANSMISSION ("Kleiner Felsenbrecher")
02C transmission/B3 Passat G60 Syncro
AP Tuning (G-Force Transmission) race gearset
CTN 3.157 final drive
Clutch Masters FX725 ultra light clutch and flywheel kit
Clutch Masters hydraulic throwout bearing for 02J/02A

DIFFERENTIALS/COUPLINGS
Peloquin 02C limited slip differential
FEX angle drive/Typ 1U Škoda Octavia
Haldex rear center coupling/Audi TT 225
Peloquin R32 rear differential

*BRAKES/SUSPENSION*

FRONT
Stock MK1 lower control arm and spindle
Epytec 5x100 hub for MK1 spindle M14x1.5
Epytec Porsche brake adapters
Porsche 986 Boxter 4 piston front brakes
Eurospec 280mm vented slotted 5x100 Corrado rotors
Front Coilovers
Just Engineering Lower Control Arms
H&R 22mm front Anti-sway bar

REAR
Syncro beam and 191 trailing arms/B3 Passat G60 Syncro
Dutchbuild Haldex Kit
5x100 hub for B3 Passat G60 Syncro M12x1.5
VW Mk4 rear calipers
239mm vented slotted 5x100 rotors

*TUNING
*Ignitron ECU
Ignitron EGT Amplifiers (x2)
Eurowise Plug and Play Engine Harness for 1.8T
BOSCH 4 Bar MAP sensor.


----------



## elRey (May 15, 2001)

sub'ed like white on rice!


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

elRey said:


> sub'ed like white on rice!


Thanks! Here's a short video:


----------



## All_Euro (Jul 20, 2008)

YES


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

All_Euro said:


> YES


Hehe... can't wait to put the power to the ground.


----------



## ticketed2much (Feb 18, 2012)

Glad you started this thread. Should be an awesome build. If you need an extra set of hands I am not that far away!


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

ticketed2much said:


> Glad you started this thread. Should be an awesome build. If you need an extra set of hands I am not that far away!


Thanks, man!

EDIT: I just saw your build thread. Very good source of information.

http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthread.php?7772233-My-back-wheels-won-t-engage-a-build-thread


----------



## sleepy1.8t (Sep 5, 2013)

mainstayinc said:


> ('Merica man. LOL)


FRAK YEA MURICA


Your builds are always amazing mainstay, I'm very excited to see your work--


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

sleepy1.8t said:


> FRAK YEA MURICA
> 
> 
> Your builds are always amazing mainstay, I'm very excited to see your work--


LOL. Thanks. I'm leaving the hardest part of this project to Bill Schimmel. He will have to work out the Haldex install and other chassis details. He is also doing the engine build which I was originally going to do myself. However, I decided to have him do it because he already built my 2.1L stroker on my MK4 daily driver and that's been bullet proof. This new engine will also be a 2.1L stroker but will spin to 8500 to 9000 RPMs with largeport AEB head. So, it's critical that the engine is built right. I would hate to make a **rookie** mistake which could be very costly.


----------



## vr6 3.0 (Apr 19, 2008)

Amazing!

Will you be using the 02M from the TT or using the 02C you have? I am going back and forth for my build. The 02C is tempting because the weight savings and mounting situation vs the 02M, but even the built 02C I'm looking at with the 6-speed Gemini gear kit is supposed to be rated at 600BHP, which seems limiting vs an 02M with steel shift forks. 

Just curious what you're using since I think you said you were hoping for 4-digit power?

Thanks,
Isaac


----------



## GasInMyVeins (Jul 11, 2010)

Oh, this is going to be awesome. :thumbup::thumbup:


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

vr6 3.0 said:


> Amazing!
> 
> Will you be using the 02M from the TT or using the 02C you have? I am going back and forth for my build. The 02C is tempting because the weight savings and mounting situation vs the 02M, but even the built 02C I'm looking at with the 6-speed Gemini gear kit is supposed to be rated at 600BHP, which seems limiting vs an 02M with steel shift forks.
> 
> ...


I will be using the 02C which has the AP Tuning (G-Force Transmission) race gearset mated to a FEX angle drive that was sourced from a Škoda Octavia. The 02C is also reinforced with a lower pinion girdle and a 5th gear cuff making it a four speed. Although the 02M is inherently stronger due to shorter input/output shafts, it is also heavier as you pointed out and there are less options in the United States as far a choosing a taller final drive.

A taller final drive is necessary as HP increases and gives the transmission longer "legs". In contrast, I was able to source a 3.157 (60/19) final drive from an 02A diesel transmission (CTN/CHU code) in the US for $250.00. Below is a chart comparing my 02C with a stock 02M and a stock 020 (2H) "close ratio" transmission found on my 1984 Rabbit GTI. Each transmission uses the same 205/45R16 tire with 23.3 inch diameter which is what I plan on using in my MK1 setup.









As you can see, it only takes me 3 gear shifts to reach 177.5 MPH at the top of fourth gear at 8500 RPMs. Whereas the 02M with stock 3.94 final drive takes 4 shifts (5 gears) and still doesn't achieve the same top speed. Also, the 02M is more likely to spin tires in first and second gear *all things being equal* due to lower overall gearing. You will also notice that the 6-speed 02M is virtually identical to the 020 "close ratio" transmission from the 1984 Rabbit GTI when using the same tire size.

There are taller final drives available for the 02M but those are more difficult to obtain. Below is a chart someone put together of the different options. As you can see, these are sourced from the Bora and Sharan (diesel), which are not sold in the US.










Even if you were to obtain the tallest final drive (3.238) found on the Bora, the gearing still falls short of the 02C. I'm still almost 20 MPH faster at the top of third gear (141.2 v. 123.6 MPH). See below.










Typically guys will put a larger diameter tire on the car to compensate for lack of final drive. This helps a little. Below is the same 02C setup with the same 23.3 inch diameter tire compared to the 02M with stock 3.94 final drive but with 25 inch diameter 225/45R17 tires.








The 02M definitely has its merits. I will probably keep the 02M from the Audi TT 225 Roadster as a backup in case the 02C fails. However, the AP Tuning G-Force race gearset has proven itself to be very strong on the race track. Joel Brown's 2.1L corrado ran in the 8's with the identical AP Tuning gearset in a FWD chassis (see below).






And he was putting out 1075 HP (934 WHP) which is more than I will be able to achieve with my GTX3584RS setup. Below I reposted his setup from Lugnuts Tuning website.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

GasInMyVeins said:


> Oh, this is going to be awesome. :thumbup::thumbup:


:thumbup: Thanks!


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

I'd rather be stronger than lighter, especially in the great box department.

Why in the Hell are you running 205 or planning on it??? 225 or more, then again. I'm a road course guy who loves grip. 

Not saying go berg cup wide to fit, but, why go so far with everything....to just drop the ball on contact patch, which is crucial for grip. Especially with 500+whp.

Serious inquires.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Vegeta Gti said:


> I'd rather be stronger than lighter, especially in the great box department.
> 
> Why in the Hell are you running 205 or planning on it??? 225 or more, then again. I'm a road course guy who loves grip.
> 
> ...


Yeah, yeah. I know. The 205/45R16's are only 8.1 inches wide. No worries though. I want to keep the MK1 sleeper for now with the exception of the 16 inch rims and roll bar. Notice, I said roll bar not roll cage. It will be a killer street setup for now until I can thoroughly test and tune this setup. After that, I can put on wider tires using spacers and custom wheel arches if traction becomes an issue. Contact patch is very important no doubt.

By comparison, the Boba Motoring MK1 uses 205/40R17's which are also only 8.1 inches wide. The 17 inch wheels looks too big IMO on an MK1 not to mention his obnoxiously wide rear Haldex track. It's as if he didn't bother to narrow down the Haldex subframe to fit the MK1 chassis. I plan to narrow down the Haldex unit by 165mm (about 6.5) inches which will bring the rear wheels back to stock wheel track.










Also, he uses an 02M transmission with shorter gearing. That is probably a better fit for the GTX4202R since that turbo has a much narrower powerband than the GTX3584RS on 2.0L.

FYI you'll be happy to know that Bill Schimmel convinced me to use Ferrea exhaust valves instead of the Supertech Inconel's. Since I bought 2 sets of the Supertech's, I will put one is my MK4 daily driver and sell the other set.


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

Good.I'm very much up to speed in boba's cars. I'm still gathering parts for the 4 motion swap. But I'll be tying it into my cage and rear end modifications.

Stoked to see the end result. Remember, everything is important!


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Vegeta Gti said:


> Good.I'm very much up to speed in boba's cars. I'm still gathering parts for the 4 motion swap. But I'll be tying it into my cage and rear end modifications.
> 
> Stoked to see the end result. Remember, everything is important!


Nice. I didn't know you were going AWD. Converting an MK1 to Haldex is no easy task. You should consider stroking out your motor one of these days as I think you are still stock.


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

I have an engine I'm building on the side, cage and independent suspension are far more important right now...and more affordable lol.

But Yesssssss 2008cc 10:1


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Vegeta Gti said:


> I have an engine I'm building on the side, cage and independent suspension are far more important right now...and more affordable lol.
> 
> But Yesssssss 2008cc 10:1


I can see why suspension is more important ATM after reading your recent post in the "Official Track Day..." thread. You should stick with the voice to text, as I was wondering why there were so few spelling mistakes in that post. LOL.


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

Lol I'm a terrible typist.
But you're inspiring me!! Subscribed to see the build!! Stoked for you man!


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Vegeta Gti said:


> Lol I'm a terrible typist.
> But you're inspiring me!! Subscribed to see the build!! Stoked for you man!


Thanks, man. Hopefully this build won't kill me too much in the pocket.


----------



## All_Euro (Jul 20, 2008)

mainstayinc said:


> Thanks, man. *Hopefully this build won't kill me too much in the pocket.*


Tell yourself whatever you need to, John, just keep at it


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

All_Euro said:


> Tell yourself whatever you need to, John, just keep at it


I can't stop LOL at that comment!


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

BTW if anyone needs parts from the donor Audi TT 225 quattro Roadster then please PM me. I already have an inquiry for the front bumper. I only need the Haldex subframe, tunnel, engine block and driveshaft for myself. Everything else can be parted out for cheap. Here are a few pictures I took over the summer. She is a real looker!



















I purchased from a guy in NJ. He put some nice aftermarket parts on. It only needed a new fuel pump to run. Too bad she had to be sacrificed!


----------



## Marcus_Aurelius (Mar 1, 2012)

Nice John, looking forward to seeing where you take this project! I'll be messaging you about some spare parts and maybe take a trip down to come collect. :beer:


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Marcus_Aurelius said:


> Nice John, looking forward to seeing where you take this project! I'll be messaging you about some spare parts and maybe take a trip down to come collect. :beer:


Thanks, man. Sound good. Let me know what I can do for you if anything. You were more than helpful when I had questions about my MK4 suspension.


----------



## vr6 3.0 (Apr 19, 2008)

mainstayinc said:


> I will be using the 02C which has the AP Tuning (G-Force Transmission) race gearset mated to a FEX angle drive that was sourced from a Škoda Octavia. The 02C is also reinforced with a lower pinion girdle and a 5th gear cuff making it a four speed. Although the 02M is inherently stronger due to shorter input/output shafts, it is also heavier as you pointed out and there are less options in the United States as far a choosing a taller final drive.


Thanks for all the info! Didn't want to re-quote the whole thing, but really enjoyed looking over the graphs you've put together. Look forward to watching the progression!


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

vr6 3.0 said:


> Thanks for all the info! Didn't want to re-quote the whole thing, but really enjoyed looking over the graphs you've put together. Look forward to watching the progression!


:thumbup:


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)




----------



## l88m22vette (Mar 2, 2006)

Not gonna lie, I'm kinda pissed your taking apart a rare white TT (roadster, no less), couldn't you just get a wrecked one?  

Actually I'm excited, the project itself is inspired and that Rabbit will haul nuts!


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

l88m22vette said:


> Not gonna lie, I'm kinda pissed your taking apart a rare white TT (roadster, no less), couldn't you just get a wrecked one?
> 
> Actually I'm excited, the project itself is inspired and that Rabbit will haul nuts!


Yeah, I really struggled with the decision to use this Audi TT 225 quattro Roadster as a donor car. I found other wrecked Audi TT's for sale in the 2000 to 2500 range. But I decided to pay up a little more for this one since it had no collision damage. In fact, it was perfect other than needing a fuel pump. Since I needed the Haldex drivetrain and engine block, I decided not to consider a donor car with either front or rear damage. I didn't realize this particular TT was rare. I wish I would have taken some pictures with the top down. It looked stunning. I had several people over the summer stop by wanting to buy the car. I probably could have flipped it and made a few thousand dollars. However, that would leave me without a Haldex drivetrain and engine block, which is what I'm really after.

I plan on going down to spturbo in Warminster, PA tomorrow to check on the progress. I will try to take a video or at least some pictures.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

EDIT: That syncro beam will save a lot of weight and make the installation a lot easier. Hopefully we can secure it.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Front brakes and suspension:










Epytec 5x100 hub for MK1 spindle
Epytec Porsche brake adapters
Porsche 986 Boxter 4 piston front brakes
Corrado 280mm vented slotted 4/5x100 brakes.

Front control arms from SCCH:


----------



## BR_337 (Sep 3, 2011)

Can't believe I only saw this now bad ass bro. I'll definitely be following the progress 🍻
Btw: real man turn left and right :laugh: jk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

BR_337 said:


> Can't believe I only saw this now bad ass bro. I'll definitely be following the progress 🍻
> Btw: real man turn left and right :laugh: jk


Thanks, man. BTW I decided to fabricate my own exhaust manifold after seeing your original MK4 337 build thread. Too bad you crashed that car!


----------



## BR_337 (Sep 3, 2011)

mainstayinc said:


> Thanks, man. BTW I decided to fabricate my own exhaust manifold after seeing your original MK4 337 build thread. Too bad you crashed that car!


 Ha ha nice dude I remember being furious how no one in the VW community would build me a manifold lol

I know man I missed that car the reaction It got when people watched it smoke z06s and Porsches on road courses Was always priceless


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Bill just purchased a syncro beam with trailing arms from a local guy about 10 minutes from me. It is already adapted to accept a Haldex differential. That should save some time and money on the install. It will also be a direct install into the MK1 chassis with only some minor fabrication (2 bolt to 3 bolt mount, etc.). The syncro beam will widen the rear track about 50mm (1 inch on each side). I decided it's not worth it to shorten the beam to get back to stock track width. It will be sanded/blasted and powdercoated before final installation.


----------



## CD155MX (Dec 18, 2007)

Really enjoying watching this thread. Thanks for the continued updates. :thumbup:


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

CD155MX said:


> Really enjoying watching this thread. Thanks for the continued updates. :thumbup:


Thanks, man.

After doing a little more research on the 02M, I came across a thread with this spreadsheet.










You will notice that there are a few 02M transmission codes with a 2.955 final drive (FSM, FJW, GUC, JNF, JSA, KDW, KPC). Plugging that into my spreadsheet, gives me the following results.










As you can see, the 02M with 2.955 final drive is almost identical to my built 02C. I managed to find an 02M on ebay.co.uk with the 2.955 final drive for a decent price. It is from a 2003/4 Seat Ibiza Cupra 1.9L 160bhp 4 cylinder TDI (GUC code). I purchased the transmission and am waiting on the seller to send me a final invoice with a shipping quote. The ring and pinion from that transmission will be used in my Audi TT 02M donor transmission as a backup in case my 02C fails. Since I now have a backup option for the transmission, I plan on running the 02C "balls out".


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

The Seat Ibiza Cupra gearbox with the 2.955 final drive is on its way! It is being shipped from Barnsley (South Yorkshire), UK. The ebay.co.uk seller originally posted the auction as local pickup only. However, I contacted him and he was willing to package and ship to the USA. Below is a comparison of the FFE Racing 02M 6-speed Dog box gearset with 3.94 final drive (FZQ) versus my 02J AP Tuning Race gearset with 3.389 final drive (EGR) in my MK4 versus my 02C AP Tuning Race gearset with 3.157 final drive (CTN) going into my MK1. All of these are on 225/45R17 25 inch diameter tires. 










Notice how fourth gear on the FFE gearset is slighly lower than third gear on the 02J and 02C gearboxes at 8500 RPMs. You can alway install a taller final drive for the FFE gearbox such as the 3.238 from the ERF box (see below) but that would put first gear up much taller and still make second, third and fourth gear shorter in comparison to the other gearsets. No doubt the FFE gearset with the taller first gear is setup for quick bursts of speed off the starting line.










Below is a comparison of my 02C gearbox going into my 1984 MK1 Rabbit GTI but with 205/45R16 23.3 inch tires versus my 02J gearbox in my 2002 MK4 Golf GTI with 225/45R17 25 inch tires. Both of these have the AP Tuning (G-Force Transmission) race gearset. Notice how the 02C and 02J are identical. One has 23.3 inch tires but with 3.157 final drive and the other has 25 inch tires but with 3.389 final drive.










Needless to say, I am very familiar with the gearing going into my MK1 as I have been driving my MK4 around with the AP Tuning gearset for several years now. The only difference is that the MK1 will be about 800 lbs. lighter.


----------



## ALCOBENDAS (May 13, 2012)

Not have words to say...


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

ALCOBENDAS said:


> Not have words to say...


:thumbup:. I must have lucked out finding the Seat Ibiza Cupra TDI gearbox. Those are not very common as I think they were only made in 2003/04. I contacted SQS Racing and they only sell the 2.955 final drive in combination with their gearset. He said it's possible to order one new for 900 to 1000 EUR. That's just for the ring and pinion. I paid 325 GBP for the entire gearbox plus 350 GBP for shipping from the UK.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Front bumper cover sold! Ramon has an identical 2002 Audi 225 Roadster but in black. Identical baseball leather interior. I gave him a great price. Check out his build thread.

http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthread.php?7232477-Question-on-a-rebuild


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

I posted some build details at the top of the first page for anyone interested.


----------



## One-Eight GTI (Jan 5, 2010)

Subscribed to this. Looking forward to seeing more updates 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

One-Eight GTI said:


> Subscribed to this. Looking forward to seeing more updates
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I contacted Bill on Monday to get a part number on the syncro trailing arms. Apparently, they made two versions of the syncro rear suspension. The earlier version (PN: 191_) uses a 68.07mm bearing and a 39mm hub as found on MK2 Golf Syncros in Europe which had drum brakes and early Passat G60 syncros in Canada which had disc brakes. The later version (PN: 357_) uses a 72mm bearing and a 40mm hub and can more easily be converted to a 5 lug wheel using an MK3 VR6 5x100 front hub.










The 5x100 format will give me more wheel options for this project. The front wheels were easy to convert to 5x100 because Epytec (German company) makes a nice conversion hub which uses the factory bearing and is a direct replacement. The rear wheels are more difficult to convert to 5x100 with the earlier version (68.07mm) trailing arm since it uses an odd size bearing only used on VW Fox and Quantum cars. However, I lucked out when I found these for sale on ebay Germany (shipped from Zielona Góra, Poland):

Radnabe 5x100 4x100 VW Golf 2 Syncro hintere Naben 39 mm 823407615a 











So, now that I have the wheel bearings and hubs figured out, I went ahead and purchased some drilled and slotted rotors for the rear wheels. I decided to keep the factory Passat G60 Syncro 239mm disc brakes in the rear since those are interchangable with Mk1/MK2 Golf front brakes. In fact, they are the same part number. So, that gives me 239mm x 10mm (9.4 inch) brakes in the rear and 280mm x 20mm (11 inch) vented brakes in the front. Not a bad brake bias, eh? I can always use a proportioning valve to fine tune my brake bias. BTW, here's a very nice 'white paper' by Stoptech entitled,"Brake Bias and Performance: Why Brake Balance Matters" http://stoptech.com/technical-suppo...ias-and-performance-why-brake-balance-matters

Unfortunately, I could not find 5x100 conversion rotors for the rear like I did for the front. The fronts use Eurospec 280mm 5x100 Corrado rotors I bought off-the-shelf. The rears will have to be custom machined. I stopped by my local machine shop yesterday and asked if he could drill out the rotors to 5x100. He initially said 'No' since he had no way of determining the centerlines for the holes. However, I told him I would supply a 5x100 hub which will attach to the rotor and provide an exact centerline for the new set of holes. He seemed to be more comfortable with that.

The last items to figure out are the rear calipers, caliper carriers and dust shield. The original calipers found on the B3 Passat G60 Syncro use steel calipers and carriers which are not meant for high-performance. One popular upgrade is to use an MK4 aluminum rear calipers which fit directly into the original steel carriers on the syncro. Eurospec sells a nice conversion kit:










The syncro steel caliper carriers are hard to find. I found a seller on ebay Germany (shipped from Italy):

BDA228 SUPPORTO PINZA FRENO TRW


----------



## Dave20v (Nov 25, 2014)

I just stumble on this and great move to use the syncro rear end. welcome to the vw mk1 awd club!! if you have questions let me know, can you send me a link for the rear carrier has mine are rusted out. I have narrowed my rear synco beam by 65 mm because other wise 7'' wide wheels sit flush with the arches. the only issue with that its it make less room on the left side of the haldex to access it. I would also advise you to had toe and camber modifications to the mounting point of the trailing arms for better alignment options. I was able to use the mk1 rear suspension by modifying the mounting point on the trailing arms other wise you need to raise the shock tower.


----------



## CD155MX (Dec 18, 2007)

This has got to be the best thread going right now in the 1.8T section. I'm learning a lot and truly enjoying these posts. Info like the whitepaper, detailed info on your hubs, bearings, rotors, etc., This thread does not dissapoint. :thumbup::thumbup::thumbup:


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Dave20v said:


> I just stumble on this and great move to use the syncro rear end. welcome to the vw mk1 awd club!! if you have questions let me know, *can you send me a link for the rear carrier has mine are rusted out*. I have narrowed my rear synco beam by 65 mm because other wise 7'' wide wheels sit flush with the arches. the only issue with that its it make less room on the left side of the haldex to access it. I would also advise you to had toe and camber modifications to the mounting point of the trailing arms for better alignment options. I was able to use the mk1 rear suspension by modifying the mounting point on the trailing arms other wise you need to raise the shock tower.


Thanks for the great advice. As far as the caliper carriers, I just got email notification that my order from Italy was cancelled. 



ricambigenny said:


> Gentile cliente,
> Ci dispiace comunicarle che, purtroppo, di seguito ad un aggiornamento della giacenza di magazzino, sono state aggiornate tutte le voci del magazzino per errore, quindi tutto ciò per dirle che purtroppo non abbiamo il ricambio da lei acquistato, ci scusiamo e speriamo nella sua comprensione,
> Intanto abbiamo provveduto al rimborso,
> Cordiali saluti.
> ...


That's the second vendor who advertised the caliper carriers and then cancelled due to them not being available. So, at this point, I am going to assume that these are not available at all. I also had to cancel my order for the Eurospec MK4 rear caliper conversion kit since that does not include any caliper carriers. I will probably buy a complete MK4 rear caliper and carrier kit such as the one that ECS Tuning sells and then try to adapt the MK4 carriers to the rear trailing arms. That will probably require drilling new mounting holes on the trialing arms and possible spacers. Not sure.

I'm glad you chimed in here because I came across a lot of your posts while researching this project. How did you narrow your rear syncro beam? Do you have pictures or a post I can check out? I'm also interested in seeing how you modified the mounting points on the trailing arms. That seems a lot easier than raising the shock tower.

EDIT: I just found your build thread. I'm going to check that out again.

*my build thread, .:Rabbit...with Haldex*

EDIT: Holy crap. That's a legitimate build. I actually sent Bill Schimmel links and pictures of your build and a Dutch Build project last week. He commented how nice it must be to have a rotisserie. Unfortunately, since Bill doesn't have a rotisserie, he is going to have to get under the chassis and work vertically to do all the chassis mods to the tunnel and rear end.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

CD155MX said:


> This has got to be the best thread going right now in the 1.8T section. I'm learning a lot and truly enjoying these posts. Info like the whitepaper, detailed info on your hubs, bearings, rotors, etc., This thread does not dissapoint. :thumbup::thumbup::thumbup:


:thumbup: Thanks, man. I try to post the most relevant information here. That's after sifting through literally hundreds of pages of info.


----------



## ramone23456 (Dec 29, 2009)

*Thanks for the bumper.*

Good luck on the build. Will be following with everyone else.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

ramone23456 said:


> Good luck on the build. Will be following with everyone else.


Thanks, man. Enjoy your new bumper cover.

I must have found the last pair of caliper carriers for the rear syncro trailing arms currently available. Part numbers: 191615425A, 191615426. These are from the same vendor on ebay Germany that sold me the 4/5x100 39mm conversion hubs (shipped from Zielona Góra, Poland): 










The final product will look like this:










EDIT: I'm going to have to re-order the Eurospec MK4 rear caliper conversion kit. The guy from Four Seasons Tuning is going to be real confused since I placed an order, then cancelled the order, and now am going to place the same order. LOL.

Also, I'm not real happy with the red color of the caliper carriers. However, it looks like that color may have been stock on the MK2 Syncro in Europe. So, maybe I'll keep the red. Everything else on the exterior will basically be black since it is a black on black theme (i.e.: no blazing red Porsche front calipers. Those will stay stock black as in the picture on the previous page).


----------



## Dave20v (Nov 25, 2014)

I strongly recommend of using a rotisserie, it will save bill a lot of time and money. you can make one for less the 100$.
the way I shorten the rear beam is pretty simple, measure the half point, and cut 32.5mm on both side, machine a sleeve to the inside tub diameter, drill holes in the beam to be able to ''spot welds the bushing and, put it back in a jig to be sure it is straight and weld the seam. but since you already have the haldex bracket welded to them, it might be hard to do.

for the mounting point I laser **** myself new tabs and figured out the best place and weld them. I cut the old on out and made some clearance on the control arms. it is pretty tight with the brake carrier and the suspension hardware... but it can be fitted.

I made my own mount from the mk1 rear beam pattern to be able to go back to a stock beam. almost all my modification are made to be reversible. ill be using a custom gas tank in the oem location has I dont want to have to deal with fuel cell and making a new fire wall.

car will be back soon from paint and ill be able to update more the build thread




mainstayinc said:


> Thanks for the great advice. As far as the caliper carriers, I just got email notification that my order from Italy was cancelled.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Dave20v said:


> I strongly recommend of using a rotisserie, it will save bill a lot of time and money. you can make one for less the 100$.
> the way I shorten the rear beam is pretty simple, measure the half point, and cut 32.5mm on both side, machine a sleeve to the inside tub diameter, drill holes in the beam to be able to ''spot welds the bushing and, put it back in a jig to be sure it is straight and weld the seam. but since you already have the haldex bracket welded to them, it might be hard to do.
> 
> for the mounting point I laser **** myself new tabs and figured out the best place and weld them. I cut the old on out and made some clearance on the control arms. it is pretty tight with the brake carrier and the suspension hardware... but it can be fitted.
> ...


Thanks for the detailed explanation. I may have to get creative with that rear beam to make it fit. I paid extra for the beam due to the Dutchbuild Haldex bracket and mounting hardware. It doesn't look like I could easily shorten the beam without disturbing the Haldex bracket. The alternative is to make a cut along the section where the trailing arms are mounted. That would require making one cut on each side and possibly relocating one of the trailing arm mounting brackets. Not a real big deal I guess. The alternative is to try and mount the beam without shortening it and possibly widening my rear track in the process. I don't mind that too much as a wider track in the rear will give it a slightly more aggressive stance. But, that might require opening and widening the wheel arches (Berg cup style... LOL just joking). Since I already ordered the 68mm bearings, hubs etc., I think the best thing to do is to purchase my wheels and tires now and assemble the entire syncro rear and trial fit it into the MK1. 

That should give me a good idea of how to proceed. Here's a picture of a the Dutchbuild Golf MK1 20VT 4Motion project.

http://www.dutchbuild.com/index.php...-projects/vw-golf-mk1-20vt-4motion?Itemid=441










It doesn't look like he shortened the rear beam to get it to fit. I might be wrong, though. Here's another picture but with the Haldex mounting bracket installed.


----------



## Dave20v (Nov 25, 2014)

you are right, this setup doesn't have a narrow beam. I have been following dutchbuild for a long time and I have use some of his ideas to make my own... if you don't narrow the rear beam you will ne to cut into the rocker panel to allow some room for the rear control arms

if you have any leads on rear carrier let me know, and keep up the good work


----------



## All_Euro (Jul 20, 2008)

This is moving along nicely - love the details and pics :beer:


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Dave20v said:


> you are right, this setup doesn't have a narrow beam. I have been following dutchbuild for a long time and I have use some of his ideas to make my own... if you don't narrow the rear beam you will ne to cut into the rocker panel to allow some room for the rear control arms
> 
> if you have any leads on rear carrier let me know, and keep up the good work


Thanks, man. Your feedback has been very useful at this early stage. It will save me from having to possibly make some mistakes going forward. I see how the rocker panels were trimmed in the Dutchbuild project. I can live with that. I'll make sure to send you any leads I have for the carriers. I paid $285 for those carriers after shipping. Not cheap. But, it will allow me to have a bolt on solution for a rear brake upgrade.

Also, I'm looking forward to any updates you post on your build thread. I wouldn't even attempt such a project without you and others who were smart enough or crazy enough to take on such a challenge.:thumbup:


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

All_Euro said:


> This is moving along nicely - love the details and pics :beer:


:thumbup:. I have a lot more stuff to post. Tomorrow I am scheduled to drop off all my engine building parts to Bill Schimmel in Warminster, PA. I'll try to take some pictures before I send those off.


----------



## vr6 3.0 (Apr 19, 2008)

Sure you've seen this thread, but Jeebus had an alterative solution for narrowing the rear syncro beam. I don't think he has finished his yet and this likely required other modifications, but might save having to cut into the rockers needlessly and also wouldn't be affected by your rear beam already having the DB conversion in place. 

http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthread.php?6881669-MK1-16VT-with-Haldex-AWD-Silly-Rabbit-v1-5 

Keep up the good work! :thumbup:

Isaac


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

vr6 3.0 said:


> Sure you've seen this thread, but Jeebus had an alterative solution for narrowing the rear syncro beam. I don't think he has finished his yet and this likely required other modifications, but might save having to cut into the rockers needlessly and also wouldn't be affected by your rear beam already having the DB conversion in place.
> 
> http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthread.php?6881669-MK1-16VT-with-Haldex-AWD-Silly-Rabbit-v1-5
> 
> ...


:thumbup: Thanks for the tip. I'll check that out later today.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

^^That thread has a lot of useful information! For one thing, it convinced me to use a Peloquin rear differential for more traction. I wasn't sure whether it was worth the expense. Also, what tire size do you plan on running on your project? I plan on running a 16x7 rims with 205/45R16 tires. Those are basically the same size as a 205/50R15 tire on a 15 inch rim except with a nicer *45* profile.










I think overly-large rims and tires don't look good on an MK1. However, I want to have enough "legs" on my setup to utilize the power. Consequently, I will be using a black-painted rim to maintain a smaller appearance.

BTW, it looks like you are going 2.1L, correct? That's a great choice IMO.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Here's a few things I dropped of at Bill Schimmel's this morning.










ALH (TDI) crankshaft
IE Tuscan connecting rods
IE Ultimate Crankshaft Girdle Kit
IE Timing Belt Gear Dowel Pin Kit
Mahle PowerPak+ 9:1 CR pistons (2 sets of pistons in picture)
Mahle Race Main Bearing Set










Brand new AEB largeport head from Issam/ABED Industries
Catcams 3660 Intake/Exhaust camshafts with adjustable sprocket
PPT Adjustable Camshaft gear
Gates Ultimate Timing Belt Kit
Dorman VVT solenoid

Also pictured are some Supertech inconel exhaust valves but Bill convinced me to use Ferrea throughout so I am going to put those in my MK4 daily driver.

I walked in and didn't expect to see so much progress with this project. Bill already sandblasted the rear syncro beam and trailing arms. He already sent the TA's out to powder coat. He is going to clean up and re-weld some of the welds on the Haldex bracket with stronger TIG welds. He also had the Audi TT engine completely disassembled down to the bare block ready for the new parts I brought. This project is moving forward pretty fast.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Forged Audi TT 225 crankshaft for sale! It will hold a lot more power than the cast unit that comes with some MK4's. Perfect for anyone looking to upgrade thier turbo past 300 HP, such as a Frankenturbo or anything larger. Best to upgrade when you're changing rods and other internals.










EDIT: PM me if anyone's interested.


----------



## vr6 3.0 (Apr 19, 2008)

mainstayinc said:


> ^^That thread has a lot of useful information! For one thing, it convinced me to use a Peloquin rear differential for more traction. I wasn't sure whether it was worth the expense. Also, what tire size do you plan on running on your project? I plan on running a 16x7 rims with 205/45R16 tires. Those are basically the same size as a 205/50R16 tire on a 15 inch rim except with a nicer *45* profile.
> 
> I think overly-large rims and tires don't look good on an MK1. However, I want to have enough "legs" on my setup to utilize the power. Consequently, I will be using a black-painted rim to maintain a smaller appearance.
> 
> BTW, it looks like you are going 2.1L, correct? That's a great choice IMO.


Glad it helped :thumbup: 

I used to run 16x7 205/45 on my rabbit too but felt like even the 16's looked too big. It might have just been the design wheel I had though, since 5-spoke wheels often look more "open" than a mesh wheel for example. 
IMG_1874 by isaacpettit, on Flickr

I can understand why someone looking for top speed/ matching gear box ratios etc would opt for a 16" though. I found two almost new sets of these 15" wheels which I always wanted so will be using these. They are currently 15x7 but thinking about having one set widened to allow for a fatter contact patch. Will wait till the car is back together to measure how much I can get out of them. 
IMG_1871 by isaacpettit, on Flickr

You're right, I'm also going with a 2.1L. I got the same pistons as you (from Issam right?) and sounds like we'll have a very similar engine spec. haven't decided on manifolds, injectors or management yet, so excited to see how yours comes together! 

I'll take the pictures down if you want to keep the thread specific, just let me know :beer:

Cheers,
Isaac


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Please keep the pictures! That's very helpful as far as visualizing what my wheel/tire combination will look like. I am hoping that my 10-spoke rims will have a slightly smaller appearance. Also, with the GTI spoiler in the front and DOT bumpers, that might distract from the wheels a little. There is no doubt that wider 15 inch rims are more classy looking on the MK1.

Yes, I got the 2.1L pistons from Issam. I actually bought two sets. One for the MK1 and one to replace the JE's in my MK4.

As far as intake manifold, I will be using a driver-side inlet SEM IM. I will be custom fabricating a short runner, unequal length divided exhaust manifold for use with a divided T3 turbine housing.


----------



## vr6 3.0 (Apr 19, 2008)

I've got more pictures of that wheel set up if you want to see them (front, side, rear, etc). Yes the NA front end setup should help offset the impact of the 16" for sure. I've been thinking SEM intake and FFE tubular exhaust.. will definitely be watching as yous is taking shape much quicker than mine :laugh:


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

vr6 3.0 said:


> *I've got more pictures of that wheel set up if you want to see them (front, side, rear, etc). *Yes the NA front end setup should help offset the impact of the 16" for sure. I've been thinking SEM intake and FFE tubular exhaust.. will definitely be watching as yous is taking shape much quicker than mine :laugh:


Yes, please post them up. The main reason I chose the SEM IM is that there is plenty of room along the intake runners to run second set of injectors. That will allow me to run a sequential fuel injection setup with E85. The IE manifold is very nice but the plenum is very large might interfere more with a second set of injectors.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Here's a quick shot of the SEM IM. It will be powder-coated in a black wrinkle finish.










Here's a screenshot of the short-runner unequal length divided exhaust manifold that I want to fabricate using schedule 10 elbows. It is a front mount manifold similar to the log-style ATP T3 manifold in my MK4 daily driver. This view is from the bottom looking up with cylinder 1 on the right and cylinder 4 on the left. I plan to 3D print some of the runners and use those to scribe and cut the merged areas since those are not simple curves. Below that is close up of the 1 inch thick flange which I will have Issam/ABED Industries custom fabricate for me. It will convert the round schedule 10 piping to the rounded-square shape of the divided T3 turbine housing.










BTW this was inspired by BR_337's custom fabricated manifold he made for his original MK4 GTI 337.

http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthre...BT-build-!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## All_Euro (Jul 20, 2008)

Is this the idea behind going unequal length?...


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

All_Euro said:


> Is this the idea behind going unequal length?...


The unequal length runners are just a consequence of having shorter runners. Shorter runners will allow the GTX35 series turbo to spool quicker as compared to an equal-length runner race manifold. That's due to there being less volume in the manifold and less surface area to lose heat. Plus, those race manifolds are like 1000 to 1200 USD. Basically, the short-runner, unequal length manifold is a quick and dirty way to utilize a twin scroll turbine housing. I originally got the idea from a guy that posted on another forum. He did some tests and had much better spool with this short-runner style manifold. I saved the link somewhere on my office computer. I will post a link to his thread when I get a chance. BTW, here are the benefits on a twin-scroll turbine housing:


----------



## sleepy1.8t (Sep 5, 2013)

still, if i'm reading your graphs correctly, equal-length runners would be preferable, especially with a twin-scroll setup, right?

because if not i'm wasting my time drawing up an equal-length divided t4 manifold


----------



## vr6 3.0 (Apr 19, 2008)

mainstayinc said:


> Yes, please post them up.
> 
> 
> > Here's a few more .. I don't remember the offset of the wheels unfortunately, but they were 16x7 and had Nitto NT555 205/45 tires. These pictures were with Weitec coilovers which were wound pretty high as you can tell, so clearance/ rubbing wasn't an issue at all. I had mk2 Scirocco disks in the rear and Corrado G60 rotors w/ Wilwood 4-pot calipers in the front.
> ...


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

sleepy1.8t said:


> still, if i'm reading your graphs correctly, equal-length runners would be preferable, especially with a twin-scroll setup, right?
> because if not i'm wasting my time drawing up an equal-length divided t4 manifold


In theory, equal-length runners are better because the pulses are timed evenly as they arrive at the turbine. And since each pulse is isolated from the other pulses before it enters the collector, there is little chance of pulses colliding with each other as compared to a log-style manifold. However, the trade off is that you have to increase the length of each runner in order to achieve an equal length setup. That results in some loss of manifold pressure at lower engine speeds as compared to a short-runner setup. That is why equal-length manifolds shine at high engine speeds but tend to be a little slow to spool up. The other problem with longer runners is that you increase the amount of surface area of the manifold. That tends to cool the exhaust gas before it enters the turbine. That, of course, can be remedied somewhat by insulation.

Yes, equal length runners are still preferable IMO in a twin-scroll setup. A TS setup solves the problem of pulses colliding by combining cylinders that are timed farthest apart (180 degrees on a 4-cylinder application). It also solves the problem of exhaust backflow where more then one cylinders' exhaust valves are open at the same time. However, the same problem exists in a twin-scroll equal length manifold as with a single-scroll equal length manifold as mentioned above.

In an short-runner unequal length manifold, you still get the benefits of a twin scroll setup as mentioned above (mainly, eliminating exhaust backflow). However, the pulses are not timed evenly as they arrive at the turbine. In my particular setup, cylinder number 4 will be slow to arrive at the turbine having the longest runner length. This may interfere with the next cylinder in the firing sequence when engine speed increases. That would be cylinder number 2 in a 1-3-4-2 firing order. However, I am willing to make a small tradeoff for the benefits of a short-runner manifold. That is quicker spool (remember, I am installing a large GTX35 series turbo) and smaller packaging.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

vr6 3.0 said:


> Here's a few more .. I don't remember the offset of the wheels unfortunately, but they were 16x7 and had Nitto NT555 205/45 tires. These pictures were with Weitec coilovers which were wound pretty high as you can tell, so clearance/ rubbing wasn't an issue at all. I had mk2 Scirocco disks in the rear and Corrado G60 rotors w/ Wilwood 4-pot calipers in the front.
> 
> 
> 
> Hope that helps visualize a bit :thumbup:


That's great. Thanks for posting up some more views of the car with the 16x7's. Your brake setup front and back is basically the same as mine. I actually like the higher ride height with the sixteen inch rims.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

APR's 1.8T manifold is basically the same idea. Except mine is front mount whereas APR's is bottom mount. Also the APR's manifold in not a truly divided manifold since it used a single scroll internally wastegated turbine housing IIRC. A truly divided manifold uses twin wastegates.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Here's a link to the short-runner unequal length manifold experiment.

http://www.evolutionm.net/forums/ev...8-short-runner-t4-ts-gtx3076r-experiment.html










Below is a comparison with a RevHard T3 Cast manifold with 0.63 A/R turbine housing and his custom short-runner unequal length T4 TS with 1.06 A/R. As you can see, the short-runner spooled 400 RPMs sooner even with the larger T4 1.06 A/R turbine housing!



240Z TwinTurbo; said:


> WOW, I am impressed with the initial results. I did not change anything on the tune and just ran the setup as it was with old tune running the 0.63 a/r t3 housing. So what where the results?
> ~400rpm increase in spool with the new 1.06 a/r T4 twinscroll.
> 3.5krpm
> +21hp/+29ft/lbs/
> ...





240Z TwinTurbo; said:


> In all honesty I was also surprised. Knowing that timing and fuel tuning will only make spool better I am happy with the results. The pic below is the .63 a/r T3 OS vs. 1.06 a/r T4 TS untuned. Also, keep in mind this is the RevHard Cast Manifold vs. Short Runner Tubular manifold.
> As you can see the larger T4 TS outspools the old setup.
> Keep in mind this is stock motor, stock cams, stock intake, and stock tb.


Here are some more results. Below, he replaced the 0.63 A/R turbine housing with the larger 0.82 A/R for the T3 cast manifold.



240Z TwinTurbo; said:


> I posted the results of plugging the BOV and the car made 444hp/378ft/lbs @31psi on 93 octane. The new Tial BOV arrived on Friday, but I won't be able to install until next week. Once the new Tial is installed I will work with Tom to finalize the tune. I hope that when I install the GSC S2's I should get better results.





deeman101; said:


> Thats more like it! I was afraid the extremely short runners would cause high back pressure and limit top end horsepower. But if there is any, its certainly not affecting you by much.
> I didn't know you were on pump gas btw (with 31psi!). Great results!


I wish he had a comparison of a TS equal length manifold versus a TS short runner. Looking at the short runner results look great though without any noticable loss of power on the top end.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

I stopped off at Bill Schimmel's this morning to get an update and to pickup the cyclinder head from the Audi TT. I need the cylinder head to begin mocking up my twin scroll manifold. I re-designed the manifold to resemble the EVO IX manifold I posted above. That was after spending a couple hours late last night reading the first 18 pages of that thread. Apparently, wastegate placement is pretty important to the performance of the manifold. So, I moved the number 4 runner from the bottom of the manifold to the top (see below). 

That will allow me to run twin wastegates at the bottom where the two sections merge into "collector" section. The only problem with moving the number 4 runner to the top is that it may not clear the cylinder head. That is why I want to do a mock-up on the Audi TT cylinder head. I originally threw out this design as I didn't think there would be enough room. But, I think it's worth a try since there are so many benefits of running the twin wastegates on the bottom.










Bill instead convinced me to leave the cylinder head at his shop and bring up my Supertech valves, springs and other stuff next Friday to re-build that head and then swap it into my MK4 GTX2867R + 2.1L daily driver. As some of you may recall, I ended up hydro-locking that cylinder head after experimenting with a NOS fuel nozzle last spring. I posted my troubleshooting efforts in the "GTX2867R Spool" thread. Once that is built, I will tow my MK4 DD down to Bill's shop and he will swap out the cylinder head with the built one and possibly replace my JE pistons with the second set of Mahle's I bought from Issam. However, Bill convinced me to possibly keep the JE's in there since those are a very good piston. We'll see how those look in a few weeks when he removed the head.

While I was down there I had a chance to talk to Tan, another one of Bill's customers. He owns a heavily modified MK5 R32 which he tracks at Englishtown, NJ (quarter mile). I briefly showed his car in the last video I posted. I don't know a lot about his setup other than the fact that he has some carbon fiber parts, a really nice fuel cell, 19 inch tires, R32 engine bored out to 3.34 liters (86mm x 95.9mm). The whole inside is stripped down and setup as a serious race car. 

He recently replaced his DSG transmission, which couldn't hold the power, with a new 02M 6-speed sequential transmission from KAPS Transmissions in the Czech Republic. They offer three different race gearsets for the 02M and Tan said that got the "Long" version (see below).

http://eng.kaps-transmissions.com/products-02m.html










When I first asked him how much the transmission cost two weeks ago, he said, "about the price of a nice used car." As you can see, it has a billet end-case which is strong and makes the whole assembly very light. Dog-box engagement (see below).










I asked him what final drive he is using, and he wasn't sure. I couldn't help plugging his data into my transmission spreadsheet to see how that compared to the SQS "Boost" gearset and my stock 02M "GUC" diesel transmission that I will keep as a backup. Both the SQS on GUC are graphed with the 2.955/2.407 final drive and the KAPS I put the 3.944/3.087 final drive since that put first gear closest to the other transmissions. Also, engine speeds in this comparison are at 7500 RPMs, not 8500 RPMs as I posted before. Bill and Tan are looking to trap above 150 MPH at the end of fourth or fifth gear in the quarter mile.









Here's the same comparison but with a taller 3.684/2.917 final drive for the KAPS.









Interestingly, when I first contacted Bill several weeks ago about this project, he mentioned that Tan is also upgrading to the GTX3584RS. Below is the GTX3584RS overlaid with 3.3L (3342 CC's) displacement (86mm x 95.9mm).









I recommend P2/P1=2.5 or about 22 psi at 7500 RPMs with this turbo and engine combination for 900 HP on pump/race gas or about 1080 HP on E85.
For comparison, below I overlaid the GTX3584RS with my 2.1L (2067 CC's) engine. I am shooting for P2/P1=3.3 or about 33 psi at 8600 RPMs for 840 HP on pump/race gas or 1008 on E85.









Personally, I think the GTX3584RS is too small for 3.3L's. I would recommend the GTX4508R or similar turbo with P2/P1 = 3.7 or about 39 psi at 7000 RPMs for 1240 HP on pump/race gas or 1450 HP on E85. 









EDIT: The above graph is with 23.3 inch 205/45R16 tires. Below is the same graph but with 25 inch diameter 225/45R17 tires.


----------



## One-Eight GTI (Jan 5, 2010)

That is a serious chunk of aluminum for that 02m housing. I can't even imagine the price tag on that setup. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

One-Eight GTI said:


> That is a serious chunk of aluminum for that 02m housing. I can't even imagine the price tag on that setup.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Yeah, no kidding. I think he paid twice as much as my built 02C transmission. And that was over $6000.00. He was showing me the service documents for the KAPS transmission. Basically, he gets free regular maintenance for life (every 700 kms service interval), including free shipping back to the Czech Republic.

Bill told me that the KAPS guy was surprised he only bought one transmission, as they usually do a minimum of three for race teams. Make him feel like small potatoes.

EDIT: Another view of the KAPS transmission (from website):


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Bill sent me a *.pdf file with the actual gear ratios installed on the KAPS transmission. First through third are the same as before, but fourth through sixth gear are slightly different. Also, he confirmed the final drive as 4.167/3.333. 










Plugging those number into my spreadsheet gives me the following results. Also, please note that I used a 3.238/2.615 final drive for the SQS transmission and, of course, the 2.955/2.407 final drive for the OEM GUC transmission. Since you can use any final drive in the 02M, you can raise or lower these speeds as needed. Some final drives are easier to obtain than others. Also, I changed the tire size to 265/30R19 which is the size that Tan uses in his MK5 R32.










Below is a visual comparison of my 215/40R16 versus Tan's 265/30R19's. As you can see, tan is running a much wider contact patch. However, I can always install a wider tire in the future, especially if I keep my ride height close to stock height which will allow me to clear the wheel arches. A 225 tire might be a nice compromise (225/40/R16) but that might limit the tire choices since that is not as popular size as the 205/45R16's.










EDIT: Bill said that Tan's tires are 265/30R19's. I updated the visual comparison and vehicle speed graph above. Also, I changed the tires size on the MK1 to 215/40R16 since Yokohama makes the S.drive in that size. That will give me an 8.5 inch width tire and will be the same as the stock 185/60R14's on the GTI with a diameter of 22.8 inches (versus 23.3 inches for the 205/45R16's). Although that will take away some of the "legs" on my tire/transmission combination, I still have enough final drive to achieve my speed targets.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Quick update. I stopped by Bill's shop this morning to drop off my Supertech exhaust valves, springs, guides and seals to rebuild the Audi TT head that is going into my MK4 daily driver. We plan to re-use the intake valves since those look like they are in good shape. Hopefully sometime next week I can bring my MK4 down and have Bill swap the old head out and put the built Audi TT head in. Finger's crossed that will solve my *no start* situation on my MK4. We'll see.

He just sent the syncro beam out to get powder coated along with the trailing arms which were sent out a few weeks ago. He also sent the Audi TT engine block out to Greg at Automotive & Industrial Machining Company in Telford, PA to get bored out for the new 83mm Mahle pistons and line bored and honed for the IE Tall Boy main caps. Those needed a lot of material to be machined off to match the crank main journals. Height-wise, the Tall Boy main caps fit almost level with the bottom of the block and may not require any machining.











Integrated Engineering; said:


> *REQUIRES MACHINE WORK*
> Girdle plates require machine work and precise measurements for correct installation, this should be performed by a certified engine technician. The IE Tall Boy main caps will need to be line honed by an engine machine shop with the supplied IE Spec ARP studs installed and the nuts torqued to ensure journal circularity. Tall Boy main caps will also need to be measured, and machined flat between the girdle plate and engine block surface. The tolerance for the gap between the girdle plate and block is 0.001”


Also, I received my MK4 rear alloy brake calipers from Eurospec. Those will be a direct fit with the syncro carriers which still haven't arrived yet.










Also arriving this past week is my MK1 Hydraulic Clutch Kit and DBW Pedal Adapter Bracket from S & P Automotive.


----------



## sleepy1.8t (Sep 5, 2013)

mainstayinc said:


> In theory, equal-length runners are better because the pulses are timed evenly as they arrive at the turbine. And since each pulse is isolated from the other pulses before it enters the collector, there is little chance of pulses colliding with each other as compared to a log-style manifold. However, the trade off is that you have to increase the length of each runner in order to achieve an equal length setup. That results in some loss of manifold pressure at lower engine speeds as compared to a short-runner setup. That is why equal-length manifolds shine at high engine speeds but tend to be a little slow to spool up. The other problem with longer runners is that you increase the amount of surface area of the manifold. That tends to cool the exhaust gas before it enters the turbine. That, of course, can be remedied somewhat by insulation.
> 
> Yes, equal length runners are still preferable IMO in a twin-scroll setup. A TS setup solves the problem of pulses colliding by combining cylinders that are timed farthest apart (180 degrees on a 4-cylinder application). It also solves the problem of exhaust backflow where more then one cylinders' exhaust valves are open at the same time. However, the same problem exists in a twin-scroll equal length manifold as with a single-scroll equal length manifold as mentioned above.
> 
> In an short-runner unequal length manifold, you still get the benefits of a twin scroll setup as mentioned above (mainly, eliminating exhaust backflow). However, the pulses are not timed evenly as they arrive at the turbine. In my particular setup, cylinder number 4 will be slow to arrive at the turbine having the longest runner length. This may interfere with the next cylinder in the firing sequence when engine speed increases. That would be cylinder number 2 in a 1-3-4-2 firing order. However, I am willing to make a small tradeoff for the benefits of a short-runner manifold. That is quicker spool (remember, I am installing a large GTX35 series turbo) and smaller packaging.



I am excited to see the results. Like was discussed in the Evo thread you linked to, the effects of the uneven pulses will be extremely difficult to measure. Wastegate location will also be very influential to exhaust inertia. It sets off alarms in my head visualizing the pulses hitting the turbine in an uneven manner. :laugh:


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

sleepy1.8t said:


> I am excited to see the results. Like was discussed in the Evo thread you linked to, the effects of the uneven pulses will be extremely difficult to measure. Wastegate location will also be very influential to exhaust inertia. It sets off alarms in my head visualizing the pulses hitting the turbine in an uneven manner. :laugh:


Yes, it would be difficult to measure the effects of the uneven pulses. The best comparison would be a dyno pull between the short-runner unequal length and a full race equal length manifold.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

I forgot to post my Mahle 1.2 TFSI turbo wastegate actuator that I will adapt to control my 3.5 inch QTP exhaust valve.










I already have a 2.5 exhaust valve on my MK4 daily driver which uses an electric motor that is controlled by an open/close switch. Some of you may remember this video I posted of the exhaust valve:






The only downside to the QTP electric motor is that it is a little slow and is not programmable. The Mahle wastegate actuator will solve this problem by being wired into my standalone ECU and controlled by a GPO (general purpose output). I will have a physical arming switch on the dashboard and then program the standalone to open/close the wastegate actuator when certain conditions are met, such as RPM > 2000 or PSI > 7 etc. I will have to custom fabricate a bracket to replace the electric motor and mount the wastegate actuator to. It should work really nice.


----------



## Synapse215 (Jan 27, 2017)

Sub'd to see how this thing turns out. Bill is great at what he does, I've know him for ten years. He had Tan's build out at a benefit I was at, that thing is nuts! If you need a hand with anything, let me know, our towns are connected :laugh:


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Synapse215 said:


> Sub'd to see how this thing turns out. Bill is great at what he does, I've know him for ten years. He had Tan's build out at a benefit I was at, that thing is nuts! If you need a hand with anything, let me know, our towns are connected :laugh:


Thanks, man. I might take you up on that. Bill was nice enough to take an hour out of his schedule this morning just to talk about my project and other things he has going on. He is very good at what he does and is very detail oriented with his engine builds and other things. I showed Bill this build thread on his work computer and some of the compressor maps I made for Tan's R32. It would be nice to see Tan step up to a GTX4508R which will make his R32 even more nuts! We'll see. I can always buy his GTX3584RS from him since I don't have one yet and his is brand new. The only problem is that he has the slip-hose compressor housing and I want the v-band compressor housing. I just called ATP Turbo to see if they sell the v-band compressor housing separately. We'll see how this all plays out.

Good to know there are people local here that are interested in this project.:thumbup:


----------



## Synapse215 (Jan 27, 2017)

Always willing to lend a hand to a fellow Dubber! There are a few good folks left that still frequent here (been a long time lurker myself) that will be willing to give feedback on your project. Not sure but, there is another local dubber that may be done with his rotisserie, not sure if he ever got his Scirocco done. Maybe he'd be willing to part with it.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Synapse215 said:


> Always willing to lend a hand to a fellow Dubber! There are a few good folks left that still frequent here (been a long time lurker myself) that will be willing to give feedback on your project. Not sure but, there is another local dubber that may be done with his rotisserie, not sure if he ever got his Scirocco done. Maybe he'd be willing to part with it.


LMK if you find out if he's done or willing to part with it. Otherwise, Bill will have to fabricate "crick-ed neck" style on one of his vertical lifts (LOL). Seriously, Bill and I talked about this and he thinks it would be way easier to do with the rotisserie.


----------



## 35i 2000 (Jan 27, 2005)

this is by far one of the most technical and well thought out builds i've ever seen.

I am certain this car will be nothing short of remarkable. It's too bad you had to use a clean 225TTQ 6spd but it seems like the parts its donating are going to great use.

I can't wait to see more updates!


----------



## 35i 2000 (Jan 27, 2005)

mainstayinc said:


> *BRAKES/SUSPENSION
> *
> FRONT
> Stock MK1 lower control arm and spindle
> ...


the epytec 5x100 front hubs, are they for the larger 100mm driveshafts (from the later year cabby's)?


did you receive these? can you comment on the quality? fit and finish?

thanks! 

excellent build again


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

35i 2000 said:


> *this is by far one of the most technical and well thought out builds i've ever seen.*
> 
> I am certain this car will be nothing short of remarkable. It's too bad you had to use a clean 225TTQ 6spd but it seems like the parts its donating are going to great use.
> 
> I can't wait to see more updates!


:thumbup: Thanks! Yeah, too bad about the Audi TT 225 Roadster. That thing would have been way too nice for me to drive around anyway. The little MK1 Rabbit GTI has grown on me in the last year and is going to be a real sleeper. Once it is complete, I will probably drive it around in its current, unrestored condition for a while. That will really surprise a lot of VRT's, Golf R's, LS3's etc. especially when I go "open-header" style with the exhaust valve open at 9000 RPMs!



35i 2000 said:


> *the epytec 5x100 front hubs, are they for the larger 100mm driveshafts (from the later year cabby's)?*
> 
> 
> did you receive these? can you comment on the quality? fit and finish?
> ...


I'm not sure. Below is the Epytec website with a description of the 5x100 MK1 hubs:

https://www.epytec.de/en/wheel-hubs...nversion-bolt-circle-adapter-front-axle?c=173



Epytec said:


> *Product description*
> 
> Wheel hub for bolt circle conversion on the front axle of your VW Golf 1 Caddy and Scirocco vehicle.Allows the installation of 5x100mm bolt circle.
> 
> ...


The product description says that the hub is for Golf 1, Caddy and Scirocco. That sounds like the later 100mm driveshaft. Not sure, though. 

Yes, I did receive the Epytec 5x100 hubs. As far as quality, fit and finish these are second to none. Made in Germany. Almost too nice to put on a 33+ year old car.

Stock photo:


----------



## 35i 2000 (Jan 27, 2005)

thanks for the quick response mate!

if you have 100mm driveshafts, can you try and see if they sleeve through the hubs, I have emailed epytec but they haven't responded, its quite likely because i'm using google translate to make it all happen.

I figured the quality was excellent. I purchase my 02J mounts from them and they are nothing short of fantastic.

It's funny to see x-y plots of the gear ratio's!! A lot of my friends made fun of me as i plotted all the ratio's of the 020's, 02a's and 02j's before finally selecting a gear box for my type of summer driving. Nice to see that I'm not the only one!

Wanted to also ask the diff you have in your 02c, is that the same diff as an 02a/02j diff? or is it specific to an 02c?

thanks!


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

35i 2000 said:


> thanks for the quick response mate!
> 
> if you have 100mm driveshafts, can you try and see if they sleeve through the hubs, I have emailed epytec but they haven't responded, its quite likely because i'm using google translate to make it all happen.
> 
> ...


The Peloquin diff is specific to the 02C. I also decided to get the R32 rear diff for some added Haldex traction in the back.

Yeah, gearing is very important to me. I have been a big fan of the 02J/02A 5-speed mainly because there are a lot of different gear combinations available. When my 02J transmission blew up in my Mk4 after installing my GTX2867R, I had to learn a lot about the subject. I was lucky enough to listen to the guys at AP Tuning and install a taller final drive (3.389) to compensate for a somewhat shorter first gear on their race gearset. As it turns out, that was a very good decision. I can achieve over 80 MPH in second gear (smoking tires all the way) on my MK4 before shifting into third. That's a lot of fun. This new transmission is pretty special and has an even taller final drive (3.157). However, this is offset by the smaller tires of the MK1. 

I have also been somewhat critical of the 02M mainly because of its short gearing. It is really meant to extract the most power out of a NA engine. However, that changed when I discovered that there are taller final drives available for the 02M. But those are not available in the US/North American for the most part. I am currently waiting to receive my 02M diesel (GUC code) transmission from Great Britain. It will sit idle as a parts transmission as long as my 02C hold up.

Yeah, I like calculating and graphing etc. It's how I relax from the stresses of daily life. I'm glad you and possibly others can appreciate. Those compressor maps take a lot of work BTW!


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Here's a link to my transmission failure thread:

http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthread.php?6015996-Catastrophic-clutch-transmission-failure-need-your-opinion!&highlight=catastrophic+transmission


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

35i 2000 said:


> thanks for the quick response mate!
> 
> *if you have 100mm driveshafts, can you try and see if they sleeve through the hubs*, I have emailed epytec but they haven't responded, its quite likely because i'm using google translate to make it all happen.
> 
> ...


Yes, I will check and post back in this thread once MK1 is at Bill's shop.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

One of the problems I had to solve in this build is getting a digital speed signal from the transmission while still using a cable-operated speedometer on my gauge cluster. The digital signal is necessary for my standalone ECU to control such functions as boost-by-gear, launch control etc. I decided that I want to keep the MK1 as close to stock appearance as possible. My solution is to install an MK2 16V Europe-only 160 MPH/8000 RPM gauge cluster that uses a cable operated speedometer. However, the original speed sensor that came with the 02C transmission uses a gear wheel connected to a magnetic sensor that generates a digital speedometer signal (see top part of picture below).










As you can see, there is no way to attach a physical cable to the sensor to generate a speed signal for the speedometer. My solution was to purchase a pass-through style sensor from a 1993-2000 Europe-only Ford Mondeo (PN: 95FB9E731AA). See lower part of picture above. It allows the cable to pass through the sensor while still picking up a digital signal. The top part of the VW sensor can be removed and replaced with the pass-through sensor. It actually threads right on. I added two 1/8 inch nylon spacers which I had to drill out the ID to fit the VW sensor housing. The picture below shows the final product along with the nice MK2 16V gauge cluster.


----------



## 35i 2000 (Jan 27, 2005)

mainstayinc said:


> Yes, I will check and post back in this thread once MK1 is at Bill's shop.


thank you so much 

Epytec responded to me, they said it should fit all Mark I's, I guess they aren't clear on the differences.


----------



## 35i 2000 (Jan 27, 2005)

mainstayinc said:


> One of the problems I had to solve in this build is getting a digital speed signal from the transmission while still using a cable-operated tachometer on my gauge cluster. The digital signal is necessary for my standalone ECU to control such functions as boost-by-gear, launch control etc. I decided that I want to keep the MK1 as close to stock appearance as possible. My solution is to install an MK2 16V Europe-only 160 MPH/8000 RPM gauge cluster that uses a cable operated tachometer. However, the original speed sensor that came with the 02C transmission uses a gear wheel connected to a magnetic sensor that generates a digital tachometer signal (see top part of picture below).
> 
> As you can see, there is no way to attach a physical cable to the sensor to generate a speed signal for the tachometer. My solution was to purchase a pass-through style sensor from a 1993-2000 Europe-only Ford Mondeo (PN: 95FB9E731AA). See lower part of picture above. It allows the cable to pass through the sensor while still picking up a digital signal. The top part of the VW sensor can be removed and replaced with the pass-through sensor. It actually threads right on. I added two 1/8 inch nylon spacers which I had to drill out the ID to fit the VW sensor housing. The picture below shows the final product along with the nice MK2 16V gauge cluster.


wow this is by far the most clever approach i've seen to having a digital speed signal!! excellent work mate! :thumbup:


----------



## Dave20v (Nov 25, 2014)

Your speedo idea, could it work with 02m transmission. One of the solutions o found firmly projet was to use a cable-x module.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

35i 2000 said:


> thank you so much
> 
> Epytec responded to me, they said it should fit all Mark I's, I guess they aren't clear on the differences.


That's good to know :thumbup:.



35i 2000 said:


> wow this is by far the most clever approach i've seen to having a digital speed signal!! excellent work mate! :thumbup:


Thanks, man. The MK2 16V gauge cluster should look virtually OEM in the MK1. I didn't want to install an MK3 or MK4 cluster with digital speedometer as that would look totally out of place. Nor did I want to have a fancy electronic aftermarket gauge cluster. The stock 120 MPH/7000 RPM MK1 cluster is not quite up to task with what I want to do.

EDIT: Also, I plan on using the unused LED indicators in the center section of the MK2 gauge cluster for things like indicating Haldex engagement, chemical intercooling activation etc.
Also, I meant to say "cable-operated speedometer" not "tachometer" in my previous post.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Dave20v said:


> Your speedo idea, could it work with 02m transmission. One of the solutions o found firmly projet was to use a cable-x module.


Since both the 02J and 02M use a digital sensor without any moving parts, I think the only option is the cable-x module. The speed sensor in the 02A and 02C transmissions were a hybrid mechanical/digital design using an actual plastic gear mated to a sensor.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

I just ordered the speedo cable that will connect the speed sensor to the MK2 16V gauge cluster. It is from a Golf 2 G60 (PN: 191957803E). Also, here's a great DIY on how to convert an MK1 to an MK2 cluster.

https://vwgolfmk1.org.uk/forum/index.php?page=topicview&id=electrical-faq_2/mk2-clocks-in-a-mk1-my_2

Fits perfect inside the MK1 dashboard!


----------



## Synapse215 (Jan 27, 2017)

woah woah woah, is that little MK1 RHD?!


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Synapse215 said:


> woah woah woah, is that little MK1 RHD?!


Yes, yes, yes sir. RHD FTW!

EDIT: The MK1 in the DIY is RHD. Mine will remain LHD.


----------



## Synapse215 (Jan 27, 2017)

This build keeps getting better and better!


----------



## Synapse215 (Jan 27, 2017)

35i 2000 said:


> wow this is by far the most clever approach i've seen to having a digital speed signal!! excellent work mate! :thumbup:


Just wanted to second this notion, I didn't even know this was possible. Did you figure this out on your own or find the info?


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Synapse215 said:


> This build keeps getting better and better!


Thanks, man!



Synapse215 said:


> Just wanted to second this notion, I didn't even know this was possible. Did you figure this out on your own or find the info?


I totally had to figure that out on my own. I had to get very creative with Google to try and find the *theoretical* part I was looking for. To my surprise, an image showed up that looked like it would work. I ended up emailing a guy in the UK to see if the part would fit. He couldn't tell me but said that most speedo cables in Europe and the UK are pretty standard. M18x1.5 thread IIRC. So I took a chance and bought the pass-through sensor to see if it would fit. When it arrived, to my surprise it was a direct replacement for the VW sensor (top part). I only had to add a few spacers to make it work perfect. I just ordered the speedo cable from a guy Greece. It is an OEM part from the G60 Golf (Syncro?). It should also be a direct fit. We'll see.


----------



## 35i 2000 (Jan 27, 2005)

mainstayinc said:


> I just ordered the speedo cable that will connect the speed sensor to the MK2 16V gauge cluster. It is from a Golf 2 G60 (PN: 191957803E). Also, here's a great DIY on how to convert an MK1 to an MK2 cluster.


may i add that the fact that this is going to be RHD, officially checks off all the boxes for an incredible build, totally unique, totally different

curious how come you had to order a Golf 2 G60 speedo cable, you need a speedo cable that threads on one end and clips in to the Mark II cluster on the other end, isn't that how normal Mark II speedo cables are?

keep up the amazing work :thumbup::thumbup:


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

35i 2000 said:


> may i add that the fact that this is going to be RHD, officially checks off all the boxes for an incredible build, totally unique, totally different
> 
> curious how come you had to order a Golf 2 G60 speedo cable, you need a speedo cable that threads on one end and clips in to the Mark II cluster on the other end, isn't that how normal Mark II speedo cables are?
> 
> keep up the amazing work :thumbup::thumbup:


I probably confused people by posting that DIY which is from the UK and shows a RHD MK1. Mine will still remain LHD but the cluster install will be the same. As far as the speedo cable, you are correct. It has to thread on one end and clip onto the other. I think normal MK2 cables attach differently on the transmission side, but I may be wrong. The research I did pointed me to either using a Golf MK2 G60 speedo cable or a Golf 1.3 cable.

Sorry for the confusion on the RDH/LHD issue.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

I just edited my previous post (#104) about RHD/LHD to make it more clear. I thought Synapse215 was referring to the MK1 in the DIY. After re-reading the original post, I can totally see how most people would read that differently than what I originally intended to say. **insert facepalm here** LOL. I will probably post some new material in the next few days.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

UPDATE: After reading Gulfstreams' timing gear failure, I decided to stop by Bill's shop yesterday to examine my TDI Dowel Pin Kit from IE which also uses a modified OEM 1.8T timing gear.










The timing gear has the 'key' (the part that fits into the keyway) machined off and two holes drilled into the hub for the dowel pins. We discussed the idea of upgrading the timing gear to IE's billet steel gear as insurance against possible failure. Bill said he knows a machine shop that can machine the 'key' section and drill the dowel pin holes in the timing gear. He suggested that we use the modified OEM timing gear from the IE kit as a template to locate the dowel pin holes. I really doubt that my modified OEM timing gear would fail since I am building a street car. However, it makes sense to upgrade this part now while I am building the engine in case I decide to track the car in the future.

I've been resisting buying a Fluidampr pulley since it is expensive and I don't see the benefit outweighing the cost. However, I am starting to think that this might be a good idea especially with a stroked out 2.1L engine. It definately vibrates more than the stock 1.8T due to increased rod angle during the expansion stroke. Anyone have any experience with the Fluidampr?


----------



## One-Eight GTI (Jan 5, 2010)

All I can say is fluidampr reduced clutch chatter when I installed mine. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Gulfstream (Jul 28, 2010)

Good call. :beer:

About the Fluidampr I strongly recommend it on a stroker engine specially if you intent to rev it above 4k on a regular basis. It miiight be down to the fluidampr that my engine made it to the workshop in one piece.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

One-Eight GTI said:


> All I can say is fluidampr reduced clutch chatter when I installed mine.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk





Gulfstream said:


> Good call. :beer:
> 
> About the Fluidampr I strongly recommend it on a stroker engine specially if you intent to rev it above 4k on a regular basis. It miiight be down to the fluidampr that my engine made it to the workshop in one piece.


Thanks. That's exactly the kind of feedback I was looking for. Fluidampr it is. I will purchase on Monday along with the billet timing gear. I will get the 4-bolt 1.8T Fluidampr (PN: 551201) versus the 6-bolt 2.0T FSI version (551211).


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

I also wanted to mention that my engine block will probably be back from the machine shop next week. The cylinders are being bored out to 83mm and will have the IE Tall Boy main caps installed. The Tall Boy main caps were only suppose to be line honed, but they were so out of spec that they had to be line bored first. Also, the Tall Boy main caps were way too wide and were pushing the block apart. Consequently, they had to be narrowed to properly fit into the bottom of the block. That was not covered in IE's installation instructions. The last operation is to machine them down to the proper height, but they were pretty close to begin with. So, anyone contemplating an IE Crankshaft Girdle Kit with Tall Boy main caps will have to properly machine the main caps to fit the engine block as the latest batch appear to be quite out of spec.

Once the engine block is returned from the machine shop, Bill can start to assemble the bottom end and this project will start to take shape. Here's a link to Mike Pauciullo's engine block destruction thread which prompted me to go with the girdle: http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthre...lip-but-it-was-a-costly-one!&highlight=girdle

Here's also a link to Gulfstream's timing gear failure which prompted the purchase the billet version: http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthre...85-build&p=104371929&viewfull=1#post104371929


----------



## rainbowrabbit (Apr 29, 2003)

if you use a cabby or mk2 cluster from a car with cruise control they have a hall effect sensor build into the cluster that you can tap into for a digital speed signal. nice build too.:beer:


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

rainbowrabbit said:


> if you use a cabby or mk2 cluster from a car with cruise control they have a hall effect sensor build into the cluster that you can tap into for a digital speed signal. nice build too.:beer:


Thanks. Below is a photo of the back of my speedo cluster. Are you talking about the yellow plug next to where the speedo cable plugs in? If so, it looks like my MK2 cluster might have this Hall effect sensor.


----------



## rainbowrabbit (Apr 29, 2003)

Yes that yellow plug should be it


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

rainbowrabbit said:


> Yes that yellow plug should be it
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


Thanks for advice :thumbup:.


----------



## vr6 3.0 (Apr 19, 2008)

Today I was told by someone I consider to know what they are talking about that the Octavia transfer box internals can't be built into the 02C. I've also been told that it can, and like you, plan to go that route. Curious if you've already had your gearbox/ transfer case assembled or not? Any issues?


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

vr6 3.0 said:


> Today I was told by someone I consider to know what they are talking about that the Octavia transfer box internals can't be built into the 02C. I've also been told that it can, and like you, plan to go that route. Curious if you've already had your gearbox/ transfer case assembled or not? Any issues?


Yes, the 02C gearbox with FEX (Skoda Octavia) transfer box was assembled last summer by AP Tuning. The only issue IIRC are the o-rings for the oil passages are different on the FEX unit. The "correct" way to solve this problem is to machine the seals on the FEX unit to match with the 02C transmission. The guys at AP Tuning ended up tapping and plugging the seals on the FEX unit and making it self-contained with its own oil. That was the easiest, best solution. Below is an email exchange with Tom, the sales and marketing manager.




Tom D. APTuning said:


> Just wanted to follow up. We got everything but the seal for the transfer case to the bellhousing. I think I have exhausted all means of finding these things myself. The problem is the FEX uses a weird oring/grommet and only the FEX uses it. Its almost like it doesnt exist anymore and searching the internet I was only able to find one of them in Russia
> 
> Everything else uses a dowel between the the two with a normal oring.
> Came up with 2 options/ideas. We can get the bellhousing and transfer case housing machined to work with the normal dowels/orings.
> ...


You can call Tom at APTuning if you have any further questions. He is a standup guy.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

I plan to go down to Bill's shop tomorrow morning. I will post some new updates.


----------



## 35i 2000 (Jan 27, 2005)

looking forward to updates!


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

35i 2000 said:


> looking forward to updates!


:thumbup:.


----------



## vr6 3.0 (Apr 19, 2008)

mainstayinc said:


> You can call Tom at APTuning if you have any further questions. He is a standup guy.


Thanks! I just talked to Tom last week Friday about their lower bearing girdle install, I'll get with him on this as well. 

In for progress :thumbup:


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Quick update:

Yesterday I towed my MK4 daily driver (2.1L+GTX2867R + E85) to Bill's shop so that he can replace the cylinder head with the re-built unit from the Audi TT donor car. Here's a thread that details that situation:

http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthread.php?5895838-gtx2867r-spool&p=97390777&viewfull=1#post97390777

All of my troubleshooting pointed toward a bad cylinder head. I drove back down to Bill's shop this morning to discuss the situation. Bill will remove the cylinder head from the car in the next week and get to the bottom of why it won't start. The cylinder head needed to be serviced anyway since it was leaking oil on startup and appeared to have bad valve seals.

Here is a picture of the re-built Audi TT unit:



















I had them put the Supertech inconel exhaust valves in (which were originally designated for the MK1 until Bill convinced me to do Ferrea all the way around) along with new valve stems, valve seals, performance springs etc. They even did a 3 angle valve job. I also bought a VVT tensioner solenoid along with new timing belt and all accessories. So, with any luck the MK4 daily driver will be up and running soon after a year of sitting in my driveway. I kind of forget what boost feels like since I've been driving my MK1 GTI Rabbit around. Can't wait.

Talking about the MK1, the syncro beam and trailing arms came back from powder coating. The arms look factory new:










Also, the engine block came back from Automotive and Industrial machine shop in Souderton, PA. They did a lot of work to get the tall boy main caps to fit properly (line bore, hone etc.). However, as you can see, the girdle and main caps look perfect:


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Almost forgot. I have a second set of Supertech Inconel exhaust valves for sale (PN: AEVI-1103). These are brand new, never installed and still in package. These retail for $259.99 + shipping on IE's website. You can have them for $195.00 + shipping. That's a 25% discount. These are far superior to the stock sodium-filled valves which tend to break under extreme conditions. PM me if interested.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Sale pending...

EDIT: Sold!


----------



## 35i 2000 (Jan 27, 2005)

wow this continues to be such an excellent build!

can't wait to see what the powdercoated beam looks like under the rabbit!


----------



## Gulfstream (Jul 28, 2010)

Really interested to hear some inputs from this turbo.

ic::wave:


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

35i 2000 said:


> wow this continues to be such an excellent build!can't wait to see what the powdercoated beam looks like under the rabbit!


Me too! Bill said it will be the *newest* looking part in the car.


Gulfstream said:


> Really interested to hear some inputs from this turbo.ic::wave:


:thumbup:


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

UPDATE:I stopped by Bill's shop this morning to get an update on my MK4 daily driver. I was hoping that Bill would have the cylinder head removed so we can get to the bottom of my *no start* situation. However, other customer cars took priority in the past week so no progress. Bill said that the head will be off by Tuesday of next week.

Matt was there working on another customer's car (VR6 Corrado). His brother was in the process of building the ultimate 1.8T before he passed away last year. Consequently, he mentioned that he had a Eurospec Billet crankshaft for sale. It turned out to be a 95.5mm stroker crank (PN: EBC 105 101 SC 955). That would fit perfect with my Malhe 95.5mm Powerpak+ pistons and IE Tuscan rods.










I already have a 95.5mm TDI (ALH) crankshaft I bought last year which was already polished, magnafluxed, and checked for straightness etc. at the machine shop. However, I decided to get Matt out of the Eurospec unit and bought it from him. Just when I thought I had a great engine setup, it is taken to a whole new level with this Eurospec billet unit.

Consequently, I will post my 95.5mm TDI (ALH) crankshaft for sale once I can find the receipt from the machine shop.

EDIT: Stock picture of Eurospec unit.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

I just noticed that Matt's Eurospec crankshaft is missing the chain sprocket for the oil pump. Does anyone know if that is going to be a problem? Can a new chain sprocket be fitted easily?


----------



## GrimJettaGLI (Aug 2, 2004)

mainstayinc said:


> I just noticed that Matt's Eurospec crankshaft is missing the chain sprocket for the oil pump. Does anyone know if that is going to be a problem? Can a new chain sprocket be fitted easily?


The sprocket is pressed on, should be an easy fix. :thumbup:


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

GrimJettaGLI said:


> The sprocket is pressed on, should be an easy fix. :thumbup:


Thank you! I'll let Bill know and we'll move ahead with the billet unit.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

BTW we weighed the Eurospec billet crankshaft on a crappy scale and it was 31 lbs. versus the 39 lbs. for the TDI (ALH) unit. According to Eurospec's website, the billet crankshaft weighs 13 kg's or 28.7 lbs. At any rate, it's 8 to 10 lbs. lighter than the ALH unit. Any suggestions for a light-weight flywheel to make this a really nice, light-weight rotating assembly? I think I used a G60 flywheel in my MK4. Go with the same or something different/better in the MK1 Rabbit?


----------



## vr6 3.0 (Apr 19, 2008)

Curious to see your experience with this crank. I had been planning to run one but was advised that they are made in China and anthough they are much lighter, they have a tendency to bend. I was recommended specifically not to use it with my setup, which utilizes the same pistons yours does.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

vr6 3.0 said:


> Curious to see your experience with this crank. I had been planning to run one but was advised that they are made in China and anthough they are much lighter, they have a tendency to bend. I was recommended specifically not to use it with my setup, which utilizes the same pistons yours does.


Interesting. It looks like a quality piece. Eurospec's products are generally top notch. I am sure Bill wouldn't recommend this billet unit unless it could withstand the punishment. It's made out of chromoly 4340 steel which has extremely high tensile strength. Also, the process of making a crankshaft out of billet steel is quite expensive. USRT and other vendors stand behind this crankshaft.

If you can link to any actual failures with this crankshaft I would be very interested in reading about that.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

I was up late last night reseaching Eurospec billet crankshafts and whether anyone had issues or failures. I did read some posts by Issam that advise against using the Eurospec unit. I contacted a guy who installed a 92.8mm billet crankshaft from Eurospec and am waiting for his reply back. In the meantime, I am going to have Matt's billet crankshaft validated at my local machine shop for straightness and balance. Below is the receipt for my OEM TDI (ALH) crankshaft that was cleaned, magnafluxed, polished and balanced. It did not need to be straightened as it was within spec.









I plan on keeping my OEM TDI (ALH) crankshaft for now as a backup. Hopefully, the Eurospec crankshaft gets a good report from the machine shop. Billet 4340 steel is pretty much standard on all high-performance race crankshafts. I really don't see it bending especially with the engine girdle and ARP main bolts holding it in place.


----------



## vr6 3.0 (Apr 19, 2008)

mainstayinc said:


> I did read some posts by Issam that advise against using the Eurospec unit.


He was the one who strongly suggested against it to me. I got the same pistons as you from him, and asked him about that specific crank then and that was when he said he had known of several to bend, and he recommended sticking with the ALH one. 

For what it's worth, I tried to reach out to Scott at USRT several times on feedback from his perspective and never heard back.

Happy to be shown the opposite, but based mostly off that I decided to stick with the ALH for now.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

vr6 3.0 said:


> He was the one who strongly suggested against it to me. I got the same pistons as you from him, and asked him about that specific crank then and that was when he said he had known of several to bend, and he recommended sticking with the ALH one.
> 
> For what it's worth, I tried to reach out to Scott at USRT several times on feedback from his perspective and never heard back.
> 
> Happy to be shown the opposite, but based mostly off that I decided to stick with the ALH for now.


Thanks for your feedback. Let me know if Scott gets back to you. In the meantime, I'll get the billet crank checked out at my machine shop before I make any final decisions. Issam seems to know his stuff and I trust his opinion. I have bought a lot of items from him including the FEX angle drive, Mahle pistons (2 sets), brand new AEB cylinder head and a bunch of other stuff. I am currently waiting on delivery of a race alternator kit from him and a custom CNC'd exhaust flange. I'll have to give him a call sometime this week to discuss.


----------



## vr6 3.0 (Apr 19, 2008)

mainstayinc said:


> Thanks for your feedback. Let me know if Scott gets back to you. In the meantime, I'll get the billet crank checked out at my machine shop before I make any final decisions. Issam seems to know his stuff and I trust his opinion. I have bought a lot of items from him including the FEX angle drive, Mahle pistons (2 sets), brand new AEB cylinder head and a bunch of other stuff. I am currently waiting on delivery of a race alternator kit from him and a custom CNC'd exhaust flange. I'll have to give him a call sometime this week to discuss.


He does. If it were simply another member I wouldn't have even mentioned it, but he had specific times he knew of that they had failed. I've got the same alternator kit and one of his aluminum oil pans also :thumbup:

Did he sell you just the FEX angle drive? He told me he'd only get them together with the gearbox... will have to go back and check his wording.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

vr6 3.0 said:


> He does. If it were simply another member I wouldn't have even mentioned it, but he had specific times he knew of that they had failed. I've got the same alternator kit and one of his aluminum oil pans also :thumbupid he sell you just the FEX angle drive? He told me he'd only get them together with the gearbox... will have to go back and check his wording.


I bought a FEX angle drive from him that came disassembled. This was 2 or 3 years ago. Did you receive the alternator kit yet? I am still waiting for him to deliver mine. Mine is a 90 AMP kit and custom larger pulley.


----------



## vr6 3.0 (Apr 19, 2008)

mainstayinc said:


> I bought a FEX angle drive from him that came disassembled. This was 2 or 3 years ago. Did you receive the alternator kit yet? I am still waiting for him to deliver mine. Mine is a 90 AMP kit and custom larger pulley.


Thanks for the info on the FEX. That is what I would need too, since I'm also using an 02C base w/ 17/27 rear Haldex. 

Yes I received the alternator kit several months ago, but it did take about 6-8 weeks after I ordered it. Mine is his standard kit with the Denso 8162 60amp alternator.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

vr6 3.0 said:


> Thanks for the info on the FEX. That is what I would need too, since I'm also using an 02C base w/ 17/27 rear Haldex. *Yes I received the alternator kit several months ago, but it did take about 6-8 weeks after I ordered it.* Mine is his standard kit with the Denso 8162 60amp alternator.


That's good to know. I think the 90 AMP might require some machining to make it fit. That might be why it is taking longer to deliver.


----------



## vr6 3.0 (Apr 19, 2008)

mainstayinc said:


> That's good to know. I think the 90 AMP might require some machining to make it fit. That might be why it is taking longer to deliver.


I wouldn't be surprised. I ordered the AEB alternator kit from him several years ago and that was also a great kit, but also took longer than you might expect to get it.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

vr6 3.0 said:


> I wouldn't be surprised. I ordered the AEB alternator kit from him several years ago and that was also a great kit, but also took longer than you might expect to get it.


LOL. I just might ask Bill to bug him for the alternator kit since we are getting close to building the engine. Maybe he will have more influence. EDIT: Bill and I jokingly talked about driving up to see Issam in my cargo van since he is only 6 hours away. Bill suggested that we take Josh from NLS with us but that's a whole other story.


----------



## vr6 3.0 (Apr 19, 2008)

haha, I know Issam has had his differences with certain other vendors over the years. In my experience he's always been very helpful, and he makes great products, sometimes you need to wait for a while, but I'm okay living with that most days for custom made parts for a 35 year old car.


----------



## vr6 3.0 (Apr 19, 2008)

Sorry if I missed it, have you decided on a clutch yet?


----------



## northendroid (Sep 16, 2014)

vr6 3.0 said:


> haha, I know Issam has had his differences with certain other vendors over the years. *In my experience he's always been very helpful, and he makes great products, sometimes you need to wait for a while*, but I'm okay living with that most days for custom made parts for a 35 year old car.


He has help me greatly since the first day I met him, went to buy a Autotech G60 pulley he had for sale ended up buying 2 x (new) AEB block with intermittent and crankshaft, (new) AEB head, exhaust header, oil pan, Mocal oil cooler. Heading there today to pick up more parts off him,I'm lucky enough to live an hour away from Ottawa. First time I entered his warehouse where he has his private stash it was like finding G60 heaven :laugh:. You should see his engine collection unbelievable  he's extremely knowledgable and alway willing to help
Mainstayinc love your build great info exceptional workmanship, I'll be building a 20V AEB to put into the Corrado and putting the PG internal to the second block to get the Rado on the road sooner than later.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

vr6 3.0 said:


> haha, I know Issam has had his differences with certain other vendors over the years. In my experience he's always been very helpful, and he makes great products, sometimes you need to wait for a while, but I'm okay living with that most days for custom made parts for a 35 year old car.


Yes, I agree. He has always treated me fairly.



vr6 3.0 said:


> Sorry if I missed it, have you decided on a clutch yet?


I haven't decided on a clutch yet. I was originally going to go with a twin-clutch setup like the Clutch Masters 725 series (PN: 17036-TD7R-4S) with 14 lb. flywheel.










However, when I had my 02C built at APTuning last summer, Michael, the transmission expert, said that I don't need anything special since it is going into a light-weight MK1. I definitely trust his opinion since he built me previous 02J transmission and that has been super reliable. I run a Bully Performance Clutch from Ottawa Clutches on that setup. That has also been bullet-proof. So, my thinking since I spoke with Michael is to go with a single disc clutch such as another Bully Clutch or maybe something Clutch Masters.



northendroid said:


> He has help me greatly since the first day I met him, went to buy a Autotech G60 pulley he had for sale ended up buying 2 x (new) AEB block with intermittent and crankshaft, (new) AEB head, exhaust header, oil pan, Mocal oil cooler. Heading there today to pick up more parts off him,I'm lucky enough to live an hour away from Ottawa. First time I entered his warehouse where he has his private stash it was like finding G60 heaven :laugh:. You should see his engine collection unbelievable  he's extremely knowledgable and alway willing to help, as for the vendors he has his reason
> 
> *Mainstayinc love your build great info exceptional workmanship*, I'll be building a 20V AEB to put into the Corrado and putting the PG internal to get the Rado on the road sooner than later.


Thanks. I would love to see his warehouse and I may just drive up there to pick up some syncro-related parts from him that I will need for this build. That includes a rear sway bar and possibly a drive shaft. I really can't imagine him packaging those up for shipping. Anyway, it would give me an excuse to drive up to Canada again through upstate New York. Canada is stunningly beautiful through that area! That silver Corrado is nice. It looks like you're going from the G60 to a turbo'd 1.8T with AEB head, correct? Which turbo do you plan on running?


----------



## northendroid (Sep 16, 2014)

Yes G60 first then the turbo haven't given much thought yet on the turbo been concentrating on the G60 build for know. Any suggestions?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

northendroid said:


> Yes G60 first then the turbo haven't given much thought yet on the turbo been concentrating on the G60 build for know. Any suggestions?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


That depends on how you are going to use the car. For daily driving, I would recommend the second generation GTX2860R or GTX2867R or first generation GTX2863R on stock displacement and pump gas. Those will give you good boost response with a lot up top for a daily driver.

If you want to go cheaper, then look into a Frankenturbo F23 or similar.

If you don't want to pay anything, then I can send you my K04-022 from my Audi 225 donor car. With a tune it can make over 250 HP or possibly more.

If you want to go bigger, the sky is the limit.

If I were going to re-do my MK4 GTI daily driver, I would do a second generation GTX3071R with T3 twin-scroll turbine housing. But I'm stroked out to 2.1L. I also run on E85 and other power adders.


----------



## northendroid (Sep 16, 2014)

Not looking to go crazy I'd like 300/350hp range. Could I get that or close to that with the K04 you mentioned. As for tuning I'll be going standalone when I drop that engine in. Got a tuner in Quebec that can look after that. The price is right on the K04 LOL


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

If you were reading this thread carefully you will notice I am using a driver's side SEM intake manifold (large port) for this project.










Here are some dyno results versus the Integrated Engineering intake manifold on a stroked out 2.0L large port AEB head with HTA8635R:










Not only does the SEM make more power, but it is a better option for me since I will be using a sequential fuel injection setup (8 injectors). The long runners and efficient design of the SEM unit will allow me to place a second set of injectors along the runners. I wouldn't be able to do that as easily with the IE unit since it has a taller style detachable plenum.

In the comparison above, the SEM made over 13 HP more maximum HP than the IE unit or a 3.5% increase. Scaling that to my setup, that could translate into an additional 35 HP!


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

northendroid said:


> Not looking to go crazy I'd like 300/350hp range. Could I get that or close to that with the K04 you mentioned. As for tuning I'll be going standalone when I drop that engine in. Got a tuner in Quebec that can look after that. The price is right on the K04 LOL
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


LOL (K04). For that HP range, I would go with the first recommendation (second generation GTX2860R or first generation GTX2863R). You will be amazed at the power of those turbos. The Frankenturbo F23 will get you close but it will be maxed out.


----------



## northendroid (Sep 16, 2014)

Ok appreciate the info. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

northendroid said:


> Ok appreciate the info.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


:thumbup:


----------



## INA (Nov 16, 2005)

John,
Here is the kit I did for Nick. Your unit will follow the same set up.
i.e. allowing those with a 90A , 120A or 140A (Touareg) Alternator to "pivot" essentially converting it to an "ABF" style alternator.
Sorry I don't have photos uploaded to the website but you get the idea.

https://www.instagram.com/p/BTSaqoVjkFW/


----------



## INA (Nov 16, 2005)

mainstayinc said:


> Hopefully, the Eurospec crankshaft gets a good report from the machine shop. Billet 4340 steel is pretty much standard on all high-performance race crankshafts.


The issue isn't the material.
It is the engineering that went into the product. Additional material where it does not need to be and no material where it needs to be.
4340 is pretty solid material but like I said in emails and over the forums , one of the first door stops we had at the machine shop was a Eurospec 92.8mm crankshaft that was completely out of wack. Thought it was an odd ball until others followed suite. 
Rule of thumb:
- 92.8mm Eurospec crank - stay away
- 92.8mm CAST AZG/AEG crank - good till about 500hp (seen them break)
- 92.8mm FORGED BPY/BMP 2.0 TFSI crank - have not seen one fail yet
- 95.5mm FORGED ALH, etc crank - have not seen one fail yet. Have seen a good few that came out the motor bent . Then again that is to be expected on an engine that has 500000+miles on it running the CR they run.


----------



## Budsdubbin2 (Sep 20, 2016)

I am pretty stunned at the results of the IE vrs the SEM intake manifold. I figured you should have peak torque sooner but toward redline I would have thought the IE would come out on top. I wonder if the 1psi made a difference. Hard to argue with the results here other than the wavy torque curve on the IE run curious what happened there. Any logs of knock, lambda or timing during that run?


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

INA said:


> John,
> Here is the kit I did for Nick. Your unit will follow the same set up.
> i.e. allowing those with a 90A , 120A or 140A (Touareg) Alternator to "pivot" essentially converting it to an "ABF" style alternator.
> Sorry I don't have photos uploaded to the website but you get the idea.
> ...


That looks like a great solution. Definitely better than having to modify the alternator housing to make fit. Don't forgot the larger pulley option for my kit.:thumbup:


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

[


INA said:


> The issue isn't the material.
> It is the engineering that went into the product. Additional material where it does not need to be and no material where it needs to be.
> 4340 is pretty solid material but like I said in emails and over the forums , one of the first door stops we had at the machine shop was a Eurospec 92.8mm crankshaft that was completely out of wack. Thought it was an odd ball until others followed suite.
> Rule of thumb:
> ...


Thanks for your feedback. Bill just texted me and is going to bring the 95.5mm Eurospec crank to the machine shop to be validated this week. If it's out of spec in regards to straightness and cannot be fixed (>.002 inches), then I will pass on the crank and just go with the OEM unit which already passed inspection. If I do decide to go with the Eurospec unit, it would probably be a good idea to drop the oil pan and remove the crankshaft and re-check for straightness.

Talking about oil pans, do you still sell the custom aluminum oil pans for the 1.8T?

I read in that thread that it clears the studs on a Eurospec and INA engine girdle. Will it clear an IE girdle kit? It's also 1/4 inch.


----------



## INA (Nov 16, 2005)

mainstayinc said:


> Don't forgot the larger pulley option for my kit.:thumbup:


65mm
it will not be installed on the alternator though. It will be included in the package 



mainstayinc said:


> I read in that thread that it clears the studs on a Eurospec and INA engine girdle.


Showing 2 oil pan's in stock. It is not the studs that interfere , its the nuts and washers. Depending on which nut is used , they are clearanced for them but you might have to get in there with a dremel.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Budsdubbin2 said:


> I am pretty stunned at the results of the IE vrs the SEM intake manifold. I figured you should have peak torque sooner but toward redline I would have thought the IE would come out on top. I wonder if the 1psi made a difference. Hard to argue with the results here other than the wavy torque curve on the IE run curious what happened there. Any logs of knock, lambda or timing during that run?


Here is a back-to-back comparison Badger5 did of the SEM, IE and 034 on a GTX35R variant which shows boost and lambda.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

INA said:


> 65mm
> it will not be installed on the alternator though. It will be included in the package
> 
> 
> Showing 2 oil pan's in stock. It is not the studs that interfere , its the nuts and washers. Depending on which nut is used , they are clearanced for them but you might have to get in there with a dremel.


I see. I will be giving you a call shortly.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

mainstayinc said:


> I see. I will be giving you a call shortly.


I just got off the phone with Issam. Great guy. I decided to order his custom oil pan.










It looks like it will be a lot easier to modify than a stock unit for the IE engine girdle. If you look at the stock unit, there are sections which protrude and have to be cut out. Not to mention that it's a cast unit which is harder to weld. I don't anticipate that being as much of a issue with the INA unit.










Also, he finished my custom exhaust flange which he will ship with the oil pan along with an 02C transmission bracket  which I have not been able to obtain and QTP exhaust cutout I sent to him a few months ago. I am very much looking forward to receiving this shipment!

I should be getting the *broken* MK4 cylinder head back from Bill Schimmel this week. That along with Issam's custom CNC'd exhaust flange, I should be able to begin mocking up my short-runner, unequal length, divided T3 exhaust manifold.


----------



## sleepy1.8t (Sep 5, 2013)

mainstayinc said:


> I should be getting the *broken* MK4 cylinder head back from Bill Schimmel this week.


Was there a cause of failure determined?


----------



## vr6 3.0 (Apr 19, 2008)

Good info on the clutch, appreciate it! I'll be sending them my gearbox as well for a girdle install, will check with Matt at that time. 

You'll like that oil pan!


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

sleepy1.8t said:


> Was there a cause of failure determined?


Not yet. I just presume it's broken. I'll know for sure this week when Bill removes the cylinder head. There definitely has to be some kind of mechanical failure in the head. I ruled out everything else including bad sensors, fuel pressure, ignition etc. I might be wrong, though. We'll see.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

vr6 3.0 said:


> Good info on the clutch, appreciate it! I'll be sending them my gearbox as well for a girdle install, will check with Matt at that time.
> 
> *You'll like that oil pan!*


I didn't necessarily need the oil pan but I figured it would make the engine girdle install a little easier. By "girdle" I think you mean "lower pinion girdle" correct? If so, that's a smart move. APTuning custom machines their girdle to fit your gearbox.


----------



## vr6 3.0 (Apr 19, 2008)

mainstayinc said:


> I didn't necessarily need the oil pan but I figured it would make the engine girdle install a little easier. By "girdle" I think you mean "lower pinion girdle" correct? If so, that's a smart move. APTuning custom machines their girdle to fit your gearbox.


It gives you more capacity and confidence in corners as well.. plus it looks pretty :laugh:

Yes I meant the lower bearing girdle. I won't be at the power level you're shooting for, but want the gearbox as tough as possible all the same.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

vr6 3.0 said:


> It gives you more capacity and confidence in corners as well.. plus it looks pretty :laugh:
> 
> Yes I meant the lower bearing girdle. I won't be at the power level you're shooting for, but want the gearbox as tough as possible all the same.


:thumbup:


----------



## INA (Nov 16, 2005)

vr6 3.0 said:


> You'll like that oil pan!


Isaac! How are you doing? Hey now....you liked the oil pan first


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

^^

Hey Issam,

I saw your VR6 oil pan at Bill Schimmel's shop last month for an R32 project. That got me thinking about buying one for my 1.8T since it's such a nice piece. I'm glad I decided to go for it.

-John.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

UPDATE:

The Eurospec 95.5mm crank was sent out to Greg at Automotive and Industrial machine shop last week to get checked out. Bill just texted the following:



Bill Schimmel said:


> Hi. Greg said crank is perfect!


I also contacted a guy on the Club GTI forum in the UK who installed the 92.8mm Eurospec crank to see if he has had any problems with it. He finally wrote me back:



***** said:


> How do John
> 
> Eurospec crank is faultless, still doing the job it was designed for
> 
> ...


So, based on his feedback and the fact that the crank is perfectly balanced and straight, I am going to use it in the MK1 Rabbit GTI. Bill just called me back and said that Greg was impressed with how nice the Eurospec crank is. He is going to balance the entire rotating assembly which includes the crank, rods, pistons wrist pins etc. That gives me a lot of confidence to spin this engine to the 8500 to 9000 RPM range that will be required to extract the most power out of the GTX3584RS on 2.1L.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

UPDATE:

I went down to Bill's shop this morning to go over a few details relating to the MK4 and MK1 projects. Bill had the engine block out of the MK4 and is going to send that out to the machine shop to get honed for the new Mahle 9:1 pistons. I decided to purchase a new ATP clone manifold and port match that to the GTX2867R 0.48 A/R turbine housing. The T3 gasket cracked on the previous ATP clone manifold due to the fact that I got a little overzealous when I ported it years ago and didn't leave enough material to seal the gasket. It was likely leaking and effecting my spool. So, for $69.98 plus free shipping from California, we are going to start off with a new manifold. Hopefully, this time I don't get another metal chip in my eye and land myself in the hospital when I try to port match the manifold. LOL. I'll make sure I wear eye protection this time.

Since I now have a lightweight billet crank that weighs 8 to 10 lbs. less than the OEM version, I have been doing a lot of research on the benefits of a lightweight rotating assembly. This includes the crank, connecting rods, pistons, flywheel and pressure plate. Apparently, there are many. Most people report a 5 to 10 HP gain using a lightweight flywheel. For example, this guy reported a 6 HP and 4 LB FT torque increase across the board in his Nissan 370Z just by installing a lighter flywheel.










The other benefits is a quicker revving engine. This guy did a nice comparison of a stock versus lightweight flywheel.






To really understand the benefits of a quicker revving engine, you have to look at the HP versus time to speed relationship. Even though this guy only gained 9.3 HP and 8.6 LB. FT of torque in his Z06 Corvette, he achieved maximum horsepower in 11 seconds using a lightweight flywheel/clutch combo versus 14 seconds using the stock. Plotting horsepower versus time, you can see that he gained 25 to 50 HP across the board over stock. 










In the same article, they compared a "Development" Z06 with the following results:










I think the Clutch Masters 725 series ultra light clutch and flywheel kit will go really nice with my engine setup. It is only 18 lbs. versus 25 lbs. for a standard 228mm single disc clutch. Even more important, it uses 184mm clutch discs which have a lower Moment of Inertia (smaller radius) as compared to a stock size disc. That should mate nicely with the Eurospec light weight billet crankshaft. Total weight savings for this combination is 15 lbs. of for the crank, pressure plate and flywheel (49 lbs. versus 64 lbs.).










I read that for every 1 pound of rotating mass you remove, you effectively lighten your curb weight by 20 pounds in first and second gear when looking at quarter mile times. 15 lbs. x 20 = 300 lbs. I am not counting the Mahle pistons or IE connecting rods. The Mahle pistons weigh in at 292 grams versus 320 grams for the JE's I had in the MK4. That's almost an ounce per piston less weight as compared to the JE's. I'm not sure about the IE Tuscan rods. Those look pretty heavy duty.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

I thought I would share this CFD simulation of the SEM intake manifold posted on instagram.










I have the large port, driver side, version for the MK1 Rabbit GTI and a custom made, limited production small port, passenger side version for my MK4. I'm glad I jumped on these when I did! Below is a photo of the small port, passenger side below:


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

UPDATE:

Bill stopped by my place today to pick up the second set of Mahle pistons that will go into the MK4. He informed me that, according to Greg at Automotive and Industrial, the cylinder bores that formerly housed the JE pistons are too wide for the Mahle's. We are talking a few thousandths of an inch too wide. My first reaction was to just slap the Mahle's in there and call it a day. After all, won't the piston rings take up the extra gap? But I doubt that Greg would do that.

So, Bill suggested I either get another set of JE's or get a new 06A engine block. He said he thinks he has an extra 06A in his shop which he is willing to give to me. He will let me know later this week. If that's not an option, then I will just get one from ebay or here on vwvortex. Shouldn't be a big deal.

I also had a chance to do some die grinding on the new ATP clone manifold that will replace the old unit in the MK4. I got a tracing of the GTX2867R turbine housing flange last Friday while at Bill's shop. I used that as a template to clean up the outlet flange on the ATP clone. Not bad for a 45 minute job using an old Rotozip someone gave me last year. Good thing I didn't rotozap a metal chip in my eye this time. LOL. Bill took the manifold with him to get powder coated.










Bill also ordered the Clutch Masters FX725 ultra lightweight clutch and flywheel kit for the MK1 Rabbit GTI. He got the Race/Street version (PN: 17036-TD7S-4S) which has one sprung hub and one solid hub. That should make for better engagement on my street setup. He also ordered **check this out** a hydraulic throwout bearing for the twin disc clutch specific to the 02J/02A transmission. Up until now, Clutch Masters has only offered the hydraulic bearing for the 6-speed transmission. Apparently, it is now available for the 02J/02A 5-speed but is not yet listed on their website. That should make for a killer setup with my MK1 Hydraulic Clutch Conversion Kit by Fast Bunny Metalwerks. I will put up my nice APTuning billet clutch fork for sale if anyone is interested. It's a nice piece.

Hydraulic Bearing 6-speed version:


----------



## vr6 3.0 (Apr 19, 2008)

Any idea what chatter will be like with that setup on the street?


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

vr6 3.0 said:


> Any idea what chatter will be like with that setup on the street?


Not sure. With a lightened steel flywheel and 184mm twin clutch discs, it definitely won't be as smooth as a stock dual mass flywheel setup. As long as it's installed and broken in correctly, then I don't mind some chatter. Here is a link to the Clutch Masters' Twin Disc Clutch page.

Apparently, the 850 series has less clutch chatter and smoother engagement compared to the 725 series. Also, it looks like the 725 has two rigid discs, not one sprung and one rigid like Bill mentioned to me. I'm not too concerned about that. It will be interesting to see how the hydraulic throwout bearing works with this setup. Hopefully, it will give me good control over clutch engagement.


----------



## sleepy1.8t (Sep 5, 2013)

mainstayinc said:


> UPDATE: cylinder bores that formerly housed the JE pistons are too wide for the Mahle's. We are talking a few thousandths of an inch too wide.


Waaaat..... how, and why


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

sleepy1.8t said:


> Waaaat..... how, and why


I have no idea! I am trusting Bill and Greg, the machinist at Automotive and Industrial. Since Greg is located in the next town over, maybe I'll stop by and have him explain to me directly.


----------



## One-Eight GTI (Jan 5, 2010)

I bought that hydro setup also. Just haven't installed it yet. Looking forward to updates to see how many shims you end up using


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

One-Eight GTI said:


> I bought that hydro setup also. Just haven't installed it yet. Looking forward to updates *to see how many shims you end up using*
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


:thumbup: Very nice. I'll post details once we do the engine and transmission install into the MK1.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

UPDATE: I stopped by Bill's shop last Friday to pay some bills and get an update. The Clutch Masters FX725 arrived along with the hydraulic throwout bearing. We weighed the whole FX725 assembly which came to 20 lbs. 7 ounces. which is slightly more than the 18 lbs. advertised on the CM website. Still, the whole FX725 assembly which includes the flywheel, clutch discs, pressure plates and housing weigh less than a standard weight G60 flywheel which IIRC is 20.5 lbs. Add to that about 10 lbs. for a standard size pressure plate and clutch and you come in around 30 to 32 lbs. for a single disk setup. So, weight savings for the FX725 is about 10 to 12 lbs. over a single disc setup.

I called CM and confirmed that the FX725 only comes with two (2) rigid discs. Having one sprung disc and one rigid disc would make it more streetable like the FX850 twin disc. That got me thinking about how I can damper the FX725's clutch engagement. CM sells a Hydraulic Flow Control Valve which controls clutch engagement by restricting hydraulic fluid flow in one direction using different size jets (see below).










There is one problem with the CM Flow Control Valve. That is the fact that it is active in every gear. You only really need to control clutch engagement in first gear. This is especially true on a rigid disc setup like the FX725. Let the clutch out too fast and you have instant engagement. That results in shocking the transmission and drivetrain. Too slow and you burn up your clutch discs. You don't want to necessarily slow down clutch engagement in second, third, fourth gear etc. That would defeat the purpose of having a light-weight rotating assembly (faster shifting).

A little more researching came up with this:










It is Magnus Motorsports' Clutch Release Valve also called their Launch Control Device. It is basically a line lock solenoid used in drag racing combined with a needle valve. The solenoid is normally open and allows clutch hydraulic fluid to flow normally from the clutch master cylinder to the slave cylinder. When the solenoid is engaged, it closes that circuit and forces the hydraulic fluid through the needle valve which restricts flow. The needle valve is unique in that it restricts flow in one direction but allows free flow in reverse direction. That allows you to push the clutch pedal down to the floor normally, but then restricts (controls) fluid flow in the reverse direction when the clutch pedal is released and the clutch engages.

Here is a quick video how it works:






And another video which goes into more detail by Real Street Performance:






And another video from Magnus Motorsports:






The other nice feature about the Magnus unit is that it is infinitely adjustable using the needle valve instead of jets. That allows you to have fine control over clutch engagement. Since I am a cheap bastard, I don't want to pay $300 for a line lock and needle valve. Doing a little more research uncovered the exact needle valve.

So, I will be building my own clutch release valve using the Parker valve and a line lock from Summit Racing along with some NPT to AN adapters and either braided hose or SS tubing. The solenoid is from B&M. Since it has the outlet on the front of the solenoid instead of the bottom, I can make the whole unit more compact as compared to the Magnus unit.










I will be using a Hall-effect proximity sensor (magnetic sensor) as a first gear indicator mounted either on the transmission or the gearshift box.










That will be wired to an arming switch on the dash. When the arming switch is turned on and the proximity sensor is activated, the line lock solenoid will engage and restrict hydraulic fluid flow. I discussed my idea with Bill last Friday. He said that Tan would be very interested in such a device. If you recall correctly, Tan has an race prepped R32 with the same GTX3584RS I plan to use. We will use my MK1 as a test platform for the custom clutch release valve. If it works, Bill may implement that same design for Tan's R32.


----------



## One-Eight GTI (Jan 5, 2010)

I love this thread. It's a great way to learn about all the goodies I didn't know existed. Love updates 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

One-Eight GTI said:


> I love this thread. It's a great way to learn about all the goodies I didn't know existed. Love updates
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Glad you like!:thumbup:


----------



## frechem (Oct 19, 2002)

One-Eight GTI said:


> I love this thread. It's a great way to learn about all the goodies I didn't know existed. Love updates


Indeed. It's great to see the whole thought and selection process.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

frechem said:


> Indeed. It's great to see the whole thought and selection process.


With so much invested in the engine and transmission, I want to try and avoid breaking things. I had a catastrophic transmission failure in my MK4 daily driver several years ago which was not fun. That was with an CM FX200 single disc and stock transmission. I never drove a unsprung, rigid disc clutch before so that will take some getting use to.

I also decided to change my timing belt setup from a OEM hydraulic tensioner to a FSI spring-type tensioner after reading this thread: Gates Racing belt failure....Fun times. Having a timing belt tensioner fail could be very expensive. The AEB cylinder head alone cost me about $3000 ($800 for the head + $1300 for the Ferrea Valve kit + $900 for machine shop to install valve kit). And that doesn't include the Catcams 3660 camshafts, adjustable timing wheel etc. I forget what I paid for those items.

I ordered the timing belt kit from Arnold at PPT late last night and it is already scheduled for delivery tomorrow. That's about the best customer service I have received ever. He sent me a nice email thanking me for my purchase. Great guy. I spoke with him on the phone last year to get some advice on my valvetrain. He as more than willing to take time out of his busy schedule to talk with me.

Here is a link to the kit: Timing Belt Kit 1.8T Manual Conversion Kit










I also received the line lock and adapters from Summit Racing today and started mocking up the Clutch Release Valve. I will have to wait another couple weeks for the Parker F200S4 valve to ship.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

UPDATE: I stopped by Bill's shop yesterday to get a progress update. There was another customer there picking up parts. Later Bill told me that the guy's name was John and he has a 8.3 second corrado. After doing a little research and connecting the dots, I am pretty sure it was John from MMI Concepts, a car dealer/recycler in Bangor, PA. Back in 2010/2011 he built the ultimate tube chassis Corrado dragster with VR6 turbo and rear wheel drive.










The car dyno'd at 957 WHP on 40 lbs. of boost.






And made some nice passes on low boost:






Here's a discussion thread on vwvortex. I'm not sure if the car has been around since then but there hasn't been a lot of discussion on the forums. Anyways... from what I overhead from Bill's office, it sounds like the guy is gearing up to get this project back on the track. Maybe someone wants to contact John/MMI Concepts to confirm. This is certainly a project I will be following.

Aside from that news, Clutch Masters sent the wrong hydraulic throwout bearing again! The first one they sent was for the 02M. The second one seemed to fit until Bill and I test fitted it onto my 02C. It had the wrong thread size (M8 versus M7) and was misaligned by about 3mm. So, that has to be sent back. Also, we unpacked the FX725 twin disc and weighed the flywheel to confirm it was the 10 lb. version. Upon taking apart the clutch packs, we noticed that CM sent two (2) sintered steel clutch discs instead of 1 sintered and 1 tuffcrap disc. So, that would make it their race version. Bill ordered the street/race version (it was even marked correctly on the outside of the box). So, I don't know what kind of fumes these guys at CM are breathing in Rialto, California, but it ain't working for me ATM.

Also, Bill said he expects the MK4 engine block to be returned shortly from the machine shop and will be building that engine in the next week or so. Also, now that IE shipped my billet timing gear, he now has all the parts for the MK1 engine to begin that build except for an alternator kit from Issam/iABED Engineering. I contacted Issam earlier this week and he said he will ship it out that day, so hopefully he comes through.

On another note, ticked2much aka Chad contacted me earlier this week about some Audi TT suspension parts. If you haven't seen his build thread, it's worth checking out. Haldex conversion into a MK4 Jetta. Are you kidding me! Despite the rain this morning, he made quick work of the Audi TT 225 quattro front suspension, which included the steering rack, subframe, control arms and spindles. The majority of those parts will go into a 2000 GTI VR6 project. I am glad to see these parts put to good use!










He also grabbed the rear suspension which included the trailing arms, brakes, shocks, springs and roll bar. I don't see me having the Audi TT parked in my driveway past the end of the year. So, if you need any Audi TT parts, let me know and I'll give you an great deal.


----------



## robertTT225 (Apr 9, 2007)

Love the looks of the Corrado drag cars.









Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

robertTT225 said:


> Love the looks of the Corrado drag cars.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk


Holy crap. Isn't that the 7.4 second Corrado from PR?


----------



## robertTT225 (Apr 9, 2007)

Yep

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

robertTT225 said:


> Yep
> 
> Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk


That car has a 2.0L 16v engine! The fastest VW's I am aware of are 2.0L 16v's, not VR6T's or other.


----------



## robertTT225 (Apr 9, 2007)

That car has gone 7.3 many years ago and the white one 7.2 i believe.









Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

robertTT225 said:


> That car has gone 7.3 many years ago and the white one 7.2 i believe.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk


That's nuts! Another 2.0L 16V Corrado from PR.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Ordered a set of 949 Racing 6UL's in 15x8 in Charcoal last night.










11.6 lbs. Flow formed on a mandrel. 4x100 bolt pattern. Popular in the Mazda world.


----------



## All_Euro (Jul 20, 2008)

mainstayinc said:


> Ordered a set of 949 Racing 6UL's in 15x8 in Charcoal last night.
> 
> ...
> 
> *11.6 lbs.* Flow formed on a mandrel. 4x100 bolt pattern. Popular in the Mazda world.



Featherweights... this new engine should be able to rotate them


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

All_Euro said:


> Featherweights... this new engine should be able to rotate them


Yes, keeping with the lightweight theme! I would have loved to put a set of Fifteen52 RML 15x8 Snowflakes but those are not available. They weigh like 18 lbs. so they are on the heavy side anyways.


----------



## vr6 3.0 (Apr 19, 2008)

Nice to see you're sticking with 15"s, I think they'll suit the OE look you're going for better than a larger wheel.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

vr6 3.0 said:


> Nice to see you're sticking with 15"s, I think they'll suit the OE look you're going for better than a larger wheel.


Yes, I agree. The 16 inch wheels are just a little too big for the small MK1 chassis. I will probably go with 205/50R15's or 225/45R15's with the 6UL wheel. There are a lot of tire choices in that size range from extreme summer performance to track tires. Either way, I will probably have to use spacers to fit the +36 offset 6UL's. Hopefully, I won't have to touch the wheel arches much to fit the wider tires.


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

Rpf1 isn't a choice?

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Vegeta Gti said:


> Rpf1 isn't a choice?
> 
> Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


Yes, I considered those. They are even more lightweight than the 6UL's IIRC. The RPF1's are nice but have larger gaps between the double set of spokes. I prefer spokes that are more evenly distributed. It's a matter of personal taste I guess. Also, the 6UL are proven on the track in the Mazda, Honda world.


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

Gotcha 

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

After waiting more than 2 1/2 months, I **finally** got my 39mm rear syncro hubs from Germany yesterday. These are a 4x100/5x100 conversion hub which will allow me to use any 4x100 or 5x100 bolt wheel.

Radnabe 5x100 4x100 VW Golf 2 Syncro hintere Naben 39 mm 823407615a










Now that I have the 39mm syncro hubs, I pretty much have everything I need to complete the rear wheels and suspension on the MK1 Rabbit GTI except for bushings.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Last Friday was a good day for me. Not only did I receive my 39mm rear syncro hubs, but I also received my 02M TDI backup transmission after waiting almost **4 months**. The transmission is from a 2006 Seat Ibiza Cupra TDI (GUC Code) with a 2.955 final drive (65/22). A taller final drive is important since you cannot run a very large wheel/tire size in an MK1. I will limited to a tire diameter of approximately 23 inches using either a 205/50R15 or 225/45R15. Compare that to a 225/45R17 tire on a MK4 with a 25 inch diameter.










I plan to drop off the 02M backup transmission at Bill's shop this Friday. He will open the case and verify that the ring and pinion has 65/22 teeth as I cannot identify the transmission conclusively from the P/N on the case. Below I reposted a chart from page 2 of this thread. As you can see, the 02M transmission with 2.955 final drive has almost the same gear ratios as my built 02C with 3.157 final drive.










Time to run "balls out" LOL now that I have a backup option for my 02C.


----------



## CD155MX (Dec 18, 2007)

Good news and progress. I learned something new today as well. Thanks


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

I need that trans 

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## ticketed2much (Feb 18, 2012)

mainstayinc said:


>


Forgive my ignorance, is that a haldex transmission or are you just planning to use the gears?


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

ticketed2much said:


> Forgive my ignorance, is that a haldex transmission or are you just planning to use the gears?


Yes. I saved the 02M from the Audi TT 225 quattro that has the center differential. If the 02C blows up, then I will remove the ring and pinion gears from the 02M TDI (GUC code) transmission that I got from the UK and put them into the Audi TT transmission. Viola! 2.955 final drive AWD quattro/Haldex setup.

EDIT: The 02M TDI transmission is FWD.


----------



## ticketed2much (Feb 18, 2012)

mainstayinc said:


> Yes. I saved the 02M from the Audi TT 225 quattro that has the center differential. If the 02C blows up, then I will remove the ring and pinion gears from the 02M TDI (GUC code) transmission that I got from the UK and put them into the Audi TT transmission. Viola! 2.955 final drive AWD quattro/Haldex setup.
> 
> EDIT: The 02M TDI transmission is FWD.



Yeah seems that's what most people that want longer gears do. Thought maybe VW actually made a TDI with angle
drive, guess that's too much to ask for!


----------



## vr6 3.0 (Apr 19, 2008)

Am I understanding the graph correctly that you're going to be at 100mph in mid RPM range in 2nd? :laugh:


----------



## sleepy1.8t (Sep 5, 2013)

once again, amazing information. thanks John for posting this.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

vr6 3.0 said:


> Am I understanding the graph correctly that you're going to be at 100mph in mid RPM range in 2nd? :laugh:


I will be at 100mph at the top of second gear (RPM=8500). That's with a 23 inch diameter tire and 3.157 or 2.955 final drive, depending on which transmission I run.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

CD155MX said:


> Good news and progress. I learned something new today as well. Thanks


Glad you like.



Vegeta Gti said:


> I need that trans
> 
> Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


:beer::beer:



sleepy1.8t said:


> once again, amazing information. thanks John for posting this.


:thumbup:


----------



## frechem (Oct 19, 2002)

mainstayinc said:


> I will be at 100mph at the top of second gear (RPM=8500). That's with a 23 inch diameter tire and 3.157 or 2.955 final drive, depending on which transmission I run.


It might help to see it better if you positioned the x-axis on the tick marks.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

frechem said:


> It might help to see it better if you positioned the x-axis on the tick marks.


I see what you're saying. Microsoft Excel sometimes draws charts a little funny. Those tick marks should be in the center of 'First Gear', 'Second Gear' etc.


----------



## frechem (Oct 19, 2002)

mainstayinc said:


> I see what you're saying. Microsoft Excel sometimes draws charts a little funny. Those tick marks should be in the center of 'First Gear', 'Second Gear' etc.


You have to right click on the x-axis then select format axis then check "on tick marks" under axis options.


----------



## vr6 3.0 (Apr 19, 2008)

mainstayinc said:


> I see what you're saying. Microsoft Excel sometimes draws charts a little funny. Those tick marks should be in the center of 'First Gear', 'Second Gear' etc.


Looking at it again I assumed that was the case, but wasn't sure if you were planning to rev to 12,500 or not :laugh:


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

frechem said:


> You have to right click on the x-axis then select format axis then check "on tick marks" under axis options.


I'll check that out. thanks!



vr6 3.0 said:


> Looking at it again I assumed that was the case, but wasn't sure if you were planning to rev to 12,500 or not :laugh:


Nah, I can only imagine the g-forces at 12,500 RPMs. Actually, I can probably calculate the g-force like I did in this thread.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Just for fun, I decided to dig up my spreadsheet from the link above and compare g-forces at 8,500 and 12,500 RPMs using a 144mm connecting rod. The DARK BLUE is a stock 86.4mm stroke at 8,500 RPMs. The PURPLE is a 95.5mm stroke at 8,500 RPMs which is the maximum engine speed I plan to run on my MK1. The YELLOW is the same 95.5mm stroke but at 12,500 RPMs.










As you can see, there is not much difference *relatively speaking* between the stock 86.4mm stroke and the 95.5mm stroke at 8,500 RPMs. Maximum piston acceleration comes in at TDC and equals 4535 g's (gravitational units) for the stock 86.4mm stroke at 8,500 RPMs. Compare that to 5134 g's for the 95.5mm stroke at 8,500 RPMs.

The Mahle Powerpak+ pistons weigh 292 grams. Applying the maximum g-force at TDC, these pistons apply 2,919 lbs. of force on the connecting rods and main journals (292 x 4535/453.6) for the stock 86.4mm stroke. Compare that to 3,305 lbs. of force for the 95.5mm stroke. If I were to switch to JE pistons which weigh 320 grams, then the maximum amount of force applied to the connecting rods and main journals would increase by about 317 lbs. at 8,500 RPMs.

Since g-force increases by the square of engine speed, you can see how much more g-forces there are at 12,500 RPMs. The maximum g-force for the 95.5mm stroke at 12,500 RPMs at TDC is 11,103 g's. That amounts to 7,148 lbs. of force applied to the connecting rods and main journals for the Mahles and 7,833 lbs. for the JE's. These numbers do not include the weight of the connecting rods which must be taken into account. Tuscan rods weigh 568 grams. You can do the math.

I hope my billet Eurospec crank and IE Tuscan rods are up to task! Imagine if I mis-shifted and rev'ed the engine to 12,500 or more. That would not be good.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

I recently purchased a larger oil cooler for the MK1 engine.










P/N: 038117021B

It is from the VW Passat, Touareg with 3.2L, 3.6L engines. Supposedly, a larger oil cooler will warm up the oil sooner and keep the oil at normal operating temperature under extreme engine conditions. That will help protect bearings and other wear surfaces. I figure it would be an easy upgrade while I am building the engine. Anyone else have experience with a larger oil cooler?


----------



## vr6 3.0 (Apr 19, 2008)

mainstayinc said:


> a larger oil cooler will warm up the oil sooner


This seems counter intuitive? Not disagreeing with you.. just curious on the reasoning behind it. Is the fin surface larger and the capacity the same (ie, more cooling power), or are the fin surface and capacity equally larger than the 1.8t one I wonder (ie, more cooling capacity). 

I feel like I read somewhere that if you didn't properly match your oil viscosity to your cooling efficiency you could potentially cause damage to the engine by never allowing the oil to reach its appropriate operating temp... probably not a worry with an OE cooler though. Are you planning to run a separate auxiliary oil cooler as well?


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

vr6 3.0 said:


> This seems counter intuitive? Not disagreeing with you.. just curious on the reasoning behind it. Is the fin surface larger and the capacity the same (ie, more cooling power), or are the fin surface and capacity equally larger than the 1.8t one I wonder (ie, more cooling capacity).
> 
> I feel like I read somewhere that if you didn't properly match your oil viscosity to your cooling efficiency you could potentially cause damage to the engine by never allowing the oil to reach its appropriate operating temp... probably not a worry with an OE cooler though. Are you planning to run a separate auxiliary oil cooler as well?


Yeah, that does seem counter intuitive. The larger unit does have increased cooling capacity. It's possible that the engine coolant heats up quicker than the engine oil on warmup and thereby transfers heat to the oil. Not sure. Also, there might be some kind of thermostat that stays closed on warmup preventing the oil from going through the cooling circuit. I'll have to look into this in more detail. Other people who might know about this are welcome to comment.

I don't plan on running a separate auxiliary oil cooler. The larger OEM unit should be sufficient by itself for my current and future needs. Below is a visual comparison between stock and other VW OEM oil coolers and a link to some more information.


----------



## GasInMyVeins (Jul 11, 2010)

mainstayinc said:


> It's possible that the engine coolant heats up quicker than the engine oil on warmup and thereby transfers heat to the oil.


That's exactly why.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

GasInMyVeins said:


> That's exactly why.


:thumbup:

It looks like Photobucket is starting to charge for 3rd party hosting. They want $399.99 from me in order to continue with their service. None of the pictures I posted here are currently visible. Does anyone know of a *FREE* hosting service where I can transfer my pictures?

I imagine all of the pictures in my other threads (compressor maps etc.) are no longer visible too.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

I signed up with Imgur for hosting my pictures. It seems a lot better than Photobucket, which has always been very laggy when I logon.

Anyways, as I was leaving the bank today, I saw a first generation Mitsubishi Eclipse with drag radials and a parachute parked in the bank parking lot. I approached the owner, Kevin, and asked him about his setup. It's got a 2.4L engine with a twin scroll BWS366 turbo running on E98 capable of 8 seconds in the quarter mile. He said that he will be switching to the 2.0L engine since that is apparently more stout and capable of reving to 11,000 RPMs. The problem with the 2.4L is that the cylinder head twists under high stress and breaks the head gasket seal.










He's running a DBW VW R32 throttle body and a Magnus Motorsports Launch Control Valve (see below).










He said he was running a twin-disc clutch and the Magnus valve is hard to dial in. I told him that I am building my own launch control valve using a fine tune needle valve which should be much more precise and compact than the Magnus unit. I stopped by Bill Schimmel's house this morning to show him the prototype. It uses all steel fittings and will be capable of mounting inside the cabin so you don't even have to open your hood to adjust the amount of clutch grab. Once the prototype is proven, then Bill will probably start selling the launch control valve on his website.


----------



## northendroid (Sep 16, 2014)

It did the same thing (Imgur). Now need to fix the threads I care about and leave the other ones with no pictures. This is going to screw up a lot of DIY threads with the pictures missing.:facepalm: Cool Eclipse 8 seconds is some serious ponies.


----------



## CD155MX (Dec 18, 2007)

northendroid said:


> This is going to screw up a lot of DIY threads with the pictures missing.:facepalm:


It's such a sad thing to see when people put a lot of effort into a good DIY and then others can't benefit from them down the road because of the picture issue.

I switched to imgur a few months ago as well when my photobucket just wouldn't load anything in a timely manner. That being said I just checked my maintenance documentation thread (link in signature) with lots of photobucket stored pictures and they are still live in the thread.


----------



## INA (Nov 16, 2005)

mainstayinc said:


> *I don't plan on running a separate auxiliary oil cooler. *The larger OEM unit should be sufficient by itself for my current and future needs. Below is a visual comparison between stock and other VW OEM oil coolers and a link to some more information.


You should...
If that heat exchanger (it is not really an oil cooler) fails , it will mix the oil & coolant. Most people upgrade to an air cooled oil cooler to divorce the systems , not necessarily to get additional cooling (allthough they do). Considering the cost involved in this build , you really should run a Mocal kit.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

northendroid said:


> It did the same thing (Imgur). Now need to fix the threads I care about and leave the other ones with no pictures. This is going to screw up a lot of DIY threads with the pictures missing.:facepalm: Cool Eclipse 8 seconds is some serious ponies.


I just painstakingly re-hosted this entire thread on Imgur from photobucket. I noticed that there are other threads across Europe which use photobucket that no longer have pictures. Here is an example of a nice write up for putting an MK2 gauge cluster into an MK1 now without pictures:

https://vwgolfmk1.org.uk/forum/index.php?page=topicview&id=electrical-faq_2%2Fmk2-clocks-in-a-mk1-my_2

Also, I have a bunch of threads on this forum such as the compressor map thread and others which will take much longer to update since those have a lot more pictures and span like 9 or 10 years!


----------



## CD155MX (Dec 18, 2007)

mainstayinc said:


> I just painstakingly re-hosted this entire thread on Imgur from photobucket.


Thanks for you continued efforts in documenting things. People years from now will still be able to enjoy your hard work. :thumbup::thumbup:


----------



## northendroid (Sep 16, 2014)

CD155MX said:


> It's such a sad thing to see when people put a lot of effort into a good DIY and then others can't benefit from them down the road because of the picture issue.
> 
> I switched to imgur a few months ago as well when my photobucket just wouldn't load anything in a timely manner. That being said I just checked my maintenance documentation thread (link in signature) with lots of photobucket stored pictures and they are still live in the thread.


Its sure is, some people are reporting the same thing but yesterday there's a thread I sign through daily and it had all of the pictures posted, today they've all fallen to PhotoBucket


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

INA said:


> You should...
> If that heat exchanger (it is not really an oil cooler) fails , it will mix the oil & coolant. Most people upgrade to an air cooled oil cooler to divorce the systems , not necessarily to get additional cooling (allthough they do). Considering the cost involved in this build , you really should run a Mocal kit.


Yes, I am familiar with the Mocal Kit. I will keep an eye on the water to oil heat exchanger (oil cooler) for any signs of failure. One of the reasons I wanted to go with a compact system is that there is not a lot of room in the MK1 engine bay to run a divorced system. I am sure it's possible, but things are tight as it is.

I want to start keeping an eye on my oil temperature and pressure now that I have a lot invested in the engine. I don't want to spin a rod bearing or have any lubrication-related issues that could be very costly. I will probably program my standalone to shut off the engine if oil pressure drops below a certain point to preserve the engine.

I am learning how important proper lubrication is in this type of setup.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

CD155MX said:


> Thanks for you continued efforts in documenting things. People years from now will still be able to enjoy your hard work. :thumbup::thumbup:


:thumbup: Hopefully, I can chip away at those other threads when I get a chance.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

UPDATE: My lightweight 949 Racing 6UL 15x8 wheels arrived today for my MK1 Rabbit GTI! 










I plan to test mount them on the MK1 before the car gets sent down to Bill's shop. I will probably have to use spacers to get them to clear the suspension (+36mm offset). As far as tires, I am considering either a 205/50R15 or 225/45R15 extreme performance summer tire (200 UTQG). Both of those sizes are a 23 inch diameter tire.

That leaves me with the following choices for the 205 tire:

BFGoodrich G-Force Rival S 1.5
Bridgestone Potenza RE-71R
Dunlop Direzza ZII Star Spec
Toyo Proxes R1R

And the following choices for the 225 tire:

BFGoodrich G-Force Rival S 1.5
Hankook Ventus R-S4
Nexen N Fera Sur4G
Toyo Proxes R1R

Most people in the Mazda world mount the 205/50R15 tire onto the 15x8 6UL wheel which adds a little bit of stretch.










I don't like the stretch look but may have to settle for this option depending on how it fits with the MK1 suspension and wheel arches. Ideally, I would like to run the 225/45R15 tire without having a stupid amount of wheel poking outside of the stock wheel arch. I will be using stock-height suspension or slightly lowered if possible. I really don't want to mess with the wheel arches if I don't have to.

Bill starting assembling the MK4 engine yesterday and will hopefully have everything together soon. Once my MK4 is complete, I will drop off the MK1 and then the fun begins.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Below is another photo of the 6UL's in Charcoal (same as mine).










Slightly stretched BGGoodrich Rival S on 15x8 6UL's.










EDIT: This thread is getting a little ricey what with all the Mistu and Mazda photos. Just ignore, please. I only drive German.


----------



## GasInMyVeins (Jul 11, 2010)

mainstayinc said:


> That leaves me with the following choices for the 205 tire:
> 
> BFGoodrich G-Force Rival S 1.5
> Bridgestone Potenza RE-71R
> ...


I can finally contribute some (hopefully) helpful info to this wonderful thread!

-In the autocross world, the RE-71R is currently king. Super grippy and comes up to temp quickly. The downside is that it doesn't do well on full tracks (overheats) and it only lasts about 5k miles. In a car as light as yours, those two negatives will be mitigated though.
-The Rival S is right behind the RE-71R, but it handles track heat a little better and has a little more life. It also looks cool as hell (personal opinion).
-The N Fera Sur4G is a newer one. The feedback I've heard is that it's 85-90% of the RE-71R or Rival S for 80% of the price. It has a tendency to pound the outside shoulder though, so it works best on a car with a good bit of camber and a decent camber curve. No idea about track use.
-The R-S4 is brand new, so I haven't heard much. I have its predecessor though, and it's a fair bit slower than the RE-71R, but lasts about twice as long and handles track heat better.
-I don't know of anyone using the Star Spec or R1R. I think they're both kind of old (in a class of tire where 12 months is "outdated").


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

GasInMyVeins said:


> I can finally contribute some (hopefully) helpful info to this wonderful thread!
> 
> -In the autocross world, the RE-71R is currently king. Super grippy and comes up to temp quickly. The downside is that it doesn't do well on full tracks (overheats) and it only lasts about 5k miles. In a car as light as yours, those two negatives will be mitigated though.
> -The Rival S is right behind the RE-71R, but it handles track heat a little better and has a little more life. It also looks cool as hell (personal opinion).
> ...


That's the exact kind of feedback I was looking for! Thanks. Right now I am leaning toward either the Bridgestones (RE-71R) or the Dunlops (Star Spec II). The best thing is that all of those tires fall into the $100 to $120 range for a 205/50R15. 

Bridgestone RE-71R











Dunlop Direzza ZII Star Spec










The BFGoodrich g-Force Rival S does look very cool!










My biggest concern right now is to fit such a wide wheel and tire combination on the MK1 which was originally fitted with a 6 inch wide wheel and 185/60R14 tire. The new 6UL wheel is 8 inches wide and the new tire will be either a 205 or 225 tire. I measured the stock tire and it just cleared strut spring by about 1/4 of an inch (6mm). However, it cleared the strut tower below the spring by about 15mm. The previous owner installed Raceland coilovers which have an upper and lower spring. I might try to remove the upper spring so that the spring perch can be moved upward to clear the wider tire. Not sure if that's possible.

According to my measurements, the 8 inch 6UL wheel, which has an outer width of 8 15/16" will just barely clear the strut tower. However, the tire will bulge out beyond the side of the wheel once it's mounted, even with a stretched 205 tire. So, I will most likely have to use a 5mm to 15mm spacer to get it to fit without suspension interference. That should just about bring the outside edge of the tire flush with the edge of the GTI wheel arch in the front.

I have no idea how the rear wheel and tire combination will fit until we install the syncro rear beam and trailing arms. According to my calculations, the syncro rear suspension will be 22mm wider on each side as compared to the stock torsen-beam setup on the MK1. So, already, I am starting out with an aggressive rear stance with this car. That actually might help balance the car visually since the MK1's rear wheels are pretty well tucked into the rear arches anyway.

The whole idea of this car is to build a sleeper and try to keep close to stock appearance (except for roll bar and wider wheels and tires). Berg cupping this car might give away too much (LOL Vegeta).


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

QUICK UPDATE: I stopped by Bill's shop this morning to pay some bills and get a progress update. Bill completed the engine for my MK4 daily driver (2.1L + GTX2867R). This was a complete re-build after the NOS incidient I posted in a previous post. The only thing that engine shares with the previous engine are the IE H-beam connecting rods. It has a new engine block, new ALH crankshaft, new Mahle 9:1 pistons, rebuilt Audi TT 225 cylinder head with Supertech exhaust valves, new exhaust manifold etc. I was going to bring my camera down to take some pictures but my wife needed it. 

Bill said he is going to Waterfest in NJ this weekend with 10 other guys and will be back next week to finish installing the engine into the car. So, with any luck, I will have the MK4 back by next Friday. I haven't driven my MK4 DD in over 15 months so I am really looking forward to getting some seat time. Since I am dropping compression from 9.5:1 (JE pistons) to 9.0:1 (Mahle's), I am thinking about contacting Gonzo (if he's still around) to raise my boost from 2 bar (29 psi) to 2.5 bar (36 psi). I will still be running E85 so my setup should be able to handle the added boost. I don't mind loosing a little spoolup with the lower compression Mahle's since I was getting great spoolup with my setup before. It will be interesting to do a before and after comparison of spoolup between the two pistons.

I also spoke with Tan this morning about his R32 drag car. He purchased new 17x9 inch Forgeline wheels and will be mounting Toyo R888's 245/40R17's. The new Forgelines are notably lighter than his previous 19 inch wheel and tire combination but still come in at 16 or 17 lbs. He got the new Forgelines in black with a polished lip (model GA3R)










I couldn't help show off my new 11.5 pound 6UL's which look very similar to the 3-piece Forgeline's but, of course, not as nice or expensive.

Some of you may recall the video of Matt's R32 chassis car with the 12 valve engine I posted earlier in this thread. Matt stopped by my house the other day to pickup an extra 02M starter I had from the Audi TT 225. I asked Bill how it worked out. He said it was already installed in the car and worked perfect. That got be thinking about how his setup compares to Tans and to my little GTI. Matt is running a GT4094R with a 94mm compressor wheel on 2.8L displacement (2792 CC's). Tan is running the 84mm GTX3584RS on 3.3L displacement (3342 CC's). I will be running the GTX3584RS on 2.1L (2067 CC's).

Here is a comparison of the 94mm GT4094R and smaller 84mm GTX3584RS on 2.8L displacement:










You can see how much better the new gen2 compressor wheel and redesigned turbine wheel of the GTX3584RS is as compared to the older technology GT4094R.


----------



## G-zo (Oct 16, 2016)

mainstayinc said:


> I am thinking about contacting Gonzo (if he's still around) to raise my boost from 2 bar (29 psi) to 2.5 bar (36 psi).


Still here. Text me.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

G-zo said:


> Still here. Text me.


Super. Bill should have the car back together his week. I'll text you when I'm up and running.:thumbup:


----------



## Dave20v (Nov 25, 2014)

to help with coil over / tire clearance, look into those: 
http://fastbunnymetalwerks.bigcartel.com/product/mk1-raise-strut-mount-hd

for my own awd mk1 setup I narrowed the beam by 65mm for 2 reason, to keep from cutting into the rocker panels and to keep the has close to possible the mk1 width because syncro beam allow you to run 7" wide wheel will 205 tire before pocking out of control.


keep up the good great documentation


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Dave20v said:


> to help with coil over / tire clearance, look into those:
> http://fastbunnymetalwerks.bigcartel.com/product/mk1-raise-strut-mount-hd
> 
> for my own awd mk1 setup I narrowed the beam by 65mm for 2 reason, to keep from cutting into the rocker panels and to keep the has close to possible the mk1 width because syncro beam allow you to run 7" wide wheel will 205 tire before pocking out of control.
> ...


Thanks. That's a nice solution (raised strut mount). That will allow me to raise the spring perch on my coilovers without having to remove the upper spring (if that's even possible on Raceland coilovers) and without having to raise my ride height. Raising the spring perch will gain me at least an additional 15mm clearance for my wheel/tire combination.

*MK1 Raise Strut Mount HD*












Fast Bunny Metalwerks said:


> These mount will add 2'' of travel to your coilover setup. This kit allow you to either run your mk1 lower or compress your coilover 2'' more for better suspension but retain the same ride height. The kit come with a better bushing then oem unit, we teamed up with 034motorsport to offers you there high density bushings. We supply all the stainless steel hardware needed to bolt in the mit to you mk1. We also supply caps for a better overall look in the bay.
> 
> These raise strut mounts can replace the factory "early strut mount" with extra suspension travel
> ***picture is for the painted glossy black option***


As far as the rear syncro beam, I purchased with the Dutchbuild Haldex adapter already welded in place. So, I didn't have opportunity to shorten (as you did) to fit the original MK1 rear track width. I am not sure how much poke it will have until suspension, wheels etc. are installed. We'll have to see how that turns out and go from there. My gut feeling is that maybe adding a little track width in the rear might not be a bad thing considering it's an AWD setup. But, then again, I would like to keep as close to stock-looking as possible.


----------



## All_Euro (Jul 20, 2008)

Been lurking and loving the updates John - excellent progress. I imagine you’ll be tearing up the streets later this summer?


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

All_Euro said:


> Been lurking and loving the updates John - excellent progress. *I imagine you’ll be tearing up the streets later this summer?*


I'm hoping. Bill is in the process of moving his shop from Warminster, PA to Sellersville, PA which is where I live. He will literally be just a few minutes away. So, besides building cars for his customers, he is also 
moving equipment, cars etc. to his new location. He just completed building a pole barn on his new property to store customer cars. He hired a group of Amish and they literally built the structure in a few days. So, with any luck, my car will be completed by the end of the year. It could be done a lot sooner. Not sure. We'll see. I have all of the main components at this point (engine, transmission, drivetrain etc.). So, it's just a matter of time that it all comes together. Glad you like the updates!


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

UPDATE: I stopped by Bill's shop this morning to drop off some parts. He installed the engine and transmission in the MK4 daily driver and is almost about done. 










You'll notice something interesting in the lower, left corner of the engine bay. Here's a close up picture:










It's my nitrous/CO2 injection system that caused me to bring the MK4 to Bill's shop in the first place. The lower WON (Wizard of NOS) solenoid is the fuel solenoid that got stuck open and hydro-locked my engine, causing ring, piston and bearing failure. You'll notice the -3AN fuel hose going into that solenoid. This system will be swapped over to the MK1 for cooling and additional power.

Bill said he had a great time at Waterfest this past weekend. He said that there were an impressive amount of 1000+ HP cars at the event this year. Team Schimmel Performance won the drag event both days with Ricardo's MK3 FWD VR6 turbo drag car. He ran a 9.06 second pass which is really impressive for a FWD car. Here is an old video from 2014 of Ricardo's car:






Bill showed me a current video this morning which I will try to post later once he sends me the link. Here's a picture of Tan's new wheel and tire combination R888's 245/40R17 on 17x9 rims:










We weighed the wheel and tires and they came in at 44 lbs. with a tread width of 9 inches. My 949 Racing 6UL 15x8 wheels with tire should come in just over 30 lbs. once I get the tires mounted. I am leaning toward the Dunlop Direzza ZII Star Spec since those have a 7.5 inch tread width in the 205/50R15 tire size as compared to 7 inches for the Bridgestones.

EDIT: Almost forgot. Here is a picture of Bill's new pole barn. He will have to move from his current location in Warminster at the end of September.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Ricardo's 9.06 second 163 MPH pass at Waterfest:






Soon to be in the 8's I'm sure.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Nice video on the history of the Audi quattro AWD system. Although fundamentally different than Haldex, the principle of AWD is the same:


----------



## Rod Ratio (Jun 6, 2012)

How did I miss this!? Nice work John!!


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Rod Ratio said:


> How did I miss this!? Nice work John!!


Thanks, man! Nice to see you're still around.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

QUICK UPDATE: I was expecting to get my MK4 daily driver started with week. Bill completely rebuilt the engine and was scheduled to put everything back together this week. He called me on Wednesday and reported that he was getting very little fuel pressure to the rail (about 15 psi). He said that the Parker fuel hose from one of my Aeromotive pumps had cracks and was leaking! Some of you may recall that I have a "double-pumper" setup with twin Aeromotive 340 in-tank pumps leading to separate fuel filters leading to opposite ends of my fuel rail. I used Parker fuel hose rated for 300 psi that I bought locally from a hydraulics shop which was suppose to handle regular pump gas and E85. Apparently, that's not the case.

So, Bill will have to replace the Parker hose with something else. I suggested that he use the same hose that Matt uses in his R32 chassis VR6 12 valve. That was the first thing I noticed when I looked into Matt's engine bay. Really attractive, high quality reinforced fuel hose from Aeroquip. With the textile reinforcement, it looks like the same hose used on the A/C system (which I deleted in my MK4).










The only question is whether the Aeroquip hose can handle E85. I checked their website and there is no mention of fuel compatibility. So, I will have to make some phone calls.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

I stopped by Bill's house earlier this afternoon to drop off a block off plate for my 2.5 inch QTP exhaust cutout. I asked him about the fuel hose leak and he said it was literally spraying fuel on his shop floor. He said he went ahead and ordered the Aeroquip hose as we discussed and that it is compatible with all fuels. That confirms what I read in a few threads on the internet. He said it's possible the car will be up and running by the end of next week. I plan to stop by his shop on Friday for a progress update.

BTW the reason for the block off plate is that I sent Issam my 2.5 inch QTP exhaust cutout as a prototype for another project which he hasn't returned yet. Hopefully, he'll get that back to me soon along with a few other items.


----------



## 1.8TRabbit (Nov 15, 2004)

opcorn:


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

UPDATE: I stopped by Bill's shop last Friday to get an update on the MK4 daily driver. Bill had all of the fuel lines removed and laying on his shop floor. There was definitely a lot of dry rot on the Parker fuel hoses. He had to order more of the Aeroquip hose since my Corrado fuel filters sit way in the back of the chassis. I was hoping to get the car back last Friday but that has been set back a few days due to having to order more fuel hose. Bill said he was going to come in on Sunday (yesterday) to work on the fuel hoses so that the car will be done by Monday or Tuesday.

Tan was at the shop with his 2003 Audi RS6 4.2L twin turbo V8. This car is an absolute stunner with a lot of upgrades. He is looking to sell the RS6 and get into something different. He offered to sell the car to me but my next car purchase has to have a third row seat due to the fact that my wife and I are outgrowing the 2004 Audi A4 Avant 1.8T quattro. I managed to fit three (3) children's car seats in the back of the Avant but our three boys are quickly outgrowing this arrangement. My next purchase will likely be a first generation Audi Q7 which has third row seating. Last week I stopped by Bills house and he showed me his wife's Q7 which has a 3.6L VR6 in dark blue. The alternative to the Audi Q7 to accomodate my growing family would be a minivan. But... I'm not ready to "give up" yet. I'll probably get the Q7 in the 3.6L VR6 model so that I can add turbocharging in the future (maybe a custom SPTurbo setup?). The wife doesn't have to know about that.

Talking about turbocharging the wife's car without telling her about it, I bought a nice upgraded turbocharger kit from Gonzo a year or two ago complete with injectors and software that I never installed in the 1.8T Avant quattro. This setup adds another 100 HP on top of stock. Considering that my family is growing quicker than I have time to install this kit, I will probably put it up for sale at a nice discount.

Stock 2003 RS6 photo (not Tan's):










I'm still trying to decide on which tires to mount onto the 949 Racing 6UL 15x8 wheels. I have a set of Yokohama S.Drives on my MK4 daily driver and those have served me quite well. Yokohama makes the S.Drive in 205/50R15 in a 300 UTQG rating. Sure, these are in a different class than the 200 UTQC Bridgestones and Dunlops, but they might be a nice street tire to break in my new MK1 setup. Here is how they mount up to the 6UL wheels.










They are slightly stretched being a 205 tire on an 8 inch wheel, but not bad, eh?



1.8TRabbit said:


> Vehicles:82 Rabbit 1.8L, *84 Rabbit GTI 20vBT*, 86 Audi 4000Q, 96 Audi A4Q V6, 02 Audi A4 1.8T,06 BMW 325I


Do you have a build thread for your 1984 Rabbit GTI 20v BT? Or any pictures or information?


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

UPDATE: I received a text message from Bill this morning.



Bill Schimmel said:


> Not at shop today. Got MK4 started sounds great. Throwing code for O2 and coil so I got new ones


So, after almost a year and a half, I finally get to drive my MK4 daily driver (2.1L + GTX2867R + E85). This also means that Bill can move on to bigger and better things (i.e.: MK1 + Haldex conversion + 2.1L + GTX3584RS + E85). The next step is to build the 2.1L engine for the MK1. He should have that completed in the next week or two. I am still waiting on some critical parts from Issam. Namely, an alternator kit and custom T3 flange so I can fabricate my own twin scroll exhaust manifold. I spoke with Issam earlier this week and he said he is going to make it a priority. So, fingers crossed, he can deliver those parts soon as the MK1 project is starting to heat up.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

UPDATE: I haven't updated this thread in the last two weeks but there were some important developments to report. Firstly, Bill finished my MK4 daily driver (2.1L + GTX2867R) last week. There were a few minor but significant delays in completing the car. This included replacing the fuel lines with new Aeroquip hose as I mentioned above. Also, the O-rings holding my Genesis II 1200 fuel injectors were all "folded over" according to Bill creating a major boost leak. He had to order new O-rings and replace before returning the car to me.

I picked up the car last Friday and drove it home from Warminster. I wasn't sure what to expect from the lower compression Mahle pistons (9.0:1) which were custom ordered through Issam ABED Industries as compared to the JE's (9.5:1) which came with the original stroker kit I purchased from IE. After driving the car for a few minutes, I noticed how eager the car wants to build boost even with very mild input from the throttle. There is absolutely no loss in boost response as compared to the higher compression JE's. So, fixing the boost leak(s) along with replacing the exhaust manifold (which was also probably leaking due to a failed turbo gasket) plus tighter clearance 9.0:1 Mahle pistons = win.

The biggest difference with the Mahle pistons as compared to the JE's is that the JE's would audible 'ping' under moderate boost using premium/race gas. That is why I decided to switch to E85. However, the Mahle's show no indication of detonating under boost using premium/race gas and are super quiet. I think the lower compression Mahle's are more forgiving and seem to be able to take more boost. 

I am still in the process of breaking in the engine which was completely rebuilt by Bill at SPTurbo. Everything is completely new on this engine including the engine block, crankshaft, cylinder head from the Audi TT 225 (rebuilt with Supertech exhaust valves), Mahle pistons etc. The only thing that survived from the old engine were the IE H-beam connecting rods. Even the GTI oil pan was replaced with the one from the Audi TT. I've only put about 50 miles on the car so far. After about 300 miles, Bill suggest that I change out the break in oil with full synthetic. At that point, I will probably post some new boost logs to compare this new setup with the old.

On a different note, I decided to call Ferrea Racing Components in Ft. Lauderdale, FL last week and ask them about the their 1.8T valve kit. That is the kit that Bill convinced me to purchase and install in the MK1 Rabbit GTI project (2.1L + GTX3584RS + E85). I specifically wanted to know at what engine speed I can safely run these valves. They transferred me to a very knowledgeable engineer and we discussed details about cam lift, duration, crankshaft stroke etc. He said the Ferrea's are good to 9500 RPMs on my setup!










So, I feel comfortable setting my rev limiter to 8750 or even 9000 RPMs on my setup. TBO I don't think I will have to rev past 8500 RPMs on my setup to achieve my HP goals. But it's nice to know the Ferrea's are up to the task.

Lastly, I got an unexpected email from DHL.










It looks like Issam finally shipped my alternator kit along with the custom T3 turbo flange I had him design and fabricate along with a few other goodies. This is a happy day!


----------



## ArclitGold (Apr 21, 2009)

Nice work! Keep it coming


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## vr6 3.0 (Apr 19, 2008)

mainstayinc said:


> On a different note, I decided to call Ferrea Racing Components in Ft. Lauderdale, FL last week and ask them about the their 1.8T valve kit. That is the kit that Bill convinced me to purchase and install in the MK1 Rabbit GTI project (2.1L + GTX3584RS + E85). I specifically wanted to know at what engine speed I can safely run these valves. They transferred me to a very knowledgeable engineer and we discussed details about cam lift, duration, crankshaft stroke etc. He said the Ferrea's are good to 9500 RPMs on my setup!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


What code blocks are you using? Assume 144mm rods? Curious what Bill is saying about the 2.1's revability. I've been getting mixed reviews about not being able to rev due to rod ratios. Was planning on using an AWP style or similar block w/ the ALH crank but was then adviced it wouldn't be able to rev reliably so should consider an ALH block as well, 16mm taller, better rod ratios. 

You've thought through everything carefully and are obviously counting on the 2.1 being reliable and able to make excellent power, just curious? 

Excited to hear how it will perform once broken in! 

Thanks,
Isaac


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

vr6 3.0 said:


> What code blocks are you using? Assume 144mm rods? Curious what Bill is saying about the 2.1's revability. I've been getting mixed reviews about not being able to rev due to rod ratios. Was planning on using an AWP style or similar block w/ the ALH crank but was then adviced it wouldn't be able to rev reliably so should consider an ALH block as well, 16mm taller, better rod ratios.
> 
> You've thought through everything carefully and are obviously counting on the 2.1 being reliable and able to make excellent power, just curious?
> 
> ...


I'll be using the engine block from the Audi TT 225 (AMU engine code) with 144mm connecting rods. The connecting rod ratio on this setup is within accepted limits (1.50 to 1.75) but just barely (144mm/95.5mm = 1.51). As far as reliability of this setup at 8500 to 9000 RPMs, I am fairly confident that the shorter connecting rod ratio won't be an issue.

The shorter connecting rod ratio will, however, create more side-loading of the piston in the cylinder bore causing more engine vibration as compared to the longer ratio of say the ABA engine which has a 159mm connecting rod and 92.8mm stroke. However, if you compare the maximum connecting rod angle between both setups, the 144mm/95.5mm setup is only 2.4 degrees higher from vertical than the 159mm/92.8mm setup (19.37 v. 16.97 degrees). Below is a graph showing the connecting rod angle of these setups through 180 degrees of swept volume.










I am definitely concerned about increased engine vibration on my setup due to increased connecting rod angle. However, I took a couple of steps to mitigate this issue. The first was to have the entire rotating assembly precisely balanced at my local machine shop. Second, I purchased a Fluidampr which is suppose to help dampen engine vibration. Lastly, my entire rotating assembly from the billet crankshaft to Mahle pistons to twin disc clutch is super-lightweight.

Bill hasn't commented on the revability of this setup. 

Remember that Joel Brown ran the identical engine and transmission setup that I will be running on this 8.98 second Corrado but with a larger 71mm (inducer) turbo. So, the 2.1L 144mm/95.5mm setup has been proven on the track in high-horsepower, high-reving setups.










EDIT: Below is a visual comparison between the two connecting rod angles (if that helps). Remember that the 95.5mm stroke has more horizontal deflection in the cylinder bore as compared to the 92.8mm stroke and accounts for some of the increased connecting rod angle.










EDIT: If you were to use the taller 236mm engine block with 159mm connecting rods and a 95.5mm stroke crank, then you would get the following connecting rod angles:










As you can see, the 159/95.5mm combination is virtually identical to the original 144/86.4mm connecting rod and stroke ratio found on the 1.8T (17.48 degrees versus 17.46 degrees). In conclusion, going with the taller 236mm engine block with 159mm connecting rods while using the 95.5mm ALH crank will only reduce your connecting rod angle by 1.89 degrees (19.37-17.48 = 1.89). If the added weight of the 159mm connecting rods and slightly decreased engine vibration are worth it for you, then I say go for it.

EDIT: After running my 2.1L stroker kit in my MK4 daily driver for seven years with JE asymmetrical pistons, Bill did not notice any increased cylinder wall wear when he disassembled and re-built that engine.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

ArclitGold said:


> Nice work! Keep it coming
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


:thumbup:


----------



## Rod Ratio (Jun 6, 2012)

Wow, you are building a monster


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Rod Ratio said:


> Wow, you are building a monster


Hehe... Hopefully it all holds together and I don't do anything stupid like hydro-lock the engine.


----------



## All_Euro (Jul 20, 2008)

mainstayinc said:


> ...Remember that Joel Brown ran the identical engine and transmission setup that I will be running on this 8.98 second Corrado but with a larger 71mm (inducer) turbo. So, the 2.1L 144mm/95.5mm setup has been proven on the track in high-horsepower, high-reving setups...
> 
> EDIT: After running my 2.1L stroker kit in my MK4 daily driver for seven years with JE asymmetrical pistons, Bill did not notice any increased cylinder wall wear when he disassembled and re-built that engine.



Mike Hood successfully ran a 2.1L stroker in his A4 drag car as well... 

People also get weird about boring the cylinders to 83.5mm but head over to Speeding G-60’s FB page and sift through his picks - he’s got one of a cut up block that shows how much meat is left on an 83mm bore.

Thanks for the updates and the report on cylinder wall health :thumbup:


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

All_Euro said:


> Mike Hood successfully ran a 2.1L stroker in his A4 drag car as well...
> 
> People also get weird about boring the cylinders to 83.5mm but head over to Speeding G-60’s FB page and sift through his picks - he’s got one of a cut up block that shows how much meat is left on an 83mm bore.
> 
> Thanks for the updates and the report on cylinder wall health :thumbup:


:thumbup:


----------



## vr6 3.0 (Apr 19, 2008)

mainstayinc said:


> If the added weight of the 159mm connecting rods and slightly decreased engine vibration are worth it for you, then I say go for it.
> 
> EDIT: After running my 2.1L stroker kit in my MK4 daily driver for seven years with JE asymmetrical pistons, Bill did not notice any increased cylinder wall wear when he disassembled and re-built that engine.


Thanks for the feedback. Looks like Joel used an 058 block? But dimensionally identical I see. Was the ALH crank in your DD all those year lightened? 

Inspirational work here :thumbup:


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

vr6 3.0 said:


> Thanks for the feedback. Looks like Joel used an 058 block? But dimensionally identical I see. Was the ALH crank in your DD all those year lightened?
> 
> Inspirational work here :thumbup:


No. The ALH in my daily driver was a stock unit I purchased from ebay for like $200 with free shipping. I have purchased two ALH cranks from ebay over the years and both were perfectly straight and usable.


----------



## vr6 3.0 (Apr 19, 2008)

mainstayinc said:


> vr6 3.0 said:
> 
> 
> > Thanks for the feedback. Looks like Joel used an 058 block? But dimensionally identical I see. Was the ALH crank in your DD all those year lightened?
> ...


Gotcha. I'm sure the billet crank in the MK1 combined with the l/w f/w will feel considerably different. Curious what the difference between an knife edged ALH crank and the billet one would be, all other parts being equal.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

vr6 3.0 said:


> Gotcha. I'm sure the billet crank in the MK1 combined with the l/w f/w will feel considerably different. Curious what the difference between an knife edged ALH crank and the billet one would be, all other parts being equal.


A knife-edged ALH crank might get you close to a light-weight billet crank if done correctly since your removing a lot of the rotational mass on the counterweights. It should also help with windage losses. IMO that is a great solution if you want to stick with OEM crank.

EDIT: A light-weight clutch and flywheel would probably have a bigger impact on reducing your rotational mass as compared to a lightened crank.


----------



## vr6 3.0 (Apr 19, 2008)

mainstayinc said:


> A knife-edged ALH crank might get you close to a light-weight billet crank if done correctly since your removing a lot of the rotational mass on the counterweights. It should also help with windage losses. IMO that is a great solution if you want to stick with OEM crank.
> 
> EDIT: A light-weight clutch and flywheel would probably have a bigger impact on reducing your rotational mass as compared to a lightened crank.


:thumbup: Look forward to seeing progress on the mk1!


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

vr6 3.0 said:


> :thumbup: Look forward to seeing progress on the mk1!


Thanks! Bill is in the process of moving his shop from Warminster to Sellersville, PA. Once he gets settled in his new location, he will start the chassis modifications on the MK1 for the Haldex system. Probably starting around mid-October. In the meantime, he might decide to build the MK1 engine which features:

Fully build AEB large port cylinder head with Ferrea valves
Catcams 3660 Intake/Exhaust camshafts with adjustable sprocket
Lightweight billet 95.5mm crankshaft
IE Tuscan connecting rods
Mahle PowerPak+ 9:1 CR pistons (same as installed on MK4)
IE Ultimate Crankshaft Girdle Kit with billet main caps.
Custom Billet timing gear with dowel pin kit.
Fluidampr Crank Pulley
IABED Industries Alternator Kit
PPT Manual Timing Belt Kit with Gates Racing belt

I plan to use the VVT feature to make power. See this thread.


----------



## Ephraim (Sep 18, 2003)

Me wants!!!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Ephraim said:


> Me wants!!!
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


:thumbup: I forgot to mention on my list above that I also purchased a baffled oil pan from Issam/ IABED Industries:


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

UPDATE: I have been driving around my MK4 daily driver (2.1L + GTX2867R) **which Bill completely rebuilt** for the past three weeks. I finally past the 300 mile mark on the break-in oil and have to decide what synthetic oil to use. Normally I put Mobile 1 in and call it a day. Bill recommended fully synthetic Amsoil after the break-in oil which he carries at his shop/home. After doing some research, I discovered Ravenol which is a super high-quality oil made in Germany and is the only oil recommended by VW and Audi. I searched around and found a 20 liter bag-in-box sold through amazon for $135.95 with free shipping. That turns out to be about $6.43 per quart.










I was a little concerned how to dispense the 20L bag-in-box. However, it is a simple matter of placing the box on top of your valve cover and opening the spigot.










This format became popular in Germany in the 1980's with their bag-in-box wine.










Also, today I was passing through Center Valley, PA and decided to stop by NLS to see Adam and Josh. I originally approached Josh to do my MK1 project but he was very busy and would not be able to get me in for quite some time. That is why I asked Bill to do the project. I spent a half an hour with Adam discussing my MK4 and MK1. He also shared details about his new project... and AWD MK5 with a 5-cylinder Audi TTRS engine. Very nice! I told Adam I would like to bring my MK1 around next year when it is complete. He is very excited to see the finished project. I also asked about fender flares which Josh used to sell for the MK1. Apparently, he sold the molds and is no longer making them. They were gracious enough to give me the contact information but are not sure if the flares are still being produced. Since I didn't shorten my rear syncro beam, I will most likely have to run larger fender flares to make the car look somewhat normal. I won't know for sure until the syncro beam is installed and the wheels are on.


----------



## Ephraim (Sep 18, 2003)

mainstayinc said:


> :thumbup: I forgot to mention on my list above that I also purchased a baffled oil pan from Issam/ IABED Industries:


Sexy!!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## All_Euro (Jul 20, 2008)

mainstayinc said:


> ...After doing some research, I discovered Ravenol which is a super high-quality oil made in Germany and is the only oil recommended by VW and Audi. I searched around and found a 20 liter bag-in-box sold through amazon for $135.95 with free shipping. That turns out to be about $6.43 per quart.


Great to hear you’ve got the MK4 back on the road. Does it pull as hard as you remember?

Fine choice in oil... I used Ravenol for my A4 TIP as it has much better cold weather operability than Motul - which I was going to use initially. 




mainstayinc said:


> This format became popular in Germany in the 1980's with their bag-in-box wine.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Could swap boxes and keep a stash hidden in the garage :laugh:


----------



## ArclitGold (Apr 21, 2009)

Awesome man. I saw issam a site but there's no product on it? What does he make?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

All_Euro said:


> Great to hear you’ve got the MK4 back on the road. *Does it pull as hard as you remember?*
> 
> Fine choice in oil... I used Ravenol for my A4 TIP as it has much better cold weather operability than Motul - which I was going to use initially.


The MK4 feels like it pulls harder than before with the lower compression 9.0:1 Mahle pistons. That's without any loss in spoolup. The engine never felt happy with the 9.5:1 JE pistons I had in there before. Frequently I would get misfires and ignition cuts from my Gonzo tune when I was on the edge of detonation. However, the Mahle's can take a lot more boost without running into detonation.

I normally add Torco Accelerator to a full tank of premium gas from my 5 gallon pail (see below). That brings my octane up to about 103 AKI and allows me to run full boost (29 psi). However, even without adding the Torco, it seems like I can run the Mahle's at full boost without detonation. When I tried that with my JE's two year ago, I had a massive backfire which bent open my exhaust cutout valve and almost blew out my entire exhaust system.










The Mahle's are definitely more forgiving and much more tolerant of boost.



All_Euro said:


> Could swap boxes and keep a stash hidden in the garage :laugh:


LOL wife won't notice the difference.



ArclitGold said:


> Awesome man. I saw issam a site but there's no product on it? What does he make?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


He has a lot of nice parts for sale but currently doesn't post them on his website. Best to call him to see what he has.



Ephraim said:


> Sexy!!
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


The baffled oil pan from Issam/ IABED Industries is the only part I bought for my MK1 to add some "bling" to the project. Not that you can see the oil pan if you open the hood. Issam also sells a CNC'd valve cover for the 1.8T which I am tempted to buy but haven't (yet).


----------



## All_Euro (Jul 20, 2008)

mainstayinc said:


> The MK4 feels like it pulls harder than before with the lower compression 9.0:1 Mahle pistons. That's without any loss in spoolup. The engine never felt happy with the 9.5:1 JE pistons I had in there before. Frequently I would get misfires and ignition cuts from my Gonzo tune when I was on the edge of detonation. However, the Mahle's can take a lot more boost without running into detonation...
> 
> The Mahle's are definitely more forgiving and much more tolerant of boost...


Interesting... wonder how much of a factor the piston material is? Others have successfully run 10:1 @ 30 psi... maybe the tune was just too aggressive for your CR. 




mainstayinc said:


> LOL wife won't notice the difference.


No man NO - you’d have to buy another box a booze n then keep it stashed in the Ravenol box :sly:


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

All_Euro said:


> Interesting... wonder how much of a factor the piston material is? Others have successfully run 10:1 @ 30 psi... *maybe the tune was just too aggressive for your CR*.


It's hard to say. The JE's ran great with E85 and I had no issues with detonation. However, with pump/race gas, the tune would pull timing or cut ignition when it I was on the edge of detonation. The Mahle's run great out of the box on pump/race gas and I can push it to the limit without the tune intervening.

The other thing to consider is that I have my MBC locked down tight and have no boost control other than my right foot. Boost climbs very quickly after 2400 RPMs and I really have no way of controlling it other than tapering off the throttle. The reason is that I hate the idea of my WG bleeding off exhaust as the turbo is spooling up. 

I also have an upgraded SMIC which tends to run hotter than a FMIC or AWIC. The reason is to keep the sleeper look without giving away what's under the hood. That's why I supplemented my SMIC with chemical intercooling (direct C02 injection). Works great.



All_Euro said:


> No man NO - you’d have to buy another box a booze n then keep it stashed in the Ravenol box :sly:


:thumbup:

EDIT: Below is a repost of my spoolup from the GTX2867R Spool thread.










And here's what happens when you use C02 direct injection to assist spoolup.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

QUICK UPDATE: I stopped by Bill Schimmel's new location in Sellersville earlier this morning to pickup a snow blower I purchased from him. I thought that would be a good opportunity to touch base with him about my MK1 project and other matters. He has been busy since the end of the summer moving all of his tools and other items from his Warminster location to his new place in Sellersville. He said he can take my MK1 in two or three weeks. Very exciting. That will leave me just enough time to finish my *quick and dirty* rotisserie I've been working on.










The rotisserie consists of a 2x6 bolted to the stock bumper mounts with a 6 inch long, 1 1/2 inch diameter, pipe bolted through the 2x6. That will serve as a pivot point for a heavy duty pipe stand (2500 lb. capacity) on each end of the vehicle. The vehicle will have to be jacked up or lifted onto the pipe stands. The vehicle will be stabilized with the addition of several 2x4's attached onto the 2x6 bumper once the vehicle is rotated into place. Not shown in the above picture is a T-fitting which threads onto the end of the 1 1/2 inch pipe which will allow Bill to insert a broom handle or other pipe which will act as a lever to rotate the whole vehicle. It will also act as a way to prevent the pipe stands from slipping off the center pivot.










I figure this would be the easiest method to rotate the vehicle onto it's side so Bill can proceed with the Haldex conversion, which includes cutting the center tunnel, welding new mounting points for the rear suspension etc. I didn't want to use engine stands as most of those are too short and are on wheels. The Rigid pipe stands I purchased can be raised from 27 to 54 inches and only cost $80 each with free shipping. So, the whole rotisserie cost me less than $250 ($80 x 2 for the pipe stands + another $90 for misc. bolts, wood and pipe).

Best part about this design is that I can just throw the pipe stands in the trunk and drive my *rotisserized* MK1 up to Bills place at any time. Not bad, eh? I may just drive the car around town for now with the rotisserie bumpers just for laughs. Once the car is at Bills, he will remove the engine, transmission and doors etc. which will lighten the vehicle enough to get it on the pipe stands.

There are all sorts of methods to rotate an MK1. Here is a nice tip-tisserie:










I didn't want to get too involved with building a wooden rotisserie. Here is Derek Spratt's version of the rotisserie which uses 'come-alongs' attached to stock bumpers to rotate the vehicle.










I like to keep things simple.


----------



## sleepy1.8t (Sep 5, 2013)

mainstayinc said:


> I like to keep things simple.



droooooooooooooooool


this thread is like crack


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

sleepy1.8t said:


> droooooooooooooooool
> 
> 
> this thread is like crack


:thumbup: Hopefully, my *quick and dirty* rotisserie works.


----------



## northendroid (Sep 16, 2014)

ArclitGold said:


> Awesome man. I saw issam a site but there's no product on it? What does he make?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Products are on his instagram account. PM him for prices.
https://www.instagram.com/iabedindustries/


----------



## F4T (Jun 23, 2014)

Wow! just read through this entire thread, Great work mate, looking forward to updates :thumbup:


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

F4T said:


> Wow! just read through this entire thread, Great work mate, looking forward to updates :thumbup:


:thumbup:


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

QUICK UPDATE: 
I finally received a few key parts for my MK1 build this past week. The first part is a custom flange I designed in FreeCAD for the divided T3 exhaust manifold I plan to fabricate. This part allows exhaust gas to smoothly flow from round 1 1/4" schedule 10 pipe to the (rounded) rectangular shape of Garrett's twin scroll turbine housing. The flange is an inch thick and has two 1/8 NPT ports for such things as an EGT sensor and exhaust pressure probe.










I had to estimate the size, shape and radius of the inlet ports on Garrett's twin scroll turbine housing based on pictures published on the internet. Once I was satisfied with the part, I exported from FreeCAD (*.STP) and sent it to a great company in Northern New Jersey called eMachineShop. Within 24 hours they sent me an estimate for the part in 302 stainless steel and within four weeks the part arrived on my doorstep.










After the part arrived, I decided to order the T3 Twinscroll Turbine Housing in Ni-Resist For GT35R/GTX35R 1.01 A/R from atpturbo to see how well the custom flange matched the housing (see below).










As it turns out, the custom T3 flange is an exact fit! This will allow me to more easily fabricate the collector section of my divided manifold since it makes the 1 1/4" schedule 10 pipe *plug and play* with the Garret twin scroll housing. If anyone is interested in fabricating their own short or long runner divided T3 manifold with this custom flange, then you can PM me with your email and I will send the CAD file to you for free. I put a lot of time into designing the flange in FreeCAD to get it absolutely perfect. Expect to pay over $500 to have it custom machined at a professional parts fabrication shop like eMachineShop.

Talking about my custom manifold, I decided to take a different approach than what I originally planned. Some of you may recall this short-runner unequal length manifold experiment I posted earlier from the evolutionm forum (see below).










This guy had very good results switching from a single scroll setup to a twin scroll setup using a divided short runner manifold. In fact, he picked up 700 RPMs in HP and 950 RPMs in torque switching from a 0.82 A/R single scroll housing on a cast manifold to a 1.06 A/R twin scroll housing on a short runner tubular manifold (see below).










TBO I am not very confident in my fabrication skills. So, I decided to look at a simpler twin scroll manifold design. Instead of a *properly* divided twin scroll setup which joins 1+4 and 2+3 primaries, I decided to go with a mis-matched design which I think will work just as good if not better (see below).










This mis-matched design joins 1+2 and 3+4 primaries. Some of you may ask, "doesn't this design defeat the purpose of a true divided manifold?" The answer is "Yes and No". One of the benefits of a divided manifold is that it prevents high-pressure exhaust gas from flowing back into the combustion chamber due to exhaust valve overlap between cylinders (i.e.: "reversion"). As you can probably figure out from my new design, only cylinders 1 and 4 are free from reversion on a 1-3-4-2 firing order engine. Cylinders 2 and 3 will experience exhaust reversion. This makes my new design only "half as good" as a true divided manifold from that respect.

However, preventing exhaust reversion is only one of the benefits of a twin scroll setup. The main benefit of using a twin scroll setup is the turbine housing itself which effectively lowers your A/R while at the same time does not limit your top end like a smaller A/R turbine housing. That is precisely why a quick spool valve works on an undivided manifold with a twin scroll turbine housing. All of the primaries are tied together into a single collector on an undivided manifold causing exhaust reversion on all four cylinders. And yet, guys are seeing almost equal results as compared to a true divided manifold.

This guy increased his spoolup by almost 650 RPMs between 4750 and 5500 RPMs using an undivided manifold with a twin scroll housing and the quick spool valve (see below).










So, why did I say that I think this new design will work just as good if not better than a true divided manifold? Well, firstly, the calculated volume of the new design is about 25% less than my original short-runner design. This includes the additional volume of the combustion chamber and added cylinder displacement for primaries 2 and 3 due to exhaust reversion. The smaller volume will create more peak pressure which should help spool the turbine quicker. Secondly, the Catcams 3660 camshafts I will be using have very short exhaust valve overlap between cylinders (20 degrees at 1mm lift). Lastly, there will be less exhaust reversion at higher RPMs on cylinders 2 and 3 since the blow-down event will take more time in terms of crankshaft degrees. Consequently, this new design should work more like a true divided manifold once I begin to spoolup the GTX35R-size turbine. It will be interesting to see what my actual results are.


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

I will weld that for you for free and give you cash to make 2, cos I'd love to try it out on my car, though I'm single scroll. No joke. Fukn pm, that's legit. I'll purge it, etc. Clean it up and smooth everything i can reach, etc. Sit ill even get it ceramic coated. 

Looks fukn awesome dude. I love my v2 stainless treadstone, it's great compared to the v1. But that would be so dope.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Vegeta Gti said:


> I will weld that for you for free and give you cash to make 2, cos I'd love to try it out on my car, though I'm single scroll. No joke. Fukn pm, that's legit. I'll purge it, etc. Clean it up and smooth everything i can reach, etc. Sit ill even get it ceramic coated.
> 
> Looks fukn awesome dude. I love my v2 stainless treadstone, it's great compared to the v1. But that would be so dope.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


Heck yeah! I'll take you up on that. The V2.0 SS treadstone manifold was the inspiration behind this new design. I'll PM you later this week.

EDIT: V2.0 SS Treadstone:










EDIT: Side view of proposed new design:


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

I noticed  and i was thinking the same thing you posted a few days ago. Lol

So whay about wastegate location?









Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Vegeta Gti said:


> I noticed  and i was thinking the same thing you posted a few days ago. Lol
> 
> *So whay about wastegate location?*
> 
> Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


Wastegate(s) can go anywhere. Since this is a divided manifold, there has to be two wastegates. Although you could merge the two wastegate ports into a single pipe and use only one wastegate as long as the two sections are kept separate. If you mate the manifold to a single scroll turbine housing, then the two sections do not have to be separate.

The best location for a wastegate IMO is where the two primaries merge. These can be on the top or bottom of the manifold. Below, I mocked up two v-band style wastegate ports where the primaries merge on the bottom of the manifold. Bottom location is better IMO since the wastegate can easily be routed to the downpipe. Top mount is also possible but doesn't make a lot of sense to me.










From a fabrication point of view, I would drill for the wastegate ports after the entire manifold has been welded together.


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

mainstayinc said:


> Wastegate(s) can go anywhere. Since this is a divided manifold, there has to be two wastegates. Although you could merge the two wastegate ports into a single pipe and use only one wastegate as long as the two sections are kept separate. If you mate the manifold to a single scroll turbine housing, then the two sections do not have to be separate.
> 
> The best location for a wastegate IMO is where the two primaries merge. These can be on the top or bottom of the manifold. Below, I mocked up two v-band style wastegate ports where the primaries merge on the bottom of the manifold. Bottom location is better IMO since the wastegate can easily be routed to the downpipe. Top mount is also possible but doesn't make a lot of sense to me.
> 
> ...


 If that's stainless of any type... have it laser cut lol. Drilling would take for ever +infinity. 

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## ticketed2much (Feb 18, 2012)

Looks good and really well thought out! Curious why rear mount? Seems like it would make things really tight to the firewall/raintray. Is there more room behind the engine in MK1s?


----------



## Pat @ Pitt Soundworks (Nov 14, 2008)

The whole benefit of twin scroll is the divorced runners and staggered pulses. If you don't divorce the runners, you lose the benefits. In fact, it would be worse since you also lose the scavenging effects.

Also drilling isn't that bad. You use a bimetal hole saw and go slow.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

ticketed2much said:


> Looks good and really well thought out! Curious why rear mount? Seems like it would make things really tight to the firewall/raintray. Is there more room behind the engine in MK1s?


Thanks. The new design is only about 3/4 inches taller than an ATP log manifold and probably about the same as the Treadstone. There's a good amount of space between the engine and firewall in an MK1 (see below. Not sure who's car this is). I plan on cutting the firewall if the manifold + turbo doesn't fit. I'm a big fan of front mounts (or, as you call, rear mount).


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

Pat @ Pitt Soundworks said:


> The whole benefit of twin scroll is the divorced runners and staggered pulses. If you don't divorce the runners, you lose the benefits. In fact, it would be worse since you also lose the scavenging effects.
> 
> Also drilling isn't that bad. You use a bimetal hole saw and go slow.


 So drill it for free. With personal tools. On personal time. 

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## Pat @ Pitt Soundworks (Nov 14, 2008)

I would, if he would choose a different manifold design. It shouldn't be more than 2 minutes a hole including the predrilling using a hand operated drill.

Edit: my drill press can do it in about 30 seconds a hole in "gravity feed" mode


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Pat @ Pitt Soundworks said:


> The whole benefit of twin scroll is the divorced runners and staggered pulses. If you don't divorce the runners, you lose the benefits. *In fact, it would be worse since you also lose the scavenging effects*.
> 
> Also drilling isn't that bad. You use a bimetal hole saw and go slow.


Thanks! and nice to hear from you. As mentioned above, only two out of four cylinders are divorced in the new design. However, exhaust scavenging won't be an issue since I will not be running any valve overlap between intake and exhaust valves. Below is a diagram showing my modified Catcam 3660 setup (bottom chart). As you can see, even with VVT on (red curve), there is virtually no overlap between intake and exhaust valves. This will negate any potential benefit of using exhaust scavenging to help fill the cylinder during the "overlap period".










However, I will have a problem with higher EGT's on cylinders 2 and 3 due to exhaust valve overlap (not shown in diagram above). That is what I meant by "reversion" in my previous post. This problem could potentially lead to higher engine knock in cylinders 2 and 3. However, I will be using E85 and methanol injection to help prevent engine knock. Also, as mentioned in previous post, this becomes less of a problem as engine speed increases.

Yes, there are tradeoffs in my "mis-matched" design. However, the main benefit of a twin-scroll setup IMO is the lower A/R from the twin-scroll housing. That is why guys in the Supra world run undivided manifolds (i.e.: non-divorced) into twin-scroll turbine housings using quick spool valves with good results (see video below. Fast forward to the 1:30 mark).








Pat @ Pitt Soundworks said:


> The whole benefit of twin scroll is the divorced runners and staggered pulses. If you don't divorce the runners, you lose the benefits. In fact, it would be worse since you also lose the scavenging effects.
> 
> Also drilling isn't that bad. *You use a bimetal hole saw and go slow*.


Thanks. I'll check into the bimetal saw.


----------



## Pat @ Pitt Soundworks (Nov 14, 2008)

The quick spool on the undividied manifolds is a _slightly_ different application. That's more akin to VGT turbine housings.

I typically use Lenox saws. I have a bunch of china saws, but the lenox work great. And they're like $7 each. Just drill a small pilot hole with a 16th inch bit, then open it up to your hole saw arbor bit size. Then go at it with the hole saw. If you try and drill the arbor hole with the hole saw attached to the arbor at the same time, you *will* crash the saw in to the manifold when the arbor bit breaks through and ruin the saw. Stainless *drills* better with very high pressure bit and very low rotational speed. And the hole saw WILL try and skip and bend your arbor bit if don't start the hole saw cut VERY VERY lightly. Once you have a starter groove for the hole saw, you can start feeding a little bit more pressure.

On my press, I'll drill it at around 100rpm. Then when I switch to the saw, I'll run it at around 150-175 rpm. My base belt speed is around 340rpm and my vfd lowers speed based on percentage, not rpm, so those are guesstimates.


----------



## Pat @ Pitt Soundworks (Nov 14, 2008)

mainstayinc said:


> Thanks! and nice to hear from you. .


Thanks! I've been away far too long. I'm just now finally starting to play with my VW projects again, after relocating across the country over 3 years ago. 

I really like that DSM compact twinscroll design you posted up. It's very similar to the GM and volvo cast manifold designs, but just a little more bulky due to the construction. Build wise, it should be pretty easy as well, compared to an equal length big tubular. I really think you should consider copying that design 

Oh, if I'm out of line for asking, would you be interested in doing some small on-the-side cad work? I have a couple jobs that just aren't worth sending out to big companies.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Pat @ Pitt Soundworks said:


> Thanks! I've been away far too long. I'm just now finally starting to play with my VW projects again, after relocating across the country over 3 years ago.
> 
> I really like that DSM compact twinscroll design you posted up. It's very similar to the GM and volvo cast manifold designs, but just a little more bulky due to the construction. Build wise, it should be pretty easy as well, compared to an equal length big tubular. *I really think you should consider copying that design *
> 
> Oh, if I'm out of line for asking, would you be interested in doing some small on-the-side cad work? I have a couple jobs that just aren't worth sending out to big companies.


Yeah, I really like that DSM compact twin-scroll design. That's what convinced me to go twin scroll in the first place. I did copy this design in FreeCAD and it is a true divided manifold design. However, the collector sections where each primary merges are much more complex than my simpler mis-matched design. It would take an expert fabricator to pull off that design. Based on my fabrication skills (which is minimal), I feel the mis-matched design is more realistic.

I wish I had more time to do CAD work. Thanks for the offer. With three (3) children now and running a business full time, I just don't have the time. Wife already yells at me for spending too much time on internet and with cars LOL.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Here's the *proper* version of the manifold (1+4 and 2+3 primaries) that I designed in FreeCAD. It uses the same custom T3 flange and is a bottom mount (same as DSM manifold). However, the DSM uses a T4 flange.










EDIT: Problem is that the #4 runner will not clear the cylinder head on the bottom mount version. The 1.8T cylinder head is too wide above the exhaust ports as compared to the DSM cylinder head. A top mount version would solve this problem (where the #4 runner is on the bottom), but I want a passenger-side inlet. Front mount (or, "rear mount") makes the most sense in this situation since there are no clearance issues.


----------



## Pat @ Pitt Soundworks (Nov 14, 2008)

Do you have room to center the driver's side flange inlet over the number 2 runner? There's plenty of room to run the number 4 under the manifold and clear the ptu. Or the other way, with the ps flange inlet over the #3.


----------



## Pat @ Pitt Soundworks (Nov 14, 2008)

I'm going to play with some pipes this afternoon and see what I can think of.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Pat @ Pitt Soundworks said:


> Do you have room to center the driver's side flange inlet over the number 2 runner? There's plenty of room to run the number 4 under the manifold and clear the ptu. Or the other way, *with the ps flange inlet over the #3*.


If you put the passenger side inlet over the #3 runner, then you can shorten the #4 runner but you will have to lengthen the #1 runner. It will end up having the same problem as above. Below is a picture of a cast SPA T3 divided manifold (TMA 05). Notice how the manifold is relatively "flat" in the drawing so as not to interfere with the cylinder head. However, this manifold is a little "clunky" IMO.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Other than being a little clunky, that SPA manifold is a good price. However... does not fit AWD applications. Probably because it is a bottom mount.


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

The spa isnt all that, they are decent in a longitudinal application, atleast when i used one and it was nice, but it feels cluttered and the internal casting in the 2 I've had in my hand were meh. 



Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## Gulfstream (Jul 28, 2010)

mainstayinc said:


> Other than being a little clunky, that SPA manifold is a good price. However... does not fit AWD applications. Probably because it is a bottom mount.


On my awd Leon I use a PPT bottom mount mani with ok clearance.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Gulfstream said:


> On my awd Leon I use a PPT bottom mount mani with ok clearance.


:thumbup: Thanks for confirming!


----------



## Pat @ Pitt Soundworks (Nov 14, 2008)

That's a shame becuase that's a fairly nice manifold design. 

For what it's worth, my first manifold for my twin charger was a bottom mount, and it fit with the XWD transfer case no problem.










And my twin scroll manifold fits no problem as well. It's a top mount, but a lot of the tubes get pretty low and those are beefy 1.5" pipe elbows, not the puny 1.25's you're using.











Want a hand making a manifold? I can probably put one together real quick, or at least get it fit up if you want to final weld it.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Pat @ Pitt Soundworks said:


> That's a shame becuase that's a fairly nice manifold design.
> 
> For what it's worth, my first manifold for my twin charger was a bottom mount, and it fit with the XWD transfer case no problem.
> 
> ...


Sure, man. If you are willing to use the 1 1/4 Schedule 10 piping and make it a *true* divided short runner manifold (similar in concept to the DSM), then I would be very interested. PM me with a parts list and I will have all the materials shipped to your address. Include the number of short and long radius bends you need etc.

In the meantime, I will see how far I can get with the mis-matched manifold design. If both manifolds are good, then I will have them both welded up with the custom T3 flange (will order a second flange). That will allow me to test both manifolds on the dyno to see if one is better than the other. I can always use the other manifold on my MK4 daily driver which was recently rebuilt. That will be a good excuse to upgrade that car to a twin-scroll second generation GTX3071R (or, even the G25-660). Or, I can put up for sale at cost and kick back a few hundred dollars to you.

Let's do this.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

PM received from [Pat @ Pitt Soundworks].


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Atpturbo finally listed the GTX3584RS with the new T3 Twinscroll Ni-Resist Turbine Housing as a separate item in their catalogue. Here is what it looks like:










The turbine housing looks pretty compact.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Back to the short-runner unequal length manifold experiment, once the guy plugged a faulty BOV, his spoolup improved to just under 1100 RPMs at 300 ft-lbs of torque over the 0.82 A/R single scroll housing on a cast manifold. His peak torque and horsepower numbers also increased with the twin scroll housing (see below).










Very impressive results.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

QUICK UPDATE:

Below are some pictures Pat @ Pitt Soundworks sent me. The manifold is basically a copy of the DSM design I posted earlier but uses ("puny" LOL) 1 1/4" schedule 10 versus the 1 1/2 inch. It also uses the 1" thick custom T3 flange I had fabricated and a 1/2" thick cylinder head flange I sent Pat over the weekend.










Plenty of clearance for the passenger-side drive axle and transfer case.










And the number 4 primary clears the cylinder head!










The 1 1/4" schedule 10 pipe essentially matches the ID of the exhaust ports on the AEB head. That should keep the exhaust gasses moving fast and efficiently into the turbine. I decided to go with the largest A/R twin scroll turbine housing available for the GTX3584RS. It will be interesting to see how this housing plays with the short runner manifold Pat is fabricating. I can always drop down from 1.01 A/R to the smaller 0.83 A/R if that's a better match but don't plan to.

Based on the dyno results from the short-runner unequal length manifold experiment, I figure that a divided short runner manifold will add 350cc to 700cc of *virtual displacement* to a 2.0L or 2.1L engine based on a 500 to 1000 RPM increase in spoolup. That puts this setup in VR6 territory if you were to compare it to a 2.8L VR6 with a single scroll turbine housing.

EDIT: Having a *proper* divided manifold will allow the engine to run cooler with less risk of engine knock. That is why I mentioned the problem of exhaust reversion in cylinders 2 and 3 with my simpler mis-matched manifold design. The guy from the DSM forum ran 29 psi with only 93 octane pump gas. I might change my fueling strategy which currently consists of running 44 psi boost on E85 through a second set of injectors (8 injectors total). Using E85 will require me to custom fabricate a second set of injector bungs on my drivers-side inlet SEM manifold (4 x ID1300 + 4 x ID1700). However, with a *proper* divided manifold, I might be able to get away with running a single set of ID1700 or ID2000 injectors by using E25 to E40 with methanol injection.

It looks like I would have to bump base fuel pressure up to 4 bar to get away with 1 set of ID1700 to ID2000 injectors (see below).


----------



## ticketed2much (Feb 18, 2012)

That looks so good. In for results!


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

ticketed2much said:


> That looks so good. In for results!


:thumbup: I wish Garrett made a single scroll T3 turbine housing for the GTX3584RS. That would allow me to slap on my old ATP log manifold with the single scroll and do a nice comparison. They do make a single scroll v-band housing, but that would require fabricating a whole new manifold for comparison purposes.

Tan, one of Bill's customers, is running the GTX3584RS on a v-band single scroll long runner race manifold. But he is 3.3L. That would be an unfair comparison. Nonetheless, I might be able to glean some important data from his setup if he ever gets it dyno'd.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Below is version 2.0 of the custom T3 flange. It now includes some additional space (+2mm) between the inlet ports to allow enough room to weld each schedule 10 pipe individually. My previous version had no space between the inlet ports as the pipes were butted up against each other. It also now includes an inset area (witness boss) that allows the schedule 10 pipe to self-align with the flange.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

QUICK UPDATE:

Below are some pictures Pat @ Pitt Soundworks sent me of the finished manifold. This project turned out way better than I could have imagined. He took the time to weld and smooth out all of the joined areas which I didn't expect.










Wastegate placement is perfect!










The converging sections looks real smooth.










Per his advice, I am going to bring the manifold to a machine shop to flatten the cylinder head flange just to make sure it's absolutely straight. After that, I will have the manifold powder coated and begin to think about my wastegate strategy. This also gives me an excuse to bother Bill Schimmel and show him the manifold. I haven't heard from him in over three months and have been patiently waiting for him to contact me to start the chassis work.

:thumbup: Big thumbs up to Pat for his time and expertise! I would have never been able to pull this off myself and am very excited to see what this short runner twin scroll setup can do.


----------



## One-Eight GTI (Jan 5, 2010)

The manifold is bad ass. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

One-Eight GTI said:


> The manifold is bad ass.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Thx! Actually, thank Pat. This manifold takes this project to a whole new level IMO.


----------



## One-Eight GTI (Jan 5, 2010)

It blows my mind that you will be boosting with your 3584 at same time as my 3076r . 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

One-Eight GTI said:


> It blows my mind that you will be boosting with your 3584 at same time as my 3076r .
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Yeah. I was just thinking about that. The DSM guy tested a couple different turbos with the short runner twin scroll manifold including the GTX3076R and GTX3576R. He built a divided long runner *race* manifold going into a twin scroll v-band turbine housing on a first generation GTX3582R. Ultimately, he switched back to the short runner twin scroll setup and gained an additional 950+ RPMs with the short runner. Compared to his GTX3076R and GTX3576R, he only lost about 150 RPMs in spoolup on the GTX3582R. But that setup included hotter cams and a new intake manifold. So, the slight loss of spool on the GTX3582R setup could have been attributed to these other changes.

Considering that the GTX3584RS has a better surge line than the first generation GTX3582R, I am hoping to at least match the DSM guy's results. I will take a slight penalty in spoolup because of the AEB head due to lower port velocity down low. However, that should be offset somewhat by using slightly smaller diameter 1 1/4 schedule 10 piping on the exhaust manifold and, in my opinion, a more refined manifold design over the DSM unit.

EDIT: Below is a re-post of the GTX3584RS and the first generation GTX3582R that the DSM guy was using on 2.0L. Notice the 200 to 500 RPM better surge line for the GTX3584RS. It will be interesting to see how the short runner twin scroll plays with the newer aero turbine wheel of the GTX3584RS.










Here is a link to his GTX3582r Short Runner TwinScroll Setup and results comparing the short runner and longer runner using the GTX3582R.

And some pictures of the long runner setup.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

I was thinking about doing a T4 version of the custom flange using 1 1/2 schedule 10 pipe if anyone is interested. Also, Pat, if you still need some CAD work done, please PM me! I owe you big time for this one.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

mainstayinc said:


> I was thinking about doing a T4 version of the custom flange using 1 1/2 schedule 10 pipe if anyone is interested. Also, Pat, if you still need some CAD work done, please PM me! I owe you big time for this one.


Just finished the T4 version of the one (1) inch thick flange. It uses 1 1/2 inch schedule 10 pipe and features the witness bosses on the inlet side to help self-align with the flange. It also includes the additional space (+2mm) between the inlet ports to allow complete welding of individual primaries. This flange will work for any T4 twin scroll turbine housing such as the 1.06 A/R housing the DSM guy used (see below) in his short-runner unequal length manifold experiment. It provides a smooth transition between the 1 1/2 schedule 10 pipe and the rounded rectangle shape of the T4 turbine housing. PM me if your interested and I'll send you the CAD file for free (for now!).

Forgot to mention that it also features two (2) 1/8 NPT ports on either side of the flange to accept such things as an EGT temperature probe, exhaust back pressure probe etc.










Turbine Housing, T4 Divided inlet 3" V-Band outlet, 1.06 A/R for GT3582R/GTX35


----------



## sleepy1.8t (Sep 5, 2013)

holy shiat. that manifold is everything i have ever dreamed of doing to my 1.8

fantastic work Pat


----------



## Lysholm (Nov 8, 2001)

> Below is a re-post of the GTX3584RS and the first generation GTX3582R that the DSM guy was using on 2.0L. Notice the 200 to 500 RPM better surge line for the GTX3584RS. It will be interesting to see how the short runner twin scroll plays with the newer aero turbine wheel of the GTX3584RS.


nice work, but i'm pretty sure there are birds of prey that don't have eyesight good enough to read that map overlay


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Lysholm said:


> nice work, but i'm pretty sure there are birds of prey that don't have eyesight good enough to read that map overlay


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

QUICK UPDATE:

Finally after four months I decided to stop by Bill Schimmel's place in Sellersville, PA this morning. Some of you may recall that he moved from his Warminster, PA location to my hometown in September of last year. He was suppose to contact me in November of last year to bring the MK1 in for the chassis modifications. So, I've been patiently waiting for him to contact me. However, now that Pat at Pitt Soundworks came through in a big way with his divided short-runner unequal length manifold, I thought that would be a good excuse to contact Bill.

First off, Bill was way impressed with the quality of the welds on the manifold. I also pointed out how nicely ported and smooth the inside was. I tried to explain to him all of the benefits of a short-runner divided manifold as I have outlined in this build thread. I think he got most of it. We talked about several aspects of the build including the fuel system, engine, suspension etc. It's always good to bounce ideas off of him since he is up to date with most of the technology and only uses top-shelf stuff for Tan's R32 drag car. I talked about my new fueling strategy which has changed since the addition of the divided short-runner manifold. I now plan to run a single set of four (4) ID 1700 fuel injectors at 4 bar base fuel pressure. Those will be essentially equal to a set of ID 2000's at 3 bar base fuel pressure. That will allow me to run the same in-tank dual Aeromotive 340 pump setup that I have in my MK4 2.1L + GTX2867R. That setup is rated up to 1400 HP and has proven itself to be extremely reliable and quiet. Unfortunately, the guy who sold me the dual pump setup no longer sells them. However, Aeromotive sell an identical system but nicer. It's called their Dual Phantom Stealth Fuel System See below.










Compare that with IE's Dual Surge tank I was planning on using that uses noisier Bosch 044 pumps.










The Aeromotive setup will drop right into an aftermarket fuel cell with a little fabrication work such as this nice unit from JAZ.










Bill suggested I take a look at Aeromotive's new brushless pumps which are super-quiet and have less amperage draw. But those are like $1,200. I'm not going to spend that much on a fuel pump. Anyways, a dual pump setup has a second pump as a safety backup in case the other pump fails. On a different note, Bill mentioned he went to the PRI (Performance Racing Industry) show in Indianapolis, IN this past December with Matt and Tan. That sounded like quite an adventure as they made it to IN but Bill's Porsche Cayenne didn't. Bill said that the guys from Street Outlaws were their with their cars including Big Chief, Murder Nova, Doc and Reaper etc. He mentioned what a POS the Crow looked like as the exhaust headers looked like they were cut with a sawzall and left completely un-deburred.

So, the new 2.1L engine is almost complete. Bill just needs to install a new set of hydraulic cam followers and my Catcams 3660 camshafts. He is going to call me when he installs the camshafts so that we can set the proper centerlines. Remember, I plan on using VVT for power and will not be using the stock centerlines on the 3660's. In the meantime, I will install the front rotisserie bumper and get the car ready for Bill in about three (3) months. That's the plan at least.


----------



## ArclitGold (Apr 21, 2009)

Nice work!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

ArclitGold said:


> Nice work!
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


:thumbup:


----------



## F4T (Jun 23, 2014)

Nice one bro! looking forward to more updates on this


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

F4T said:


> Nice one bro! looking forward to more updates on this


Thanks:thumbup: Bill is going to have the exhaust manifold flange machined flat and then have it finished with some kind of white ceramic coating. I think it's the Zircotec coating which is applied with a plasma gun.











Then, it's just the hydraulic cam followers, cams, FSI tensioner and iABED alternator and oil pan and the engine should be finished. Bill is a dealer for Injector Dynamics so he is going to get me the ID 1700's.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

No updates but quick question. I read about halfway through this post: 2.0T Coilpacks and spark plug gap, trying random new stuff. Are the 2.0T ignition coils worth the upgrade? I see that IE and ECS Tuning sell a nice adapter plate for the longer ignition coils.









Gulfstream mentioned that he dyno'd both the 1.8T and 2.0T ignition coils and they performed identical. Is there any benefit to running the 2.0T coils? Less misfires, better fuel economy etc.? Or, should I stick with stock 1.8T ignition coils for this build?


----------



## CD155MX (Dec 18, 2007)

Everything I've read says that it's not really a worthwhile "upgrade."


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

CD155MX said:


> Everything I've read says that it's not really a worthwhile "upgrade."


That's my impression. Some guys insist that the 2.0T coils help with misfires etc. I wonder if anyone has actually measured the output of the coils. I couldn't find any hard data on the first 15 pages of the thread. I know you can run a larger spark plug gap with the 2.0T coils. Is there any advantage to larger gap?


----------



## CD155MX (Dec 18, 2007)

mainstayinc said:


> That's my impression. Some guys insist that the 2.0T coils help with misfires etc. I wonder if anyone has actually measured the output of the coils. I couldn't find any hard data on the first 15 pages of the thread. I know you can run a larger spark plug gap with the 2.0T coils. Is there any advantage to larger gap?


I'm not sure about the gap question. Hopefully someone smarter than I can chime in. 

I suspect a lot of folks were replacing worn out 1.8T coils and plugs with new 2.0T coils and plugs making them think there was an actual benefit. I have no data to back this up however, just a hunch.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

CD155MX said:


> I'm not sure about the gap question. Hopefully someone smarter than I can chime in.
> 
> I suspect a lot of folks were replacing worn out 1.8T coils and plugs with new 2.0T coils and plugs making them think there was an actual benefit. I have no data to back this up however, just a hunch.


:thumbup:


----------



## blueduece (Sep 11, 2007)

This thread kept me up reading all night, such great info in this thread. Your build sounds like it will be a beast, I would love to see it when completed as you're fairly local to me. My only question is how you will control the needed inputs to the haldex unit with stand alone? I have been out of the loop for awhile but I know that was a major obstical for running an R32 on stand alone tuning without also having a stand alone haldex controller as it relies on input from throttle and abs sensor inputs to engage the haldex. I'm guessing that the newer stand alone engine management options now can provide these inputs to engage the clutch packs? Forgive me if you mentioned this as it's 7:30am and I have been reading this thread for the last 4+ hours and need sleep.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

blueduece said:


> This thread kept me up reading all night, such great info in this thread. Your build sounds like it will be a beast, I would love to see it when completed as you're fairly local to me. My only question is how you will control the needed inputs to the haldex unit with stand alone? I have been out of the loop for awhile but I know that was a major obstical for running an R32 on stand alone tuning without also having a stand alone haldex controller as it relies on input from throttle and abs sensor inputs to engage the haldex. I'm guessing that the newer stand alone engine management options now can provide these inputs to engage the clutch packs? Forgive me if you mentioned this as it's 7:30am and I have been reading this thread for the last 4+ hours and need sleep.


Thanks for your interest! SQS Racing makes a Haldex controller (MHRB) for the first generation Haldex found in the MK4 R32 and MK1 Audi TT. This controller is designed for cars that do not use the original CAN Bus wiring. Here is the product description:



SQS Racing said:


> *Product description*
> 
> Hydraulic controler for Haldex transmission unit used in VAG Mk4 cars.
> Simple and reliable solution for Racing and special build cars where is not used original CAN-Bus wiring.
> ...












I plan to modify the system to send a 12V signal from the standalone ECU instead of the handbrake (as used in the SQS setup) when certain conditions are met, such as TPS>50% etc. That will allow me to customize the Haldex system to my needs instead of using the SQS handbrake setup or the "smart" setup that comes with the original Haldex system. The "smart" system is reactive and decides when to engage the Haldex system for you. I don't like that. I want to be able to flip an arming switch on my dashboard and either engage the Haldex directly, or have the standalone ECU detect TPS and engage the system accordingly. This setup will invariably be a "dumb" setup as compared to the original system.

That's the plan at least. If, for whatever reason, the SQS controller doesn't work the way I want, then I can always revert back to the original Haldex setup since I will be using the wiring loom from the donor Audi TT which has all the original sensors etc. We'll see how it goes.


----------



## Pat @ Pitt Soundworks (Nov 14, 2008)

Don't forget about this little guy

https://www.darksidedevelopments.co...insert-for-haldex-first-generation-50-50.html


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Pat @ Pitt Soundworks said:


> Don't forget about this little guy
> 
> https://www.darksidedevelopments.co...insert-for-haldex-first-generation-50-50.html


I likey! I think I will get that.


----------



## One-Eight GTI (Jan 5, 2010)

mainstayinc said:


> I likey! I think I will get that.


Or this











Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Pat @ Pitt Soundworks (Nov 14, 2008)

That it one expensive haldex controller


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

One-Eight GTI said:


> Or this
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



That's top shelf. I found the following video:






Funny, I don't even own a smart phone.


----------



## One-Eight GTI (Jan 5, 2010)

Yeah it is. Wish there was a dumbed down version of it that was cheaper. One that you could send your stand-alone signal to it based off tps and say boost signal to make a map to control Haldex. Don’t need a fancy one that uses an app


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

One-Eight GTI said:


> Yeah it is. Wish there was a dumbed down version of it that was cheaper. One that you could send your stand-alone signal to it based off tps and say boost signal to make a map to control Haldex. Don’t need a fancy one that uses an app
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I will probably start with an ON/OFF Haldex setup where the front/rear differential is either 100/0 or 50/50. I only need the 50/50 for hard launches to control wheel spin. Once the car is up to speed I can disengage the rear differential and go 100/0 as in FWD. That will add a few ponies to the front wheels as I will have less drivetrain loss.

In the future, I can possibly program my Vipec Standalone ECU to do something other than 100/0 or 50/50 if that's even possible with the SQS controller. Not sure.


----------



## blueduece (Sep 11, 2007)

I'm not sure if it would work without the sensor inputs but HPA's haldex controller offers user programability to control the engagement that could also be an option if it works without the CAN signals from the ABS and TPS signals. If it does it would allow you to retain some of the original haldex functionality. It might be worth giving them a call to see if it is possible.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

blueduece said:


> I'm not sure if it would work without the sensor inputs but HPA's haldex controller offers user programability to control the engagement that could also be an option if it works without the CAN signals from the ABS and TPS signals. If it does it would allow you to retain some of the original haldex functionality. It might be worth giving them a call to see if it is possible.


Thanks. I'll check into that.


----------



## CorrieG60 (Jan 18, 2004)

Im sure the Dutchbuild haldex controller can also work with a signal send by the ECU, to determine the amount of torque-transfer..
You can ask Wilco about it, or I might be able, the next time I talk to him (but I'm currently out of the country for unknown period).


----------



## One-Eight GTI (Jan 5, 2010)

CorrieG60 said:


> Im sure the Dutchbuild haldex controller can also work with a signal send by the ECU, to determine the amount of torque-transfer..
> You can ask Wilco about it, or I might be able, the next time I talk to him (but I'm currently out of the country for unknown period).


Yes it can. Has canbus option or stand-alone option that you choose when ordering


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Pat @ Pitt Soundworks (Nov 14, 2008)

How is torque transfer % actually achieved with the haldex system? It's a multi pack clutch. Surely the system doesn't intentionally slip the clutches, right? That would leave it with sold state engagement controlled basically via pwm


----------



## vr6 3.0 (Apr 19, 2008)

mainstayinc said:


> I will probably start with an ON/OFF Haldex setup where the front/rear differential is either 100/0 or 50/50. I only need the 50/50 for hard launches to control wheel spin. Once the car is up to speed I can disengage the rear differential and go 100/0 as in FWD. That will add a few ponies to the front wheels as I will have less drivetrain loss.
> 
> In the future, I can possibly program my Vipec Standalone ECU to do something other than 100/0 or 50/50 if that's even possible with the SQS controller. Not sure.


Is your plan mostly street/ 1/4 use? 

Another cool feature about the Dutchbuilt unit is it's compatible with Gen 1-4 Haldex units, vs most others are only compatible with Gen 1. For most builds like these people will use the Gen 1 (I assume because there are more options for controllers and aftermarket LSD's available). The Gen 4 units don't have any aftermarket LSD's available, but are "proactive" rather than "reactive", so you can control them to launch engaged from a stop, rather than engaging upon sensing wheels slip (or tricking it into sensing slip). 

Assume you've seen it already, but some good info here: http://www.awdwiki.com/en/haldex/ 

I'm not positive on the weight and dimensional comparison between Gen 1 and Gen 4, but the mounting system for Gen 4 also seems easier for designing a one-off rear subframe (the route I'm taking with my build) vs what is more common, using the mk2 syncro rear beam and modifying it.


----------



## One-Eight GTI (Jan 5, 2010)

Pat @ Pitt Soundworks said:


> How is torque transfer % actually achieved with the haldex system? It's a multi pack clutch. Surely the system doesn't intentionally slip the clutches, right? That would leave it with sold state engagement controlled basically via pwm


I’ve been asking in forums trying to find out also. How is Dutchbuild able to make a canbus option (oem sensors sending it info)and a stand-alone option where you send it a 0-5v signal. 




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

vr6 3.0 said:


> *Is your plan mostly street/ 1/4 use?*
> 
> Another cool feature about the Dutchbuilt unit is it's compatible with Gen 1-4 Haldex units, vs most others are only compatible with Gen 1. For most builds like these people will use the Gen 1 (I assume because there are more options for controllers and aftermarket LSD's available). The Gen 4 units don't have any aftermarket LSD's available, but are "proactive" rather than "reactive", so you can control them to launch engaged from a stop, rather than engaging upon sensing wheels slip (or tricking it into sensing slip).
> 
> ...


Yes, street and possibly a few quarter mile runs. I already have a syncro rear beam and trailing arms from a Canadian G60 Syncro Passat. I bought that locally from a guy who already had the Dutchbuilt adapter welded to fit the Haldex differential. I would like to eventually to a one-off rear subframe and trailing arms for the Gen1 Haldex unit.

It's good to know that the Dutchbuilt Haldex controller can be used with a standalone ECU. That gives me another option if the SQS setup doesn't work.



Pat @ Pitt Soundworks said:


> How is torque transfer % actually achieved with the haldex system? It's a multi pack clutch. Surely the system doesn't intentionally slip the clutches, right? That would leave it with sold state engagement controlled basically via pwm


The more I think about it, the more I realize I probably only need either 100/0 or 50/50 torque split for my application. The 50/50 split is perfect for hard launches from a dig. I can't imagine a scenario where I would need anything other than 100/0 or 50/50. That Powertrack insert BTW gives instant 50/50 torque split. That would work perfect in my "dumb" setup.












CorrieG60 said:


> Im sure the Dutchbuild haldex controller can also work with a signal send by the ECU, to determine the amount of torque-transfer..
> You can ask Wilco about it, or I might be able, the next time I talk to him (but I'm currently out of the country for unknown period).


:thumbup:


----------



## ticketed2much (Feb 18, 2012)

Pat @ Pitt Soundworks said:


> How is torque transfer % actually achieved with the haldex system? It's a multi pack clutch. Surely the system doesn't intentionally slip the clutches, right? That would leave it with sold state engagement controlled basically via pwm


There has to be some clutch slippage or you’d have instant binding on turns. I believe there is a valve controlled by a stepped motor that controls percent engagement, although too much slippage can overheat the clutches.

I have OEM+ the power track insert in mine. I think for mainstays purposes he’s right, either 100 percent or 0 engagement would be best.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

ticketed2much said:


> There has to be some clutch slippage or you’d have instant binding on turns. I believe there is a valve controlled by a stepped motor that controls percent engagement, although too much slippage can overheat the clutches.
> 
> I have OEM+ the power track insert in mine. I think for mainstays purposes he’s right, either 100 percent or 0 engagement would be best.


I might be wrong, but I think the rear differential is what prevents binding between the two rear wheels during turns. The clutch pack is only there to transfer torque to the rear axle/differential assembly.


----------



## Pat @ Pitt Soundworks (Nov 14, 2008)

I think he's referring to binding between the front and rear axles. Unlike the evo awd setups, the clutches are the only disconnect between the front and rear assemblies. 

Looking at that faq, it's the difference in axle speed that drives the hydraulic pump. So more wheel speed difference = higher clamping load. Not sure how the electronics play out then. I always assumed the pump was electronicly driven

The only downsize I could see to no bias between 100/0 and 50/50 would be potential bogging during times when the turbo isn't spooled up. That's extra load the engine has to fight against to rev up faster. But if you're controlling it with a standalone, you should be able to configure multiple parameters simultaneously to control lock up, such as load % requested, TPS, RPM, and boost. Hell, even just boost would work. Don't let it lock until you're at 5-7psi of boost.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Pat @ Pitt Soundworks said:


> I think he's referring to binding between the front and rear axles. Unlike the evo awd setups, the clutches are the only disconnect between the front and rear assemblies.
> 
> Looking at that faq, it's the difference in axle speed that drives the hydraulic pump. So more wheel speed difference = higher clamping load. Not sure how the electronics play out then. I always assumed the pump was electronicly driven
> 
> The only downsize I could see to no bias between 100/0 and 50/50 would be potential bogging during times when the turbo isn't spooled up. That's extra load the engine has to fight against to rev up faster. But if you're controlling it with a standalone, you should be able to configure multiple parameters simultaneously to control lock up, such as load % requested, TPS, RPM, and boost. Hell, even just boost would work. Don't let it lock until you're at 5-7psi of boost.


Ok. That makes sense. It will take some experimenting to determine which parameters are best to engage the Haldex.


----------



## ticketed2much (Feb 18, 2012)

Pat @ Pitt Soundworks said:


> I think he's referring to binding between the front and rear axles. Unlike the evo awd setups, the clutches are the only disconnect between the front and rear assemblies.
> 
> Looking at that faq, it's the difference in axle speed that drives the hydraulic pump. So more wheel speed difference = higher clamping load. Not sure how the electronics play out then. I always assumed the pump was electronicly driven
> 
> The only downsize I could see to no bias between 100/0 and 50/50 would be potential bogging during times when the turbo isn't spooled up. That's extra load the engine has to fight against to rev up faster. But if you're controlling it with a standalone, you should be able to configure multiple parameters simultaneously to control lock up, such as load % requested, TPS, RPM, and boost. Hell, even just boost would work. Don't let it lock until you're at 5-7psi of boost.



Yeah that’s what I meant. The stepper motor controls a valve that relieves the pressure of the hydraulic pump. The motor is controlled by the electronics/haldex controller. So when the controller wants fwd, the valve is opened relieving the pressure and disengaging the clutch. When it wants awd, it closes the valve. It can also be partly open. Don’t know all the parameters, but say you start to slip while cornering, instead of full clutch engagement, it may only do partial so some slippage can happen. It uses the data from all the sensors to determine when and how much to close the valve.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

ticketed2much said:


> Yeah that’s what I meant. The stepper motor controls a valve that relieves the pressure of the hydraulic pump. The motor is controlled by the electronics/haldex controller. So when the controller wants fwd, the valve is opened relieving the pressure and disengaging the clutch. When it wants awd, it closes the valve. It can also be partly open. Don’t know all the parameters, but say you start to slip while cornering, instead of full clutch engagement, it may only do partial so some slippage can happen. It uses the data from all the sensors to determine when and how much to close the valve.


That makes perfect sense! Thanks for the clear explanation.


----------



## brunjc2 (Jul 24, 2017)

mainstayinc said:


> That's my impression. Some guys insist that the 2.0T coils help with misfires etc. I wonder if anyone has actually measured the output of the coils. I couldn't find any hard data on the first 15 pages of the thread. I know you can run a larger spark plug gap with the 2.0T coils. Is there any advantage to larger gap?


Hope I'm not too late to the party with my input here. Sorry if I come off as too "basic"... here we go...

The ignition coil is essentially iron wrapped with copper wire. Apply current to the copper wire, and as soon as the iron core is saturated, you open the circuit (disconnect the ground not V+!), and induce "spark" from the iron core. What you are really doing, is taking 12v+ @ x amps, and transforming it to 45kV at .0000x amps (or similar), to jump a gap. Kind of like static electricity, jumping gaps-static electricity can be upwards of 15k volts, at extremely minute amperage.

So, if someone has an oscilloscope that can measure ~60k DC volts, and can simulate an ME to saturate coils and fire, we could get actual factual data. I can help with #2. that would be easy enough with an Arduino or similar. Maybe I can find someone with a good o-scope too....

As far as spark plug gap, the ability of xV to jump a gap of y millimeters will change when cylinder pressures increase and IIRC mixtures become more rich. So the idea, is that you can maintain a gap at higher cyl pressures with higher kV.

Is a bigger gap better? Well, an engine dyno session will tell you for sure. But I think that you should concentrate more on, "is the center electrode shrouded by the ground electrode?" and "are my plugs indexed?"

There's a good article on this here -> http://www.randakksblog.com/spark-plug-tricks/

as for the question about 1.8t vs 2.0t coils..... it about time someone benchmarks them, scientifically speaking...

hope this helps.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

brunjc2 said:


> Hope I'm not too late to the party with my input here. Sorry if I come off as too "basic"... here we go...
> 
> The ignition coil is essentially iron wrapped with copper wire. Apply current to the copper wire, and as soon as the iron core is saturated, you open the circuit (disconnect the ground not V+!), and induce "spark" from the iron core. What you are really doing, is taking 12v+ @ x amps, and transforming it to 45kV at .0000x amps (or similar), to jump a gap. Kind of like static electricity, jumping gaps-static electricity can be upwards of 15k volts, at extremely minute amperage.
> 
> ...


That DOES help.:thumbup: Thank you for the explanation. I plan to run at 3 bar boost with this setup so maintaining good ignition is very important. The 2.0T coils are sold as the cat's meow but do they really improve performance? Like you said, a dyno session would answer that question.

I'll check out that article. I need to learn about indexed plug etc.


----------



## All_Euro (Jul 20, 2008)

mainstayinc said:


> That DOES help.:thumbup: Thank you for the explanation. I plan to run at 3 bar boost with this setup so maintaining good ignition is very important. The 2.0T coils are sold as the cat's meow but do they really improve performance? Like you said, *a dyno session would answer that question*.
> 
> I'll check out that article. I need to learn about indexed plug etc.



Didn’t Gulfstream already do this?... thought he did and found zero difference.

Loving the build John :thumbup:


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

All_Euro said:


> Didn’t Gulfstream already do this?... thought he did and found zero difference.
> 
> Loving the build John :thumbup:


Now that you mention it, I think he did do a comparison and found no difference between the 2.0T coils and stock. I totally forgot about that.


----------



## Pat @ Pitt Soundworks (Nov 14, 2008)

It really depends on the testing methodology. Stock for stock you're not going to notice a difference. It really comes down to cylinder pressure and arc gap. Maybe the 2.0 are less seceptible to boost blow-out. Maybe they have a hotter arc temperature vs the same gap length. I don't claim to know how he tested, but if it was done in an engine, that's the wrong way to do it. It would need to be on a test bench.


----------



## CorrieG60 (Jan 18, 2004)

mainstayinc said:


> That DOES help.:thumbup: Thank you for the explanation. I plan to run at 3 bar boost with this setup so maintaining good ignition is very important. The 2.0T coils are sold as the cat's meow but do they really improve performance? Like you said, a dyno session would answer that question.
> 
> I'll check out that article. I need to learn about indexed plug etc.


Ideally you would like to measure PCP(peak-cylinder-pressure) vs spark blow-out(IF it occurs). then you can either reduce/eliminate this by using different spark plugs(or differen gapping) or coils when they aren't up to the task.
Measuring PCP can be done using specific Bosch spark plugs with pressure-sensors in them(they use these to develop engines)


----------



## brunjc2 (Jul 24, 2017)

Pat @ Pitt Soundworks said:


> It really depends on the testing methodology. Stock for stock you're not going to notice a difference. It really comes down to cylinder pressure and arc gap. *Maybe the 2.0 are less seceptible to boost blow-out. Maybe they have a hotter arc temperature vs the same gap length.* I don't claim to know how he tested, but if it was done in an engine, that's the wrong way to do it. It would need to be on a test bench.


Ahh, THIS makes sense too.... the 2.0T is a direct injection engine. I used to work at MB, and remember reading documents that, with the strat or homogeneous direct injection, at a certain RPM range, they could determine cyl temp and when the mixture would ignite, and injected fuel precisely at that moment, and control flame propagation without ever firing the spark plug-essentially operating similar to a diesel engine. They were also able to create a richer mixture around the spark plug electrode, and leaner in other areas of the cylinder. I hope i'm remembering this correctly.

Mercedes-Benz and VW both use Bosch MEs, so... perhaps, just perhaps, less kV is needed and therefore spec'ed, for direct injection engines. 

I bet its all in here (BOSCH AUTOMOTIVE HANDBOOK), along with other awesome bits of knowledge. Has anyone ever had the privilege of thumbing through this? It will blow your mind.



CorrieG60 said:


> Ideally you would like to measure PCP(peak-cylinder-pressure) vs spark blow-out(IF it occurs). then you can either reduce/eliminate this by using different spark plugs(or differen gapping) or coils when they aren't up to the task.
> Measuring PCP can be done using specific Bosch spark plugs with pressure-sensors in them(they use these to develop engines)


Wow, this is great info here too. Never knew about PCP or pressure sensor spark plugs.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

After doing further research and watching this video (see below), I decided to build my own Haldex controller.






The controller consists of the following:

1. Driver for the stepper motor (EasyDriver V 4.4)










2. Controller for the driver (Arduino Nano V 3.0)










Knockoff versions of these can be purchased for less than $3 for both the EasyDriver and Arduino Nano. I estimate the total cost in parts for this project to be less than $10.  This page gives plenty of examples on how to program the Arduino to generate the step and direction pulses for the EasyDriver. Although I never programmed in Arduino nor do I have any experience in electronics, I do have a background in computer programming which should make this project doable.

My custom Haldex controller will not have a standalone interface like the CRC Performance controller which retails for 950 ERUO (1200 USD). Instead, it will be controlled by my standalone engine management system (ViPec). I can setup general purpose outputs (GPOs) in ViPec which can be used to communicate with the Arduino controller based on certain criteria, such as boost > 5psi, TPS > 50% etc. and which **program** (control loop) to use such as STREET, RACE OR QUARTER MILE. The quarter mile program can close the Haldex control valve completely to provide 100% rear wheel lock. The race setting might use a 90% rear wheel lock which will allow for some slippage through turns etc. This controller can easily be adapted to use without a standalone EMS such as ViPec. You can adapt it to use simple on/off switches to select parameters or a Hobbs switch for boost etc. I will post all of my custom Arduino code here for free if anyone else wants to try this and maybe how to setup and wire the various parts of the controller.

I decided to go this route for several reasons but mainly to overcome the limitations of other options that are currently available. The first option is the SQS controller (MHRB) which allows you to turn on/off the Haldex using a pre-selected lock percentage. I can certainly get this to work with my setup but all this does is open/close the Haldex flow control valve manually. Also, you have to get under the car to adjust the percentage lock. All this for 470 EURO (575 USD) it's just not worth it. The second option is the PowerTrack Insert which closes off the top part of the Haldex flow control valve and provides nearly 100% rear wheel lock. I really like this solution because it's simple and inexpensive and it works. However, it does not allow you to disengage AWD instantly as it takes time for the pressure in the clutch plates to bleed down. The third option is to buy a standalone Haldex controller such as the CRC Performance controller. But who wants to pay $1200 for a fancy standalone interface? Anyways, my custom controller will have many more options since I am integrating it with my engine EMS. The last option is to wire all of the stock sensors and stick with the stock Haldex controller. In my case, the Audi TT donor car came with a nice Blue Controller. But, that system is reactive and not directly under my control. It likes to make its own decisions. My custom controller, like the other aftermarket options is proactive and allows you to pre-set the lock percentage.

Oh, I almost forgot. I can build fail-safes into the system. For example, if the Haldex oil is above a certain temperature, it will not engage the Haldex. People have burned out their clutch plates because of using different size front and rear tires. I can program a few simple fail safes to avoid this situation. I plan to text Bill tomorrow to see if I can stop by his place this Friday to discuss this little project and hopefully remove the stock (Blue) Haldex controller from the Haldex unit itself (currently at his place). This will allow me disassemble the controller and start to poke around with the stepper motor.


----------



## One-Eight GTI (Jan 5, 2010)

What your gonna do is exactly what I want. Been on the Audi TT track forum on Facebook for some time and found this stuff from a year ago. 
You might find it interesting










The dude is using his haltech ecu to control his pwm driver. So he makes his own map ti control it via tps, boost ect

He’s also uses the pressure sensor to monitor it so he can log it to see what’s its doing for making changes to his map


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

One-Eight GTI said:


> What your gonna do is exactly what I want. Been on the Audi TT track forum on Facebook for some time and found this stuff from a year ago.
> You might find it interesting
> 
> The dude is using his haltech ecu to control his pwm driver. So he makes his own map ti control it via tps, boost ect
> ...


That is very cool. That looks similar to what I want to do with a standalone EMS but with a totally custom setup and some really nice parts. Thanks for posting. The only modifications required for my custom controller is unplugging the 4 wires going to the Haldex stepper motor and plugging them into the aftermarket driver board (EasyDriver). You should be able to leave the existing stock controller in place. If this is successful, then I might design a case in FreeCAD for those people who want to 3D print their own protective case. I will, of course, post the CAD file here for free.


----------



## One-Eight GTI (Jan 5, 2010)

Oh nice. I like the idea of not having to remove the oem controller but still having the ability to control via stand-alone. . 

The guy that made above stuff talks about the fact that his is 0% bleed by which he states is one of the down falls of oem setup ??? 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

One-Eight GTI said:


> Oh nice. I like the idea of not having to remove the oem controller but still having the ability to control via stand-alone. .
> 
> *The guy that made above stuff talks about the fact that his is 0% bleed by which he states is one of the down falls of oem setup ???*
> 
> ...


Interesting. Do you have a link to his FB page? I thought about wiring the driver directly to my standalone EMS but then I realized that I have much more programming flexibility with using the Arduino in between. Also, ViPec can only output a 50 Mhz signal which is 20 microseconds per step. The arduino can be programmed to output a much faster signal (less than 1 microsecond) and can, therefore, step the motor much faster. That will allow very fast engagement/disengagement of the flow control valve.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Here is an example of the Haldex stepper motor being controlled by an Arduino:


----------



## One-Eight GTI (Jan 5, 2010)

Sent a pm with link. Hope it works


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

One-Eight GTI said:


> Sent a pm with link. Hope it works
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Yes. Link works! Thanks.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

QUICK UPDATE:

I stopped by Bill Schimmel's this morning to touch base and get the Blue Haldex controller from him. He made some more progress with my stroker engine and installed the VVT tensioner and had the Catcams in place. He will call me in the next week so that we can degree the cams to my custom centerlines and then button everything up. He is also going to send the custom divided manifold and turbine housing to get ceramic coated. Unfortunately, the ceramic coating only comes in white. But I will probably heat wrap everything in addition to the ceramic coating so that's not a real big issue.










Tan's MK5 R32 drag car is looking nice. Bill just finished custom fabricating his water-to-air intercooler and installed some kind of trick launch brake inside the cockpit. Bill hopes to have this project together and running this summer.










He also showed me another customer's car. It's a drag beetle that is getting a VR6 and 500HP turbo. At 1800 lbs. with all fiberglass body and tube chassis, it should be able to do wheel stands at the track. The customer was not able to remove the engine from the back and had to get it through the driver's side door. Bill built some kind of pin release system on the rear frame so that the engine can now be removed from the back.










And this is what I was after. It is the Haldex controller that was at Bill's place from the donor Audi TT225 car.










I already purchased the micro-controller and the driver for my custom Haldex controller. Now that I have the stock controller in hand, I can start to dis-assemble the unit and start to play around with the stepper motor. After researching this little project further, I realized that I can easily adapt my custom controller to work as a standalone unit without the need for anything else. You can just unplug the 4 wires that go to the stepper motor from the stock controller and plug in my custom controller. That's it. It will also have the ability to receive instructions from a standalone EMS like ViPec and override the installed program. Here is a quick mock-up of the display screen.










It will have a control knob to change the amount of Haldex engagement and choose between different profiles (QTR MILE, RACE, STREET etc.) on the fly as well as an activate button. You can also implement such features as 'OVERRIDE' by wiring a throttle switch to your gas peddle which will give 100% engagement on demand (similar to NOS engagement); as well as 'LOCKOUT' and 'FAILSAFE' features if you want to wire a handbrake switch and/or monitor Haldex oil temperature. You can also wire a boost switch to engage the Haldex at a pre-determined boost level. 

With the addition of a standalone EMS, you can override the installed program and trigger Haldex engagement by boost, engine speed, TPS etc. You can also implement traction by gear, traction by boost, AWD engine braking, gear lockout and other advanced features. I plan to make this an open source project where you can build an identical unit for cheap yourself and possibly improve on the design. Let me know if you have any suggestions as far as features to build into this controller.

-John (mainstayinc).


----------



## One-Eight GTI (Jan 5, 2010)

That exhaust manifold is bad ass . Excited to see what you build for your Haldex controller. Love this thread 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## ticketed2much (Feb 18, 2012)

If that controller works it’s worth something. You sure you want to ruin it?


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

One-Eight GTI said:


> *That exhaust manifold is bad ass *. *Excited to see what you build for your Haldex controller.* Love this thread
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Thanks. Credit for the exhaust manifold goes to Pat @ Pitt Soundworks. I'm really in some uncharted territory with the custom Haldex controller. But I think I can pull it off.



ticketed2much said:


> If that controller works it’s worth something. You sure you want to ruin it?


I would rather use a stock controller for this project and not touch the Blue controller. I'm not sure how much the Blue one is worth. If you have a stock controller and want the Blue one, PM me and maybe we can do a swap plus a few dollars on top. Whatever you think is fair. LMK.

EDIT: PM received.


----------



## One-Eight GTI (Jan 5, 2010)

Check this option out

https://www.ecumaster.com/products/haldex-controller/


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

One-Eight GTI said:


> Check this option out
> 
> https://www.ecumaster.com/products/haldex-controller/
> 
> ...


That is very interesting. Thanks for sharing. That looks similar to what I am doing as it has a potentiometer and activation switch. It looks like that controller uses a VSS input to optionally control torque transfer. Whereas my controller will use a PWM input to control torque transfer and override the stock program. The PWM signal can come from a standalone EMS unit setup with a 3D map, for example, boost + gear, which opens up a whole lot of possibilities in terms of AWD traction control. The stock program without a standalone EMS will have a lot of race feature not found in that unit. My controller will also have different ramp curves based on Haldex oil viscosity (i.e. oil temperature) similar to the stock Haldex unit. I am about 75% done with programming the interface. I just have to solder pins onto my driver board and connect with the Haldex stepper motor. I am getting very close and might post a video at some point. Busy with work and family ATM and am doing this on my spare time.


----------



## One-Eight GTI (Jan 5, 2010)

I agree. Your controller will be better for the application that your using it for (and mine ). It’s crazy how many different controllers I’ve been coming across since wanting to delete abs controller ect and wanting my own maps from standalone to control haldex

Looking forward to seeing what you create 



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FTMFW (Jan 1, 2008)

Just checking in to see if there are any updates. I figure it's been a bit...


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

FTMFW said:


> Just checking in to see if there are any updates. I figure it's been a bit...


Thanks for the bump! Bill contacted me last week for some engine parts to finish the engine build. I am hoping to contact him later this week or next week so I can stop by and get a progress update. Hopefully, he can take my car in soon to begin the chassis work. As far as the standalone Haldex controller, I am working on that pretty much daily on my spare time. I decided to go with a full graphics display (128 x 64 pixels) over the character display I had before. However, the graphics display requires a lot more memory and processing power. So, I upgraded my microcontroller to an STM32 32 bit ARM processor with a Cortex-M3 core running at 72 Mhz. That has plenty of memory and processing power for what I want to do. Basically, it will be similar to the CRC Racing Haldex controller but way better. Here's a quick teaser picture (see below). It takes VSS, MAP and TPS sensor inputs and calculates Haldex % based on sensor input and user-programmable conditions. It will come pre-installed with multiple programs or you can change or create your own program(s). It can also double as a universal gauge. It will use a digital rotary encoder like the CRC and have a menu system etc. Shown in the picture is a potentiometer to simulate 5V input from sensors. Also shown is a 2.4 inch OLED display over the I2C bus (2 wire + ground + power). As I mentioned before, it can take inputs from a standalone engine management system like Link G4+ to implement features like traction-by-gear using 3D PWM output tables etc.










I will probably make this a DIY project if people want to build their own standalone Haldex controller for cheap. You can buy the STM32 controller from me with the code already installed and the other parts yourself. You just have to solder the wires according to my diagram. I don't expect it to cost more than $50.00 USD and most of that is for a quality OLED display (the STM32 controller by itself is only $3.00). I just don't have the time right now to assemble complete units myself. Down the road I will probably make it compatible for all generations of Haldex systems. Currently, it will start out as a Gen 1 controller. I plan to pre-install 10 to 20 different gauge layouts ("dashboards") accessible through the menu system if people want to choose a different look.


----------



## brunjc2 (Jul 24, 2017)

The controller is looking good. CAN bus input over GPIO/analog inputs would prob be a great addition, esp for mkv+ cars.

What happened with the Arduino unit?


----------



## ausredliner (Oct 20, 2012)

I'd definitely be interested in purchasing the STM32 controller from you with the code. I'm sure a few of us in Australia would be interested as well. 

Nice to see projects like yours.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

brunjc2 said:


> The controller is looking good. CAN bus input over GPIO/analog inputs would prob be a great addition, esp for mkv+ cars.
> 
> What happened with the Arduino unit?


Thanks for the feedback. I'll check into that once the majority of the code is complete.

EDIT: I ran out of memory with the Arduino Nano when I tried to use the menu system with the rotary encoder. Here is a quick comparison of the Nano and the STM32. Apparently, the STM32 has a CAN Bus which can possibly receive inputs from MKV+ cars. See line #4 below. Also, I can overclock the STM32 to 144 Mhz if necessary.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

ausredliner said:


> I'd definitely be interested in purchasing the STM32 controller from me with the code. I'm sure a few of us in Australia would be interested as well.
> 
> Nice to see projects like yours.


:thumbup: Thanks for your interest. I'll keep working at it and hopefully come up with a nice controller. Below is a snapshot of an example 3D PWM output table I keep talking about from the G4+ PCLink software. On the vertical axis is Gear (1 to 5) and along the horizontal axis is boost (kPa). At each intersection is a duty cycle (DC) which the STM32 can read and convert into Haldex %. Notice how first gear ramps up quickly to 100% DC whereas 4th and 5th gear don't ramp up very fast. This will allow you to implement boost-by-gear traction control.


----------



## One-Eight GTI (Jan 5, 2010)

So sweet. Love where your Haldex controller is going. Pumped to see it finished


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

One-Eight GTI said:


> So sweet. Love where your Haldex controller is going. Pumped to see it finished
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Thanks! I am thinking about upgrading the display to a 320x240 Nextion full color touchscreen display. That will cut down on development time since that display automatically draws gauges for you. That will also give me more room to display gauges and data. Up until now, I have been coding all the gauges from scratch. The Nextion is actually cheaper than the 128x64 OLED monochrome display and can do a lot more.

-John (mainstayinc).


----------



## vr6 3.0 (Apr 19, 2008)

mainstayinc said:


> Thanks! I am thinking about upgrading the display to a 320x240 Nextion full color touchscreen display. That will cut down on development time since that display automatically draws gauges for you. That will also give me more room to display gauges and data. Up until now, I have been coding all the gauges from scratch. The Nextion is actually cheaper than the 128x64 OLED monochrome display and can do a lot more.
> 
> -John (mainstayinc).


\

Awesome update John! All that talk about what goes into the Haldex controller you're designing is over my head, but I'll echo others in stating my interest if you were ever to offer something to others who are building similar setups (myself being one of them). Look forward to seeing updates on chassis work once Bill gets to it as well. I still haven't found any credible insight into the issue of centering the angledrive using the available aftermarket mounts available that we talked about recently, so excited to see if that will all work out easily or if further chassis/ mount modifications will be necessary. Chassis modifications of course meaning to the frame rails, obviously the fire wall will need modifying to fit the propshaft. 

Thanks,
Isaac


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

vr6 3.0 said:


> \
> 
> Awesome update John! All that talk about what goes into the Haldex controller you're designing is over my head, but I'll echo others in stating my interest if you were ever to offer something to others who are building similar setups (myself being one of them). Look forward to seeing updates on chassis work once Bill gets to it as well. I still haven't found any credible insight into the issue of centering the angledrive using the available aftermarket mounts available that we talked about recently, so excited to see if that will all work out easily or if further chassis/ mount modifications will be necessary. Chassis modifications of course meaning to the frame rails, obviously the fire wall will need modifying to fit the propshaft.
> 
> ...


I purchased AP Tuning's transmission mounts and Epytec engine mounts IIRC. Hopefully, there won't be any issues with centering the angle drive. I'm anxious to start the chassis work and hopefully Bill can take my car in soon. I'm sure he's been busy with finishing Tan's MK5 race car and other customer cars. I plan to stop by in the next week or two to get an update.


----------



## vr6 3.0 (Apr 19, 2008)

mainstayinc said:


> I purchased AP Tuning's transmission mounts and Epytec engine mounts IIRC. Hopefully, there won't be any issues with centering the angle drive. I'm anxious to start the chassis work and hopefully Bill can take my car in soon. I'm sure he's been busy with finishing Tan's MK5 race car and other customer cars. I plan to stop by in the next week or two to get an update.


Those are both quality mounts. I talked to Marc at Bolt-Action in the Netherlands about the Epytec 02M mounts and he said they wouldn't center the angle drive on the chassis. He said in order to center the angle drive you'd need to shift the position of the engine/ gearbox, and ultimately suggested fully custom frame rails in going Haldex in the mk1. I, like you, went with an 02C instead of an 02M, but still curious if those mounts will work or not. Wish I'd been able to mock them up already and give you an answer one way or another, but will be watching here and hope it works out :thumbup:

Thanks,
Isaac


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

vr6 3.0 said:


> Those are both quality mounts. I talked to Marc at Bolt-Action in the Netherlands about the Epytec 02M mounts and he said they wouldn't center the angle drive on the chassis. He said in order to center the angle drive you'd need to shift the position of the engine/ gearbox, and ultimately suggested fully custom frame rails in going Haldex in the mk1. I, like you, went with an 02C instead of an 02M, but still curious if those mounts will work or not. Wish I'd been able to mock them up already and give you an answer one way or another, but will be watching here and hope it works out :thumbup:
> 
> Thanks,
> Isaac


Thanks. That's very helpful to know. I did get the Epytec engine mounts through Bolt-Action in the Netherlands.


----------



## brunjc2 (Jul 24, 2017)

Yeah the Arduino can run out of steam fairly quickly. The uC you’re using will work just fine, pair it to a transceiver and you’ll be in business. You could use something like MCP2551 but there’s some pretty slick transceivers with built in voltage regulators and such from NXP that are used in OEM applications a lot. If you want/need a hand with the CAN bus stuff LMK.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

brunjc2 said:


> Yeah the Arduino can run out of steam fairly quickly. The uC you’re using will work just fine, pair it to a transceiver and you’ll be in business. You could use something like MCP2551 but there’s some pretty slick transceivers with built in voltage regulators and such from NXP that are used in OEM applications a lot. *If you want/need a hand with the CAN bus stuff LMK*.


Awesome! Thank you.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

QUICK UPDATE:

It looks like this project is finally starting to take shape. I stopped by Bill Schimmel's shop last Saturday for an update only to find out that not much progress has been made on the engine build. Apparently, Bill thought that I was either too busy or not that involved with this project over the summer. When, in fact, I've been patiently waiting for Bill to contact me to bring my car in to start the chassis work etc. I told Bill that I was very eager to get started like 6 months ago. His response, "the squeaky wheel gets the grease". I told him, "that might be a dangerous thing since I live only 5 minutes from your shop." LOL. 

Now that I got the memo...










I figure I would stop by his shop more often to drop off parts and discuss details of the build with him etc. Today I dropped off my built 02C transmission which has been sitting way too long in my basement along with engine and transmission mounts. I had a nice discussion with Bill today about the build and I finally think we are on the same page with this project. He decided that instead of waiting until his pole barn is finished, he will work on my MK1 in his engine shop where Tan's R32 and the drag beetle are currently situated. That's pretty significant since that will move the schedule up a couple of months. He also sent out the custom fabricated exhaust manifold and twin-scroll turbine housing for heat coating. So, with any luck, I can start posting some positive progress here soon. We'll see.


----------



## One-Eight GTI (Jan 5, 2010)

Great news. Vortex has been slow lately on cool builds


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

One-Eight GTI said:


> Great news. Vortex has been slow lately on cool builds
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


:thumbup:


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

UPDATE: I stopped by Bill's shop this morning for an update. He made a lot of good progress with the engine build since my last visit. This includes installing the iABED Industries oil pan, billet timing gear, FSI timing belt tensioner etc. The iABED oil pan fit perfect, but the IE girdle plate had to be removed and one or more holes re-drilled as they didn't line up correctly. Generally, IE products are top notch. But that's the second time I had an IE product that had to be custom modified to fit correctly. As some of you may recall, the tall boy main caps needed extensive modification to fit correctly as they were very much out of spec.

Also, the SEM intake manifold and AEB valve cover came back from power coating and were installed (see below).










Notice the iABED oil pan , FSI tensioner and IE billet timing gear. Bill dowel-pinned the billet gear to the Eurospec 4340 crankshaft and bolted it down with a quite expensive ARP timing gear bolt. He ordered the lower metal timing belt cover. We also degreed the Catcams 3660 camshaft(s) using a Pagparts adjustable timing gear (black). The next step is to install the Fluidampr and iABED alternator kit and find the camshaft centerlines using a degree wheel. After that, the engine it pretty much ready to rip.










I was a little disappointed that the custom divided exhaust manifold and the GTX3584RS twin scroll turbine housing didn't return from heat coating. However, Bill just texted me when I got back and said those will be shipped out today from Swain Tech. So, I expect those to be installed before my next two (2) week update. Before I left, Bill talked about the "next step". Turns out he's already anticipating bringing in the MK1 for the Haldex modifications to the MK1 chassis. That's great news!

So, I am going to start to strip out the interior of the MK1 GTI and get it ready for him. I also have to install the front rotisserie bumper (rear one is already installed). That will allow him to cut and weld the center tunnel and rear Haldex mounting points in a comfortable, upright position. He told me how he had to lie on his back to do all the chassis modifications to his original VR6 Corrado and 911 Porsche laying flat on his back. What a PITA! Hopefully, my custom rotisserie will enable him to be comfortable and take his time with the welds etc.


----------



## One-Eight GTI (Jan 5, 2010)

You should have bill take a lot of pics during the tunnel install. Engine is looking 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

One-Eight GTI said:


> *You should have bill take a lot of pics during the tunnel install*. Engine is looking
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


That's what I was thinking. He also has to fabricate mounting points where the 3 bolt axle brackets attach to the chassis. He mentioned that he wants to tie the mounting points to the bottom of the roll bar to keep everything rigid and tied together.










Also, I forgot to mention earlier, that the custom Haldex controller is coming along quite nicely. I got the Nextion up and running and am able to enter sensor data via touch-screen control.


----------



## All_Euro (Jul 20, 2008)

mainstayinc said:


> That's what I was thinking. He also has to fabricate mounting points where the 3 bolt axle brackets attach to the chassis. He mentioned that *he wants to tie the mounting points to the bottom of the roll bar* to keep everything rigid and tied together.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Nice - looking forward to updates!


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

All_Euro said:


> Nice - looking forward to updates!


:thumbup:


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

UPDATE: I stopped by Bill's shop earlier today to drop off suspension parts: rear syncro hubs, bearings, brakes, syncro caliper carriers, rotors etc. He is pretty much finished up with the drag beetle (see above) and ready to take my car in the next week or two. That's very exciting. I am going to order all the bushings for the syncro rear beam and trailing arms. We matched up the center drive shaft from the Audi TT 225 to make sure it fits the output flange on the FEX angle drive. Fits perfect! We just have to shorten the drive shaft to fit the smaller-chassis MK1. Bill is going to order new bushings for the center drive shaft where it connects to the Haldex unit and another bushing on the other end.










The engine is almost complete as the custom fabricated divided exhaust manifold and turbine housing came back from Swain Tech. He had to fabricate a wrench "ATP-style" in order to install some of the nuts behind the #4 primary as they were hard to reach. He also installed the Fluidampr but did not install the iABED alternator kit as that will be installed in the car. He also ordered ID2000 fuel injectors. I will order an aftermarket fuel rail and start to think about my fuel pump strategy. I will probably end up building an identical twin Aeromotive 340 drop in fuel pump (same as MK4 daily driver) running at 5 bar base fuel pressure. The second pump will be triggered by standalone EMS when needed. I was originally going to go with a staged injection system using ID1300 and ID1700 injectors at 4 bar BFP. However, that changed when Pat @ Pit Soundworks chimed in with his fabrication skills and built my custom divided manifold. That will allow me to run a lower ethanol-to-fuel ratio and smaller injector (not like ID2000's are small). I am hoping to run E40 to E50.










I have to seriously make some time this week to start to strip out the interior of the MK1 GTI. Bill said by spring time one of us will probably go to jail LOL as he anticipates the car will be complete by then. I told him that he has my permission to thoroughly test the MK1 and have fun with it before he returns it to me.

After reading the LS2/Yukon Coil Conversion thread I have more questions than answers as no one posted any comparison dynos in that thread. I decided that I will probably go with 4-wire C5 RS6 COP pencil coils that are a direct fit for the AEB head and are larger/more powerful than stock coils. If those are not sufficient, then I will consider using an aftermarket box that will step up primary voltage to the coil same as the OP ended up doing in the LS2/Yukon thread. Bill said not to get too ahead of myself as one of his VR6 customers just did an 8.6 second quarter mile using stock VR6 coils in an MK3 FWD drag car.


----------



## Pat @ Pitt Soundworks (Nov 14, 2008)

John. You'll have to apologize to Bill for me about the stud access.

The motor looks good. I forgot which ever you're using. But forget the ls2/d585 swap. Just jump straight in to the ign1a smart coil set up. They're industry standard now and charge faster than ls2 coils could with similar discharge energy. They use an hei style coil end, which is also industry standard.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Pat @ Pitt Soundworks said:


> John. You'll have to apologize to Bill for me about the stud access.
> 
> The motor looks good. I forgot which ever you're using. But forget the ls2/d585 swap. Just jump straight in to the ign1a smart coil set up. They're industry standard now and charge faster than ls2 coils could with similar discharge energy. They use an hei style coil end, which is also industry standard.


:thumbup: Thanks for the coil advice. I never heard of the IGN1A smart coil setup. I'll have to research that a little more. As far as the stud access, I guess that comes with the design of the manifold and is unavoidable. Bill assured me however that he got it completely tight. Thanks for chiming in BTW. Your input (and fab skills!) have taken this project to a whole new level. I never expected to have such a nice engine setup. I can't wait to get this car up and running come springtime.


----------



## Pat @ Pitt Soundworks (Nov 14, 2008)

It's my pleasure.

Ign1a was the original part number. The coils originated from Mercury Marine racing. Every aftermarket ignition or ECU company now sells it under their name, Holly, aem, motec, msd, etc, etc. All the same coil. They're robust and hit full power around 3ms dwell vs the 5ms LS coils. The also handle something stupid, like 1khp/cylinder and over 100psi 
worth of pressure. They're all around excellent. If you NEED an aftermarket coil, those are the guys to use.

https://www.diyautotune.com/product/ign-1a-race-coil/

Also, if you need a set, I got my hands on some nla cnc 20an thermostat housings and 10an heater core fittings. They were hugely popular about 7 years ago then completely disappeared off the markets.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Pat @ Pitt Soundworks said:


> It's my pleasure.
> 
> Ign1a was the original part number. The coils originated from Mercury Marine racing. Every aftermarket ignition or ECU company now sells it under their name, Holly, aem, motec, msd, etc, etc. All the same coil. They're robust and hit full power around 3ms dwell vs the 5ms LS coils. The also handle something stupid, like 1khp/cylinder and over 100psi
> worth of pressure. They're all around excellent. *If you NEED an aftermarket coil, those are the guys to use.
> ...


Those coils sound awesome! At 3ms those should work well with stock dwell time. I will probably have to custom fabricate an adapter plate to work with the AEB head. But that's not a big deal. The CNC's thermostat housing and fittings sound tempting. I purchased a cast aluminum set which are not as nice but still functional. If this was a show car, then I would jump on those. Unfortunately, not a lot of people are going to see what's under the hood. Bill commented today that he thinks I should keep the "patina look" and just clear coat the exterior ("people pay money for that look..."). That will make for a true sleeper. But, I will probably want to make the exterior perfect once the car is done and I have driven it around for a while.


----------



## Pat @ Pitt Soundworks (Nov 14, 2008)

Yeah I totally feel you on the paint. If you're making a hot rod, patina is a decent choice. But not for a nicer or restored car. Not for a race car.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Pat @ Pitt Soundworks said:


> Yeah I totally feel you on the paint. If you're making a hot rod, patina is a decent choice. *But not for a nicer or restored car*. Not for a race car.


:thumbup: It'll still be a sleeper fully restored. Nobody will expect anything from this little rabbit.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

QUICK UPDATE:

I have been stopping by Bill's place every Friday for the past month but have not posted any progress updates. All of the PowerFlex bushings for the syncro rear suspension and trailing arms are installed except for the two (2) bushings that connect the rear suspension beam to the chassis. Those were too small (52mm) and do not fit the larger VR6 beam used in the Passat G60 Syncro (62mm). Those had to be special ordered from Germany from this ebay seller: VW Golf 3 Syncro Passat 35i Achskörperlager PU schwarz Shore 90.

Last week I dropped off a Cam Degree Kit I bought from Summit Racing at Bill's shop. The piston stop that comes with that kit is too short and sits very low inside the spark plug well. Bill is going to special order a longer-style piston stop to make things easier. I plan to change the intake and exhaust camshaft centerlines on my Catcams 3660's from 108/110 (Exhaust/Intake) to 120/120 centerlines. Adding the additional 22 degrees between the intake and exhaust camshafts will allow me to run VVT to make stock-like torque but also make 3658-llike top end power. See this discussion. Here is what the final result will look like:










Talking about VR6, Bill recently had Tan's MKV R32 drag car dyno tested at Second Street Speed in Perkasie, PA. Apparently, the guy there tuned Tan's Motec standalone ECU. The custom wiring harness for this setup cost something around $10,000. Tan's setup is a 3.3L R32 engine with a tubular race manifold and GTX3584RS on a single-scroll turbine housing with Motec. My setup will be 2.1L with custom short-runner divided manifold and T3 twin-scroll GTX3584RS using Link G4+ ECU (i.e. Vipec) with stock wiring harness from the Audi TT 225 donor car.

Here is a video. That's Bill slamming through the sequential dogbox on the dyno.






This was suppose to be a 15 psi test run on wastegate spring alone with no other wastegate control. However, he recorded 26 psi with wastegate fully open on his last run. That netted him 804 front-wheel-drive WHP on the dyno (Haldex not connected). That's 925 HP at the crank. Here's a snapshot of the dyno:










Unfortunately, there is no x-axis showing engine speed to show where his power comes on. I would be very happy with 800 WHP on my MK1 setup.


----------



## ticketed2much (Feb 18, 2012)

mainstayinc said:


> That's what I was thinking. He also has to fabricate mounting points where the 3 bolt axle brackets attach to the chassis. He mentioned that he wants to tie the mounting points to the bottom of the roll bar to keep everything rigid and tied together.



Thats a really good idea. Your going to need more rigidity in that chasis



mainstayinc said:


>


Maybe you know this but thats the rear segment of the driveshaft you have connected to the trans. Thats supposed to go to the haldex lol

Your engine looks sooo good. Hope it makes lots of power for you!


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

ticketed2much said:


> Thats a really good idea. Your going to need more rigidity in that chasis
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Thanks, man. Now that you pointed it out, it does look like the driveshaft is backwards. I think Bill just threw the driveshaft on the floor next to the transmission without taking notice of orientation. It's not connected to the transmission at all just sitting on the dolly for the sake of discussion. Also, we further discussed the idea of connecting the roll bar to the 3 bolt axle brackets using through bolts. I saw this Derrick Spratt video (see below) which shows his 2 point roll bar mounted into the stock MK1 seatbelt locations. I really like that idea. So, I am considering having a custom roll bar made that is bolted into the stock seatbelt locations and then into the custom 3 bolt axle brackets making is a good 4 point system. Like you said, the MK1 chassis is going to need some reinforcement.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

UPDATE: I finally bought a set of four (4) tires this past week to fit my 6UL 15 x 8 inch rims. I decided to go with Nitto's NT05 Max Summer Performance tire with a UTQG rating of 200. The tire size is 205/50R15. They fit nicely with a little bit of stretch on the 15 x 8 inch rims. These tires are very sticky and are popular in the Mustang world. Nitto makes a drag radial version of this tire called the NT05R with a 00 UTQG rating but not in my size. They also make the NT01 drag radial with a UTQG rating of 100 in the 205/50/R15 size. So, I can always upgrade to the NT01 if I decide to get serious about tracking this car.










This wheel and tire combination weighs 32.4 lbs (see below). That's a lot lighter than the 225/45/R17 Yokohama S-drives and Audi Nuvolari rims I have on my MK4 daily driver. Those weigh almost 50 lbs. each. The lighter weight will keep the rotating mass at a minimum on my MK1 setup.










I did not stop by Bill's shop today as I normally do every Friday. He is in the process of getting his pole barn completed. I will probably contact him next week and stop by on Friday after Thanksgiving and bring the new tire/wheels with me for test fitment on the rear syncro beam.

Here's a short video overview of the tire:






These tires retail for $101 in the 205/50R15 size with free shipping to an installer on Tirebuyer.com. I paid $91 per tire after a 10% discount code.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

QUICK UPDATE: I stopped by Bill's shop last Friday. I test fitted the 6UL 15 x 8 rims (+36 ET) with Nitto NT05 205/50R15 tires on the rear Syncro beam. The fit **perfect**! They cleared the 191 trailing arms by about 8 mms and the strut mounts without any problems. So, no spacers will be required in the rear. I expect the rear wheels to sit more-or-less flush with the outside of the MK1 GTI fender flairs. But, of course, I won't know for sure until the whole Syncro assembly is installed on the car. Bill wants to take the car in before Christmas to start the chassis work.

I will probably need spacers for the front wheels as RML 15 x 8 Snowflakes with an offset of ET30 barely clear the front struts. 5mm to 10mm spacers maybe. However, there's a small chance I can get the 6UL's to fit without spacers if I remove the smaller upper spring and crank the larger spring to the top of the strut tower. We'll see.

Sorry, no pictures this time.


----------



## ticketed2much (Feb 18, 2012)

Wow that’s great! With any luck you’ll be in it by spring! You’ve sure waited long enough.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

ticketed2much said:


> Wow that’s great! *With any luck you’ll be in it by spring! You’ve sure waited long enough.*


Yeah, no kidding. Bill is still getting his main shop up and running. He said he still needs to run a 220V line for his welder which he will need for the MK1 chassis modifications. But everything else is done (like heat, etc.). He was pretty clear about bringing the car in before the holidays and not after. So, it's only a matter of a few weeks.

Also, I am pretty sure I can run a larger 225 tire in the future without any further modifications or spacers to the rear syncro setup (i.e.: 225/45R15). That will give me another option if I run into traction issues with the 205's (LOL).


----------



## Golf2 Drag (Jan 12, 2019)

It is a really nice project :thumbup: and not quite cheap either.

It will be exciting to get it on dyno 

I know 2 guys who drive with GTX3584rs, one is on a Toyota 1.6 16v age engine, 671 hp 8500rpm, 596nm 7350rpm, redline 9500rpm it sounds pretty wild


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Golf2 Drag said:


> It is a really nice project :thumbup: and not quite cheap either.
> 
> It will be exciting to get it on dyno
> 
> I know 2 guys who drive with GTX3584rs, one is on a Toyota 1.6 16v age engine, 671 hp 8500rpm, 596nm 7350rpm, *redline 9500rpm it sounds pretty wild *


That's cool. :thumbup:


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Finally. Haldex conversion is starting!


----------



## One-Eight GTI (Jan 5, 2010)

Awesome. That means more updates to come. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

One-Eight GTI said:


> Awesome. That means more updates to come.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Yes! Regular updates from now on. Things will start to move much faster now that Bill has the car. He plans to have the engine and transmission out this week and will start to fit the new engine and drivetrain after that.


----------



## Tachibanana (Jan 19, 2016)

Nice! I'm happy for you. It's always a good feeling when the build gains traction moving forward.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Tachibanana said:


> Nice! I'm happy for you. It's always a good feeling when the build gains traction moving forward.


:thumbup:

EDIT: I just saw your signature line (Schimmel Performance Mk5 R32 turbo build). Thanks for the kind words Tan! I hope you don't mind, but I occasionally post updates on your build here in my thread. It's hard not to talk about some of the details of your project!


----------



## Tachibanana (Jan 19, 2016)

mainstayinc said:


> :thumbup:
> 
> EDIT: I just saw your signature line (Schimmel Performance Mk5 R32 turbo build). Thanks for the kind words Tan! I hope you don't mind, but I occasionally post updates on your build here in my thread. It's hard not to talk about some of the details of your project!


I don't mind it at all. In fact, I really appreciate your documentation and analysis on my build. I am mostly too lazy to post updates on my build. :laugh:


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Tachibanana said:


> I don't mind it at all. In fact, I really appreciate your documentation and analysis on my build. I am mostly too lazy to post updates on my build. :laugh:


:thumbup:

UPDATE: Bill just ordered the GTX3584RS super core. This includes the CHRA and v-band compressor housing. I want to have a full-proof setup without having to worry about silicon boost hoses popping off etc. I will be pushing 2.5 to 3 bar boost on this setup. That is why I went with the v-band compressor outlet. The system has to have some flex in it though. So maybe I can use those silly wiggins-style clamps. I just don't want to pay a lot of money for those. Any suggestions, links to similar (but cheaper) products?


----------



## Tachibanana (Jan 19, 2016)

mainstayinc said:


> :thumbup:
> 
> UPDATE: Bill just ordered the GTX3584RS super core. This includes the CHRA and v-band compressor housing. I want to have a full-proof setup without having to worry about silicon boost hoses popping off etc. I will be pushing 2.5 to 3 bar boost on this setup. That is why I went with the v-band compressor outlet. The system has to have some flex in it though. So maybe I can use those silly wiggins-style clamps. I just don't want to pay a lot of money for those. Any suggestions, links to similar (but cheaper) products?


Wiggins clamps are without a doubt the best you can get for flexible boost pipe coupler. There are two alternatives that you can look into.

1. Vibrant HP clamp
https://vibrantperformance.com/cata...age=1&osCsid=c3fe339b54cd0b75bce25c6d4e07b959

2. LPS Alphaloc
https://www.lpsfab.com/product/lps-alphaloc-coupler-3-0

Vibrant mass produces those HP clamps so in terms of availability those are superior. However, personally I quite like the Alphaloc coupler from LPS. Its a single piece clamp design that twist to lock and unlock. There is no fiddling with locking mechanism. I think I would have gone with Alphaloc if I didn't get the Wiggins.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Tachibanana said:


> Wiggins clamps are without a doubt the best you can get for flexible boost pipe coupler. There are two alternatives that you can look into.
> 
> 1. Vibrant HP clamp
> https://vibrantperformance.com/cata...age=1&osCsid=c3fe339b54cd0b75bce25c6d4e07b959
> ...


Thanks for the great info! I'll check into that.

EDIT: Those Alphaloc couplings are pretty cool. And cheaper than the Vibrant ones. I didn't find any info on their site about how much movement they can take. I just emailed them with my question. I am hoping to get away with just two (2) couplings, one before and one after the intercooler. Since my exhaust manifold is bottom mount, I plan to run the intercooler piping under the engine to keep things short.






EDIT: Here's another informative video:






The VanJen clamp looks slightly different than the HD clamp.

EDIT: LPS just replied to my question:



Linder Power Systems said:


> Hi John. the couplers have roughly 5deg of angular movement and about 1/8' of axial movement, radial is pretty stationary as the o-ring surfaces determine this.
> 
> Cheers


So, it looks like the Vibrant VanJen or HD clamp offers more movement as the video above shows.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

I never knew silicone couplers could be so... flexible.


----------



## ticketed2much (Feb 18, 2012)

mainstayinc said:


> I will be pushing 2.5 to 3 bar boost on this setup.


That’s certifiably insane. Hope you have some big brakes to put on that car🔥Or a parachute! Nice update


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

ticketed2much said:


> That’s certifiably insane. *Hope you have some big brakes to put on that car*🔥Or a parachute! Nice update


Corrado 280mm rotors with Porsche 986 Boxter 4 piston brakes up front using Epytec adapters. 239mm rotors with MK4 brakes in back. No parachute.


----------



## brunjc2 (Jul 24, 2017)

mainstayinc said:


> I never knew silicone couplers could be so... flexible.


This can’t have any reinforcement in the silicon... most of the couplers are marketed as “4 ply” from what I gather is a woven substance, and I would imagine each layer is laid at different angles (if you buy a quality piece).

I’ve bought some eBay silicone couplers and vibrant lately, and without a doubt the Vibrant are superior quality, more precise fit, and they feel more robust.

If you decide to purchase anything Vibrant, check out Gearhead Performance in Largo FL. This is where I go for all of my misc parts, and it’s always cheaper than what Jegs offers. The ship and they have a huge warehouse.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

brunjc2 said:


> This can’t have any reinforcement in the silicon... most of the couplers are marketed as “4 ply” from what I gather is a woven substance, and I would imagine each layer is laid at different angles (if you buy a quality piece).
> 
> I’ve bought some eBay silicone couplers and vibrant lately, and without a doubt the Vibrant are superior quality, more precise fit, and they feel more robust.
> 
> If you decide to purchase anything Vibrant, check out Gearhead Performance in Largo FL. This is where I go for all of my misc parts, and it’s always cheaper than what Jegs offers. The ship and they have a huge warehouse.


Thanks for the tip!


----------



## brunjc2 (Jul 24, 2017)

No worries. Hey if you’re still working on any halfex/CAN bus stuff PM me I might be able to help.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

brunjc2 said:


> No worries. Hey if you’re still working on any halfex/CAN bus stuff PM me I might be able to help.


Yes, still working on that daily. I just switched to a 4D Systems 2.8 inch touchscreen display. It works way better than the Nextion display. Once I get the front end designed to my liking, then I will start working on the back end programming. Once I am able to hardwire some sensors and get them to work with the display, then I will look into getting the CAN bus setup. The CAN bus is totally foreign to me so I will definitely need some help!


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

QUICK UPDATE: Bill stopped by my place on Saturday to drop off parts he pulled from the MK1. This included the engine/transmission, rear suspension beam, wheels, radiator and other engine bay parts. Matt and another guy also stopped by. I sold Matt the four (4) snowflake wheels for one of his Scirocco projects. I also sold him the leather seats and wheels from the Audi TT 225 1.8T quattro donor car I had in my shed. I have a complete MK1 GTI engine/transmission up for sale if anyone is interested (see below).










Bill also sent me pictures of the MK1 without the above parts on his lift.



















It looks like he is moving pretty fast with the teardown. I will probably stop by his shop this Saturday for an update. Also, he purchased the GTX3584RS super core which consists of the CHRA and v-band compressor housing. I already have the twin-scroll turbine housing which was used to fabricate the short-runner divided exhaust manifold (see Pat @ Pitt Soundworks). So now I have the complete turbo. Also, Bill picked up the vertical intercooler (27 inches wide by 3 inches deep by 6 inches high) and a radiator brace and cross brace for the underside of the MK1 chassis.


----------



## Gulfstream (Jul 28, 2010)

Great to see you're still building as well :beer:


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Gulfstream said:


> Great to see you're still building as well :beer:


Yes, finally getting the Haldex conversion started.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

QUICK UPDATE: I stopped by Bill's shop this morning. Below is a picture of the GTX3584RS CHRA and compressor housing mounted to the twin-scroll T3 turbine housing. The turbo is a lot bigger than appears in the picture.










We went over a lot of details of the build including the rear mounts for the Haldex syncro beam.










We test fitted the passenger-side engine mount bracket to the engine block. It turns out the bracket interferes with the idler pulley on the timing belt (see picture below).  Since I converted to an FSI-style tensioner, it appears the idler pulley is not really necessary since the tensioner pulley provides all the tension on the timing belt. The idler pulley literally just touches the timing belt and does nothing else. So... we are going to simply not use the idler pulley. If this is a bad idea, then someone please chime in. I imagine it might help keep the timing belt from flapping a little. Not sure, though.










I plan to stop by Bill's shop next Friday to finalize the camshaft timing on my Catcams 3660 cams using his digital timing gauge. We are finalizing the intake and exhaust centerlines so I can use the VVT solenoid for power (i.e.: late IVC in the 6000 to 9000 RPM range)


----------



## Pat @ Pitt Soundworks (Nov 14, 2008)

Hey John

3584rs isn't that big 😛

http://imgur.com/bUEBgm9


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Pat @ Pitt Soundworks said:


> Hey John
> 
> 3584rs isn't that big 😛
> 
> http://imgur.com/bUEBgm9


Holy cr*p. What in the world is that? That's huge.

Actually, this is huge...


----------



## Pat @ Pitt Soundworks (Nov 14, 2008)

Funny thing. The gtx3584rs flows as much as the hx52 on that manifold but weighs about 50% as much and is 30% smaller.


----------



## Pat @ Pitt Soundworks (Nov 14, 2008)

The v6 single turbo is also a good but vband entry on a Saab 2.8l v6


----------



## Pat @ Pitt Soundworks (Nov 14, 2008)

For some reason my cellphone autocorrected the turbo to "good". Weird. And I can't edit on the terrible mobile interface

Gt3584rs


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Pat @ Pitt Soundworks said:


> For some reason my cellphone autocorrected the turbo to "good". Weird. And I can't edit on the terrible mobile interface
> 
> *Gt3584rs*


Ah, I see. I thought that looked a little familiar. I am surprised that's a slip joint compressor outlet and not a v-band. The GTX3584RS comes with either option.


----------



## Pat @ Pitt Soundworks (Nov 14, 2008)

I personally think slip joint is easier to work with.


It was the customers call. They bought the turbo as soon as it came out, so they didn't get the twin scroll housing either. Unfortunately because of the chassis restrictions, the secondary collector is pretty terrible. 20 psi ended up coming in about 4500rpm. I offered to make twin scroll work but they didn't want to sell the housing and buy another one


----------



## Pat @ Pitt Soundworks (Nov 14, 2008)

Not to detract from your thread, but I think you might like my weekend project. I did the majority of the Fab work last fall, and the shop that contracts me for Fab finally finished the wiring and mechanicals and it's back to me for some small stuff that they weren't sure they needed the first time.

It's a 67 Caprice with a 6.2ls and 6l89e. Turbo is a s476. I wanted to do an industrial art theme with the car. All the piping is on 90 degree angles, or 45s where I had to. Plumb and level. Kind of themed like the inside of a 60s era nuclear power plant.

http://imgur.com/9eBRFbT
http://imgur.com/GOG3qCf

I can't wait to see what bill gets done when he starts to really put some hours in to the car. If I was still up north of come lend a hand.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Pat @ Pitt Soundworks said:


> Not to detract from your thread, but I think you might like my weekend project. I did the majority of the Fab work last fall, and the shop that contracts me for Fab finally finished the wiring and mechanicals and it's back to me for some small stuff that they weren't sure they needed the first time.
> 
> It's a 67 Caprice with a 6.2ls and 6l89e. Turbo is a s476. I wanted to do an industrial art theme with the car. All the piping is on 90 degree angles, or 45s where I had to. Plumb and level. Kind of themed like the inside of a 60s era nuclear power plant.
> 
> ...


That is a serious power plant. The S476 is no joke either!

:thumbup:


----------



## vr6 3.0 (Apr 19, 2008)

mainstayinc said:


> We test fitted the passenger-side engine mount bracket to the engine block.


John, nice to see things moving along for you. Look forward to seeing the engine/ gearbox mocked up. Any idea yet if the off the shelf mounts you're using (Epitec I think you said?) for 06a/ o2a/j/c will center the angle drive in the tunnel? 

Thanks much,
Isaac


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

vr6 3.0 said:


> John, nice to see things moving along for you. Look forward to seeing the engine/ gearbox mocked up. *Any idea yet if the off the shelf mounts you're using (Epitec I think you said?) for 06a/ o2a/j/c will center the angle drive in the tunnel?
> *
> Thanks much,
> Isaac


We'll know soon. This Friday Bill and I are going to finalize the camshaft centerlines on the engine so that he can mount the engine and transmission into the chassis. That will give us an idea of where the output shaft on the FEX angle drive will line up. I don't anticipate any issues but you never know. The passenger-side engine mount was a surprise as it interfered with the idler pulley on the timing belt.


----------



## vr6 3.0 (Apr 19, 2008)

Sounds good, sure you're looking forward to seeing it mounted finally!


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

QUICK UPDATE: I stopped by Bill's shop two (2) Saturdays ago but didn't post any updates. We were suppose to make some final adjustments on the camshaft centerlines but were unsuccessful. We timed everything back to stock centerlines using Bill's digital crank position tool. That worked great. However, when we tried to dial in the modified the camshaft centerlines, which required turning the engine counter-clockwise, the timing belt kept on coming lose and skipping teeth. Apparently, the FSI-style tensioner pulley only works in one direction. So, Bill wanted to step back an regroup before proceeding. He texted me late last week and said he is going to order a manual-style tensioner which should presumably work in both directions and fix the skipping problem. Also, he emailed me a few pictures earlier today. The bushings for the passenger-side engine mount bracket are now installed (see below).


----------



## brunjc2 (Jul 24, 2017)

Good info on the tensioner! Which part will you be replacing it with?


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

brunjc2 said:


> Good info on the tensioner! *Which part will you be replacing it with?*


I'm not sure. I am trusting Bill on this one. Once we get the camshaft centerlines adjusted with the manual tensioner, I might go back to the FSI tensioner. I don't want to have to check and re-tension the manual tensioner all the time.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

brunjc2 said:


> Good info on the tensioner! Which part will you be replacing it with?


UPDATE: Bill replaced the FSI tensioner with a manual tensioner used in the older-style 16V engine. The mounting hardware (i.e.: stud and nut) is larger and more stout. I just hope the nut doesn't back off and loosen the tensioner. That would be a disaster. I told Bill to put a second lock nut on the stud just to be sure. Maybe even put a tack weld on there. As far as changing the camshaft centerlines, that turned out to be more of a challenge than I expected. Even with Bill's super accurate digital crankshaft degree tool, we were having trouble getting an accurate reading on the intake camshaft. Bill setup and followed the instructions very carefully in this article from IE:

Adjusting camshaft center lines on a big turbo Audi










However, even with the VVT hold-down tool, there was significant slack in the tensioner chain. Between that and a little slack in the timing belt, we were getting readings that were more than 15 degrees off from what I expected. So, I decided to return the Catcams 3660's back to stock centerlines. In stock position, there is a through bolt between the camshaft sprocket and the exhaust camshaft which is more stout anyways. If not using stock centerlines, you have to remove the bolt and depend on 5 other bolts to hold the sprocket to the exhaust camshaft with just friction and torque holding the two plates together. No through bolt. The 3660's with stock centerlines will give me a nice increase in HP over stock cams. However, I will be leaving some HP on the table not using the VVT with modified centerlines as I had planned. I can always go back to modified centerlines in the future. However, Bill thinks that will not be necessary as the engine should produce more than enough power and traction will be more of an issue.:laugh:

After doing a lot of research, I finally decided on my ignition coil setup. I decided to purchase bolt-down style coils from the C5 RS6 4.2L turbo engine. Those are a direct fit with the AEB large port head but are 4-wire instead of 3-wire. So, basically, I am going with an OEM coil setup. However, I plan to run 2.5 to 3 bar boost (36 to 43 psi) on this setup. That could be a problem as high boost with incorrect spark plug gap or insufficient spark energy can cause misfires.










Apparently, Okada solved this problem with their high output coil setup. But who wants to pay $800 for a set of ignition coils? Not me. Those will eventually wear out anyways like any other coil. But, they do produce more power. One guy posted a +30 torque and +18 HP increase just by switching to these coils and a cooler spark plug. Alternatively, I could run a voltage booster like Kenne Bell's boost-a-spark to increase primary voltage with the OEM coils but those cost anywhere from $300 to $500+ USD and have limited adjustment.

So... I decided to build my own DC-DC boost converter. Ebay or Amazon sells China units which have a wide range of voltage input and can output 12V to 48V+ at 30 amps for $22 to $30 USD. Most of those come with an adjustable potentiometer which can adjust voltage and current output. So the plan is to run a 12V to 24V primary voltage into the OEM ignition coils. Will this decrease the service life of the OEM coils? Probably. Even though I am not changing the circuit's resistance, I am increasing power (voltage x current) which will result in more heat. That will eventually compromise the coils and they will go bad. But, at $25 per coil, I think it's worth the tradeoff. I can always lower current while maintaining higher voltage to decrease the load on the circuit as long as I have good ignition. Dyno tuning will be necessary in this case to determine optimal voltage and current to the coils.










Eventually, I want to desolder the two potentiometers and wire directly to my standalone ECU. That will allow me to create an ignition voltage and ignition current table based on boost and engine speed. That will preserve the coils to some extent by sending less voltage and current to the coils at lower boost/engine speed.

EDIT: Below is a comparison between the Okada plasma coils (green) and OEM coils (red). Link to page is here.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

UPDATE: I stopped by Bill's shop this morning and was surprised to find that Bill did some major work on the MK1 chassis. He cut out the rear spare tire well and part of the rear deck **dutchbuild style** in order to mock up the Haldex/syncro rear suspension. Check out these progress pictures:




























He said he plans to have a rolling chassis in the next two weeks! That means locating and boxing out the mounting points for the syncro beam and welding, cutting into the rocker arms to fit the trailing arms etc. AWD power coming very soon! Very exciting.

EDIT: I designed a box in FreeCAD to house the DC-DC boost converter and uploaded to Modern Blacksmith 3D Printing Services in Texas to get 3D printed and shipped for $21.00 in PLA (plastic). So, for less than $45.00 I made my own adjustable ignition booster. I can email the CAD files (for free) and links to the DC-DC Boost Converter if anyone is interested in duplicating this setup.


----------



## ticketed2much (Feb 18, 2012)

Chassis progress looks good:thumbup:


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

ticketed2much said:


> Chassis progress looks good:thumbup:


Thanks, man! I decided to switch to a non-resistor type spark plug after watching a few youtube videos. The non-resistor spark plug will allow more current to flow between the spark plug gap which will result in a hotter spark. The typical NGK BKR7E (4644) that I have in my daily driver has a 5 kiloohm resistor (5000 ohms) which limits the amount of current flowing through the spark plug. A typical non-resistor type spark plug has maybe 25 to 27 ohms. You can increase current from 10 amps (50,000 kilovolts/5000 ohms = 10 amps) to 2000 amps (50,000 kilovolts/25 ohms = 2000 amps) using non-resistor plugs according to Ohm's Law. I am not an electrical engineer but I think I have my math correct. Someone correct me if I'm wrong. Here is a video showing different between resistor and non-resistor spark plugs:






The reason they started putting resistors in spark plugs is because it decreases radio interference. I don't have a radio in the MK1 nor do I use my radio in my MK4 daily driver so that's not an issue. It might interfere with ECU but I can probably shield that from radio interference if I have to. I am not sure if non-resistor plugs are legal on the street. Here is another video using a non-resistor plug. He uses capacitors in series as an ignition booster.






Basically, you get plasma (with photon emission) instead of a thin, low-amperage spark. A lot like a TIG welder. The hotter spark will definitely shorten life of the spark plug. However, NGK sells the following non-resistor ("Race") plugs for super cheap:

NGK 7173 R5672A-8 Racing Plug

It is the non-resistor equivalent to the NGK 4644 but an 8 heat range instead of 7 (NGK 7173). They also sell the same plug but with a 9 heat range (NGK 7405). I bought a set of eight (8) NGK 7173's on ebay for less than $16 with free shipping. I also purchased a used ignition coil to experiment with the DC-DC boost converter and non-resistor plug. I will have to mock up a micro-controller using my arduino to supply 5V trigger signals to the ignition coil.

EDIT: From NGK


















EDIT: Another informative video:


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

UPDATE: I stopped by Bill's shop this morning. I was hoping to see more progress with the syncro beam mounts. However, he wanted to touch base with me before proceeding any further. Instead of boxing out the entire mount **dutchbuild** style, we discussed welding two plates to the chassis frame and simply bolting the mounting plate to that. I also dropped off the NGK 7173 non-resistor plugs.

He brought Tan's R32 race car to Second Street Speed in Perkasie, PA to get dyno tested. Apparently, the car made 882 (front) WHP on the dyno at 34 psi. That's over 1000 HP to the crank. Here is a link to the video. The GTX3584RS comes on very strong!

https://www.instagram.com/p/BxTBmOyjDxL/?igshid=mwuuuz7ew7nr

And here is a picture of the dyno graph:










He also had the car alignment done. The car weighed in at 2800 lbs. with driver. That's just over 2600 lbs. without driver. That's something like 800 lbs. less than stock for a MK5 R32. Amazing! I'm hoping to make similar big power with the GTX3584RS but on 4 cylinders. We'll see. It will be a totally different power band. Mine will be screaming at 9000 RPMs!


----------



## vr6 3.0 (Apr 19, 2008)

Hi John,

Progress is looking good! Did you figure out if your mounts will center the transfer case output on the chassis yet? 

Thanks,
Isaac


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

vr6 3.0 said:


> Hi John,
> 
> Progress is looking good! Did you figure out if your mounts will center the transfer case output on the chassis yet?
> 
> ...


I haven't figured that out yet. I discussed this issue with Bill and he doesn't foresee any issue with the mounts. Once he is done fabricating mounting points for the rear syncro beam, then he will install the engine and transmission. We'll see if that centers the transfer case. I stopped by Bill's shop yesterday for a second time and we discussed the rear syncro mounting points. I am going to use FreeCAD to design some mounting plates for the syncro mounts and have them water-jet cut in 1/4 inch steel. That will be an easier solution than boxing out the frame rail as seen in the Dutchbuild project. As you probably know, the aftermarket Unix mounts will not center the syncro beam in an MK1 or MK2. So, the only solution is to cut out all the studs on the frame rails and weld custom plates that will match up with the Unix mounts.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

UPDATE: I stopped by Bill's shop today to drop off some parts I drew up in FreeCAD and had cut using Big Blue Saw's waterjet cutting service. The parts consist of a mounting plate and gusset which we will use to mount the syncro beam to the chassis. The Unix mounts unfortunately place the syncro beam on the MK1 chassis about 1/2 inch too far forward. After discussing the situation, we decided to drill a long slot in the Unix mounts (about 1 inch long) which will allow us to move the syncro beam rear-ward and center the hub in the wheel well. Once we are confident that the wheel is centered, Bill will send the rolling chassis to an alignment shop to get properly aligned. After alignment, Bill will then cut and weld the mounting plate and gusset I designed to the chassis frame and then bolt the Unix plate to that... making everything permanent. That should, hopefully, give us a good, accurate, result. Since the bolt holes in the Unix plate are a little large, we will have some adjustability (about 1/8 inch in each direction) after the mounting plate is welded to the chassis frame in case further adjustment is needed.

Here are my 949 6UL 15x8 wheels mounted to the syncro beam. Even at this angle, you can tell that the wheels sit too far forward.










The stock (unmodified, un-shortened) syncro beam stances out the MK1 rear nicely with the 6UL's +36 offset!










Bill trimmed the rocker panel out to fit the trailing arms. No big deal! Also, you can see the custom mounting plate I designed which will be welded to the frame chassis.










Bill got busy with his pneumatic wire brush on the frame rails. Notice the VW/Audi stamping in the sheet metal.


----------



## One-Eight GTI (Jan 5, 2010)

Loving these updates 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## ticketed2much (Feb 18, 2012)

Progress looks good. I’m not familiar with the rear arms but am curious if they have control arms that go toward the haldex like on the MK1 TT/R32? Or is the trailing arm solid similar to MK4 solid beam?


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

One-Eight GTI said:


> Loving these updates
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


:thumbup:



ticketed2much said:


> Progress looks good. I’m not familiar with the rear arms but am curious if they have control arms that go toward the haldex like on the MK1 TT/R32? Or is the trailing arm solid similar to MK4 solid beam?


The two trailing arms are mounted to the syncro beam and are independent of each other. They trail the syncro beam and do not go toward the Haldex unit like in the MK1 TT/MK4 R32. This setup is considered a semi-trailing arm since the trailing arms are mounted to the syncro beam at an angle. That allows the wheels to maintain camber throughout the suspension travel. Unlike the solid torsen-beam type rear suspension in MK1 to MK4's, this suspension is independent. You can tie the two trailing arms together with a rear sway bar and stiffen the suspension with heavier springs.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

UPDATE: Bill asked me to stop by his shop this morning to check out the new set of rear coilovers I had to order. The OEM Vogtland coilovers that came with the car were about 2.5 inches too tall as they mount on top of the rear trailing arms versus below the axle as on the stock setup. I was able to find an aftermarket coilover with a stud end adapter that fits directly into the MK1 strut towers without any modification. Here is a link to the coilover:

QA1 Proma Star Coilover Shocks DS304

And here is the stud end adapter:

QA1 Stud Top Conversion Kits SS110SDM

We plan to re-use the 8 inch springs and rubber parts from the Vogtland coilovers to make a perfect fit with the MK1 strut towers. The outside edge of the Vogtland springs will have to be massaged a little to fit into the QA1 spring perches (metric versus standard problem). The QA1 DS0304's give the MK1 with syncro trailing arms a perfect ride height. They are single-adjustable with 18 different settings so I can set the compression and rebound really stiff or softer depending on what works best with this setup. Hats off to QA1 *made in Minnesota* for such a great product! They also sell double-adjustable coilovers in various sizes and monotube-type coilovers.

Here is a picture of the QA1's *without the Vogtland springs* installed on the car. The short section of silver tubing that is sitting on top of the trailing arm is a temporary spacer that sets the lowest desired ride height.










With the proper ride height, the rear wheels are more centered in the wheel well. Bill has to order some hardware (spacers, etc.) to get the new coilovers to mount perfect. In the meantime, he is going to install the front wheels and to get a rolling chassis together. He asked me to order 15mm spacers for the front wheels, but I think we can go without by removing helper springs on the front Vogtland coilovers and raising the spring perches out of the way. The picture below shows the front wheels with about 10mm of spacers between the front wheel and the rotor. The final setup will be 10mm narrower in the front if we can get the wheels to clear the spring perch.










EDIT: Video of QA1 facility. I'm thinking about getting a carbon fiber driveshaft for the MK1. But will probably end up going with a modified stock Audi TT driveshaft since CF doesn't really give you any performance gains (maybe like +5 WHP or something). Not worth the expense.


----------



## vr6 3.0 (Apr 19, 2008)

mainstayinc said:


> I'm thinking about getting a carbon fiber driveshaft for the MK1. But will probably end up going with a modified stock Audi TT driveshaft since CF doesn't really give you any performance gains (maybe like +5 WHP or something). Not worth the expense.


Unless you're going for all out lightweight, having a very slightly heavier driveshaft will only pull your center of gravity lower and should actually help handling.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

vr6 3.0 said:


> Unless you're going for all out lightweight, having a very slightly heavier driveshaft will only pull your center of gravity lower and should actually help handling.


Didn't think of that. Great point!:thumbup:


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

tuning a 2.1l with big cams currently.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Vegeta Gti said:


> tuning a 2.1l with big cams currently.


Nice. Customer car I'm sure. Big cams usually means big turbo.


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

lol yeah a really nice xona rotor. They're neat turbo's, they perform and are very high quality. :beer:


----------



## CorrieG60 (Jan 18, 2004)

Vegeta Gti said:


> lol yeah a really nice xona rotor. They're neat turbo's, they perform and are very high quality. :beer:


Xona's are beautiful!! Recently sod my 2.0TFSI Xona turbo setup(8267), and currently have my 2.5 5-cyl Xona(also 8267) setup for sale... too bad I won't be installing them myself, hope to make another person very happy with it


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

QUICK UPDATE: Bill asked me to stop by his shop late Monday. He finished up the rear coilovers with all the necessary hardware and bushings. The result is a nice OEM quality setup in the rear. He was able to remove the helper springs in the front and raise the spring perches to clear the Nitto NT05 205/50R15's on the 15 x 8 6UL rims. He also mounted the Epytec Porsche brake adapters to the front steering knuckles and Porsche 986 Boxter 4 piston front brakes. However, the Porsche brakes didn't clear the 6UL rims and needed an additional 7mm. So, I will end up running 10mm spacers in the front. No big deal. Below is a picture of the Porsche 986 Boxter front brake setup.










Here is a close up of the front brakes. I am using Corrado 280mm x 22mm slotted and vented front rotors. Bill said the Epytec brake adapters perfectly centered the Porsche calipers over the Corrado rotors. I will be running an MK4 rear brake setup on the MK1.










Bill also had a chance to pressure wash the engine bay. We were originally going to brush on a rust inhibiter since this is not going to be a show car. However, after pressure washing, Bill found very little rust in the engine bay. There was only a small area of rust underneath the battery tray and on the driver-side frame horn. Apparently all the years of 8V engine oil buildup protected the original factory paint. So, the plan now is to install the engine and drivetrain, figure out the center drive shaft including cutting out the center tunnel and moving the steering rack upwards, and then removing everything and have the car professionally finished.

EDIT: I forgot to mention that Bill went to some kind of Cult Classic car show sponsored by Nothing Leaves Stock (NLS) on Monday and said he had a great time. He brought Tan's MK5 R32 race car and was making some noise LOL. Maybe next year when the MK1 is finished I will bring it to this event. I originally approached Josh and Adam about this project, but decided to have Bill do it instead. Here is a stock photo of the event from the NLS facebook page.


----------



## ticketed2much (Feb 18, 2012)

More progress 👍🏻 I was down at Cult Classic and saw Tans car. That thing is bad ass. It’s definitely loud.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

ticketed2much said:


> More progress 👍🏻 I was down at Cult Classic and saw Tans car. That thing is bad ass. It’s definitely loud.


:thumbup: :beer::beer:


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

I was browsing the MK1 classified adds here on vwvortex earlier this week and noticed someone needed an 8V engine. I contacted the poster and decided to arrange to give him the 8V engine and transmission from my 1984 GTI 1.8L. He is building a 1990 Cabrio for his son and needed a replacement engine.










I drove an hour to Flemington, NJ, to meet the guy Jason. Here is his original post:

wtb 8 valve engine for 1990 cabriolet 

It looks like the 8V engine is going to find a good home. It ran very strong before Bill removed the engine and was very reliable.


----------



## brunjc2 (Jul 24, 2017)

mainstayinc said:


> I was browsing the MK1 classified adds here on vwvortex earlier this week and noticed someone needed an 8V engine. I contacted the poster and decided to arrange to give him the 8V engine and transmission from my 1984 GTI 1.8L. He is building a 1990 Cabrio for his son and needed a replacement engine.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Good on ya... I like to here this!

Your mki is looking amazing, might I add...


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

brunjc2 said:


> Good on ya... I like to here this!
> 
> Your mki is looking amazing, might I add...


Thanks, man! :thumbup::beer:


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

mainstayinc said:


> Thanks, man! :thumbup::beer:


QUICK UPDATE: I figure I'd post a quick update of this project. Bill was on vacation in July and that's why I haven't posted any updates. He is putting the finishing details on the engine and transmission before those get mounted into the MK1 chassis. This includes installing Issam's alternator kit, CM FX725 twin-disk clutch (CM sent racing version by accident... two (2) ceramic plates. Should be very interesting on the street), starter, coolant pipes and hoses, sensors, engine mounts etc. He said only a week or two before engine and transmission gets installed in the car. Very exciting! Once those are installed, we are going to finalize the syncro beam mounts and cut out for center tunnel.

BTW I am making good progress with the custom Haldex controller I am developing.


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

I want that alternator setup. So awesome. 

More on the haldex controller. Via app?

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Vegeta Gti said:


> I want that alternator setup. So awesome.
> 
> More on the haldex controller. Via app?
> 
> Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


Yes, alternator kit is nice as it is mounted low and keeps the center of gravity low. Better for handling. The Haldex controller will be a standalone unit based on 4D Systems touch screen technology based in Australia. I can probably adapt it to use a smart phone app to control sometime in the future. I'm building some nice features into the controller that are not typically found in off-the-shelf units such as traction-by-gear, AWD launch control etc. Should be pretty cool.


----------



## brunjc2 (Jul 24, 2017)

mainstayinc said:


> Vegeta Gti said:
> 
> 
> > I want that alternator setup. So awesome.
> ...


Hey mainstay, if you’ll be doing any CAN bus implementation, PM me i’ll shoot a link to CAN bus development software I have made and support for you to use. You can simulate messages, graph values, log/replay data, etc.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

brunjc2 said:


> Hey mainstay, if you’ll be doing any CAN bus implementation, PM me i’ll shoot a link to CAN bus development software I have made and support for you to use. You can simulate messages, graph values, log/replay data, etc.


Pefect! I plan to build in CAN bus once the initial hard wire version is up and running. Thanks!


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

QUICK UPDATE: I stopped by Bill's shop this afternoon. He is putting the last few details into the engine and transmission before it gets mounted into the chassis. This includes the Clutch Masters hydraulic throwout bearing which replaces a standard (upgraded) clutch fork. I don't recommend the CM throwout bearing since it is not a direct fit in the 02J/02A/02C and requires filling, drilling and tapping holes in the transmission to mount correctly. Bill did an excellent job getting it to fit though and I am happy I went this route. You will notice the two stainless steel hoses coming out of the transmission. One is the bleeder hose and the other the pressure hose that controls the throwout bearing. This will be a nice fit with my MK1 hydraulic clutch conversion kit. Combined with the CM FX725 should make for very smooth, effortless engagement.










He also test mounted the GTX3584RS twin-scroll turbo to my custom T3 divided exhaust manifold. The inlet to the turbo will be very close to the passenger-side frame rail but I think we can make it work. We can probably put a cobra head elbow to get it to clear the frame rail. The turbine side clears the angle drive no problem and is perfect. Also, I originally wanted to run the compressor outlet underneath the engine to keep things sleeper. However, it will interfere with the passenger-side axle. So, I will have to run the compressor outlet over the engine **rude boy style** if you know what I mean.


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

Lol legit video and song

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Vegeta Gti said:


> Lol legit video and song
> 
> Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


LOL kind of shows my age.


----------



## vr6 3.0 (Apr 19, 2008)

Nice update, many similarities with my build except you're much farther along! Look forward to confirming once and for all that the off the shelf 1.8t/ 02a mounts will center the 02c angle drive on the chassis. Thats been a lingering question of mine for a while.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

vr6 3.0 said:


> Nice update, many similarities with my build except you're much farther along! *Look forward to confirming once and for all that the off the shelf 1.8t/ 02a mounts will center the 02c angle drive on the chassis.* Thats been a lingering question of mine for a while.


I'll have an answer to that question shortly. Bill may already have the engine/transmission in the car already. I won't know until the next time I talk with him. Probably in the next week.


----------



## vr6 3.0 (Apr 19, 2008)

mainstayinc said:


> I'll have an answer to that question shortly.


:thumbup:


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

vr6 3.0 said:


> Nice update, many similarities with my build except you're much farther along! *Look forward to confirming once and for all that the off the shelf 1.8t/ 02a mounts will center the 02c angle drive on the chassis*. Thats been a lingering question of mine for a while.


The off-the-shelf engine mounts center the angle drive perfect!

UPDATE: I stopped by Bill's shop this morning. Bill had the engine/transmission finally mounted into the MK1 chassis. To my surprise, the engine and transmission looked small in the MK1 engine bay! There is a lot of room to run turbo piping etc. There is also plenty of clearance between the SEM intake manifold and the front radiator support. Here a quick picture:










However, there are two (2) clearance issues. First, we test mounted the turbo to the custom exhaust manifold and realized that the compressor inlet touches the frame rail. The problem with the MK1 chassis is that it has "frame horns" where the lower control arms mount and these are molded into the frame rail. These frame horns take up space and somewhat interfere with a bottom mount style turbo. We discussed a couple of solutions including notching out the frame rail about an inch to allow for a cobra neck elbow. Bill also mentioned getting an adapter that would fit between the manifold and the turbine housing which would move the turbo away from the frame rail. However, both of these solutions are somewhat of a compromise. Bill then came up with the ultimate solution. That is to use a 4 inch hole saw and cut straight through the lower section of the frame rail directly into the wheel well. That will allow us to ditch the cobra head elbow and use a much better flowing inlet adapter. We can then mount a proper air filter inside the wheel well or even inside the fender.










The second clearance issue is, of course, the steering rack. I originally thought that we would have to raise the steering rack above the output shaft of the angle drive. However, after test mounting the engine/transmission, it is clear that it will be a lot easier to lower the steering rack below the output shaft. Bill says that is how the MK4R32 is setup. He also has a smaller-diameter MK1 steering rack from a previous project. That will allow us to get away with lowering the steering rack maybe half an inch (0.5") to gain the necessary clearance. We also test mounted my vertical intercooler and discussed intercooler piping. He is also going to order twin 38mm Tial v-band wastegates.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

UPDATE: I stopped by Bill's shop this morning. He already cut the hole in the frame rail for the GTX3584RS compressor inlet (see below). He started with a 6 inch hole saw but that didn't work well with the hardened steel around the frame rail. So he finished it with his plasma cutter. He will box out the hole and maybe add some reinforcement if that becomes necessary. Although, that area of the frame seems plenty strong. I will also run an "X" brace between the two frame horns to connect he lower control arms. A 6 inch pass-through hole will allow us to use a silicone coupler and a cone filter inside the wheel well. Or perhaps run a flexible hose from the compressor inlet into the fender where we can mount a cone filter.










While the engine and transmission are out, he is also going to cut out the lower section of the radiator support to accommodate my vertical intercooler. He will also re-locate the steering rack mounts about 1 inch lower.


----------



## seagull (Jul 5, 2006)

I love your build. Keep it up!!


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

seagull said:


> I love your build. Keep it up!!


Thanks, man!:thumbup:


----------



## carsluTT (Dec 31, 2004)

oh looky........ staying up late on vortex netted a new (to me) build to watch! keep the updates rolling :beer:


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

carsluTT said:


> oh looky........ staying up late on vortex netted a new (to me) build to watch! k*eep the updates rolling* :beer:


LOL. Progress is starting to speed up so hopefully I can post more frequent updates.


----------



## CSanti610 (Sep 18, 2019)

Looks like my return to Vortex after darn near a decade was perfectly timed to find this gloriousness!


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

CSanti610 said:


> Looks like my return to Vortex after darn near a decade was perfectly timed to find this gloriousness!


Welcome back! I'm glad you enjoy this thread. I'm hoping to post a lot more stuff soon.


----------



## CSanti610 (Sep 18, 2019)

mainstayinc said:


> Welcome back! I'm glad you enjoy this thread. I'm hoping to post a lot more stuff soon.


Thank you an looking forward to it. This build is coming together really fast all things considered. Excited to watch the progress from here, especially with you aiming to take it to shows next season. Would be sweet to watch it rip down the strip at June Bug.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

CSanti610 said:


> Thank you an looking forward to it. This build is coming together really fast all things considered. Excited to watch the progress from here, especially with you aiming to take it to shows next season. *Would be sweet to watch it rip down the strip at June Bug. *


That's the ultimate goal is to do quarter mile passes in this car. I plan to test it on the street first until I feel comfortable with the car. To be honest, my MK4 daily driver (2.1L + GTX2867R) sometimes scares the crap out of me. So, you might see Bill Schimmel driving the MK1 down the quarter mile (at least at first).


----------



## brunjc2 (Jul 24, 2017)

mainstay, I have a question, and pardon if you have previously covered it...

What will your engine break in strategy be? Everyone seems to have different preferences when it comes to this topic.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

brunjc2 said:


> mainstay, I have a question, and pardon if you have previously covered it...
> 
> What will your engine break in strategy be? Everyone seems to have different preferences when it comes to this topic.


I break it in hard to seat the piston rings. Change oil after the first few hundred miles. Then drive like normal.


----------



## brunjc2 (Jul 24, 2017)

So, hard as in max load/max RPM limit?

I understand that different load and engine speed ranges should be exercised. Some folks are in the “easy does it” camp, others in the “drive it like you stole it” camp, and the rest somewhere in between. I dig the high load idea, to put pressure on the rings, but not so certain about max RPM (let’s say 8500 rpm 1.8t hydro lifters and stiff valve springs) the first 500 miles or so. Like to hear your opinion on the latter.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

brunjc2 said:


> So, hard as in max load/max RPM limit?
> 
> I understand that different load and engine speed ranges should be exercised. Some folks are in the “easy does it” camp, others in the “drive it like you stole it” camp, and the rest somewhere in between. I dig the high load idea, to put pressure on the rings, but not so certain about max RPM (let’s say 8500 rpm 1.8t hydro lifters and stiff valve springs) the first 500 miles or so. Like to hear your opinion on the latter.


I will probably keep it below 7200 RPMs to break in the engine for the first 500 miles. But I definitely will be pushing the boost during break in to get the piston rings fully seated. I am scheduled to stop by Bill's shop this Monday and will hopefully post some updates.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

I am hoping someone can help me out here. I am getting the following error code on my MK4 daily driver:

16716 - Knock Sensor 2 (G66): Signal too Low
P0332 - 35-00 - 

I ordered a new knock sensor to replace Knock Sensor 2 (G66) but I noticed that Knock Sensor 1 seems to be in the wrong location. Bill rebuilt this engine last year and may have bolted the sensor in the wrong location. Below is a generic picture of a 1.8T engine block. I circled the location of Knock Sensor 1. It looks like it should be bolted to the port on the left. Can someone confirm where Knock Sensor 1 should be located? Also, can this cause an error code for Knock Sensor 2 due to too much variation in voltages between Knocks Sensors 1 and 2? Any help is greatly appreciated.


----------



## ticketed2much (Feb 18, 2012)

This is a generic image but my AWP looks like this


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

ticketed2much said:


> This is a generic image but my AWP looks like this


Thanks Chad! That's quite helpful. In your picture, the left side port is used, but it aligns about the same as the right side port in the picture I posted. Which is just left of center on cylinder 2. That leads me to believe that maybe my Knock Sensor 1 location might be correct. In which case, I'm inclined to leave it alone. I did check my wife's 2004 Audi A4 1.8T which I sold to a friend and it is definitely on the left side port but more in the center of cylinders 1 and 2.

Does anyone else have any more insight or pictures they can post?


----------



## ticketed2much (Feb 18, 2012)

mainstayinc said:


> Thanks Chad! That's quite helpful. In your picture, the left side port is used, but it aligns about the same as the right side port in the picture I posted. Which is just left of center on cylinder 2. That leads me to believe that maybe my Knock Sensor 1 location might be correct. In which case, I'm inclined to leave it alone. I did check my wife's 2004 Audi A4 1.8T which I sold to a friend and it is definitely on the left side port but more in the center of cylinders 1 and 2.
> 
> Does anyone else have any more insight or pictures they can post?


That is interesting, hadn’t noticed that. I would have thought the knock sensors would be more centered between the two shared cylinders, but both are off quite a bit.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

ticketed2much said:


> That is interesting, hadn’t noticed that. *I would have thought the knock sensors would be more centered between the two shared cylinders, but both are off quite a bit.*


That's exactly what I was thinking.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

QUICK UPDATE: Bill and I have been working on upgrading the brake master cylinder and brake booster to an MK4 version. The rubber diaphragm in the original MK1 brake booster is 35 years old and most likely is not up to task. I decided to upgrade to an MK4 brake master cylinder and brake booster since those parts are cheap and readily available. The MK4 brake booster bolts right into the 4-bolt flange on the MK1 firewall. Nice! However, the actuating rod that goes from the brake pedal to the BMC is different. Bill ended up cutting the MK4 actuating rod and connecting it to an eyelet bolt using a threaded collar Derek Spratt-style (see below).










I decided to run a Wilwood proportioning valve same as Derek Spratt. That should give me full control of my brake setup and allow me to set the correct brake bias. After a lot of thought, Bill and I decided to use MK4 OEM brake lines from the BMC to the proportioning valve. The only thing that we needed to make this work was an adapter from Edelmann (262012) that converts from M12x1.0 bubble flare to 3/8-24 inverted flare on the Wilwood proportioning valve.










I stopped by Bill's shop last Friday and he already had the engine and transmission back in. We discussed cutting the center tunnel above the seat rails to preserve the stock seats. We plan to insert 2 to 3 inches of sheet metal to raise the tunnel. That should be enough clearance for the center driveshaft and exhaust system. I am hoping to have the tunnel cut out by the next time I post an update. Very exciting.

More progress with the custom Haldex controller. I decided to upgrade my 4D Systems touchscreen to a larger unit to accommodate some additional features. I am also looking into ways to pre-tension the Gen1 Haldex system to launch more like the Gen4/Gen5 system without the front wheels spinning first.

EDIT: I forgot to post the mock up of my vertical intercooler setup.


----------



## ticketed2much (Feb 18, 2012)

mainstayinc said:


> More progress with the custom Haldex controller. I decided to upgrade my 4D Systems touchscreen to a larger unit to accommodate some additional features. I am also looking into ways to pre-tension the Gen1 Haldex system to launch more like the Gen4/Gen5 system without the front wheels spinning first.



Not sure if thats possible, but it would be cool if it you could!

You have a lot of awesome parts going on your car!


----------



## ArclitGold (Apr 21, 2009)

Wow that’s going to be an awesome setup!!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

ticketed2much said:


> *Not sure if thats possible, but it would be cool if it you could!*
> 
> You have a lot of awesome parts going on your car!


Thanks! I did some reading about the Powertrack Insert that replaces the regulating valve. With that in place, power distribution is 50/50 and response from the rear wheels is instant. If that's true, then I could create a 'launch' feature that simulates the Powertrack Insert by keeping the valve closed until operating pressure builds in the clutch pack. That, of course, requires a difference in speed between the front and rear wheels due to the design of the Gen1 Haldex system. One could apply the handbrake and do a quick chirp of the front wheels or do a quick burnout to pre-tension the system while the regulating valve remains shut.

I also want to monitor the operating pressure of the clutch pack. That will allow the driver to know when the clutch pack is fully pressurized and/or how much the Haldex is engaged. I don't think there is a sensor on the Haldex unit that measure this. So, I would like to drill into the unit preferably into one of the existing ports and tap for 1/8 NPT pressure sensor. Any ideas where I could drill and tap into the unit? Perhaps somewhere around the Pressure Limiting Valve? Does the port where the Powertrack Insert get threaded see operating pressure or just priming pressure? Someone more knowledgeable of the Gen1 Haldex please give me some direction here.


----------



## CorrieG60 (Jan 18, 2004)

https://imgur.com/a/QAx9KZO

This is the raised tunnel of the project build from a friend of mine! will be hosting a TTRS+DQ500+4-motion


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

CorrieG60 said:


> https://imgur.com/a/QAx9KZO
> 
> This is the raised tunnel of the project build from a friend of mine! will be hosting a TTRS+DQ500+4-motion


Freaking nice man! I have to send that picture off to Bill for some TIG welding inspiration. TTRS + DQ500+4-Motion is a killer combo. If you don't mind, I'm re-posting that image below.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

UPDATE: I stopped by Bill's shop this morning to drop off some things. This included a new 15 gallon aluminum fuel cell (29 x 12 x 9 inches), some 3 inch v-band clamps, and a custom aluminum adapter I drafted in FreeCAD and had cut with Big Blue Saw that fits between the Haldex controller and the Haldex unit. The adapter will allow me to monitor the working pressure of the Haldex clutch and program my custom Haldex controller based on operating pressure (i.e.: 50% Haldex engagement = 10 bar pressure, 100% Haldex engagement = 20 bar etc). That will be a much more accurate way to determine Haldex engagement versus simply calculating % engagement based on the valve opening. We disassembled the Haldex clutch several weeks ago and ran some shop pressure through the different openings and figured out which passage goes to the working piston that compresses the clutch plates. This also opens up the possibility of pre-tensioning the Haldex clutch plates either using a V181 pump from the Gen 5 Haldex system or by some other means. It's kind of interesting when Bill and I put out heads together and come up with these solutions. I have to give credit to Bill for the adapter idea. He was thinking outside the box. Between now and the next time I stop by, he is going to drill and tap the adapter for the 1/8 NPT 500 psi pressure sensor I purchased on ebay. I would post a picture of the adapter but imgur is not working for me at the moment. Can anyone suggest an alternative hosting site for desktop PC?

The 3 inch v-band clamps are for a 3 inch downpipe and exhaust dump I purchased off of ebay. I originally purchased a 3.5 inch exhaust dump but that wouldn't fit in the raised tunnel and we would have to cut through the firewall just to fit the exhaust dump. So, we settled on a 3 inch unit. The exhaust dump opens under boost pressure but I am going to adapt it to use CO2 pressure from my pumpless methanol system. That will allow me to open the exhaust dump before the turbo begins to spool up, which should allow the turbo to spool sooner than if it only opens past 1 bar boost. I will use a T-fitting and one-way valve to reference boost as a backup in case there is no CO2 pressure in the line. I also decided to use this same CO2 system to control my dual wastegate setup. That will allow me to open the wastegates off-boost. I forget why Bill said this was beneficial but I think it has something to do with launch control or pre-spooling the turbo or something like that. Not sure.

I bought the 15 gallon aluminum fuel cell off of ebay for like $118 shipped. I will fit nicely behind the Haldex unit in sit flush with a slightly raised deck in the trunk. It came with a 12-bolt filler adapter and a 90 ohm fuel level sending unit. I purchased a billet aluminum fuel hanger from an Australian company that will fit nicely with the tank. The only custom fabrication involved is cutting a hole in the fuel cell for the fuel hanger and either stuffing foam in the fuel cell or coming up with some kind of basket made out of rubber, foam or metal. The fuel pump setup will be identical to the much more expensive Aeromotive Dual Phantom setup (see picture below hosted by Aeromotive). Instead of using dual Aeromotive 340 pumps like I have in my MK4 2.1L + GTX2867R setup, I will be using twin DeatschWerks DW300 pumps which flow better at higher pressure.


----------



## One-Eight GTI (Jan 5, 2010)

Awesome update. Remember when you get your Haldex setup the way you want it I’m in the market for one. I bet it Would work great with my haltech setup once I get busy on my car 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

One-Eight GTI said:


> Awesome update. Remember when you get your Haldex setup the way you want it I’m in the market for one. I bet it Would work great with my haltech setup once I get busy on my car
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


:thumbup::thumbup:

EDIT: Haltech should be very easy to integrate with my controller. The quick and dirty method is to set up a digital output table in Haltech that outputs DC (duty cycle). The output table can have boost on the x-axis and gear on the y-axis for example. The cells in the middle are percentage DC for each boost/gear combination. Or, you can do any other type of table you want that outputs DC which is just a PWM signal. I plan to have push button features that overlay the base program, such as launch, lock, baseline traction and maybe even traction control. these features will either temporarily override or modify the base program.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

QUICK UPDATE: The billet aluminum fuel pump hanger arrived from Raceworks several weeks ago. I paid $175 for the unit plus $25 shipping from Australia . It is nicer than the much more expensive Dual Phantom hanger from Aeromotive. Here is a stock picture of the Raceworks unit:










Bill purchased two (2) Deatschwerks D300 (version 2.0!) pumps which flow much better at higher fuel pressure than the Aeromotive 340 pumps I have in my Mk4 2.1L GTX2867R daily driver. He mounted and wired the pumps (see below).



















The custom aluminum adapter I drafted in FreeCAD fits perfect with the Haldex unit. That will allow me to monitor clutch pressure and adjust engagement accordingly. As far as the center driveshaft, Bill and I decided to use the long rear section of driveshaft from the donor Audi 225 TT and the front short section from a Passat G60 syncro wagon that I sourced from Issam aka iABED Industries. Surprisingly, the CV joint from the Audi driveshaft fits the spline section of the syncro shaft. That made it very easy for us to join the two sections together. However, we need to make an 1 1/2 inch spacer to connect the two sections. Bill knows someone from Warminster, PA who is making that on a lathe as we speak. Once that arrives, Bill can start fabricating and welding the center tunnel and finishing the Haldex conversion. Please note, the front section of driveshaft from the Audi TT will not fit onto the FEX angle drive on the 02J transmission.

The three (3) inch stainless steel exhaust dump arrived from California. It is a nice unit except the wastegate is not serviceable if that fails.










I decided to contact TiAL Sport about their MVI 2.5 wastegate actuator. That has a replaceable diaphragm and adjustable springs. I spent quite a lot of time talking with Mike Franke at TiAL Sport about the technical details of their unit. He is going to setup a special ordering page where I can buy the unit disassembled so that I can customize it to my particular application.


----------



## vr6 3.0 (Apr 19, 2008)

mainstayinc said:


> Please note, the front section of driveshaft from the Audi TT will not fit onto the FEX angle drive on the 02J transmission.


Nice update John, excited to see this come together this year! 

Good note on the driveshaft, glad to know the syncro and Audi splines are the same.


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

vr6 3.0 said:


> Nice update John, excited to see this come together this year!
> 
> Good note on the driveshaft, glad to know the syncro and Audi splines are the same.


Indeed, info that's applicable to a few people lol


Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

vr6 3.0 said:


> Nice update John, excited to see this come together this year!
> 
> Good note on the driveshaft, glad to know the syncro and Audi splines are the same.


:thumbup: Once the driveshaft spacer is done, progress will ramp up much quicker.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Vegeta Gti said:


> Indeed, info that's applicable to a few people lol
> 
> 
> Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk


:thumbup::beer: I'll try to post some more pictures of the driveshaft from end to end so people have a better idea of what's involved in the Haldex conversion.


----------



## sdezego (Apr 23, 2004)

Wow, just went through your build. Awesome project here!


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

sdezego said:


> Wow, just went through your build. Awesome project here!


:thumbup:Thanks man! Hope to get if finished soon.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

QUICK UPDATE: I stopped by Bill's shop this morning. We are waiting on the 1 1/2 inch custom spacer from his guy in Warminster before we can complete the center driveshaft and Haldex install. In the meantime, Bill fabricated the 3 inch downpipe (see below).










And here is what it looks like installed on the turbo (see below). There's a good 3/8 inches between the downpipe and the side of the tunnel and another 3/8 inches on the other side between the dowpipe and the center driveshaft. It also clears the steering rack no problem. Bill and I had a good discussion about the wastegates. I originally wanted to dump the wastegates into the downpipe. That will keep things quiet on road and not draw any attention to the car. Also, it will keep things more inconspicuous under the hood for PA state inspection. However, Bill has been insistent that we dump the wastegates to atmosphere. That will improve performance by maintaining better exhaust flow in the downpipe. He suggested that we can remove the WG dump-to-atmosphere tubes for inspection and cap off the wastegastes if necessary. Not a bad idea. Anyways, the wastegates won't open unless I am at full boost or shift really aggressively under boost. I plan to use my exhaust cutout valve anyways when I drive aggressively on the street and that's also going to be very loud. 










We measured the v-band flange for the TiAL wastegate(s). Those were 1.375 inches or about 35 millimeters internal diameter. I suggested we do a 2-into-1 wastegate dump-to-atmosphere tube. That would require the twin wastegates to feed a single 2 inch dump tube. Bill thought that would be a pretty *trick* setup.

EDIT: Video of Bill test driving VRT customer car back in 2006. Fast forward to 01:28 and 2:04 if you want to check out the violent acceleration in third and fourth gear.






Same car but at the track.






Video of Bill's making a pass in his VRT Corrado back in 1998.


----------



## 3L3M3NT (Jun 18, 2008)

If those videos are any indication of how fast your car is going to be, all I can say is Holy Crap! Your car is gonna be a rocketship!:thumbup:


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

3L3M3NT said:


> If those videos are any indication of how fast your car is going to be, all I can say is Holy Crap! Your car is gonna be a rocketship!:thumbup:


Thanks, man. Those are all VR6 turbos so I have my work cut out for me. I am hoping the little MK1 will be a VRT killer. We'll see.:laugh:


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

I thought I'd post this up. My brother-in-law stopped by yesterday with a 1985.5 Porsche 944 2.5L. Even though it's non-turbo, the car is a blast to drive. Short ratio 5 speed gear box on a NA engine makes for a pretty quick car. That felt quite familiar as that's the same formula used on my 1984 GTI 1.8L. Even the door handles are the same as the VW. Quite a unique interior, though.










Here's a picture in front of my wife's Q7.










Here's a link to the data page on the car.

https://www.ultimatespecs.com/car-specs/Porsche/3609/Porsche-944-Coupe-25.html

I noticed how long the engine block is compared to the 1.8T. I guess the 100.0 mm bore x 78.9 mm stroke explains that. Interestingly, the engine block has an open-deck design. More efficient but not as good for making big power as compared to the closed-deck design of the 1.8T. 10.3:1 compression.










EDIT: Interesting video of open versus closed deck design.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

UPDATE: Bill asked me to stop by his shop earlier today. The spacer that connects the front syncro and rear Haldex section(s) of the center driveshaft is finished and installed on the car. Here it is (see below). Basically, it connects to the CV joint that is splined onto the syncro driveshaft to the Haldex section of driveshaft in the rear. It looks solid but it is actually hollowed out in the middle to allow the CV joint plenty of room to move around.










Here's a picture of the front section of syncro driveshaft looking toward the 02C transmission and FEX angle drive. You can see the downpipe with the exhaust valve and just behind that my wastegate dump tube.










And here is a picture looking straight up from the bottom of the turbo, FEX angle drive, exhaust valve, wastegate dump tube, steering rack etc.










Test fitting the 'X' brace that ties the two lower control arms together. Everything seems to fit.










Close up of the downpipe and wastegate dump tube.










A slightly different angle of the same showing the merge section of the wastegate dump tube.










A look at the center driveshaft from inside of the car. Bill is going to install a 2 inch v-band flange just above the exhaust valve to connect the downpipe to the rest of my 2 inch exhaust system that will run to the rear of the car. The exhaust valve will obviously dump all of the exhaust through the 3 inch downpipe when it is open and divert the exhaust through the restrictive 2 inch system when it is closed. Since everything is v-band, we talked about making a second set of downpipe and wastegate dump tubes that vent through the hood that would be used for the track. That would allow us to use a larger diameter downpipe (3.5 to 4 inch) since there is more room exiting through the hood.










A view from the rear hatch.










The next step is to finish welding the downpipe and wastegate dump tube and then weld the center tunnel back into place. Bill wants me to start sorting out the engine wiring harness. We also talked a lot about getting my standalone engine management up and running.


----------



## extremy (Dec 5, 2005)

Great update, starting to become a car again, thanks for sharing!!


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

extremy said:


> Great update, *starting to become a car again*, thanks for sharing!!


:thumbup::beer:


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

The outfront guys are the kings of closed deck. Aig has bought blocks from them to copy and still can't get it right. I know them personally after having dealt with them for years. Jeremy and company are very cool.

They're v3/4 closed deck is incredible. They have things they do that are proprietary that make all the difference.

I had then do a customer's closed deck on an aluminum 1.8t 20v block. 

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Vegeta Gti said:


> The outfront guys are the kings of closed deck. Aig has bought blocks from them to copy and still can't get it right. I know them personally after having dealt with them for years. Jeremy and company are very cool.
> 
> They're v3/4 closed deck is incredible. They have things they do that are proprietary that make all the difference.
> 
> ...


I didn't know someone made an aluminum (billet) block for the 1.8T 20V. Any info. or links is greatly appreciated.


----------



## Rabbit Farmer (Sep 22, 2003)

I thought the same thing.. based on basic internet searching, many posts in the forums (pick one) state that they are actually stock from VW. But... I never found definitive information they were out there.

Many opinions when researching was WHY use aluminum when you have this beautiful heavy block that doesn't fail under pressure... literally.

(based on internet searching) They are European blocks... not available in the US (as in, not offered in new cars sold by VW in USA)

I'm just pointing out that all the information I found was based on searching.... I have never seen one myself. (and didn't know they even existed)


----------



## fUndersteer (Apr 21, 2017)

I think this is who you want to reach out to with regards to aluminum 20v's, OEM or custom billet. https://www.instagram.com/fferacing/


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Rabbit Farmer said:


> I thought the same thing.. based on basic internet searching, many posts in the forums (pick one) state that they are actually stock from VW. But... I never found definitive information they were out there.
> 
> *Many opinions when researching was WHY use aluminum when you have this beautiful heavy block that doesn't fail under pressure...* literally.
> 
> ...


Thanks for the feedback. I agree that a heavy iron block is better for making power. The only reason to go to aluminum is for very high power setups where the block needs to flex a little bit under extreme loads.



fUndersteer said:


> I think this is who you want to reach out to with regards to aluminum 20v's, OEM or custom billet. https://www.instagram.com/fferacing/


Thanks!


----------



## vr6 3.0 (Apr 19, 2008)

mainstayinc said:


> I agree that a heavy iron block is better for making power. The only reason to go to aluminum is for very high power setups where the block needs to flex a little bit under extreme loads.


Not entirely true. 

If you are building a lower power turbo engine for a track car where handling and quick spool are king over peak power, removing approx 50lbs from the front of the car can be another HUGE reason. The aluminum 20v blocks people use for turbo are the ALT code 2L FSI NA blocks. I'm using one for my engine build, as well as aluminum oil pan, mini radiator, carbon fiber intake manifold, etc... all to move as much weight low and as far back in the chassis as possible. You need to re-sleeve them of course, but they are proven to support 600+hp. Check out the Dialynx performance R8 hill climb car. It uses a re-sleeved 20v ALT aluminum block with a 16v solid lifter head and is wicked potent and lightweight. 

Ed (FFE) is the only one putting the work in to develop an aftermarket billet 20v block. He's not doing it for the weight saving though, it's because he's found the limits of the OEM blocks and has the skills to make it happen. That block is not suited for anything other than a drag car, and most people who drive mk1's aren't in a position to drop $10+K on a bare engine block either.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

vr6 3.0 said:


> Not entirely true.
> 
> If you are building a lower power turbo engine for a track car where handling and quick spool are king over peak power, removing approx 50lbs from the front of the car can be another HUGE reason. The aluminum 20v blocks people use for turbo are the ALT code 2L FSI NA blocks. *I'm using one for my engine build, as well as aluminum oil pan, mini radiator, carbon fiber intake manifold, etc...* all to move as much weight low and as far back in the chassis as possible. You need to re-sleeve them of course, but they are proven to support 600+hp. Check out the Dialynx performance R8 hill climb car. It uses a re-sleeved 20v ALT aluminum block with a 16v solid lifter head and is wicked potent and lightweight.
> 
> Ed (FFE) is the only one putting the work in to develop an aftermarket billet 20v block. He's not doing it for the weight saving though, it's because he's found the limits of the OEM blocks and has the skills to make it happen. That block is not suited for anything other than a drag car, and most people who drive mk1's aren't in a position to drop $10+K on a bare engine block either.


Thanks for the info. That's a really cool setup. I'd really like to see a picture of the aluminum block. Do you have a link or picture you can post?


----------



## vr6 3.0 (Apr 19, 2008)

I can email them to you or text, send me your info via IM. I don’t have them uploaded to flicker to post though.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

vr6 3.0 said:


> I can email them to you or text, send me your info via IM. I don’t have them uploaded to flicker to post though.


PM sent!


----------



## vr6 3.0 (Apr 19, 2008)

mainstayinc said:


> PM sent!


Email sent just now, sorry took me a couple days.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

vr6 3.0 said:


> Email sent just now, sorry took me a couple days.


:thumbup:

Some of you may recall this discussion where I posted a video of a simple plasma ignition setup.






As per the diagram in the beginning of the video, you connect a high-voltage capacitor between the power and ground of the non-resistor spark plug. The capacitor stores and then discharges the high voltage output of the induction coil all at once. This has the effect of increasing spark energy and makes for a much hotter spark.

The problem with an induction coil setup (without the use of capacitors) is that the dwell time decreases as engine speed increases. This allows less time for the induction coil to charge and discharge at higher engine speeds. This results in a weaker spark (see graph below), engine misfires and a decrease in power. See this article for more information.










The guy in the video posted other videos showing how he implements his plasma ignition setup in his daily driver. He uses an older-style single coil with a distributor and spark plug wires. That works great because he has easy access to the power and ground sides of the spark plug. This setup would be much more difficult to implement on a coil-over-plug setup. How are you going to connect a capacitor to the output side of the induction coil when it is buried deep inside the cylinder head?

I decided to experiment with the bolt-down style Audi RS5 coil-over-plug units which I will be using on my engine. These are a lot simpler than the standard 1.8T coil-over-plug units as there is a rubber boot that can be removed at the bottom of the unit. This allows access to the power output side of the ignition coil.










I drilled a small 7/64 inch hole from the tip of the unit where the spark plug connects diagonally to the outside of the shaft. I then inserted a 14 gauge copper wire and then drilled another hole through the top cover. I then soldered the wire to the tip of the unit and soldered a 30 KV 1000 picofarad ceramic capacitor (not shown) to the other end of the wire.

I tested this setup on my MK4 daily driver by removing one of the standard 1.8T coil-over-plug units and plugging in the modified RS5 unit. I grounded the spark plug on top of the valve cover and then connected the ground side of the capacitor to the same valve cover. To my surprise, I was able to produce a really nice splasma spark. I took several videos but youtube will not allow me to upload. However, I did take some screen shots of the video.

Here is a picture of the standard spark. You can see how weak it looks with a small purple reflection off the valve cover.










And here is the plasma spark. Notice how bright and hot the spark appears as compared to the standard spark.










I will try to post the video of the plasma spark but the video is only 26% uploaded after 3 days. Not sure what's going on at youtube. Also, I managed to shock myself multiple times with 15,000 volts or more trying to take videos of this setup. That's why I am wearing leather gloves in this latest video LOL.

Also, I ordered some 30 KV 10,000 picofarad capacitors which are 10x more powerful than one I used in the video. We'll see how that turns out. I am kind of a cheap bastard when it comes to certain car parts. Who wants to pay $775 for a set of 4 Okada ignition coils? My RS5 coils cost me 12.95 each plus $3 for the 14-gauge copper wire and maybe $20 for a set of twelve (12) 30 KV 1000 PF ceramic capacitors.

Here are some dyno charts from the Okada website for the MK4 1.8T. According to the chart, these make an 8 to 10 HP increase in power and torque.


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

Very interesting

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk


----------



## vr6 3.0 (Apr 19, 2008)

What belt tensioner did you use? Just realized the IE one I got got mine interferes with the mk1 motor mount so it can't be used.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

vr6 3.0 said:


> What belt tensioner did you use? Just realized the IE one I got got mine interferes with the mk1 motor mount so it can't be used.


I am pretty sure Bill used a manual belt tensioner from a 16 valve engine (ABA 2.0L) with the larger mounting stud. We did not install an idler pulley since that interferes with the MK1 engine mount. I plan to stop by Bill's shop this Saturday so I can double check.


----------



## CorrieG60 (Jan 18, 2004)

mainstayinc said:


> :thumbup:
> 
> Some of you may recall this discussion where I posted a video of a simple plasma ignition setup.
> 
> ...


Very interesting to follow and see actual results!(with more pics and videos)
Keep it up, great posts to follow!


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

CorrieG60 said:


> Very interesting to follow and see actual results!(with more pics and videos)
> Keep it up, great posts to follow!


Thanks! I tested this setup with the 10,000 pF (picofarad) capacitors which are 10x larger than the ones above. Surprisingly, I got a spark that was 10x larger than before. Here are a couple of screen shots:

Standard spark:










Modified spark (10,000 pF capacitor)










I will definitely implement this modification on my MK1 2.1L engine. My only concern is that the spark plug electrode will wear quicker as compared to a standard setup. I was able to track down a non-resistor spark plug with an Iridium electrode which should withstand wear much better. It comes in an 8 (NGK index) heat range. This will replace the NKG 7173's which have a nickel plated center electrode (also 8 heat range). Also, I plan to gap these plugs to 0.04 inches (1 mm) versus the 0.024 I use on my MK4 daily driver.

Brisk DO12IRY. Here is a link to Brisk website.










These were very hard to find and are currently on back order. They should ship mid-April. Pulstar sells spark plugs with a capacitor already embedded in them. Here is a promotional video:






Of course, I would not use those plugs because it is a lot cheaper to add your own capacitors if you know what you are doing. Also, you can add any size capacitor you want and are not limited by the internal dimensions of the spark plug. So, you can get a much larger spark as compared to the Pulstar plugs if you want. I forgot to mention that the nicest part of this "mod" is that it does not adversely effect your ignition coils. Whereas an ignition booster that boosts voltage to your coil will *theoretically* shorten the life of the coil. Also, an ignition booster cannot output nearly as much energy as a capacitor setup.

Typically you can gain 5 to 10 HP on a normally aspirated (NA) engine with a capacitor setup. In a high-reving, high boost setup like mine that uses water-methanol injection, I think that I will see better gains as compared to a standard ignition setup. I will post a back-to-back dyno comparison once the MK1 street killer is done.

EDIT: This guy does a back-to-back comparison of the Pulstar and other plugs. Interesting results. You can see a much brighter flame front with the Pulstar plugs with his see through engine.


----------



## Stimike1198 (Sep 12, 2020)

Awesome thread love all the technical data in it.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Stimike1198 said:


> Awesome thread love all the technical data in it.


:thumbup: I hope to post some updates soon.


----------



## vr6 3.0 (Apr 19, 2008)

mainstayinc said:


> :thumbup: I hope to post some updates soon.


Look forward to that!


----------



## VRBTCHCAR (May 10, 2003)

What happened with this?


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

VRBTCHCAR said:


> What happened with this?


I'm chomping at the bit to finish this project but Bill has been super busy with other things. I met with him yesterday for some *extra curricular* activities and he said he will make more progress by next week. I plan to stop by his shop next week and will hopefully be able to post an update.


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

UPDATE: I stopped by Bill's shop this morning and was surprised to see more progress on the MK1. He finished fabricating the rear mounting points for the syncro beam which hold the Haldex unit. Instead of building out and boxing the frame rail as in the Dutchbuild 4Motion MK1 (see second picture below) , Bill decided to fabricate a bracket with a gusset using 3/16 and 1/4 steel (see below). A lot simpler and better solution IMO.



















Here's a picture of Bill finalizing the Haldex unit install in the rear syncro beam.










The next step is to finalize the syncro beam install and bolt everything back into place on the chassis. Once that's done, he is going to box out the tunnel with sheet metal and finish fabricating the exhaust. I plan to stop by his shop next Friday and hopefully will be able to post another update. Regular updates should start coming.


----------



## Brake Weight (Jul 27, 2006)

Oh, boy. Can’t wait for some videos like this. The short wheelbase should just whip them out.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Brake Weight said:


> Oh, boy. Can’t wait for some videos like this. The short wheelbase should just whip them out.


Oh yeah!


----------



## vr6 3.0 (Apr 19, 2008)

Hi John,

Any updates from you or Bill? 

Hope alls well,
Isaac


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

vr6 3.0 said:


> Hi John,
> 
> Any updates from you or Bill?
> 
> ...


Yes, all is well. I've been very busy with work and at home. I did stop by Bill's shop about three weeks ago and he made some solid progress on the center tunnel. He finished welding the tunnel and reinforced the area between the two front seats. He feels confident it is more solid than the stock chassis before the center tunnel was cut out. I did not take any pictures but will post some on the next update.

I am getting ramped up again about this project after six months of not having any contact with Bill. More regular updates to come.

BTW I do frequent this forum all the time but have not posted anything.


----------



## B1-16V (Aug 5, 2002)

As a 23 year project owner, I'm hoping you can find your momentum again.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

B1-16V said:


> As a 23 year project owner, I'm hoping you can find your momentum again.




I have been so busy since the "election" I haven't had time to think about this project. Wife and I have been busy _doing our homework_ so-to-speak and preparing for a worst case scenario going forward.


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

Well, if a bug out is required. You've got a place with us in Texas. 

Economy wise, 99% of the American population is clueless as to where things are going. And we've been working hard the last 10 years to be as self reliant as possible. 

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Vegeta Gti said:


> Well, if a bug out is required. You've got a place with us in Texas.
> 
> Economy wise, 99% of the American population is clueless as to where things are going. And we've been working hard the last 10 years to be as self reliant as possible.
> 
> Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk


YES! Nice to know other people get it. And thanks for the offer. If Pennsylvania goes the way of New York and New Jersey, then I'll be moving to the Lone Star state for sure!!! BTW, all my meetings with Bill don't always involve cars.


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

Lol that's awesome. Damn right. 

I built my own range. We have 33 acres. 

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Vegeta Gti said:


> Lol that's awesome. Damn right.
> 
> I built my own range. We have 33 acres.
> 
> Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk


NICE!!! I wish I had that kind of space. Wife and I have a couple of acres but live within the local borough which is very restrictive.


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

Well, you can do a lot with 2 acres!!

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk


----------



## MiltDoggie (Jun 30, 2020)

I dont usually dabble in politics and arguments on online forums but I must say, it's nice to see people waking up and knowing I'm not the only one.


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Vegeta Gti said:


> Well, you can do a lot with 2 acres!!
> 
> Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk


For sure!


----------



## NolanG (Jan 20, 2013)

mainstayinc said:


> The Seat Ibiza Cupra gearbox with the 2.955 final drive is on its way! It is being shipped from Barnsley (South Yorkshire), UK. The ebay.co.uk seller originally posted the auction as local pickup only. However, I contacted him and he was willing to package and ship to the USA. Below is a comparison of the FFE Racing 02M 6-speed Dog box gearset with 3.94 final drive (FZQ) versus my 02J AP Tuning Race gearset with 3.389 final drive (EGR) in my MK4 versus my 02C AP Tuning Race gearset with 3.157 final drive (CTN) going into my MK1. All of these are on 225/45R17 25 inch diameter tires.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Excellent spreads. Thorough detail. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## NolanG (Jan 20, 2013)

The amount of detail over this entire thread is fantastic! This was an excellent read over morning coffee’s! 










Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

NolanG said:


> The amount of detail over this entire thread is fantastic! This was an excellent read over morning coffee’s!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Glad you enjoyed! Gearing is very important. I just had my stock 02M gearbox from the donor Audi TT go under flood water. I should probably bring it to Bill's shop to get checked out.


----------



## NolanG (Jan 20, 2013)

mainstayinc said:


> Glad you enjoyed! Gearing is very important. I just had my stock 02M gearbox from the donor Audi TT go under flood water. I should probably bring it to Bill's shop to get checked out.


Indeed it is and so is suspension dialing. 

Crazy weather you all have gotten. How bad at your place? 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## izcorrado18 (Aug 21, 2005)

Vegeta Gti said:


> Well, if a bug out is required. You've got a place with us in Texas.
> 
> Economy wise, 99% of the American population is clueless as to where things are going. And we've been working hard the last 10 years to be as self reliant as possible.
> 
> Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk


I might hit you up since Minnesota is well on it's way down. Texas is my second choice for retirement. I fell in love with it years ago on a Navy detachment.


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

Montana is you have money saved and like the cold. It's ****ing hot af here. 

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk


----------



## izcorrado18 (Aug 21, 2005)

Vegeta Gti said:


> Montana is you have money saved and like the cold. It's ****ing hot af here.
> 
> Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk


Funny thing is that is my third. When I drove my Corrado from Washington to Minnesota, I fell in love with it. I can live that Yellowstone life. lol. If you want to take my freedom, come take it!!


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

NolanG said:


> Indeed it is and so is suspension dialing.
> 
> Crazy weather you all have gotten. How bad at your place?
> 
> ...


Homeless ATM. Currently living in a camper while we dry out and clean our house. House was under 2 feet of water! Plan on demolishing house and rebuilding above flood plain.


----------



## NolanG (Jan 20, 2013)

mainstayinc said:


> Homeless ATM. Currently living in a camper while we dry out and clean our house. House was under 2 feet of water! Plan on demolishing house and rebuilding above flood plain.


Unfortunate, but could be worse I assume. 

That would be a cool project to build new house. I designed our house to be full off the grid. Direct water in tiles with over size pipe. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## USMCFieldMP (Jun 26, 2008)

mainstayinc said:


> Glad you enjoyed! Gearing is very important. I just had my stock 02M gearbox from the donor Audi TT go under flood water. I should probably bring it to Bill's shop to get checked out.


Transmissions are typically pretty solid in water (they're sealed up tight). For peace of mind, I'd probably drain the fluid, refill, and send it. If the drain has a lot of water in it, I might do another drain/refill after ~50 miles and start considering changing some seals.



dri0514 said:


> I might hit you up since Minnesota is well on it's way down. Texas is my second choice for retirement. I fell in love with it years ago on a Navy detachment.


As long as you don't move to a city, I'm okay with it, lol. The major cities are crowded enough as it is.



Vegeta Gti said:


> Montana is you have money saved and like the cold. It's ****ing hot af here.


I feel like it's been so bad lately. Damn humidity.


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

Texas is Full. No Vacancy lol.

I'll happily sell my homestead to the right buyer though.

$1,000,000 +closing costs.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

NolanG said:


> Unfortunate, but could be worse I assume.
> 
> That would be a cool project to build new house. *I designed our house to be full off the grid.* Direct water in tiles with over size pipe.
> 
> ...


Nice! I might have to tap into some of your expertise. I built a really nice rain catchment system that waters garden, animals (chickens, etc.) and runs through a house filter and UV filter to provide drinking water. Working on stock piling wood to provide my energy needs such as running a generator, providing house heat and cooking and (of course) possibly powering a vehicle. New house, if it becomes a reality, will use a wood boiler backed up by natural gas (abundant in PA) to provide hot water and heat.

Sucks though being essentially homeless right now. But I guess it could be a lot worse.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

USMCFieldMP said:


> Transmissions are typically pretty solid in water (they're sealed up tight). For peace of mind, I'd probably drain the fluid, refill, and send it. If the drain has a lot of water in it, I might do another drain/refill after ~50 miles and start considering changing some seals.


That gives me a little peace of mind. Thanks.


----------



## NolanG (Jan 20, 2013)

mainstayinc said:


> Nice! I might have to tap into some of your expertise. I built a really nice rain catchment system that waters garden, animals (chickens, etc.) and runs through a house filter and UV filter to provide drinking water. Working on stock piling wood to provide my energy needs such as running a generator, providing house heat and cooking and (of course) possibly powering a vehicle. New house, if it becomes a reality, will use a wood boiler backed up by natural gas (abundant in PA) to provide hot water and heat.
> 
> Sucks though being essentially homeless right now. But I guess it could be a lot worse.


Always willing to help! That’s awesome. We did the same for our garden and chickens as well. 

You can make it a reality. We can always come down to change the way the typical North American house is. 

Those are all great changes. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

We're going to utilize the Texas sun and building a solar field. 

Have rain catchment and a well. Battery back up soon and secondary generator. We have a dual fuel stove/oven.. so gas for stove top and top oven, then electric bottom and they can run combined as a convection unit. 

I need to build a better pump house and prep it better for the elements, heat and cold. 

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk


----------



## NolanG (Jan 20, 2013)

Vegeta Gti said:


> We're going to utilize the Texas sun and building a solar field.
> 
> Have rain catchment and a well. Battery back up soon and secondary generator. We have a dual fuel stove/oven.. so gas for stove top and top oven, then electric bottom and they can run combined as a convection unit.
> 
> ...


Not bad. Do you have any running water near by? 

Could easily get rid of the battery back up and generator. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

Yes but not that close. I'm 3 miles from a large section of the Colorado that's very very sparsely inhabited by humans. There are other creeks, etc, but nothing close enough for that. 

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk


----------



## ticketed2much (Feb 18, 2012)

mainstayinc said:


> Homeless ATM. Currently living in a camper while we dry out and clean our house. House was under 2 feet of water! Plan on demolishing house and rebuilding above flood plain.


Sorry to hear that! That’s a scary amount of water! Do you have a crew lined up to clean out the mess? Seemed like you had your hands full already!

We got 6” of water in the partially finished basement because the POS pump quit. I thought that was bad


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

ticketed2much said:


> Sorry to hear that! That’s a scary amount of water! Do you have a crew lined up to clean out the mess? Seemed like you had your hands full already!
> 
> We got 6” of water in the partially finished basement because the POS pump quit. I thought that was bad


Hey Chad! Nice to hear from you. Yes, I have my hands full. But making progress slowly but surely. I might be knocking down old structure and building nice new place.


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

This is some data Badger5 just collected. 
Needless to say, I'm def going g25-660.






































Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk


----------



## ticketed2much (Feb 18, 2012)

Vegeta Gti said:


> This is some data Badger5 just collected.
> Needless to say, I'm def going g25-660.
> 
> 
> ...


The G25 series turbos are really impressive. They really haven’t caught on in the states yet, or at least I haven’t seen many.

Badger5 is getting 500bhp out of the 550, and they spool so early like a K04. Not cheap to set them up right but for a small displacement engine-a real game changer!


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

I meant to put this in the other thread, my apologies. I am mostly retarded.

Yeah, I've been pushing them on my customers for a year and they are all happy. The gen2 gtx is pretty good, but these continue to be more impressive. 
The g25-660 .72 is seeing [email protected] and making 300+ft/lbs on a 2.0l 20v, that is so lovely if you're tracking the car.


----------



## MiltDoggie (Jun 30, 2020)

ticketed2much said:


> The G25 series turbos are really impressive. They really haven’t caught on in the states yet, or at least I haven’t seen many.
> 
> Badger5 is getting 500bhp out of the 550, and they spool so early like a K04. Not cheap to set them up right but for a small displacement engine-a real game changer!


They're everywhere over in the UK and Europe LOL


----------



## Big_Tom (Aug 19, 2007)

I've been watching Badger5 and TeamPrawn Racing on Youtube for a hot minute with these G25's. They are everywhere in the UK! I want one but obviously that price is up there. If I ever stop buying guns and ammo I may be able to get one.


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

I'm waiting to see longevity still but I'm been at on that 660 for awhile. 

And I agree... I've been doing other things with money. 

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk


----------



## vr6 3.0 (Apr 19, 2008)

Any movement on this project recently John?


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

He said he was taking a long break from SM. So it might be awhile. I know Bill was moving in spurts, here and there on the car

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk


----------



## vr6 3.0 (Apr 19, 2008)

Makes sense. I know bill was working on it sporadically like you said, hope he comes back for an update sometime next year, this was looking really promising


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

vr6 3.0 said:


> Makes sense. I know bill was working on it sporadically like you said, hope he comes back for an update sometime next year, this was looking really promising


Starting back on my MK1 build again. I will update this thread periodically when I get a chance.


----------



## Rabbit Farmer (Sep 22, 2003)

Breaking out the popcorn....


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

Hey man!! Good to see you're alive and kicking John!


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Vegeta Gti said:


> Hey man!! Good to see you're alive and kicking John!


Yes, alive and kicking for sure! Nice to see you and others still frequent this forum. Wife and I have been super busy the past while. We also had a terrible flood last September (hurricane Ida) which set us back. Luckily, most of my important and expensive car parts were at Bill's shop which was not effected by the flood. I got together with Bill after a long period of no contact a couple of weeks ago. I decided that I want to continue with my MK1 "street killer" despite the ongoing crisis in this country. I am not going to let that shape my life. Bottom line is that most of the difficult aspects of this build are already completed. Bill is working on completing the front and rear suspension. He got the MK1 stock spindles powder-coated and a few other suspension parts installed. Next step is to measure and order the front and rear drive shafts. I finally decided to purchase tubular lower control arms today from this company. Check it out.










Those will go nice with some other suspension parts I have. Comes with half an inch of roll center correction if needed. Short video on roll center correction:






I have spent a lot of time working on my custom Haldex controller. However, I decided to put that on the back burner for now and just use the powertrack insert to get the rear wheels moving. I also have to decide on what EMS to use so that we can start thinking about the engine harness. I have been looking at the Link G4+ for the Audi TT which is plenty capable and has a lot of features. But, I know this is not very common. Bill is pushing me toward Motec, Haltec etc. but I don't want a digital display. I will be plenty happy with my laptop plugged in for programming and displaying gauges. I heard fuel tech has some new EMS products. Any thoughts or recommendations for a good EMS?


----------



## Rabbit Farmer (Sep 22, 2003)

I have used VEMS on my 1989 Cabriolet (1.8T) and plan to use it on my 1980 Scirocco (1.8T).

Unsure what I am doing for gauges (speedo/tach/etc) as I also do not want a digital display.









Engine Management


Standalone ECUs and Tuning Solutions (aka Engine Management)



shop.vemstuning.com





Steve


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Rabbit Farmer said:


> I have used VEMS on my 1989 Cabriolet (1.8T) and plan to use it on my 1980 Scirocco (1.8T).
> 
> Unsure what I am doing for gauges (speedo/tach/etc) as I also do not want a digital display.
> 
> ...


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

I'm using ignitron. 

The just eng guys make cool products.

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

I should elaborate, I'm using Ignitron, currently running a tablet(windows) for a display. I would like to run a motec or Aim dash at some point, but, money talks. 


I've been on the Ignitron ECU 2 years and i can not say enough great things about it. The UI is beautiful, it's incredibly powerful, continually improving and expanding, full can support, loss of inputs and outputs, etc. It's a straight drop in ecu, and makes things like vems, maxx, ms3 and such look and function like eurodyne lol.

I would take this ecu as far as I can of it weren't for monetary issues from the idiots in power due the idiots in the population.

Anyway, yeah. I love it, it's brilliant, I'm barely scraping the surface with it on my car and customer cars, so much potential and power. They come in stock every 2 months roughly and go fast("semiconductor shortage").

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Vegeta Gti said:


> I should elaborate, I'm using Ignitron, currently running a tablet(windows) for a display. I would like to run a motec or Aim dash at some point, but, money talks.
> 
> 
> I've been on the Ignitron ECU 2 years and i can not say enough great things about it. The UI is beautiful, it's incredibly powerful, continually improving and expanding, full can support, loss of inputs and outputs, etc. It's a straight drop in ecu, and makes things like vems, maxx, ms3 and such look and function like eurodyne lol.
> ...


I just reviewed the Ignitron ECU website. This EMS has more features than I first thought. Boost by Gear and Flat Shift are a game changer for me. I want to control a few other auxiliaries like a custom W/M injection system that uses a PWM signal to control a nitrous solenoid. I also want to control my exhaust cutout electronically based on throttle position and boost pressure. Chris, do you know if the Ignitron ECU has digital outputs to control solenoids, etc.? I guess I can always use a fuel injector signal to control a nitrous solenoid (Ignitron can drive up to 8 injectors).


----------



## MiltDoggie (Jun 30, 2020)

Ignitron

Everyone here in Europe uses it.


----------



## vr6 3.0 (Apr 19, 2008)

John nice to see you back at it! I Also went with Ignitron per Chris' recommendation. I'm not a tuner so I cant really address anything in detail that hasn't already been said, but basically make sure whoever is going to tune the car is good with whatever you go with.. Motec/ Haltech have lots of options for people in the states who are familiar with them. Ignitron seems to be the best if you're sticking to a semi factory VW/ Audi harness and fuse panel... plus literally a fraction the cost of the two mentioned above.

I'm curious to get your take on the Just Engineering LCA's. They just released a version the last week or so that allow for a front lower sway bar I believe. I was also looking at them but ended up going with something else.


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

Yes, to pretty much everything you asked. There is a great Facebook support group as well. The designer/engineer of the ecu is very active and very very helpful in there. 

If i could post videos via tapatalk I'd just show you. 


I will update this post with some info in a bit.


Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

vr6 3.0 said:


> John nice to see you back at it! I Also went with Ignitron per Chris' recommendation. I'm not a tuner so I cant really address anything in detail that hasn't already been said, but basically make sure whoever is going to tune the car is good with whatever you go with.. Motec/ Haltech have lots of options for people in the states who are familiar with them. Ignitron seems to be the best if you're sticking to a semi factory VW/ Audi harness and fuse panel... plus literally a fraction the cost of the two mentioned above.
> 
> I'm curious to get your take on the Just Engineering LCA's. They just released a version the last week or so that allow for a front lower sway bar I believe. I was also looking at them but ended up going with something else.


Hey man, nice to hear from you. I got the LCA's from Just Engineering with the front lower sway bar option. I ordered a 22mm front sway bar from H&R suspension to go with LCA's. Should be a pretty nice setup. I went to Badger 5's website to order the Ignitron ECU but he was showing 'out of stock'. I then found them in stock at EFI Motorsport:

Ignitron ECU

I also want to order two (2) of the EGT Amplifiers to run a probe in each side of my twin scroll turbine housing. But I haven't found anyone who has those in stock. 

List of items I just ordered for this project:

Egnitron ECU
Eurowise Plug and Play Engine Harness
Bosch 4 bar MAP sensor

Just Engineering Tubular Lower Control Arms
H&R 22mm front anti-sway bar for MK1 chassis


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Vegeta Gti said:


> Yes, to pretty much everything you asked. There is a great Facebook support group as well. The designer/engineer of the ecu is very active and very very helpful in there.
> 
> If i could post videos via tapatalk I'd just show you.
> 
> ...


 Looking forward to your input.


----------



## BoostedHatchback (Jun 21, 2020)

🍿🍿🍿


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Ignitron ECU is on its way from EFI Motorsports and is scheduled to arrive tomorrow. In the meantime, I downloaded the Ignitron software and have been checking out features. Below is a screen shot of the Limp Mode screen.









The number of options to protect the engine is very impressive. Engine knock, Lambda targets out of range, MAP (boost) pressure too high, ECT (coolant temperature) too high, oil temperature and pressure out of range, fuel pressure too high, air leak etc. It can also monitor EGT (exhaust gas temperature) circled in RED above. If you recall, I custom designed a flange that joins the round 1 1/4" schedule 10 pipe from my custom-fabricated exhaust manifold to the rounded rectangular-ish shape of Garrett's twin scroll turbine housing. Here is a re-post of the original FreeCAD screenshot and the actual flange I had fabricated.



















Notice the 1/8 " NPTports at the top of the flange. Those are for either a K-type thermocouple probe or exhaust gas pressure sensor. The Ignitron ECU requires an EGT Amplifier to convert the milliamp signal from the thermocouple to a 0 - 5V signal usable by the ECU. I contacted Brian at Ignitron and he said they were temporarily out of stock but gave me a link to another company that sells the device (see below).

EGT-K Thermocouple Amplifier 0-5V (Type-K)










They sell a 1, 2 and 4 channel amplifier. I will buy the 2 channel device once I am finished with this post. That will allow me to monitor EGT's and have Ignitron throw the car into Limp Mode if necessary. But, I don't anticipate that happening in normal circumstances especially since I chose the largest A/R turbine housing for the GTX3584RS. But... I do plan to mess with nitrous down the road.

Nice to have a serious ECU that protects the engine. Don't want to Pauciullo my engine any time soon (see video below).

Finally a 8 second time slip but it was a costly one!


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

You pretty much did the info. Bring in the FB page is good, but it's beginning to be filled with owners who can't grasp it or don't really have the desire to.

I switched in 2020, for the latest firmware unit. In 24 hours, after a few months of research and reading, dM's to Balazs....I immediately told all my maestro guys who were serious, to change and most did. The results are statistics and exciting for expansion. 

I picked up around 100whp going 4 bar, full flex setup. I haven't posted any it, but I'm also no longer manual controller. I'm in an N75, and it's insane. Once i direct wire the VSS(contemplating doing ABS) and get the AWD and wheel speed sensors in the mix, the potential is pretty insane. 


I am also poetically going to fab in a dual egt setup on the runners, and see if I can do a third but separate post turbine. Since i will be going 4"dp, all 321 stainless. Want to push efficiency.

Blah blah. 

Your project is perfect for it. 

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Vegeta Gti said:


> You pretty much did the info. Bring in the FB page is good, but it's beginning to be filled with owners who can't grasp it or don't really have the desire to.
> 
> I switched in 2020, for the latest firmware unit. In 24 hours, after a few months of research and reading, dM's to Balazs....I immediately told all my maestro guys who were serious, to change and most did. The results are statistics and exciting for expansion.
> 
> ...


Super happy with choosing Ignitron. Yes, it is perfect for this project. Thanks for your input! The unit arrived from EFI Motorsports within two (2) days. It's the latest version V1.94. I downloaded the software and am currently reviewing all of the capabilities. I would like to run some auxiliary systems like water/methanol injection, electronic exhaust valve, staged fuel pumps etc. Most importantly, Ignitron has user-defined outputs (2 channels) that can be setup with 2D or 3D tables which can act as a Progressive W/M controller.

I was previously using the NOS Launcher as a dedicated progressive W/M controller on my MK4 (see below). It can control two (2) stages of nitrous or W/M injection but only has 2D capabilities such as MAP, RPM or time.










Here is a screenshot of the NOS Launcher software.










Compare that with the 3D capabilities of the Ignitron ECU (see below). I setup a 3D speed density table (RPM + MAP) and can output duty cycle (DC) to an output wire. Engine RPM on horizontal axis, MAP (boost) on vertical axis. Values across the table are duty cycle. That will allow me to meter the exact amount of water and/or methanol based on the actual amount of air flowing through the system. Notice that I can also define "trigger windows" that you would typically find on a good progressive nitrous controller that trigger the system such as an RPM, MAP or temperature windows.










Since the output wire is only 2.2 amps, it cannot directly drive the Wizard of Nos fuel solenoids I have which typically require 12 to 14 amps (and can run up to 50 Hz). So, I will have to create a driver board which takes the 2.2 amp signal wire from the Ignitron to drive a 12 volt, 20 amp wire using a high-speed relay or switch such as as MOSFET. Here is an example of driving a solenoid with a signal wire from an Arduino. It is a pretty simple circuit using only a MOSFET, resistor and a diode.






Typically you would pay $400 to $500 for a "good" progressive nitrous controller. However, the auxiliary output capability of the Ignitron ECU is far superior to any off-the-shelf nitrous controller assuming you can fabricate or purchase a high-amp driver board. So, the Ignitron ECU is already paying for itself.

EDIT: I also plan to re-purpose the "AC disable" feature to engage my exhaust cutout valve. I can only run a 3 inch downpipe from the engine to the tunnel due to space constraints of the center drive shaft. At the end of the 3 inch downpipe section is my exhaust cutout. From there, it goes to 2 inches. So, having an exhaust cutout is critical for my setup to make power. Since everything is v-band, I have the option of running a 3.5 or 4 inch downpipe going up through the hood on race day.

I will use second auxiliary output to stage second fuel pump. My only "observation" about the Ignitron ECU is that they should add at least two (2) more user-defined, auxiliary outputs. Other than that, it very feature rich and highly capable.

EDIT: May have found an off-the-shelf solution for a high-amp driver board (see below).

High Amp Solenoid Driver









The High Amp Solenoid Driver has been specifically designed to provide optimal pulse width modulated (PWM) control of high-speed solenoids and fuel injectors. Each driver can provide progressive control for multiple high-speed solenoids or fuel injectors with a total current draw of 20 Amps or less. When using PWM to control a solenoid there is a limit to how quickly the solenoid is able to open and close. Below a certain duty cycle the solenoid will never open, and above a certain duty cycle the solenoid will never close. While the opening time is primarily determined by battery voltage, the closing time can vary greatly depending on the hardware being used to control the solenoid. The hardware inside of the High Amp Solenoid Driver has been designed to minimize the time required for your solenoid to close, allowing you to achieve the maximum possible dynamic flow range from your injection system.

*NOTE:* This device is intended for intermittent operation and should not be used for applications that require the solenoid to be pulsed at all times when the vehicle is running.

EDIT: Just bought two (2) high-amp solenoid drivers. I now have the complete setup to control water/methanol injection system.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Just bought two (2) Water/Methanol Injection Pump Drivers from same company to control my twin Deatschwerks D300 fuel pumps using a PWM signal from the Ignitron ECU. I may setup my twin fuel pumps either parallel or sequential. In parallel both pumps would be controlled by a PWM signal based on a speed density table or perhaps fuel pressure at the rail. In sequence, I would run continuous 12V to first pump and then PWM the second pump based on speed density table or fuel pressure. Having electronic control of fuel pumps will generate less heated fuel and also extend the life of the fuel pumps.











Here's an interesting article of PWM and fuel pumps:

How Do PWM Returnless Fuel Systems Work?


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

This is essentially how I plan to control my twin Deatschwerks D300 fuel pumps:

Walboro Ti Automotive Fuel Pump PWM Setup


----------



## Desertstorm (7 mo ago)

I use an SSR to control the Bosch 044 fuel pump with my Ignitron ECU. Works really well.
I have been using Ignitron ECU for a few years now. Great piece of kit, good choice. There is a build thread for my car here.
There is a new version of S/W out soon which gives even more functionality especially with CAN add ons for multiple sensors and outputs. This is a build thread for my 500bhp DSG MK1 TT.
Mk1 TT 225 track day car, 153mph on Track!! . Goodbye Mr GT3 :)


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Desertstorm said:


> I use an SSR to control the Bosch 044 fuel pump with my Ignitron ECU. Works really well.
> I have been using Ignitron ECU for a few years now. Great piece of kit, good choice. There is a build thread for my car here.
> There is a new version of S/W out soon which gives even more functionality especially with CAN add ons for multiple sensors and outputs. This is a build thread for my 500bhp DSG MK1 TT.
> Mk1 TT 225 track day car, 153mph on Track!!  . Goodbye Mr GT3 :)
> ...


 Thanks, Karl, for the info. on the fuel pump and link to build thread. That whole thread is a wealth of information. I'll be reviewing and taking notes.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Desertstorm said:


> I use an SSR to control the Bosch 044 fuel pump with my Ignitron ECU. Works really well.
> I have been using Ignitron ECU for a few years now. Great piece of kit, good choice. There is a build thread for my car here.
> There is a new version of S/W out soon which gives even more functionality especially with CAN add ons for multiple sensors and outputs. This is a build thread for my 500bhp DSG MK1 TT.
> Mk1 TT 225 track day car, 153mph on Track!! . Goodbye Mr GT3 :)
> ...


Karl: 

In reference to the Fuel Rail Pressure Regulator (FRPR) screen you posted, how did you change the axes from "RPM vs load" to "RPM vs MAP"? It seems like Ignitron defaults to "RPM vs load" but I will need "RPM vs MAP" same as you have set up.


----------



## Desertstorm (7 mo ago)

My car is setup to use Speed Density with the MAP sensor in the intake manifold and no MAF. I suspect that if you set the map up for speed density the load axis will change. I presume you will be using speed density as it's definitely the way to go with big turbo setups and works really well when you have got the VE table populated.
You can change the axis in the ECU setup as well.


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

Speed density in the way

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Desertstorm said:


> My car is setup to use Speed Density with the MAP sensor in the intake manifold and no MAF. I suspect that if you set the map up for speed density the load axis will change. I presume you will be using speed density as it's definitely the way to go with big turbo setups and works really well when you have got the VE table populated.
> You can change the axis in the ECU setup as well.
> View attachment 198937


Ok. Yes, I changed ECU Setup > ECU operating mode > Fuel Injection/Ignition Y axis to "MAP" instead of "Load". Now I get the "RPM vs MAP" (speed density) graph as you have. Thanks for reply.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

So, I will be re-purposing the Fuel Rail Pressure Regulator (FRPR) function in Ignitron to control one or both of my Deatschwerks DW300 in-tank fuel pumps using a duty cycle table. That will allow me to provide fuel flow and pressure on demand without having to run excessive fuel through the rail and heating the fuel. Below is a _theoretical_ chart I created based on speed density (RPM vs. MAP) for control of both pumps simultaneously starting at 25% DC and ending in 100% DC. I will have to obviously do some testing to see if I get enough baseline fuel pressure running both pumps at 25% DC at idle. I suspect that will not be enough to maintain baseline fuel pressure and may have to bump up my DC to 50% as these turbine-style fuel pumps may not build pressure at such low voltage/duty cycle. Alternatively, I may have to run the first pump at full amperage and then control the second pump using the FRPR duty cycle output table. Actual fuel rail pressure will be controlled by a traditional fuel pressure regulator (FPR) referenced with a vacuum/boost hose.

I will also install and calibrate a fuel rail pressure sensor and then do some Ignitron datalogging to compare with MAP pressure. I am looking to get a 1:1 ratio between fuel rail pressure and intake manifold pressure. A lot will depend on the characteristics of my fuel pressure regulator and the fuel pumps. But, I should be able to fine-tune the whole setup using the FRPR duty cycle output table.










The map for control of the second pump with first pump at full amperage might look like this (see below). The second pump would come on gradually based on speed density and be fully one at maximum boost and RPM.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Interesting. Ignitron has a rolling launch feature. I was going to delete that feature until I saw this video (see below).


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Good video on ignition timing and engine knock.






Another good video on fuel maps.






Great video on water/methanol injection.


----------



## Desertstorm (7 mo ago)

There is only one FRPR map so you can't have two different maps configured at the same time. Personally if I was using two pumps I think I would use two SSR's to drive the pumps. One for each pump, the Haltech SSR appears to be a Kudom or I-autoc item.There are plenty available on E-bay at reasonable prices.
I use a 40A SSR to drive a Bosch 044 with no heatsink on it. The input on an SSR is high impedance so takes very little current.
As for rolling launch it does work but you need to be careful with the EGT's as they climb pretty quickly when using this feature.





KSJ series-Kudom Electronics Technology Co.,Ltd.


Kudom Electronics Technology Co.,Ltd.Provide enterprisesKSJ series,KSJ seriesPrice,KSJ seriesParametersRelated Information.



www.kudom-elec.com


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Desertstorm said:


> There is only one FRPR map so you can't have two different maps configured at the same time. Personally if I was using two pumps I think I would use two SSR's to drive the pumps. One for each pump, the Haltech SSR appears to be a Kudom or I-autoc item.There are plenty available on E-bay at reasonable prices.
> I use a 40A SSR to drive a Bosch 044 with no heatsink on it. The input on an SSR is high impedance so takes very little current.
> As for rolling launch it does work but you need to be careful with the EGT's as they climb pretty quickly when using this feature.
> 
> ...


Thanks for your expert reply! I did purchase two (2) 20 Amp Pump drivers one for each fuel pump. Those do have small heat sinks so should be able to run continuously without issue. One FRPR map should be sufficient to control two pumps either parallel or in sequence. In sequence, I would wire the main pump to a 12V relay and run continuously as normal without any input from the FRPR map . The second pump would ramp up on demand based on the FRPR map. In parallel, both pumps would receive the same input from the FRPR map and ramp up on demand. I prefer the parallel method but the pumps might not be able to respond to a low duty cycle from the FRPR map. Not sure. I will have to do some testing to set it up properly but either method would work for my needs.


----------



## BoostedHatchback (Jun 21, 2020)

mainstayinc said:


> Thanks for your expert reply! I did purchase two (2) 20 Amp Pump drivers one for each fuel pump. Those do have small heat sinks so should be able to run continuously without issue. One FRPR map should be sufficient to control two pumps either parallel or in sequence. In sequence, I would wire the main pump to a 12V relay and run continuously as normal without any input from the FRPR map . The second pump would ramp up on demand based on the FRPR map. In parallel, both pumps would receive the same input from the FRPR map and ramp up on demand. I prefer the parallel method but the pumps might not be able to respond to a low duty cycle from the FRPR map. Not sure. I will have to do some testing to set it up properly but either method would work for my needs.
> 
> View attachment 199306


Thank you for posting such in-depth explinations of your build. I'm like a sponge soaking up all this info. I can't wait to see it all come together in the end. Cheers to you sir🍺


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

BoostedHatchback said:


> Thank you for posting such in-depth explinations of your build. I'm like a sponge soaking up all this info. I can't wait to see it all come together in the end. Cheers to you sir🍺


 🍺 🍺

Also, this is a good place to document some of the details about the build that I might otherwise forget. Busy life around here.


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

mainstayinc said:


> Thanks for your expert reply! I did purchase two (2) 20 Amp Pump drivers one for each fuel pump. Those do have small heat sinks so should be able to run continuously without issue. One FRPR map should be sufficient to control two pumps either parallel or in sequence. In sequence, I would wire the main pump to a 12V relay and run continuously as normal without any input from the FRPR map . The second pump would ramp up on demand based on the FRPR map. In parallel, both pumps would receive the same input from the FRPR map and ramp up on demand. I prefer the parallel method but the pumps might not be able to respond to a low duty cycle from the FRPR map. Not sure. I will have to do some testing to set it up properly but either method would work for my needs.
> 
> View attachment 199306


I have a few of these in a box, dead, cos they're unreliable. From customer cars, not mine. I've been on the same weird walboro 525 for 8 or 9 years now. 

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Vegeta Gti said:


> I have a few of these in a box, dead, cos they're unreliable. From customer cars, not mine. I've been on the same weird walboro 525 for 8 or 9 years now.
> 
> Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk


I guess I'll be putting the Deatschwerks fuel pumps to the test. Well, if I am able to set up the pumps like I described above, they should last longer than if they were constantly running at 12V - 14V. We'll see. I have a twin Aeromotive 340 pump setup in my MK4 daily driver and those have been bullet proof for me. Super quiet too.

EDIT: I'll make sure to program failsafe's into Ignitron ECU in case I lose fuel pressure due to a faulty pump. But it's not likely I would lose both pumps at the same time. Having two pumps adds redundancy.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

I will be installing a W/M injection system to supplement my front mount air-to-air intercooler. I chose a vertical intercooler measuring 27" long by 6" tall by 3" deep (see mock-up below). This will be less restrictive due to larger cross-sectional area through the intercooler (27" x 3" = 81" ^2 versus horizontal intercooler 6" x 3" = 18" ^2; 81/18 =4.5 or 450% larger); and a shorter, slower path through the intercooler. The intercooler will be situated behind the bumper which will block air flow to some extent. I plan to cut out the bottom portion of the bumper in order to direct air in front of the intercooler. However, I want to make reliable, big power and I am not sure how consistent this arrangement will be. So, I will have to depend of a properly tuned W/M injection system to provide supplemental cooling.










I will be installing a pumpless W/M injection system that uses compressed CO2 or N2O to provide line pressure. Typically, a good W/M injection pump can provide up to 250 psi of pressure. Whereas compressed CO2 or N2O gas can provide over 1000 psi. Higher pressure results in smaller droplet size and larger droplet surface area which results in better more instantaneous cooling. Of course, I will have to scale down my injector size to compensate for the higher pressure (about 2 to 2.5 times less flow per injector).

Some of you may recall that I hydro-locked my MK4 daily driver a couple of years ago messing around with CO2 and fuel injection. LOL that was an expensive mistake! I am not sure what happened but I think I had a faulty speed signal wire connected to my NOS Launcher controller (I used a clamp-on style connector attached to a fuel injection wire. Not very reliable). That is why I want to use the Ignitron ECU to handle my W/M injection system instead of an auxiliary controller. All the sensor data such as engine speed, MAP etc. is read directly by the ECU which can then be used in a 3D PWM injection map (based on speed density etc.). IMO that will be much more reliable.

The other problem with W/M injection is that it will actually decrease power unless you compensate for the additional fuel (i.e.: you must lean out your primary fuel injection) and increase timing a few degrees to take advantage of methanol's higher octane rating. That along with the cooling effect of W/M injection should give a nice boost to engine performance. I think there is a lot of untapped potential for the Ignitron ECU to control such things as W/M injection. Most people who are using the Ignitron ECU are using off-the-shelf solutions like Snow Performance etc. to control W/M injection. These are only loosely integrated into the Ignitron ECU.

So, how do I lean out my primary fuel injection in the Ignitron ECU when the W/M injection system is activated? Well, you can setup staged injection by specifying 8 injection channels in the ECU Setup screen.










That creates a "Staged Injection" screen in the "Injection" group.










If you change the option from "Automatic" to "Predefined", a "Pulse Width (secondary)" screen will appear under the "Injection" group. There, you can create a 3D injector pulse width map (RPM vs. MAP = speed density) to control a high-speed solenoid like the Wizard of Nos fuel solenoid or even a W/M injection pump.










However, this map must be in milliseconds (ms) instead of duty cycle. So, you need to calculate injection timing in ms based on the desired duty cycle of your fuel solenoid. To do this, I first created a speed density map in Microsoft Excel (RPM x MAP). I then chose a maximum RPM and MAP point which represents my maximum duty cycle of 85%. For my setup, I chose 7200 RPMs and 300 kPa.










From there, I then calculated 85% duty cycle at my target max RPM x MAP point.










Then I calculated my engine speed in ms at 7200 RPMs. So, at 7200 RPMs, the engine takes 16.66667 ms to complete 4 strokes or 2 rotations of the crankshaft. Since I will be using single-port injection, I will only be using one of the four (4) additional injector wires to trigger my solenoid driver. There will be only one injection event per 4 stroke cycle (two rotations of the crankshaft). If I were to use a direct port W/M injection system, then each of the four wires would trigger a separate solenoid and your base timing would be 4.16667 ms per stroke at 7200 RPMs. In that case, there would be 4 injection events per 4 stroke cycle.










Then I multiplied duty cycle by the base engine speed at 7200 RPMs to get the pulse width of my W/M injector. I zeroed out anything below 3600 RPMs and below 160 kPa. So, the secondary injection should start at 3600 RPMs and 160 kPa or about 9 psi.










I am assuming the Ignitron ECU will automatically adjust primary fuel injection based on the pulse width in the predefined secondary injection screen and the injector size selected in the "Setup" screen in the "Injection" group. Obviously, I will have to adjust that number since I will be using only 1 out of the 4 injectors and I will be using a much higher fuel pressure for my W/M injection system. I will start out small so that only a little fuel is cut from the primary injection and then read the lambda (when the system is activated) and adjust form there.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

So, how do I increase timing in the Ignitron ECU when the W/M injection system is activated? One solution is to modify the "Advance" screen in the "Ignition" group. Below, I increased timing by 3 degrees starting at 3600 RPMs and 160 kPa. That map can be saved and written into the ECU when I plan to activate the W/M injection system. Then, a standard map without advanced timing can be loaded and written to the ECU when no W/M injection is used. I am not sure if there is an easy way to switch between maps. Of course, I will have to determine the best timing (which creates the most power) and modify the map accordingly.










So, you can see that there is a lot of potential in the Ignitron ECU to control such things as W/M injection. I am new to Ignitron and am not sure if I am going down the right road here. But these are some ideas I had to set up a properly tuned W/M injection system. One that compensates for fuel and ignition.

EDIT: The Wizard of Nos fuel solenoids can operate up to 50 Hz or 20 ms. That is not fast enough for a single solenoid to open and close above 6000 RPMs. However, I can easily adapt the above setup to work with a W/M pump if necessary. Snow Performance does sell a 300 psi UHO (Ultra High Output) methanol pump that can be used in this application and will provide better atomization as compared to a regular fuel pump. In that case I would set my maximum duty cycle at 100% at the target RPM/MAP point so that the pump is fully on at that point.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

I am thinking about running the MK1 on pure Methanol instead of E85. I have the injectors (ID 2000's) and twin fuel pump to run methanol at 2.5+ bar boost. But... I don't want to pay $10 per gallon or whatever VP racing fuel charges these days for M1. I made a call to Kelly Racing Fuels located just north of me. Spoke with Richard a very nice guy. He delivers down to Warminster, PA and I am on his return route going North on 309. He said he can deliver AA grade methanol (99%+ purity) race fuel for $3.95 per gallon. Free delivery with his fuel truck into my 55 gallon drums. Considering that the price of gas is currently $5.00+ per gallon, this is looking like a nice option. Yes, you burn a lot more methanol than gasoline at the correct AFR, but I am not going to take the MK1 on long road trips.


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

time to build a big ass fuel cabinet, a good pump, proper fire extinguishers and get 4 drums, set yourself up.


----------



## Brake Weight (Jul 27, 2006)

How far are you from the oil fields there? You should be able to pick one of these 150 gallon totes fairly cheap.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Vegeta Gti said:


> time to build a big ass fuel cabinet, a good pump, proper fire extinguishers and get 4 drums, set yourself up.


Yes. I have at least three (3) good 55 gallon steel drums that are currently holding E85 but the fuel has been sitting for a while. I should probably not use. The guy from Kelly Racing Fuels plans to be in my area next Monday, so I have a couple of days to drain and clean at least one drum for the Methanol. As far as fuel pumps, the two Deatschwerks 340's should be able to handle the flow but I know you might disagree with the choice of pump/fueling strategy.

I stopped by Bill's shop yesterday and spent two (2) hours discussing details. I brought over some parts that have been sitting around for several years that are now finally going to be installed. The first one is the custom speedometer cable/sensor that I parted together for this project. Problem is that I want to use a cable-driven MK2 cluster but need a digital speedometer signal for the Ignitron ECU. My solution was to find a pass-through style electronic sensor that allows you to use the cable for the cluster. Here is the result:

My 1984 Rabbit GTI build thread: Haldex + 2.1L +...










Bill screwed the sensor into the O2C transmission housing and, to my surprise, it fit perfectly! He confirmed that the gear end of the sensor was seated properly in the transmission by turning the axle hub. Indeed, the sensor was also turning.

We also checked clearance for my twin EGT sensors I bought from Reveltronics. I bought the fast-type version with 3mm diameter inconel probe. Sensors easily cleared the fire wall and had no interference with any other exhaust parts.

Thermocouple Probe K-type for EGT [PRO]










We also did an initial test fit of the Ignitron ECU in the MK1 rain tray. Bill suggested we fit it on the driver's side and mount it on some kind of bracket to keep it from contact with water. That, of course, will be plugged into my Eurowise rebuild harness which will arrive in a few days. Here's a short video they sent me:









Eurowise Engine Harness







www.bitchute.com





We also talked about location and type of oil cooler to use. You may remember that I wanted to use an OEM-style (upgraded) water-to-oil oil cooler in the stock location. However, there were clearance issues with that so I had to buy a remote oil cooler with thermostat. That will allow me to locate the oil cooler anywhere in the engine bay or wherever. The Mocal air-to-oil oil coolers are nice but there are a couple of problems. First, the MK1 doesn't have much space left in the front to accommodate an additional heat exchanger other than my vertical intercooler and radiator. Second, I have doubts about how consistent an air-to-oil heat exchanger will perform. So, I decided to stick with a water-to-oil type heat exchanger and use and 8 in. x 3 in. x 2 in. generic Stainless Steel Copper Brazed Heat Exchanger. That should allow the oil to heat up pretty quick on start up and also consistently get the heat out of the oil while running the car.

More perhaps later...


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Brake Weight said:


> How far are you from the oil fields there? You should be able to pick one of these 150 gallon totes fairly cheap.


Yes, I got a couple of those for rain catchment but never thought about using those for Methanol. Last night I was doing research on Methanol compatibility with various materials because I have to change my fuel tank strategy. Currently using aluminum but either have to anodize the tank or replace with stainless steel or plastic. Apparently, polypropylene plastic does not react or degrade with methanol. So, as long as the IBC tote is made from polypropylene plastic, it should be good.

Also, my friend Matt purchased some used distilling equipment from the local brewery and wants to make his own methanol. It will be interesting to see how that project develops.


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

No no, a pump for the drums.

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

Don't use those for methanol. Not safe. Not their intended purpose. 



Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Vegeta Gti said:


> Don't use those for methanol. Not safe. Not their intended purpose.
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk


 Oh, ok. Thanks.


----------



## ticketed2much (Feb 18, 2012)

That seems like a really good idea. E85 is available but can be a bit of a pita to get and I paid $4+ per gallon the other day👍🏻


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

Yeah E85 is $3.80/gl here


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

ticketed2much said:


> That seems like a really good idea. E85 is available but can be a bit of a pita to get and I paid $4+ per gallon the other day👍🏻


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

My Eurowise Plug-and-Play engine harness arrived today. I was originally going to re-use the harness from the donor Audi TT 225 but Bill convinced me to get a new harness. I'm glad I took his advice. The new harness is quite nice.










I am thinking about relocating the radiator to the rear of the car to make more room my intercooler. The intercooler fits nicely in the front but doesn't leave a lot of room for a radiator. I could squeeze a radiator in there but I want to have good air flow around the intercooler. The video below got me thinking about air flow around the intercooler. He added a hood scoop above his intercooler thinking that would improve air flow. However, it had the opposite effect and air flowed back out of the hood scoop. The main take away from the video is to get a good pressure differential between the front and back of the intercooler. That's why I am considering relocating the radiator to the back of the car inside the cabin and blowing out the bottom of the chassis. Of course, I would have to crack my windows open to allow air flow in the cabin. The other take away from the video is to add a plate to the bottom of the engine bay to keep air flowing in the right direction.






Here are some of the advantages of going to the trouble of relocating your radiator to the rear of the car:

Makes space for a larger intercooler.
Better air flow around intercooler.
Removes heat from the engine compartment.
Can install a larger more efficient radiator.
Moves weight to the back of the car. Better for rear traction and handling.
More efficient cooling due to increased coolant volume.
Protects coolant system from damage due to front-end collision.

I want this to be as simple as possible and don't plan to add any ducting to get fresh air directly to the front of the radiator. Instead, the radiator will sit flat somewhere inside the cabin in the back of the car facing downward through a rectangular hole in the chassis. Radiator fans would do most of the work but there might be some negative pressure underneath the chassis at speed that will draw air through the radiator (not counting on that, though). Bill already cut a big hole in the back for the Haldex (see below). Adding a radiator to the back might be a nice way of plugging that big hole. I could also locate it where the rear seat use to be since there is no gas tank below the seat as my fuel cell is all the way at the very back of the car behind the Haldex.










Most rear radiator installations place the radiator underneath the chassis behind the rear axle. Problem is that debris can get stuck between the top of the radiator and the bottom of the chassis and has to be periodically cleaned. Installing the radiator inside the chassis blowing through a cutout to outside should provide trouble-free operation.

Apparently, relocating a radiator to the rear is not that technically difficult (see video below). You would have to run a -20 AN nylon braided hose to and from the back and also run a smaller overflow hose from the radiator to the coolant reservoir. That seems doable to me. I can either run the -20 AN lines through the MK1 frame rails or though a bulkhead fittings in the firewall. Either way would protect the coolant hoses from outside damage.






I can also possibly remove my heating system (heater core, tubing etc.) and possibly heat the cabin in the winter by reversing one of the two coolant fans. Sounds pretty far fetched but it might work. That would also remove a few more pounds from the front of the car and I wouldn't have to worry about replacing the heater core every couple of years when that fails. The only downside I can see is having the coolant system cavitate for some reason which would create hot spots in the engine. But I don't see why rear mounting a radiator would be any more prone to cavitation than a standard front mount installation.

Anyone ever try this? What are the arguments against a rear mount radiator? Stupid idea or do you think I should go for it?

EDIT: Video added below.






EDIT: Another video added below.


----------



## vdubguy97 (Sep 13, 2003)

looking forward to seeing the outcome of the rear mounted radiator

Do you have a goal/eta when this beast will be on the road?


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

vdubguy97 said:


> looking forward to seeing the outcome of the rear mounted radiator
> 
> Do you have a goal/eta when this beast will be on the road?


A lot depends on how much time Bill can put into the project and how much I bother him about it. He has other customer projects and custom fabricates VR6 parts. When I was at his shop last week he had like 10 or 15 customer engines in his shop which he rebuilds. Just as an example, he rebuilds engines for Bruce's twin VR6 turbo (see below)






I plan to push this project forward this year and get as far as I can. Most of the hard work is already done (Haldex install, engine, drivetrain, suspension). Just have to run engine wiring and intercooler piping, coolant system, finish fuel system etc. and then tune.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

I decided I want to re-purpose the unused LED lights in the MK2 16V CE1 instrument cluster as a shift light bar. I upgraded to this cluster from the MK1 because the MK2 cluster has an 8000 RPM redline and 160 MPH speedo. That will work better for my needs. When I had my 1991 Wolfsburg MK2 Jetta, I always wanted to do something with those unused LED blanks in the instrument cluster. I think a shift bar in the MK1 will be perfect.

I will order some 5mm orange LED light emitting diodes and will have to solder 400 to 500 ohm resistors. I will use the bottom five (5) unused LED blanks for the shift light.










The bottom five (5) LED's are connected to pins: 17, 19, 20, 27 and 28 on the connector in the back of the instrument cluster (see diagram below). I might also re-purpose the top, center blank for as a handbrake warning light or CEL (check engine light) or something else.










This video was very helpful to disassemble the MK2 cluster and access the LEDs (see below). It's actually not that hard.






The Ignitron ECU has a shift light feature under the "Extras" group. You can pulse, blink or continuously light up the shift bar. It can also do gear-based indication and also has vehicle speed windows.










I guess I can also get a CAN-based digital dash that is driven by the Ignitron ECU at some future date. But I tend to be old-school so we'll see.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Back to oil coolers. My 8" x 3" x 2" heat exchanger arrived today which I will use as an oil cooler. It is a 20-plate stainless steel exchanger with copper brazing and features 1/2" NPT female ports. Looks and feels quite heavy duty unlike the aluminum OEM unit which is aluminum with aluminum brazing. I got four (4) 1/2" NPT male to -10 AN male adapters which will mate (via braided hose) to my remote oil thermostat mounted on the engine block which also uses -10 AN fittings. The reason I need a remote oil cooler is that the factory oil cooler with factory filter does not clear the front of the engine compartment. As I explained before, I like the factory-style water-to-oil oil cooler because it is reliable and consistent. The Mocal units are nice but I am not so sure about air-to-oil cooling consistency. Here's a quick photo of the oil cooler with one of the NPT-AN adapters fitted. I will probably try to locate it on the frame rail or fire wall. Not sure. I will let Bill decide.










Also, I stopped by Ross-Tech today in Landsdale, PA to pick up an upgraded VCDS cable for my wife's Audi Q7. Saved $20 in shipping since they are located only 20 minutes from my house.


----------



## vdubguy97 (Sep 13, 2003)

Man that Green mk3 is f%cking nasty..

I know it’s always hard to put a timeline on projects, just excited too see this beast all finished up!


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

vdubguy97 said:


> Man that Green mk3 is f%cking nasty..
> 
> I know it’s always hard to put a timeline on projects, just excited too see this beast all finished up!


I can't wait either. The only upside of my slow timeline is that is gives me time to research and come up with solutions to specific problems with this swap. But... I'd rather have it done now so I can start driving and tuning.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Got a special delivery today. Methanol delivered to my place for $3.95/gallon. Got 110 gallons (2x 55 gallon drums). Better finish this project soon before the Methanol gets old.


----------



## sdezego (Apr 23, 2004)

Pretty cool on that pass through sensor. Another option would have been to get the cluster with MFA/Cruise as this has a VSS sensor on the back of the cluster where the cable drive connects. Edit: and maybe your cluster shown has it?

similarly, the 1990 Corrado (which you prob know) was "really" a Mk2 in a sense. Cable driven cluster with Cruise/MFA among all of the other Mk2 stuff like suspension and such.

My insanity with clusters -> The unofficial Cluster Swap thread

^ obviously not 1:1 but very relevant. 

From link above on first page. Used to Drive digital Speedo signal temporarily


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

Why use a cable vss on a trans that doesn't have one?? The cluster would be cool to use, but again, why not use something more fitting and modern for this car?

The ECU will utilize the ABS(can wire vss direct), vss on the trans and the rear wheel speed sensors as well as the front wheel speed sensors. Speed can be then transferred via canbuss or those signals. This week give a ton of options for antilag, rolling AL, flat soft, rev matching, traction control, etc. 

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

sdezego said:


> Pretty cool on that pass through sensor. Another option would have been to get the cluster with MFA/Cruise as this has a VSS sensor on the back of the cluster where the cable drive connects. Edit: and maybe your cluster shown has it?
> 
> similarly, the 1990 Corrado (which you prob know) was "really" a Mk2 in a sense. Cable driven cluster with Cruise/MFA among all of the other Mk2 stuff like suspension and such.
> 
> ...


Thanks for the info. Someone else mentioned that the back of the MK2 CE1 16V cluster might already have a speed sensor. I have to do further research to find that out. It's hard to find accurate info. on some of these older parts. I found the MK2 CE1 cluster pinout on this site:

A2Resource

And thanks for the link. I'll have to check that out. I hope I don't have too much of a headache (aka insanity) swapping in an MK2 cluster into an Mk1 chassis. The MK2 cluster is a lot nicer IMO and more functional.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Vegeta Gti said:


> Why use a cable vss on a trans that doesn't have one?? The cluster would be cool to use, but again, why not use something more fitting and modern for this car?
> 
> The ECU will utilize the ABS(can wire vss direct), vss on the trans and the rear wheel speed sensors as well as the front wheel speed sensors. Speed can be then transferred via canbuss or those signals. This week give a ton of options for antilag, rolling AL, flat soft, rev matching, traction control, etc.
> 
> Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk



I want to keep the car somewhat original looking and combine some modern features. Also, I don't want traction control or ABS since that requires more parts, sensors and wiring harness. Most of the features in the "Extras" group in Ignitron require a VSS signal in one form or another such as anti-lag, rolling anti-lag, rev. matching, gear detection, shift cut etc. If I decide to upgrade from my not-so-smart ("dumb") Haldex setup which just uses the powertrack insert (for now) to a "smarter" setup, then I will have to add wheel speed sensors etc. But want to avoid that for now. I will only use CAN bus for a digital dash (output) if I decide to upgrade that in the future. Traction control will be managed by "boost-by-gear" feature. I don't want the ECU to intervene in my driving at all other than Limp mode to protect engine. In general I don't like "smart" devices making decisions for me. That's why I never owned a "smart" phone and do all my navigation on the road by memory and common sense. My original 1991 MK2 Wolfsburg Jetta didn't even have cup holders because Germans at that time at least believed that cars were for driving and not much else. Also, I don't listen to the radio when I drive. Most of the time I am trying to get ahead of slower traffic and don't want to be distracted. I know other parts of the country are different (i.e: Texas) and are more wide open so, perhaps, driving is different. Radio in the MK1 street killer will be replaced with an arming panel. I don't like power windows. I can't tell you how many times I had to replace a power window mechanism in my wife's former Audi A4 Avante 1.8T turbo (like three times). Her current Audi Q7 3.6L driver's side window switches are worn out and needs replacement. I don't have time for that nonsense. Old school roll up windows FTW.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

sdezego said:


> Pretty cool on that pass through sensor. Another option would have been to get the cluster with MFA/Cruise as this has a VSS sensor on the back of the cluster where the cable drive connects. Edit: and maybe your cluster shown has it?
> 
> similarly, the 1990 Corrado (which you prob know) was "really" a Mk2 in a sense. Cable driven cluster with Cruise/MFA among all of the other Mk2 stuff like suspension and such.
> 
> ...


I'm reading through the first couple of paragraphs in your cluster swap post. That is a gold mine of good information. Thanks for taking the time to put together. That will definitely advance my project forward.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Posting these two (2) videos as reference for boost control. Trying to understand the different WG setups and vaccum/boost lines as well as N75 function and control. Ignitron uses PID control of N75 for boost control. Just like my MK4 setup, I don't want the WG to crack partially open at any time before requested boost level is reached if possible. On MK4 I use a MBC cranked all the way shut and boost comes on very quickly. However, I essentially have no boost control other than modulating the throttle. Ignitron can take full electronic control of N75 boost solenoid but I will use a 4 or 5 port. I need to understand and tune the solenoid for my needs. I have twin external wastegates on my divided exhaust manifold. So, over-boost situation not likely if boost control is setup correctly. I plan to use both top and bottom port for WG control. I want the WG to be slammed shut by supplying boost pressure to the top of the external WG until target boost pressure. Then will supply the bottom port with pressure and relieve the top port. There are a couple of different ways to hook up solenoid and route vaccum/boost lines.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

> Hello!
> 
> Yes are finishing up a batch this week and will be able to ship by the end of the week.
> 
> ...


Lower control arms from Just Engineering (Canada) expected to finally ship by the end of the week. Very exciting!


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Just ordered a MAC 4 way 2 position solenoid to control wastegates. Ordered from Amazon but here is a better description:

FULL-RACE 4 PORT MAC BOOST CONTROL SOLENOID










"Our 4-port boost control solenoid valve is designed to target a clearly defined boost curve and improve boost responses, and in some cases with a soft WG spring—quicker spool. The 4-port design works equally well in low boost applications and high boost. This differs from a traditional 3-port BCSV because it precisely directs pressure to the open and close ports of your wastegate diaphragm. This allows much lower wastegate spring pressure for better low gear boost control and perfect high gear, high boost control. "

I will add a flow control valve on the exhaust port of the solenoid so I can fine tune the reactivity of the valve. 4 port solenoid valves tend to be very reactive.


----------



## gli87jetta (Nov 26, 2001)

Wow, cool thread. Sub'd


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

My car has lived in the urban sprawls of dc/nova, Oahu and the country and rural of both. The sense cities and urban landscape of socal, the pnw country side, Austin greater area and more the rural of Texas. These days, it doesn't see the road much, but one thing that had stated the same.. is lots of track time. It was my daily for 10 years of the 14 since the swap. So I'm def understanding your point. It'll be cool to see the constant evolution over time. 

After 14 years of a very stripped down, raw setup... I'm personally going to utilize tech a bit. So much available, and I'm excited to use all the things I've learned and will learn on it. 

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

gli87jetta said:


> Wow, cool thread. Sub'd


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Vegeta Gti said:


> My car has lived in the urban sprawls of dc/nova, Oahu and the country and rural of both. The sense cities and urban landscape of socal, the pnw country side, Austin greater area and more the rural of Texas. These days, it doesn't see the road much, but one thing that had stated the same.. is lots of track time. It was my daily for 10 years of the 14 since the swap. So I'm def understanding your point. It'll be cool to see the constant evolution over time.
> 
> After 14 years of a very stripped down, raw setup... I'm personally going to utilize tech a bit. So much available, and I'm excited to use all the things I've learned and will learn on it.
> 
> Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk


Yes, there is a lot of good technology available. The Ignitron ECU opens up a lot of possibilities for my setup. Thanks for steering me in that direction. You feedback has shaped this project quite a bit.


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

🖤🖤🖤🥃


----------



## sdezego (Apr 23, 2004)

Vegeta Gti said:


> Why use a cable vss on a trans that doesn't have one?? The cluster would be cool to use, but again, why not use something more fitting and modern for this car?
> 
> The ECU will utilize the ABS(can wire vss direct), vss on the trans and the rear wheel speed sensors as well as the front wheel speed sensors. Speed can be then transferred via canbuss or those signals. This week give a ton of options for antilag, rolling AL, flat soft, rev matching, traction control, etc.
> 
> Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk


I see you were posting from you phone so it may just be that, but there are a few things you posted that are confusing. Not arguing, just clarifying 

For reference, 02a was always a cable driven trans by design. in 1991 VW fitted a screw on (where the cable went) VSS sender to digital cluster. I'm sure you know that but clarifying for others. Some components read that directly, where some went through the cluster to clean up the Hall Signal via circuitry to match RPM etc. ABS, etc. No reason specificly to convert the cluster unless you are looking to really take output from ECu via CAN for something like Racepack, but if you are trying to keep nostalgia, there are lots of options. Probably most people in this forum might not care, but this is not the run of the mill project  Also, 1991+ Digital cluster are somewhat easily programmable. Mileage, RPM scaling, etc. Just an advantage for someone trying to keep the look. Mechanical Cluster can drive a Hall Square wave signal to various things including Standalone (ignitron or other) as shown. Just depends on how nutty the owner is and what they want


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

sdezego said:


> I see you were posting from you phone so it may just be that, but there are a few things you posted that are confusing. Not arguing, just clarifying
> 
> For reference, 02a was always a cable driven trans by design. in 1991 VW fitted a screw on (where the cable went) VSS sender to digital cluster. I'm sure you know that but clarifying for others. Some components read that directly, where some went through the cluster to clean up the Hall Signal via circuitry to match RPM etc. ABS, etc. No reason specificly to convert the cluster unless you are looking to really take output from ECu via CAN for something like Racepack, but if you are trying to keep nostalgia, there are lots of options. Probably most people in this forum might not care, but this is not the run of the mill project  Also, 1991+ Digital cluster are somewhat easily programmable. Mileage, RPM scaling, etc. Just an advantage for someone trying to keep the look. Mechanical Cluster can drive a Hall Square wave signal to various things including Standalone (ignitron or other) as shown. Just depends on how nutty the owner is and what they want


^^Thanks for clarifying!


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

I need to clarify. 

He isn't using an 02A. I'm in here discussing his epic build. 

02M/02Q don't have cable vss. So unless John isn't going AWD, I must've missed something(which he clarified) That was the basis of my comment, John's usage and utilization of the ecu and a modern cluster.

020/02A do and you can get a conversion for 02J of you need/want. I'm very aware of what trans came with cable vss systems to the cluster. 

****, some vr6 vanagons had a cable vss from the factory, but you can't use them in a mk1/2 swap because it's too short. If you look really hard even some non US mk3 came with cable vss 02A. Some cable with a sensor. 

I ran cable vss for years myself with my 02j in my mk1. I've tried it with a digifiz, too a data pal that sent didn't info to a tablet, played with a few things to get some TC elements to work like you've mentioned. But they just all fall drastically short of having things go to the ecu in some form residual CAN. Hence why I was questioning. So much going on, so much that is beyond the platform, why not just get the most amount of data and usage from the setup vs cutting a few fingers off with a 40 year old cluster that would make you add more items and wiring to compensate. John said it's what he wanted, so that's what he'll do. Lol I'll just be my prickly ol self, and wait for the damn thing to slay some tires.



Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Vegeta Gti said:


> I need to clarify.
> 
> He isn't using an 02A. I'm in here discussing his epic build.
> 
> ...


To be clear, the transmission is an O2C (O2A/O2J family) five (5) speed from a B3 Passat G60 Syncro (Canada only). It is converted to a four (4) speed due to a fith gear cuff for reinforcement. It has a race gearset from AP Tuning (G-Force Transmission) and is quite stout. It uses a transfer case from a Europe only Skoda Octavia. That links via a front section of driveshaft from the B3 Passat G60 Syncro to a rear section of driveshaft from the donor Audi TT 225 Quattro. Both the front transmission and rear Haldex have a Peloquin differential installed. The Haldex unit is housed inside a syncro beam from the B3 Passat G60 and has semi-trailing arms. The O2A/O2C/O2J family of transmissions have a gear-based speedo pickup in the transmission which originally drove a cable speedometer. Later, the cable was dropped and a electronic sensor was attached to the gear pickup for the MK4 platform.

The choice of gauge cluster is subjective and just outputs information to the driver. I always like the MK2-style gauge cluster because it's clean and simple. It does has some limits like a single LED indicator for both right and left turn signal but that's what makes it quite German. The Ignitron ECU will handle all of the important stuff for engine management and all the extras. I spend a lot of time in front of a computer screen all day and it's nice to have the tactile experience of an analog gauge cluster. However, that doesn't mean that at some point in the future I will add on a CAN-based digital cluster if that helps operating the car.

I like electronics and even am in the process of creating my own Haldex controller (see previous pages). But that is on the back burner for now. Just ordered some meat chickens for the backyard and am quite busy building chicken tractors and ramping up the homestead.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

Back to VVT. As some of you might remember, I tried and failed to change the stock centerlines on my Catcams 3660 cams so that I can use VVT to make power. I originally planned to change the stock centerlines from 108/110 (Exhaust/Intake) to 120/120. Adding the additional 22 degrees between the intake and exhaust camshafts would have allowed me to run VVT to make stock-like torque but also make 3658-like top end power. Here is a brief discussion about the issues we were having. Here is the result I was looking for:










That always bothered me because I know I was leaving some top end HP on the table. After reviewing this issue, I think I can still use VVT to make power by starting with the stock centerlines then retarding both the intake and exhaust camshaft by 10 crankshaft degrees using my PPT adjustable camshaft gear. That will allow me to engage the VVT for low-end torque and then disengage the VVT to free up top end HP. The result will look like this (see below). The new centerlines with 10 degrees of crankshaft retardation (LOL) will be 98/120. The only difference between this setup and the previous is that the exhaust valves will close later (closer to TDC). However, it still looks like this new setup will be within acceptable limits where the exhaust valves will not interfere with the piston at TDC.










Here is a quick overlay of this new setup and the Catcams 3658 [BLUE] (see below). Notice how the smaller 3660 intake cam [RED/BLACK] on the right side of TDC nicely bridges the 3658's larger intake camshaft with VVT turned on and off. Also notice how the smaller 3660 exhaust cam opens later (closer to TDC) but closes about the same as the larger 3658's.










However, I am not sure if the "degrees" on the PPT adjustable camshaft gear refer to CRANKSHAFT degrees or CAMSHAFT degrees (see below). Maybe someone can tell me so I know how to adjust the camshaft gear.


----------



## sdezego (Apr 23, 2004)

mainstayinc said:


> ...
> However, I am not sure if the "degrees" on the PPT adjustable camshaft gear refer to CRANKSHAFT degrees or CAMSHAFT degrees (see below). Maybe someone can tell me so I know how to adjust the camshaft gear.
> ...


Yes, they refer to Cam * Typically why you only see +/- Max of 6-7*, because ~7* is one tooth (360/52T).

HTH


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

sdezego said:


> Yes, they refer to Cam * Typically why you only see +/- Max of 6-7*, because ~7* is one tooth (360/52T).
> 
> HTH


 thanks!


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

I stopped by Bill's shop last Friday to drop off some items including: tubular lower control arms, new unfinished fuel cell (30 in. L x 12 in W x 9 in. D) and a few other items. He is going to have the fuel cell anodized along with a 10 lb. aluminum bottle to get those ready for Methanol. I talked about the idea of mounting the radiator in the rear of the car and the advantages. He seemed to like the idea and mentioned he built a rear engine Corrado for a customer with the radiator in the front. Similar application but in reverse. He said the customer had some flow problems between the front and rear which were solved with the addition of an electrical coolant pump. Customer was also using -12 AN fitting which were probably restricting flow.

I took some measurement of the rear deck section of the MK1 but Bill advised me not to buy the radiator yet. However, earlier this week, I broke down and bought the following radiator from Champion Cooling Systems (RS25-16):

1 ROW DRAG RACING RADIATOR 25 X 16 OVERALL DUAL PASS










It measures 25 in. x 16 in. overall with a core thickness of 21.5 in. x 14.5 in. x 1.5 in. Compare that to the original radiator core on the MK1 Rabbit GTI which measures 22 in. x 12.5 in. x 1.25 in. It has about 36% more volume as compared to the old one. It is a dual pass radiator and features two (2) Spal 10 in. fans with a shroud and -16 AN female inlets/outlets. I tried to calculate radiator size based on some objective criteria such as engine output, etc. However, there are varying guidelines as to how to size a radiator. This link was somewhat helpful:

WHAT SIZE RADIATOR DO I NEED FOR MY CAR?

I was originally going to mount the radiator with the fans facing up wards which would necessitate reversing the pull fans and making them push fans. However, after reviewing some videos, I learned that a pull fan is 20% more efficient with a shroud than a push fan. I will be running Methanol which burns cooler as compared to petrol. That in addition to the added coolant volume necessary to run a rear mount radiator and 36% larger radiator core will hopefully keep coolant temperatures in check.

Now that the radiator is out of the way, I started thinking about improving the flow around my front-mount vertical intercooler. The following videos were very helpful:











I definitely will be adding ducting to the front side of the intercooler. I will also attempt to add ducting to the rear side of the intercooler but that is more challenging (but made much easier with the relocation of the radiator). The main point of the first video is that the inlet area of the front-side duct should be about 25% to 30 % of the frontal area of the intercooler core. This seems counter-intuitive since you would imagine that you want the largest possible inlet area leading to the intercooler. However, the reason as explained in the first video is that a smaller inlet slows down the inlet air which builds up more static pressure in front of the intercooler. Intercooler efficiency increases with an increase in pressure in front of the intercooler and a decrease in pressure behind the intercooler.

So, I will downsize my planned inlet duct to 4 in. x 27 in. which is about 67% the area of the intercooler (6 in. x 27 in.). Although this is not according to the above parameters, I don't want to give up some potential air flow. Here is a quick diagram (see below). The front scoop will be mounted to the bottom of the front bumper (thick black lines). The light gray area is the proposed air path through the intercooler. The dark gray parts at the bottom of the diagram are the original MK1 Rabbit GTI lower front air dam. Added to the bottom of the air dam is a flat splitter I intend to build. Since the intercooler is situated essentially behind the front bumper, the front scoop will have to direct air upwards behind the bumper. Also, I have no idea if there is even any room behind the intercooler to run ducting out the bottom as shown in the diagram. However, I have some ideas about how to get around some intruding engine parts (oil filter etc).










Another point not mentioned in the first video is that the splitter I intend to build should keep air flowing underneath the chassis. There should be a low pressure area at the exit of the rear scoop as it encounters the fast moving air underneath the splitter. This will hopefully improve intercooler efficiency since it will lower air pressure on the rear side of the intercooler. I plan to stop by Bill's shop this Friday and assess whether I can add front and rear ducting to the intercooler now that the radiator is out of the way. Bill said last week that he should have the tubular lower control arms mounted along with the cross brace ("X" brace) which ties both LCA's together. Should be a pretty cool suspension setup. I will hopefully post some pictures in a few days.

EDIT: There is no way I can exit the scoop out the top of the hood as in the first video due to my SEM intake manifold taking up all the space. Also, I can reduce the inlet area of the scoop and bring it down the the recommended parameters by blocking off a portion of the inlet. This will allow me to test the theories presented in the video.


----------



## ticketed2much (Feb 18, 2012)

So for aero purposes having the IC air exit thru the hood and not under the car would increase downforce. Having it exit under the car would decrease the suction effect of the splitter/flat bottom if you add that. 

From what I’ve seen adding ducting post Intercooler is much less important unless you have a full on race car that’s been tested in a wind tunnel etc.. If you add a hood vent above the SEM you’ll get a lot of the same effect even without ducting. Just my 2 cents👍

Glad to see your back at it


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

ticketed2much said:


> So for aero purposes having the IC air exit thru the hood and not under the car would increase downforce. Having it exit under the car would decrease the suction effect of the splitter/flat bottom if you add that.
> 
> From what I’ve seen adding ducting post Intercooler is much less important unless you have a full on race car that’s been tested in a wind tunnel etc.. If you add a hood vent above the SEM you’ll get a lot of the same effect even without ducting. Just my 2 cents👍
> 
> Glad to see your back at it


Thanks for the timely info! I haven't even begun to think about downforce on this car. I definitely prefer a hood exit to an under-chassis exit but... that SEM manifold takes up so much space. In the videos I posted, post-intercooler ducting is often over-looked and does effect intercooler efficiency. As long as I get a good pressure differential between pre- and post-intercooler, though, I really don't care what final form my intercooler system takes. To do this right I should invest in an air pressure gauge or whatever they were using in the videos above to test my setup.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

I had to return the Champion Cooling Systems radiator (model RS25-16) because the inlet/outlets were only -12 AN. The inside diameter of the -12 AN fitting only measured 5/8 inch or about 15 mm. That is way too small for any kind of coolant flow in my rear-mounted cooling system. Also, the twin coolant fans were unbranded so I am not so sure about air flow through the radiator. Instead, I decided to buy the following universal radiator from Mishimoto:

MISHIMOTO RACE-READY PERFORMANCE ALUMINUM RADIATOR, 29.92" X 15.28" X 2.75"










It is about 5 inches wider than the CCS radiator and has 1 5/8"-12 threaded inlet/outlets which accept the following adapter:

MISHIMOTO RACE-READY RADIATOR FITTING V2, -20AN









I originally planned to use -16 AN fitting which had an ID of about 7/8 inches or about 22 mm. However, I stopped by Bill's shop last Monday and took some measurements of the stock coolant flanges mounted to the engine. Those measured about 28 mm ID. So, I decided to go with -20 AN fittings last minute when I ordered the Mishimoto radiator. Those fittings measure 1 1/8 ID or about 28.6mm ID which is closer to the stock coolant flanges. I will probably have to mount an electric coolant pump to keep things flowing. That will be controlled by Ignitron. Maybe I can trigger the pump when the second coolant fan turns on so it's not in continual use.

Also, I purchased two (2) 11 inch Spal fans. These flow about 1600 CFM each for a total air flow of 3200 CMF through the radiator. I plan on fabricating my own radiator shroud out of aluminum sheet and aluminum C channel. Should be a pretty good setup.

Spal Electric Fans IX-30102800


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

I stopped by a local hydraulics hose shop NYCO in Souderton, PA and talked with one of the owners. I asked him if he could fabricate a -20 AN coolant hose with adapters for my project. After seeing the 1.25 inch hose that goes along with the -20 AN adapter(s), I decided to go back to -16 AN for my rear-mounted coolant system. The 1.25 inch hose looked like it had almost 2 inch outside diameter and would have looked quite out of place in my engine bay.

So... I called Summit Racing and changed my Mishimoto radiator adapters to -16 AN as per my original plan. I will probably use nice braided nylon coolant hose to go along with my coolant system. Also, there are some good electrical coolant pumps on the market. Here is a centrifugal water pump from Davies Craig:

Davies Craig EWP150 Electric Water Pump






I plan to use Ignitron to control my Spal radiator fans and electric water pump. I can run the electric water pump when the fan turns on to help circulate coolant to the radiator and back to the engine. The Ignitron ECU allows you to control the coolant fan(s) with a PWM signal based on ECT, RPM and other parameters. So both the fans and the coolant pump will be finely controlled by a PWM signal for low and high settings. Pretty cool setup IMO.


----------



## mainstayinc (Oct 4, 2006)

I am re-posting this dyno-graph from the following post:

VVT Cam Tensioner & Cat 3658s - Dyno Testing









There are clear gains to be had by using the VVT tensioner to make power. In the above case, the switchover point is at 6200 RPMs using the Catcams 3658 Billet Camshafts. The result is an increase of 60 ft. lbs. of torque at 3850 RPMs and 400 RPMs quicker spool. The 3658's have more valve overlap at TDC as compared to the 3660's in standard form (without the use of VVT). With VVT engaged, valve overlap increases on the 3658's even more. This will increase the amount of exhaust scavenging *off boost* and potentially increase torque (such as in a N.A. engine). However, once the turbo is *on boost*, the increase in valve overlap will cause a loss of power due to the intake charge escaping directly out the exhaust valve.

The gains in torque *on boost* in the above example are probably due to the IVC (intake valve close) event happening closer to BDC with VVT engaged. That is, the intake valve closes at 23 degrees ABDC versus 45 degrees ABDC without VVT engaged. This allows more air to be trapped at lower RPMs since the piston does not travel as far up the compression stroke before the intake valve closes. The later the intake valve closes, the more chance there is of the intake charge being pushed out the intake valve. However, at higher RPMs, a later closing intake valve will trap more air due to the increased inertia of the intake charge up to a certain point.

This point can be determined on a dyno by retarding the intake/exhaust cams using an adjustable camshaft gear until maximum HP is reached. I hope to have similar results as the above example except, perhaps, a slight bump in torque down low due to less valve overlap and a later opening exhaust valve. See the previous page for my planned setup. I should have similar gains up top as the above example because I can control how late my intake valve closes using the adjustable camshaft gear.

I plan to stop by Bill's shop this Tuesday and post an update. Hopefully, he had some time to work on the MK1 and make progress since the last time I met with him. My Mishimoto radiator was shipped out today and is scheduled to arrive on Tuesday. Also, I ordered another heat exchanger with -10 AN fittings to serve as a transmission oil cooler. Actually, the plan is to use the heat exchanger as a transmission oil warmer. The transmission fluid that comes with the G-Force race gearset is extremely thick. I already have this gearset in my MK4 daily driver. During the cooler months, it takes up to 20 minutes of driving for the transmission fluid to warm up and engage smoothly. An oil warmer should cut that time down and make the car more driveable during cooler months.


----------

