# 24v Quest for 550+HP experianced oppinions welcomed!



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

As the title states, i am about to embark on a pretty EPIC journey!, and i would like some oppinions from people who have completed this, befor i spend thousands of dollars! Ill lay out the set-up i have in mind please provide CONSTRUCTIVE critisism. I will start an in-depth build thread once i get some good input.......so here ya go!

*-Short Block-*
-Stock Crank(was told it is stock forged and can handle 800+hp)
-82mm bore/90.3mm stroke/8.5:1 compression JE rods and pistons

*-Cylinder Head-*
-TT 264/260 cams(maybe?)
-Ferrea 2mm long exaust and intake valves
-Ferrea spring and titanium retainer kit
-Polish and port(maybe?)
-C2 Short runner intake

*-Other-*
-Walbro 225LPH inline Fuel pump
-Stage 3 Spec clutch and lightweight flywheel
-Wavetrac LSD
-Exaust(kinda unsure of) thinking no CAT some high-flow maybe custom??

*-Turbo Kit-*
My question for everyone whos used either stage 3 kit, C2 vs CTS turbo kits, whice one will provide a good setup for the goal im looking for?? Should i fork it out and go with the Dual ball bearing Garrett turbo, or is the rottomaster or precision just as good?

and lastly, with everyone whos done these projects what else do i need to look forward to when i jump into this, you know the dumb stuff you didnt see coming, thanks guys! Hope this build can start SOOOON!


----------



## mr.candid (Sep 11, 2008)

I really recommend GT3582RR Ball Bearing- Oil cooled Coolant Cooled. Super reliable


----------



## GTIVRon (Jul 24, 2009)

How much more would a 3.2L head be compared to porting the 2.8L head? I think the 3.2L head would be more efficient, and has bigger valves.. better angle at inlet/outlet...

For exhaust, the bigger the better. 3.5" turbo back if it will fit ha ha.


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

i was thinking 3" but if 3.5" fits then heck yes! lol and as for the 3.2 head i would love to get my hands on one for the build cause your def right, better flow and overall probly cheaper, but i cannot find one for the life of me, and to make matters worse im stuck out in SD there isnt **** for dubs out here


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

that garrett turbo is an added option with the CTS kit if i decide to go the CTS route and not C2 def would like input though from people with experiance with the two


----------



## DannyLo (Aug 2, 2006)

Garret BB turbos are great but I'd save the hassle on working with water lines and go with a Billet Precision 6262 with the newer aircooled center housings. Still ball bearing, billet wheel, but NO WATER, just oil :thumbup: 

Here's a comarision between the 35R and a 6262 with the newer aircooled center. Notice the lack of water inlets/outlets on the 6262:










Out of all the things you have listed _engine-wise_ the only thing that's really necessary to make 500-550 are the pistons and rods. As well as the associated ARP hardware one would use with assembly to make sure all that money doesn't go to waste.

The head work and cams are only going to help you get to your power goals with less boost than a regular 24v turbo. Worth it? That's all up to you; believe me, I'd love to be able to spend the money to make the head breathe and beef up my valve train for 8k revs. However, is it Necessary? Not really.

C2's setup is great for making the power you want. With their hardware and your built motor you have a great setup to make your desired power. Their hardware is top notch in quality. I'm not sure how their new software is now that Jeff isn't around, so I can't really say much about that. 

United Motorsport is where Jeff currently resides, and he's capable of guiding you and proving you with a injector/tune combo to get you to where you want to be power-wise.


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

Appreciate the post Lt Dan :beer: so you think the aircooled would be just as reliable as the water cooled? clearly the aircooled seems like an easier set-up but i would choose reliability over ease of install if thats the case. and as far as the C2 set-up ive been hearing great things about them so i think i found my supplier.


----------



## Back Door Shenanigans (May 21, 2010)

Lieutenant Dan said:


> Out of all the things you have listed _engine-wise_ the only thing that's really necessary to make 500-550 are the pistons and rods. As well as the associated ARP hardware one would use with assembly to make sure all that money doesn't go to waste.


Sorry to thread jack OP Although i hope to be doing this very soon as well so i suppose i can use this thread for inspiration 

What kind of HP would you get without the pistons and rods then?


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

Ive been told and have seen around on this forum that 400-430BHP is a safe max for the stock pistons and rods. But i personally dont know anyone who has tested that theory, maybe you can be the first haha


----------



## DannyLo (Aug 2, 2006)

joeeveryman87 said:


> Ive been told and have seen around on this forum that 400-430BHP is a safe max for the stock pistons and rods. But i personally dont know anyone who has tested that theory, maybe you can be the first haha


There are plenty of locals here on LI that are making 450whp on a headspacer for quite some time now. There are a bunch on these boards as well around the rest of the country. I'm sure some of them will chime in.

As long as you get a good seal between the head and block, with the use of head studs plus installing some ARP rod bolts you should have no problem making that 400-450whp pretty reliably.


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

Another question to throw out there, new performance Engine and Transmission mounts.....are they suggested for this kind of set-up?


----------



## DannyLo (Aug 2, 2006)

I would strongly recommend having engine mount/tranny mount/dogbone inserts at the very least.


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

just out of curiousity, do you have a VRT set-up dan?


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

After careful reviewing and alot of research ive decided to go with a Precision 6262 turbo .63AR, from what ive head its a beast, power of a T67 but spools up like a T61 WOOTWOOT!!!!


----------



## DannyLo (Aug 2, 2006)

joeeveryman87 said:


> just out of curiousity, do you have a VRT set-up dan?


Yea I do. It's making considerably less power right now than your goal, because I'm on low boost and stock compression, but I'll be in the mid 400's pretty soon when I decided to finally open the motor up for a spacer.

I'm at 320whp @ 7 psi right now from a Precision 6165...and that was stopping at 6500rpm and boost leak issues. Probably around 330ish running right and to actual redline.


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

Lieutenant Dan said:


> Yea I do. It's making considerably less power right now than your goal, because I'm on low boost and stock compression, but I'll be in the mid 400's pretty soon when I decided to finally open the motor up for a spacer.
> 
> I'm at 320whp @ 7 psi right now from a Precision 6165...and that was stopping at 6500rpm and boost leak issues. Probably around 330ish running right and to actual redline.


Im surprised your going with a spacer and not low compression pistons, ive heard of sealing issues with head spacers.


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

Another question for all those experts who arent chimming in on this thread :laugh: how many if any extra engine knock sensors should i get, and where should i install them on the motor?


----------



## MeiK (Mar 18, 2005)

Why not just get the big C2 kit and call it a day? You don't need a built head for 550WHP.

Pistons, rods, hardware, clutch, diff, mounts + C2 Stage III...

Start changing head work too much and the software can give you problems. Keep it simple. 

(And to the old guys on here - yes I'm still around) :laugh:


----------



## DannyLo (Aug 2, 2006)

joeeveryman87 said:


> Im surprised your going with a spacer and not low compression pistons, ive heard of sealing issues with head spacers.


If you use studs there shouldn't be much of a problem getting a good seal. Plenty of guys do it with great results. I'd love to do pistons and rods but for the cost compared to my goals, it isn't really worth it right now. Maybe in the future when I decide to port the head and really make the car scream when it's not a daily.



joeeveryman87 said:


> Another question for all those experts who arent chimming in on this thread :laugh: how many if any extra engine knock sensors should i get, and where should i install them on the motor?


Not necessary. The engine already has 2 and they work with the bosch computer in a very sophisticated matter to protect it with the slightest signs of detonation all on it's own. They can also obviously also be logged with VCDS/Vag-Com and/or just viewed in real time to see if the car is running properly with a laptop.



MeiK said:


> (And to the old guys on here - yes I'm still around) :laugh:


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

Appreciate the responses so far (mostly dan) lol but just an FYI about CTS, i was seriously considering there kit so i was talking to Clay over there at CTS last couple days, and they have developed a Stage 4 kit for the 24v it just hasnt been fitted yet and they are looking for a 24v to test it on for an extremely reasonble price. i was gonna do it but i dont have the money to do everything i wanna do to my engine (i.e. pistons rods, clutch, LSD) and the CTS stage 4 kit this soon, so im sure if your interested and talk to clay, you can hook it up, project numbers are an added 600hp :laugh::laugh::laugh: HOLY BALLS haha. And i think im gonna go with the C2 Stage 3 kit, Chris is gonna swap out the turbo for my for a Precision 6262, cant wait to start this, this fall!!!!! KEEP COMIN WITH THE RANDOM TIP GUYS IT'LL HELP ME IM SURE


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

MeiK said:


> Why not just get the big C2 kit and call it a day? You don't need a built head for 550WHP.
> 
> Pistons, rods, hardware, clutch, diff, mounts + C2 Stage III...
> 
> ...



Your right, im most likly gonna stick with the stock head, unnnnnnnnnless i can get my hands on a sexy R32 head :laugh: And yes it has been decided C2 stage 3 kit is the one!!!


----------



## newcreation (Nov 23, 2003)

go with the 6262 i am running a 6265 dual cermaic ball bearing with billet wheel on my R32 definitely a great turbo and like it over the garrets that i have used in the past on other cars. plus you will increase your coolant temps running a oil/coolant cooled turbo and vr's are already known for running hot coolant/oil combined.


----------



## PhReE (Sep 16, 2004)

I have been running ~400whp on a stockblock motor with a headgasket spacer for about 4 years now. Very reliable setup if taken care of.


----------



## artsgotagun (Feb 24, 2010)

Random question: What side of SoDak are you on? Im in rapid and have yet to see another 24v running around...

sorry for going off topic....


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

artsgotagun said:


> Random question: What side of SoDak are you on? Im in rapid and have yet to see another 24v running around...
> 
> sorry for going off topic....



HAHA no ****? im in rapid city aswell, over by the Hospital, ive been lookin around for another 24v here all i ever find are 1.8T's


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

Kinda Off topic, but its my thread so im allowed haha i got a lil bored and took some pics of my sexy bitch to show off a lil :laugh:

Heres a decent shot


Kinda like this one a lil better though


Sexy HID's


Jetta center console is pretty much the only interior upgrade


Coil overs


20mm rear wheel spacers


Drilled "BIG" rotors (all around)


And of course the 24v in the flesh!!!!(lightweight pulleys, cold air, TT Borla muffler, Miltek down pipe and highflow cat-back, cold air intake, and this winter C2 STAGE 3 TURBO KIT BABY!!!!)


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

Oh ya forge short throw shifter to BTW, and i want to randomly add a picture of my bike with the sexy GTI, ive put alot of love into the bike to, bought it brand new stock, i think she's a sexy beast now


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

If Anyone knows of a way to fix these curb marks somehow let me know, i love these rims, just this one rim got curb checked, by a damn x-girlfriend stupid ***** lol


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

Here's the Turbo wootwoot!!!!! Precision 6262 Ball bearing 680HP capible beast master!


----------



## INA (Nov 16, 2005)

Lieutenant Dan said:


> Out of all the things you have listed _engine-wise_ the only thing that's really necessary to make 500-550 are the pistons and rods. As well as the associated ARP hardware one would use with assembly to make sure all that money doesn't go to waste.


 Not Even. The stock VR rods are so robust that a simple ARP bolt installation + a line bore is more than enough. 
I only recommend going pistons & rods IF you need to really build your motor OR dont like the idea of a compression dropping gasket.


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

INA said:


> Not Even. The stock VR rods are so robust that a simple ARP bolt installation + a line bore is more than enough.
> I only recommend going pistons & rods IF you need to really build your motor OR dont like the idea of a compression dropping gasket.


 Id say the main reasons i want them is to have a fresh "brandnew" shortblock for the build, seems like it will last alot longer if i go that route and the idea of a low compression gasket just seems like just a cheap way to go and one that wont last, just my oppinion though


----------



## One Gray GLI (Apr 2, 2007)

hmm..now let me ask you this question..why do you want to make 550+hp so badly? what are your intentions with it? anything more than 400whp is quite pointless on a FWD car on the street. 

I've been making 450+whp reliably on a stock motor (hg spacer, ARP head studs, no upgraded rod bolts) for quite some time now. 

with these cars, it's all about installation. if you wanna pinch pennies and not do it right the first time, this is the wrong platform to mod. (sorry if that sounds kinda dick, but I've been here long enough to see all the "oh I wanna turbo my car for cheap" threads.) 

it WILL cost money, most likely more than you planned, to do it correctly. I'll elaborate more when I have the chance or once you reply to why 550whp+ is your goal.


----------



## Back Door Shenanigans (May 21, 2010)

One Gray GLI said:


> hmm..now let me ask you this question..why do you want to make 550+hp so badly? what are your intentions with it? anything more than 400whp is quite pointless on a FWD car on the street.
> 
> it WILL cost money, most likely more than you planned, to do it correctly. I'll elaborate more when I have the chance or once you reply to why 550whp+ is your goal.


 Can i answer that with a "because its AWD"


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

One Gray GLI said:


> hmm..now let me ask you this question..why do you want to make 550+hp so badly? what are your intentions with it? anything more than 400whp is quite pointless on a FWD car on the street.
> 
> I've been making 450+whp reliably on a stock motor (hg spacer, ARP head studs, no upgraded rod bolts) for quite some time now.
> 
> ...


 im not sure if you were referring to me? or someone elses post on this thread....but im def by no means doing it the "cheap" way, this is not a "oh I wanna turbo my car for cheap" thread, i mean go ahead a price out this project according to what ive posted so far its somwhere around $$,$$$dollars :banghead: haha the whole reason i started this thread is so i can get experianced oppinions(as the title states) so i do it right the first time  and as for the 550whp goal yes i understand its FWD and so what? i just wanna have an Elite VR6 :laugh: their is no real reason when it comes to a "racing" stand point, im not trying to be a quick red light to red light car, cause clearly it wont be, i guess you could say i enjoy going fast on the highway??? lol but no i guess ive just allways loved this car and its badass motor design you could say its my "affordable dream car" haha and i would just love to squeez every bit of HP out of it that i possibly can just for 24v bragging rights haha i guess thats the reason for my goal man.....does this answer your question?


----------



## Snitches Get Stitches (Jul 21, 2007)

There is a couple different ways to look at building a VR Turbo. A complete blueprinted and balanced motor is not necessary for your power goals. 500-50whp has been easily attained and daily driven, as shown by posters in your thread. If you choose to build the motor for some cool-factor, that is a ton of money wasted, and better spent elsewhere. If you truly want to spend the money and have no nightmares or worries, I suggest choosing a very competent machine shop and having your crank knife-edged, and your entire rotating assembly balanced. You can always look for a bump in displacement, as I and many others have chosen 2.9L or 3L set-ups, with 82mm to 83.5mm bores. It is all about your goals and what helps you sleep at night. I have sunk a fair chunk of change into my motor, but originally I was simply going to run a spacer and be done with it. Look where that got me...the build on the motor added a year to my journey, and several extra trips to the machine shop for a micro-polishing on my crank to achieve the clearances I needed on my main bearings. Just know what you are getting yourself into, and make sure it is for the right reasons. The other big piece to keep in mind is if you go boom with a stock block, you lose alot less than going boom on a fuilly built monster. I just know that if i experience catastrophic failure on this block, there is no way in hell i would be sinking the same amount of time, energy, and money on another fully built money pit.


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

Snitches Get Stitches said:


> There is a couple different ways to look at building a VR Turbo. A complete blueprinted and balanced motor is not necessary for your power goals. 500-50whp has been easily attained and daily driven, as shown by posters in your thread. If you choose to build the motor for some cool-factor, that is a ton of money wasted, and better spent elsewhere. If you truly want to spend the money and have no nightmares or worries, I suggest choosing a very competent machine shop and having your crank knife-edged, and your entire rotating assembly balanced. You can always look for a bump in displacement, as I and many others have chosen 2.9L or 3L set-ups, with 82mm to 83.5mm bores. It is all about your goals and what helps you sleep at night. I have sunk a fair chunk of change into my motor, but originally I was simply going to run a spacer and be done with it. Look where that got me...the build on the motor added a year to my journey, and several extra trips to the machine shop for a micro-polishing on my crank to achieve the clearances I needed on my main bearings. Just know what you are getting yourself into, and make sure it is for the right reasons. The other big piece to keep in mind is if you go boom with a stock block, you lose alot less than going boom on a fuilly built monster. I just know that if i experience catastrophic failure on this block, there is no way in hell i would be sinking the same amount of time, energy, and money on another fully built money pit.


 Thanks for the in-put "snithces" i really do appreciate it  but just for the record im not spending 10,000+$ just for "cool points" trust me im not rich lol i just simply love VW i always have and finally got my hands on a 24v GTI which is a very BA motor, atleast to me  and i want to build it up. Yes i know its not gonna be the fastest car EVER, yes its FWD (who caaaaaares), yes its gonna cost alot......for me! not for you lol so can everyone just accept my passion for VW and the VR6 24v GTI and give me some useful input please, btw thank you everyone that has already


----------



## Snitches Get Stitches (Jul 21, 2007)

Ok...i can understand your desires are not for the "cool factor", but your going to spend a ton of cash for those bragging rights or epic VR6 status.(same thing as "cool factor" in my eyes) 
Will you be assembling the motor yourself? Ever blueprint a motor before? Do you own the tools neccessary for the job?
For a decent machine shop to line bore, bore your cylinders, hone, etc. with you doing the assembly yourself you will still spend $1200-1500 just on the simple stuff. For them to assemble your short block for you, add $2k to your final price. Thats not counting work needed on the head. Everything for the 24valves is expensive in comparison to 12v or 1.8T parts. I think for what it will cost you and the extra hassle, stick with just a spacer on a stock block. These motors are still "Epic" with a spacer and boost....you will still be very happy and impressed with how it turns out.


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

i do realize the amount of time and money that is going to be involved ive been researching this project idea for some time now, i have a good machine shop (freind of mine) to do the machine work for much cheaper than you "quoted" im doing all the work myself with some freinds(all of which are no strangers to heavy engine work) besides the short block reasembly and obviously the machine work. if you think im just trying to be "cool" than thats your oppinion, but im 24years young  haha and i think im past the teenage ****, it purely sm that ive always wanted to do, to be honest im not sure why your so concerned with the monetary part of this, its gonna be my money that im spending i realize it will cost somwhere between 10,000-15,000 but thats my problem. soooooooooooo back to why this thread has been started, for tips, pros, cons(besides cost) hidden problem factors anything anyone would like to let me and anyone elsewhos veiws this thread know about this project (BESIDES COST ISSUES) I KNOW ITS EXPENSIVE :banghead:, there now that has been settled haha, btw snitches, i do appreciate your concern, thanks.


----------



## One Gray GLI (Apr 2, 2007)

pros: 
fun highway car. 
sleeper status. 
sounds amazing. 
something not many people have. 
reliable if put together correctly 
stock drivability (good power under boost still, even with lower compression) 

cons: 
****ty platform, bad aftermarket support 
money (sorry. lol) 
traction issues 
the thought you could have built something else more fun for cheaper. 
VR6s are terrible to work on until you familiarize yourself with everything over time. 

the negatives outweigh the positive. Trust me, I was in your shoes before. But you've got your heart set out on it, so just research, read build threads from the past, and try not to make mistakes that people have in the past


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

One Gray GLI said:


> pros:
> fun highway car.
> sleeper status.
> sounds amazing.
> ...


 hahaha thanks man, and DAMN again with the money lol JK! oh just curious in your oppinion when you say sm more fun....you mean like RWD or AWD platform? if so i do agree with you, but FWD is what i have and i only paid 5k for it with 70,000miles on it. so spending all the extra money on sm else with a different drive system plus the turbo set-up just isnt feasible


----------



## One Gray GLI (Apr 2, 2007)

haha, I mean..I'm just giving you the other side of the arguement. I love driving my car, it still puts a smile on my face..but realistically? I would have rather spent the money I spent on my mk4 on my STI... maybe a nice rotated kit for it.


----------



## DannyLo (Aug 2, 2006)

One Gray GLI said:


> haha, I mean..I'm just giving you the other side of the arguement. I love driving my car, it still puts a smile on my face..but realistically? I would have rather spent the money I spent on my mk4 on my STI... maybe a nice rotated kit for it.


That's all subjective man. I'd rather have a built 24v with a 3.2 head and high revving valvetrain even in a fwd golf than spend money on an STI. 

Variety is the spice of life:beer:


----------



## One Gray GLI (Apr 2, 2007)

well, good luck finding a trans/gear set that's strong enough to handle the torque over time, unless you plan on buying the o2m dogboxes that Ed has now. And that'll run you almost as much as your turbo kit alone. lol the fwd o2m gearbox won't take much more 550wtq when you actually have traction. It doesn't break as easily on a fwd platform because the tires just spin. -_-

This is why I'm saying, there's a reason everyone aims for 500whp on a 24v. It's a safe point where tons of crap doesn't break. Single walbro/Bosch 044 is still enough for that power goal, trans/axles, bottom end.. everything. 

Whatever though, as I said, I do enjoy my car, I've just thought of everything i could that's negative. If I came here and said "omg 24vs are the greatest, gl" then I wouldn't be helping


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

"omg 24vs are the greatest, gl" then I wouldn't be helping [/QUOTE]

:laugh: and you are right i wouldnt want everyone to come on here and tell me that all my ideas are 100% spot on and that, the 24v is bullet proof and the ****! , you need that contructive critizism to keep your head straight so thanks again "one gray GLI" :beer: on the other hand i think your not giving the stock O2M tranny the credit she deserves, a buddy of mine has pushed 547wtq and 568whp and that lil beast is still kickin, grant it he dosnt daily drive with the kind've boost to make that power but never the less it holds up just fine, just sayin :laugh:


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

Lieutenant Dan said:


> That's all subjective man. I'd rather have a built 24v with a 3.2 head and high revving valvetrain even in a fwd golf than spend money on an STI.
> 
> Variety is the spice of life:beer:


and i agree with you buddy, i'd much rather have a built 24vT with a 3.2 head even if it is FWD, than and STI or an Evo that everyone and there mom has, no offense to you STI or EVO guys there nice cars but to many people have them, i want sm a lil more rare even if it does cost me a few extra dollhairs :laugh:


----------



## One Gray GLI (Apr 2, 2007)

Sure, you can make power with the stock gears for a while but I'm sure your friend doesn't drive every day at that power level.  you'll shear the teeth on 4th gear after a while, especially doing long pulls. My friend Dave with a turbo r32 with a t67 made over 600awhp/wtq and drove it around that power level often, really drives the car hard, and sheared 4th gear on stock gearbox, got a gearbox from Europe (DRP I believe, IIRC), broke that one the same way, and now he's on his 3rd gearbox. AND those are stronger than the fwd o2m's.


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

One Gray GLI said:


> Sure, you can make power with the stock gears for a while but I'm sure your friend doesn't drive every day at that power level.  you'll shear the teeth on 4th gear after a while, especially doing long pulls. My friend Dave with a turbo r32 with a t67 made over 600awhp/wtq and drove it around that power level often, really drives the car hard, and sheared 4th gear on stock gearbox, got a gearbox from Europe (DRP I believe, IIRC), broke that one the same way, and now he's on his 3rd gearbox. AND those are stronger than the fwd o2m's.


I hear where your comin from man, im curious, since we're on the transmission topic what do you know about the wavetrac LSD, any words of wisdom on the diff?


----------



## One Gray GLI (Apr 2, 2007)

not sure, I have a peloquin myself with much success so far, and a clutchmasters FX400 which I love, but I know many use the wavetrac's as well, as far as differentials go.


----------



## jvlrancing (Jul 20, 2011)

Hello Boys, just read the topic.....from Australia

The R32 head is the best option to the 2.8 head
Ive just invested in the R32 head from 034motorsport from there Audi A4 racecar with 264/260 cams double valve springs
and titanium retainers..
Theres not much achievement in the porting of the head for the money anyway
I can tell u the head will take 900hps as proven by 034motorsport,(no porting)just something to think about..


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

so i keep hearing about the R32 head, and i want one for my build. sooooo can everyone help me in get my hands on one? and does it just bolt on? or do i need a new fuel rail? new VVT gears?


----------



## Snitches Get Stitches (Jul 21, 2007)

You will need an R32 fuel rail and intake mani, but everything else is plug-n-play. You would use VVT from 2.8l head. Cams and electrics are the same from 3.2l head to 2.8l.


----------



## One Gray GLI (Apr 2, 2007)

Gonna need custom head studs also. They're different sizes.


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

ok, good deal thats not to bad. Now about gettin my hands on one......haha


----------



## Snitches Get Stitches (Jul 21, 2007)

Look for a Toureg or Porsche Cayene 3.2 head as well. They are exactly the same motor as in the R. Contact INA or 034 for custom head studs.


----------



## GTIVRon (Jul 24, 2009)

This thread made me realize turning my VR6 into a project is a ****ty idea for what I want. Thanks for all the honesty. Once I buy my diesel golf, my car will be up for sale. Starting to lookout for an M6 LS1... Everyone in texas drives effing automatics. Panzies. lol.


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

GTIVRon said:


> This thread made me realize turning my VR6 into a project is a ****ty idea for what I want. Thanks for all the honesty. Once I buy my diesel golf, my car will be up for sale. Starting to lookout for an M6 LS1... Everyone in texas drives effing automatics. Panzies. lol.


thats sad, someone lock this thread immediately hahaha noooo im just kidding! If this isnt the route your looking for then by all means dont do it (btw im tellin you the tranmission isnt as weak sauce as some people seem to think :banghead:, just sayin) but i still say you'd be a satisfied VRT owner after, you'd know why i strive for it so badly if you drove one, but good luck man :beer:


----------



## One Gray GLI (Apr 2, 2007)

the transmission isn't weak, but when you get up to the HP goals you want, it is.  500whp is more than enough, you can make that on pump gas with a 6262 / 6265 / 35r easily with a HG spacer.


----------



## PhReE (Sep 16, 2004)

INA said:


> Not Even. The stock VR rods are so robust that a simple ARP bolt installation + a line bore is more than enough.
> I only recommend going pistons & rods IF you need to really build your motor OR dont like the idea of a compression dropping gasket.






One Gray GLI said:


> pros:
> fun highway car.
> sleeper status.
> sounds amazing.
> ...




Both of these comments are dead on. My car has been boosted since 2006 and honestly the motor still runs GREAT. it has ~75-80,000 miles under boost (of ~110k total) and shows no signs of letting up. The MOTOR is a BEAST!

Honestly its the CAR, the BODY, the motor mounts, suspension bushings, etc that will fall apart on you. Taking a 200hp car to 450+hp puts a LOT of stress on all the other crap. 450bhp is a REALLY damn fun streetcar that will pretty much walk anything on the street, and be reliable. If you want to 'go the extra mile' go for a full suspension refresh, get heavy duty/poly bushings, get engine mount upgrades (you don't need to go full on solids, but even for example BFI stage 1 on all 3 mounts goes a long way). 

Also TAKE CARE OF IT! If you smell anything new (electrical burning smells, raw fuel, smopke, ETC) DONT IGNORE IT! Figure out what it is!! ALso any new noises, vibrations, etc, get them taken care of! Also make sure you use a decent quality synthetic, and I run ~ 7,500 miles on each change. I have had oil analyzed and they suggested not to go much more than 7500 but that 7500 was perfectly safe. 

The transmission is the strongest one that VW EVER put in a MkIV, at least in the US. Heck I ran ~350+ whp on the STOCK CLUTCH for a few years and if you drive it correctly it will hold!

Also remember you wil be SIGNIFICANTLY modding this car, and you either need to be somewhat handy and work on it yourself (I do all my own minor repairs) but it is good to have a mechanic that is familiar with the car that you can lean on for larger repairs, say to replace the clutch/timing chains. That's a job outside my scope but I have a single mechanic that I allow to work on my car and I trust him. I have never had a major failure on this car that has left me stranded, its a 2004, and I have owned it since new. 

If you love it, it will love you. :heart:


----------



## Snitches Get Stitches (Jul 21, 2007)

Phree, what kind of oil are you running in your VRT? Im breaking in my fresh motor very soon, and will have many more questions on proper procedure. 

I agree with all the comments above...


----------



## PhReE (Sep 16, 2004)

I generally run Mobil 1 15-50 in the summer and 10-40 in the winter. 

For break in I would suggest:
-warm up motor to operating temp by driving around a bit, calmly.
-do some long WOT pulls in 3rd-4th gear to redline and then let off gas and leave in gear to create lots of vac and allow it to wind down.
-repeat a few more times

Done!


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

Thanks for the in-put Phree, i always knew a 24v Turbo'd had plenty of longevity in it, but its always nice to hear it from someone who has one :beer: I have some bad news however, mainly for myself, i wont be able to start my VRT project till next fall.  Im headed over to Iraq this December courtesy of the AirForce:banghead:, but i would still love for this informational thread to keep goin untill i start the build thread in about a year


----------



## Snitches Get Stitches (Jul 21, 2007)

Well than lets keep asking the questions. 
Phree, why such a heavy oil? We were talking recently about oil for vrt use, and considering the clearances on my built motor, we were talking about simple 10w 30 synthetics after full break-in. Input on that choice is welcome.


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

Snitches Get Stitches said:


> Well than lets keep asking the questions.
> Phree, why such a heavy oil? We were talking recently about oil for vrt use, and considering the clearances on my built motor, we were talking about simple 10w 30 synthetics after full break-in. Input on that choice is welcome.


i know the question was directed towards phree, but i think we all know the VR engine runs hotter than the average motor on account of all the cylinders being alot closer to each other, so id say especially in the summer with all the extra performance your pushing out of it, the higher wieght oil adds alot more protection from heat induced oil break down......just my own 2cents theory, phree can totally slam my responce if he wants :laugh:


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

To add a little help with funding for the R32 Cylinder head (im still looking for), im selling this extra 24v head i bought that i was gonna build up while still being able to use my car, but since the consenseous is that i should go with the R32 head for my build im taking the advice, soooooo this 2.8lit 24v head with 30k miles on it is gonna go for a whopping $350 plus shipping, $50 less than i paid. Here are a few pics....................


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

BTW it is being sold as seen, no VVT gears!!! It is also in the for sale section just thought id add it on this thread aswell.


----------



## jvlrancing (Jul 20, 2011)

Ur choice is a good one togo to a R32 head
Not sure how hard they r to pick up there but here in Australia never get them
good luck getting one u wont go wrong...


----------



## EFiNVR6 (Mar 7, 2009)

Hey guys i been thinking about this for awhile now but i finally think that my vr6 deserves a snail  lol My goal is not that crazy i am hoping to get 350 whp so if you guys can point me in the right direction and what would be my best move since the more threads i read about the VR-T the more confused i get so any help i would greatly appreciated.

Thanks 


PS
sorry joeeveryman87 for hijacking your thread.


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

jvlrancing said:


> Ur choice is a good one togo to a R32 head
> Not sure how hard they r to pick up there but here in Australia never get them
> good luck getting one u wont go wrong...


haha same here in the states man, ive had no luck so far......i wonder how much they cost brand new.....probly a fortune more than its worth lol


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

EFiNVR6 said:


> Hey guys i been thinking about this for awhile now but i finally think that my vr6 deserves a snail  lol My goal is not that crazy i am hoping to get 350 whp so if you guys can point me in the right direction and what would be my best move since the more threads i read about the VR-T the more confused i get so any help i would greatly appreciated.
> 
> Thanks
> 
> ...



Well do you have a 12v or 24v? either way 350whp is etremely easy to attain on a VR6 as youll see if you read through this thread at all:facepalm:

A simple Stage 2 kit from C2 is all you'd really need(very nice high quality kits from what im told), def no need for forged internals. 

Id do a little more research though, check out the C2 site, maybe CTS(more expensive), im not sure about you but i researched this idea for over a year all over the internet, asking friends but most importanly the *VWVORTEX forum* theres all the info youll ever need on this forum......


----------



## Black Ice (Apr 27, 2006)

I'm in the same boat, except I am looking for about 450whp. Just picked up an R motor that had the head separated from the block. I keep getting mixed reviews as to whether I should get rods or not. I am currently in school and working part time, so I could sure use the $700 to utilize towards something else for the motor. There's a lot of guys on here who have reached higher hp goals than me with stock rods. I think I'll just keep the rods/pistons stock and replace the rod/main bearings and use ARP bolts. I just don't want a $6,000 paperweight later down the road. Decisions..decisions..:banghead:


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

Black Ice said:


> I just don't want a $6,000 paperweight later down the road. Decisions..decisions..:banghead:


Exactly what i was worried about, i know alot of people on here say you can pull it off with stock internals, but what if its just a case by case thing, like you said i dont wanna have an expensive paper weight thats why i figured im just gonna do it strong the first time, and go beast mode on my VR6 lol.

Id say since your already planning on digging that deep into your motor, the question isnt why should you, its why wouldnt you replace all the internals and go forged?


----------



## Black Ice (Apr 27, 2006)

joeeveryman87 said:


> Exactly what i was worried about, i know alot of people on here say you can pull it off with stock internals, but what if its just a case by case thing, like you said i dont wanna have an expensive paper weight thats why i figured im just gonna do it strong the first time, and go beast mode on my VR6 lol.
> 
> Id say since your already planning on digging that deep into your motor, the question isnt why should you, its why wouldnt you replace all the internals and go forged?


Well, it's mostly a cash flow issue, being in college full time and working part time. It took me a little time to save up to purchase the motor. The block and head are in pretty good shape. I plan to go turbo in the near 'future', but I really want to get the motor in my car because it's just sitting in my living room . I want to at least do rods, the pistons are forged and 400-450whp isn't really asking for too much from an R motor. I guess I'll just have to be patient, save up for the expensive ass rods and do it the right way the FIRST time. :banghead:


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

dont we all just wanna be millionairs :laugh: btw i would love to take that R cylinder head off your hands, just sayin


----------



## Black Ice (Apr 27, 2006)

joeeveryman87 said:


> dont we all just wanna be millionairs :laugh: btw i would love to take that R cylinder head off your hands, just sayin


HA! The funny thing is, I will spend the same amount of money on rods as I would a used R32 cylinder head.. these puppies aren't cheap AT ALL  I'll keep you in touch though, I always wanted a sport-bike :laugh:


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

Black Ice said:


> HA! The funny thing is, I will spend the same amount of money on rods as I would a used R32 cylinder head.. these puppies aren't cheap AT ALL  I'll keep you in touch though, I always wanted a sport-bike :laugh:


haha WELL! im selling my bike, if you saw the picture she is a sexy bitch lol with many many ad-ons just sayin haha


----------



## One Gray GLI (Apr 2, 2007)

rods aren't the problem, the pistons are, mostly because of the heat generated. (cracked ringlands are common)


----------



## EFiNVR6 (Mar 7, 2009)

joeeveryman87 said:


> Well do you have a 12v or 24v? either way 350whp is etremely easy to attain on a VR6 as youll see if you read through this thread at all:facepalm:
> 
> A simple Stage 2 kit from C2 is all you'd really need(very nice high quality kits from what im told), def no need for forged internals.
> 
> Id do a little more research though, check out the C2 site, maybe CTS(more expensive), im not sure about you but i researched this idea for over a year all over the internet, asking friends but most importanly the *VWVORTEX forum* theres all the info youll ever need on this forum......


I have a 24v  i looked at the c2 kits and the kinetic's kits and i was thinking wouldn't it come out cheaper to make your own kit ? Yeah this forum has everything i just got lost after reading everything about the vrt since everyone is running a different setup.


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

EFiNVR6 said:


> I have a 24v  i looked at the c2 kits and the kinetic's kits and i was thinking wouldn't it come out cheaper to make your own kit ? Yeah this forum has everything i just got lost after reading everything about the vrt since everyone is running a different setup.


No way man, the kit will definetly save you money, and not only that but it will alleviate alot of head ache, than if you were trying to find everything on your own. Im actually getting the C2 stage 3 kit, but i am gonna change out the rotomaster turbo for a Precision.


----------



## One Gray GLI (Apr 2, 2007)

you can get the C2 kit with a 6265, IIRC, the r32 kits come with them, why wouldnt it be a option with the 24v FWD kits?  just call em up.


----------



## EFiNVR6 (Mar 7, 2009)

thanks for the tips guys i am gonna give them a call sometime next week.


----------



## jvlrancing (Jul 20, 2011)

So the real difference between the 2.8 head to the 3.2 is inlets and outlets?
I read back a page that the cams are the same?
The numbers stamped on my 2.8 head is the same as The R32 head is that rite?


----------



## DannyLo (Aug 2, 2006)

One Gray GLI said:


> you can get the C2 kit with a 6265, IIRC, the r32 kits come with them, why wouldnt it be a option with the 24v FWD kits?  just call em up.


Usually they come with a 6165 journal (like mine) which is rated for only 10hp less than a 6265 which is billet. Billet would be nice, but this thing spools real fast without having to be.

I think C2 moved to rotomaster turbos though recently in an effort to try and make the kits more affordable, but i'm not sure.


----------



## EFiNVR6 (Mar 7, 2009)

Lieutenant Dan said:


> Usually they come with a 6165 journal (like mine) which is rated for only 10hp less than a 6265 which is billet. Billet would be nice, but this thing spools real fast without having to be.
> 
> I think C2 moved to rotomaster turbos though recently in an effort to try and make the kits more affordable, but i'm not sure.


i was on the site today and they have it posted up that Rotomaster T67GJ comes with the kit so you guys still thinks its better to get the 6265 since i wouldn't have to worry about running the coolant lines to it?


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

EFiNVR6 said:


> i was on the site today and they have it posted up that Rotomaster T67GJ comes with the kit so you guys still thinks its better to get the 6265 since i wouldn't have to worry about running the coolant lines to it?


The C2 "2" kit that comes with the T67GJ Rotomaster i thought came with Journal bearings, and from my understanding they spool up mush faster than billet bearings do(didnt know they were rated for less HP though...), and when your talking about a big turbo i think id want sm thats gonna spool up quicker.

But that all really dosnt matter since your HP goals are lower, you dont really need a turbo that big, therefor you wont have has much of a problem with turbo lag. 

If it were me id swap out the Rotomaster for a Garrett or Precision(which i am doing, if you go with a C2 "kit")for a little more money, yes, but your gonna get what you pay for (*reliability*)


----------



## One Gray GLI (Apr 2, 2007)

no such thing as a billet bearing, you mean ball bearing and journal bearing, journal being the slower of the two. My billet 6262 hits full boost (18psi) @ around 3500 rpm. You don't want the turbo spoiling too soon or it'll run outta breath up top, as well as just roasting tires, I went through that with my EIP kit.


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

One Gray GLI said:


> no such thing as a billet bearing, you mean ball bearing and journal bearing, journal being the slower of the two. My billet 6262 hits full boost (18psi) @ around 3500 rpm. You don't want the turbo spoiling too soon or it'll run outta breath up top, as well as just roasting tires, I went through that with my EIP kit.


you right i did mean "ball bearing" haha sorry its been in interesting morning already at work lol i was looking into getting the precision 6262 and im told by a distributer that journal bearing are much quicker with spool up than ball bearings(hence why there more expensive) and that journal bearing are better for larger turbos for that exact reason, it reduces turbo lag on large turbos, so to me that sounds alot better.....dosnt it?


----------



## Snitches Get Stitches (Jul 21, 2007)

You got it reversed brotha!! A bb turbo will spool up sooner than a journal bearning turbo of the same size. Are you referring to a billet wheel'd turbo? That is the new tech for turbos and supposedly will spool quicker.


----------



## One Gray GLI (Apr 2, 2007)

you have it reversed  a ball bearing, billet 6262 will spool probably 2-300rpm sooner than it's journal bearing counterpart, granted the hotside is the same and such.


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

oooooooooooooooooooooooooohhhhh boy!!!!!! :banghead::banghead: hahahaha man my bad guys apparently i am just way out of it today, gettin everything all backasswords, maybe i need to just sleep it off :laugh: you are both right, snitches and one gray! im just being dumb today lol
sooo check this out hope i get this right.....

-Precision 6262
-680hp capable turbo 62mm PTE Billet Compressor Wheel, 62mm Turbine Wheel
-T3 4bolt .63 or should i go .82AR????
-Ported T04S Housing
-ANNNNNNND the *MORE* expensive *BETTER* *BALL BEARINGS* lol an extra $540.00 

im sorry if my confusion, confused anyone checking out this thread, i had a dumb moment please forgive me lol


----------



## Jefnes3 (Aug 17, 2001)

:banghead:

Never put a T3 turbine on a VR6.

:banghead:

And NO NEED for ported cover on Precision 62mm compressor. (on a VR6)

Just my opinion.

:beer:
-Jeffrey Atwood
United Motorsport


----------



## 24valves_of_Fury (Jun 30, 2008)

http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthre...c-injector-turbo-file&p=72769101#post72769101


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

Jefnes3 said:


> :banghead:
> 
> Never put a T3 turbine on a VR6.
> 
> ...



May i ask why you are so against the T3 housing, and ported compressor cover, inparticular on a VR6? just curious....
Would you suggest a T4 V-Band inlet and discharge?? or T4 devided inlet and V-Band discharge??

this is exactly why i started this thread :beer: thanks guys!


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

How about this guys straight from the precision website pick it apart for me and tell me yay or nay......

*Street and Race Turbocharger - PT6765*

*HP Rating: 755*
We know you want to be the best both on the track and off. Whether you're a diehard racer or just looking to boost your daily driver's performance, Precision Turbo and Engine has what you need. For exceptional power and unbeatable technology at an affordable price, PTE can help you find the perfect turbocharger for your unique setup.

PTE's PT6765 Turbocharger features the following: 
• 67mm inducer compressor wheel 
• Compressor cover options: 
- "E" compressor cover 3.0" inlet/2.0" outlet 
- "S" compressor cover 4.0" inlet/2.5" outlet 
- "Ported S" compressor cover 4.0" inlet/2.5" outlet 
- "H" compressor cover 4.0" inlet/3" outlet 
- "Ported H" compressor cover 4.0" inlet/3" outlet 
• 65mm, 76 trim turbine wheel 
• Turbine housing options: 
- T3 .63 or .82 A/R with 4 bolt (2.5") discharge 
- T3 .63 A/R with 5 bolt discharge (with or without wastegate hole) 
- T3 .63 or .82 A/R with 3" V-Band discharge 
- V-Band inlet .82 A/R with V-Band discharge 
- T4 Tangential .58, .68, .81, or .96 A/R with 3 5/8" V-Band discharge 
- T4 Divided .84, 1.0, 1.15, or 1.32 A/R with 3 5/8" V-Band discharge 
- Mitsubishi .63 A/R 
- Buick .63 or .85 A/R 
- GMC Syclone/Typhoon .85 A/R 
• Hydrodynamic 360° thrust bearing system


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

also this is the site

http://www.precisionturbo.net/Stree...ils/Street-and-Race-Turbocharger---PT6765/241

it cost $1,099.99 from them(lil pricey)


----------



## Jefnes3 (Aug 17, 2001)

joeeveryman87 said:


> May i ask why you are so against the T3 housing, and ported compressor cover, inparticular on a VR6? just curious....
> Would you suggest a T4 V-Band inlet and discharge?? or T4 devided inlet and V-Band discharge??
> 
> this is exactly why i started this thread :beer: thanks guys!


In my opinion:
A T3 turbine config is a bit small for decent top end on these bigger motors: 2.8L +

GT35R with a 1.06 is ok. BUT the 1.06 is only available on the Garrett GT turbos.

T3 .82 will have you fully spooled before 3000 and choke up top. (above ~5500 or so)

Once you start turning up the boost the torque curve will get more peaky.
Mid range torque will rise with boost but power at redline does not rise by the same amt.

Turbo choice is about the ~shape of the torque curve. I simply like my turbo cars able to maintain near flat torque to redline, this makes for bigger turbine side specs, almost oversize in other's view.


-Jeffrey Atwood


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

Jefnes3 said:


> In my opinion:
> A T3 turbine config is a bit small for decent top end on these bigger motors: 2.8L +
> 
> GT35R with a 1.06 is ok. BUT the 1.06 is only available on the Garrett GT turbos.
> ...



So the Precision that i listed 2post up is no good you think?


----------



## Snitches Get Stitches (Jul 21, 2007)

Its not that its not a good product, its just not the best choice for our motors. Boost comes on too early and chokes your top end out. In my opinion, a larger hotside allows boost to come on above 3500rpms, allowing you to save your drivetrain from tourque spikes and helping traction. It also allows you to drive the car easier out of boost, while still allowing you to make that power in a useful spot in higher revs. I chose a GT 3582R T4 with 0.68AR in precision housings, as garrett doesnt make the 0.68. Im looking for full boost by 35-3800rpms and allowing me to rev to 8200, with the appropriate valvetrain upgrades. Its all about where you want boost to come on. Full boost below 3k rpms is usually accompanied by no traction and breaking axles or trans in the process. Most exhaust manifolds for our motors come in a T4 flange anyway.


----------



## turbo4motion (Jun 12, 2007)

One Gray GLI said:


> My billet 6262 hits full boost (18psi) @ around 3500 rpm. You don't want the turbo spoiling too soon or it'll run outta breath up top, as well as just roasting tires, I went through that with my EIP kit.


Have you had it dynoed since you changed your turbo/manifold etc? Would be good to see a comparison between the torque curves with the different turbos.


----------



## One Gray GLI (Apr 2, 2007)

Yep, but not on the same dyno. :/ I'll post the two after I get home from work though. One was on a dynojet, other was on a dyno dynamics.


----------



## Norwegian-VR6 (Feb 6, 2002)

Singel clutch "doesnt matter what brand or stage crap" will not hold the torque you are looking for over time.

Get a 6265 T4 0.68 or a T4 0.82
GT35R T3 1.06 would reach your 550 whp goal.


----------



## .SLEEPYDUB. (Jul 28, 2005)

550whp is retarded on a FWD...just save the hassle


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

.SLEEPYDUB. said:


> 550whp is retarded on a FWD...just save the hassle


why would it be retarted??? sure it wont be a stop light to stop light car but she'll be a beast from 40mph and up, i bought the car for 6,000 mint condition from a freind, with the silverstone gray paint, which i love! and only had 80k miles on it, and its a mk4 love that body style! id be payin twice if not three times that much for a R32, and just so i can have awd? Nah ill invest some power and money into this very inexpensive fwd :laugh:

but trust me i do understand where your coming from, theres just no way ill sell what i already own, then pay $17,000 for basically the same car with awd


----------



## GTIVRon (Jul 24, 2009)

joeeveryman87 said:


> ......but she'll be a beast from 40mph and up.........


Try closer to the range of 3rd or probably 4th gear before you find traction. With 500+whp you won't be able to get on it in 2nd and maintain traction. And unless you are on some really sticky >235 sized tires 3rd won't be much better.


----------



## PhReE (Sep 16, 2004)

GTIVRon said:


> Try closer to the range of 3rd or probably 4th gear before you find traction. With 500+whp you won't be able to get on it in 2nd and maintain traction. And unless you are on some really sticky >235 sized tires 3rd won't be much better.


Yeah it's more like a beast from ~70mph and up.


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

GTIVRon said:


> Try closer to the range of 3rd or probably 4th gear before you find traction. With 500+whp you won't be able to get on it in 2nd and maintain traction. And unless you are on some really sticky >235 sized tires 3rd won't be much better.


Never the less, have you all seen TomTom's build thread virtually almost the same goal with the same car i am shooting for, and he loved it and the guy who bought the car from him loves it aswell, no regrets. 

......but you guys would suggest that i ditch the already paid for car i OWN, that has TT cams, catback exaust, suspension, LW pullies, cold air, boser hood extension, R32 skirts/Modified R32 front bumber with 1 bar rieger grill molded to it, deleted hatchback handle........(taking breath):laugh:.......so that i can spend 17,000 on a used stock R32......thats just crazy talk guys, im sorry my goal isnt necessarily to be the quickest car from 0-60, this is a hobby, i love this car im just attempting to squeez all i can out of this car, thats where ill get my satisfaction, either way shes gonna be a sexy bitch and is gonna be one fast mofo at speed, thanks guys!

Now back on topic i need some oppinions on turbos ive heard many different things so far with regaurds to stuff like getting just a full on garret, or getting a precision turbine with a garret hotside??, is there anything that everyone agrees on ...


----------



## PhReE (Sep 16, 2004)

Nope, nobody is saying go R32, honestly that has it's own set of problems (breaking parts! instead of breaking traction).

Just making sure your expectations are set correctly, but honestly, you dont NEED 550 whp. You can make that GTI faster than your CBR600 withOUT building the motor. You can have a lot of fun with just a headgasket spacer motor. These motors are so tough it's ridiculous. I have over 80,000 boosted miles on my headgasket spacer'd motor and the problems I am running into now are with the chassis, suspension, bushings, etc. The motor? Perfect.


----------



## .SLEEPYDUB. (Jul 28, 2005)

joeeveryman87 said:


> why would it be retarted??? sure it wont be a stop light to stop light car but she'll be a beast from 40mph and up


40mph and up? With that kind of power you are looking at not having traction till over 100mph, and thats with a nice drag radial setup. With 600+whp, I wouldnt catch traction at all, in any gear, it was completely pointless. I only drove it like that once, and i never did it again because its pointless. 

I had a big ol response typed up, and I lost it. Just watch this. This is about 400whp. Can you imagine 150whp more?


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

Touche' Touche' and WOW! thats 400whp?? thats insane power man i didnt realize thats all you'd need for that performance.......


----------



## PhReE (Sep 16, 2004)

joeeveryman87 said:


> Touche' Touche' and WOW! thats 400whp?? thats insane power man i didnt realize thats all you'd need for that performance.......


That's pretty much what we have all been trying to say.


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

PhReE said:


> That's pretty much what we have all been trying to say.


Im sorry i was taking it the wrong way, thought you guys were telling me a fwd car is a waste of time to upgrade, def seeing that video puts some different/cheaper:laugh: thoughts in the back of my head, thank guys!


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

Guess you can say im a "visual" learner :laugh: thanks again


----------



## .SLEEPYDUB. (Jul 28, 2005)

No problem man. Theres not very many good videos out there showcasing what a real street vrt is like. That one puts it into perspective.


----------



## RmL1.8T (Jul 21, 2009)

There's a boatload of great info in this thread. Good stuff guys. Subscribed. :thumbup::thumbup:


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

.SLEEPYDUB. said:


> No problem man. Theres not very many good videos out there showcasing what a real street vrt is like. That one puts it into perspective.


So the video def caught my attention and i have a couple questions, what turbo and clutch setup did you go with, what did the spacer drop your compression down to(any issues with it?), and did you install an LSD? or atleast have an oppinion on pelequin or wavetrac LSD perfromance on the O2J tranni......


----------



## .SLEEPYDUB. (Jul 28, 2005)

joeeveryman87 said:


> So the video def caught my attention and i have a couple questions, what turbo and clutch setup did you go with, what did the spacer drop your compression down to(any issues with it?), and did you install an LSD? or atleast have an oppinion on pelequin or wavetrac LSD perfromance on the O2J tranni......


 Turbo is T4 35R with a 1.06AR turbine housing.
No spacer, fully built schimmel block.
Autotech wavetrac diff, on my 2nd one. Broke the diff, 4th gear, and a bunch of other **** in the tranny all at the same time doing a 4th gear pull on low boost.
No experience with Peloquin, although ive heard nothing but good things from them.

O2J? Did you mean O2M?


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

Well ive been workin on a few projects in the past couple weeks so i figured id post some pics, ill start with my boser hood extension we welded on and painted last week, turned out pretty good enjoy :laugh:


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

.SLEEPYDUB. said:


> Turbo is T4 35R with a 1.06AR turbine housing.
> No spacer, fully built schimmel block.
> Autotech wavetrac diff, on my 2nd one. Broke the diff, 4th gear, and a bunch of other **** in the tranny all at the same time doing a 4th gear pull on low boost.
> No experience with Peloquin, although ive heard nothing but good things from them.
> ...


Yes sorry i did mean O2M, so the wavetrac is good then? why did you have such bad tranni issues? is the O2M weak?


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

And you wonder why the whole front end is pulled off in those??? because i also installed some 264/260 TT cams i got brand new for $500 :laugh: with a C2 flash 









annnnnnnnd Cams installed....


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

This is the new hood with the old bumper still on, i bought an aftermarket R32 bumper and a rieger 1bar grill and we plastic "welded" it to the bumper.



This "custom" bumper was kind of a bitch but we finally got it and primed it last night, check it out.....



and finally me rockin the new roof rack with my kayak :laugh:, also its hard to see but you can see that we all shaved the handle off the hatch and i installed a popper :laugh: left the emblem though still gotta rep you know!?!


----------



## .SLEEPYDUB. (Jul 28, 2005)

I liked the wavetrac, just didnt like that it broke on me...when just using 4th gear, but hey **** happens


----------



## D03GLIR (Oct 21, 2004)

*Sleepydub, that's sick*

Yeah man, that's sick. I thought near 300 was fun but VRT is the champ- :thumbup::thumbup:
Nice drivin.........
You convinced me, over 400 HP is just a waste w/ these cars.....but fun nonetheless (Gee officer, I wasn't out of 4rth yet, can I catch a break?).


----------



## BakBer (Apr 19, 2007)

joeeveryman87 said:


> Yes sorry i did mean O2M, so the wavetrac is good then? *why did you have such bad tranni issues?* is the O2M weak?


You saw the video right?


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

BakBer said:


> You saw the video right?


yesssss......


----------



## .SLEEPYDUB. (Jul 28, 2005)

It should be obvious then. Catching traction suddenly while your tires are spinning in excess of 100mph, just isnt good for gears...


----------



## GTIVRon (Jul 24, 2009)

To be completely honest, I've learned that the VR6 is a hell of a motor for boosting. The rest of the car sucks total ass. Transmission isn't built for much power. Yet to find a mount that somebody hasn't broken or don't have to replace with practically every oil change (the design behind the mounts are just not meant to take the abuse). The chassis sucks, heavy and sloppy. 

I get you like the car... It's just a very crappy platform to build a monster from. Do a search for VRT's and check all the "for sale" threads. People do it, learn FWD sucks for power/learn the car just can't handle it, and then go for a platform that can sustain the power goals they have.

I really like VW, and will more than likely always have one on my drive way (Buying a MK6 4dr Golf TDI soon), but I'm sad to admit I don't think there will ever be a quality platform for high power under the VW badge. That's why I'll be selling my car after I get my DD, and be buying domestic V8 for a project/weekend warrior.


----------



## One Gray GLI (Apr 2, 2007)

still haven't sold the car, and I'm closing in on four years now, 3 of them turbo'd.  granted I have another car or two now also. No point in selling it, it's not worth what it once was, and I don't owe anything on it, and it still puts a smile on my face. 

If you put a decent set of tires on the car, it'll hook. obviously not in the winter or in the rain, but during the spring/summer, depending on where I go WOT in the rpm range, I can get the car to hook by the end of second, and that's at 470whp.

Like I've said..the breaking point on these cars is in excess of 500whp. after that, along come the trans issues, then motor issues if it's just got a HG spacer. As I've said in the past, there's no point to having THAT much power for a FWD street car. long WOT pulls in 4th/5th will destroy your trans, and the heat created by those "longer pulls" isn't so great either.

you don't want tranny problems? go buy a quaife gear box and spend >4k at least.


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

hmmm so many things to think about............:banghead: i still think ill build up the motor and slap a goos sized turbo in her, just might lower the power goals a slightly


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

finished ic::laugh:


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

An intercooler would look soooooo sexy in that bumber.......just sayin


----------



## .SLEEPYDUB. (Jul 28, 2005)

Im going to be taking my 16psi wastegate spring out of my TIAL and run a 7psi spring like I did back when I first turboed the car. It was tamable, and Ill actually be able to catch traction enough to tune the car how I want to. NOT LIKE A RACECAR!! God I hate that my car is just an on/off button with power :banghead:


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

.SLEEPYDUB. said:


> Im going to be taking my 16psi wastegate spring out of my TIAL and run a 7psi spring like I did back when I first turboed the car. It was tamable, and Ill actually be able to catch traction enough to tune the car how I want to. NOT LIKE A RACECAR!! God I hate that my car is just an on/off button with power :banghead:


how much psi can you run to your engine off a 7psi spring as opposed to a 16psi? or is it just 7 or 16psi total that you can run alltogether....meaning if i wanted to run 30lbs of boost i would need a 30psi spring for the wastegate?


----------



## .SLEEPYDUB. (Jul 28, 2005)

oh man, you need to do some more research if you dont know the answer to that question.

The psi associated with a wastegate spring is the minimum amount of boost the wastegate will allow the turbo to produce. It wont go under ~7psi and wont go over ~7psi unless the wastegate has a boost controller hooked up to it. In theory you usually can only going about 15psi over the wastegate pressure. So a 7psi spring will allow for up to ~22psi. However I have seen some people go above that range, but thats usually a good safe estimate. Youll get at least 22psi out of a 7psi spring.

I used a 16psi spring because I was running 28psi+ and a 7psi spring wouldnt allow me to go that high.


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

.SLEEPYDUB. said:


> oh man, you need to do some more research if you dont know the answer to that question.
> 
> The psi associated with a wastegate spring is the minimum amount of boost the wastegate will allow the turbo to produce. It wont go under ~7psi and wont go over ~7psi unless the wastegate has a boost controller hooked up to it. In theory you usually can only going about 15psi over the wastegate pressure. So a 7psi spring will allow for up to ~22psi. However I have seen some people go above that range, but thats usually a good safe estimate. Youll get at least 22psi out of a 7psi spring.
> 
> I used a 16psi spring because I was running 28psi+ and a 7psi spring wouldnt allow me to go that high.


see i learn sm new everyday :beer:, im learning and know most of the operations of the turbo setup as a whole, but as for individual stuff, i may know what they do in general, but not so much specifics. So thanks for the wastegate 101 :laugh:, thats exactly why i started this thread gotta love Vortex man!


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

I always thought, the bigger the better than you can just get a boost controller and turn it down when you dont want it and turn it up when you do, but not so much......?


----------



## .SLEEPYDUB. (Jul 28, 2005)

You can only turn it down as far as your wastegate allows. ie; a 7psi wastegate cant go lower than 7psi, but it can go higher.


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

.SLEEPYDUB. said:


> You can only turn it down as far as your wastegate allows. ie; a 7psi wastegate cant go lower than 7psi, but it can go higher.


Thanks buddy :beer:


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

*How stuff works: TURBOS AND WASTEGATES EXPLAINED...*

*So i did some research cause i was dissapointed about not knowing what waste gates are really all about and i found this interesting and very informative post on an Evo Forum enjoy!!! *
hey guys, i just got a call from a guy that I dont believe is on this forum or anything but we had a conflicting conversation about what size wastegate he needed to use on his subaru. He told me that he did a ton of research and he said he wanted to run high boost and that a 38mm wastegate would not be enough for 30+ psi on a GT35R. 

First of all, just to put it out there, wastegates LOWER boost, meaning that the lower boost you run, the more of the wastegate you use. 

Below is a turbo and how it works basically. The red side is the exhaust side, the blue side is the compressor side. The 2 wheels are connected by a shaft. Exhaust gases turn the exhaust wheel which is attached to the shaft that is attached to the compressor wheel. The compressor wheel sucks in air and compresses it, forcing it through the intercooler pipe and into the engine.



Below is a turbo setup in color. There is no wastegate on this setup. Consider the red tube to be a header or exhaust manifold. With no wastegate on that tube, boost would keep going up and up with rpm to whatever the turbo could produce because the engine would just keep producing more and moer exhaust gases. Now if you put a wastegate on that tube its basically going to act like a controlled exhaust leak and its going to leak out exhaust gases before they can reach the exhaust wheel. The more you leak out, the less the exhaust wheel will turn; creating less boost. 



Now heres where we get technical. wastegates will open up to whatever spring pressure the spring inside is because The vacuum line thats hooked up to the lower port has the pressurized air going through it to the gate under the valve assembly forcing it open. Basically if you have a 14.5 psi spring in your gate and everything else is working properly, when you floor your car, your turbo will create 14.5 psi of boost and once theres 14.5 psi of boost in your engine/intake manifold, that means theres 14.5 psi of boost going through that vacuum line. once 14.5 psi of boost hits the wastegate it forces it open, thus bleeding off exhaust and maintaining the amount of exhaust it takes to turn the exhaust wheel to create 14.5 psi. Now imagine we install a manual boost controller in the vacuum line between the intake mani and the wastegate. Now we have another controlled leak. If we leak off 4 psi before the wastegate sees it, then the motor is going to have 18.5 psi in it when the wastegate sees 14.5 psi. As we bleed off more air through the boost controller the boost will go up and up because the wastegate isnt seeing that 14.5 psi yet.

here is a link to a pdf file that shows how all of the above works
http://www.tialmedia.com/documents/w..._wginstall.pdf


Now lastly, there are other factors that will effect boost levels. 

Boost creep and cars not reaching the desired boost level are other problems people have.

Scenario 1. If you have a 38mm wastegate on a 8.0L viper which obviously has a ton of exhaust and you want to run 3 psi of boost well whats gonna happen? The gate is gonna maxxed out and the exhaust gases are just gonna turn the exhaust wheel faster and faster creating more boost then desired.

Scenario 2. Imagine we put a stock subaru turbo on a dodge viper with a four 44mm gates with a 3 psi springs. Now we want to run 20 psi of boost and we have a boost controller to do that. Ok now we have plenty of wastegate room to work with so scenario 1 wont be a problem. What would happen? Obviously the TINY exhaust side of the stock subie turbo would be a huge bottleneck for 8.0L of exhaust gas. So we'd want to run 20 psi but we wouldnt reach that number most likely. WHY? because there would be so much backpressure in the headers from the exhaust not being able to squeeze through the subie turbo so well over 3 psi of pressure would build up inside the headers/exhaust manifolds. That would thus force the wastegates open and 20 psi wouldnt never be achieved. This is why people with 7 psi springs cant run 35 psi without their gate opening up. I've seen people pull the vacuum hose off the wastegate completely and the car might only run 24 psi because there is 7 psi of exhaust pressure inside the exhaust manifold when there is 24 psi of pressure inside the engine.

if anyone has any questions please feel free to ask as I'll do my best to explain. There are other things that can sometimes effect boost control such as recirculating, backpressure in the wastegate, backpressure in the exhaust system, etc... but if anyone wants to know about that, just post it. Thanks and enjoy the info guys!!!

Also check this video out aswell, great video describing wastegates-- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PA5T5PnWE-k

Courtesy of Joeeveryman87 :laugh: 

Info from "ScKcBc's"


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

*Blow Off Valve: What it does, and how it works*

Just some more random information as i learn it all better i figured id post my findings on the thread......soooooo

Blow off valves are air pressure release valves that can be mounted on the intake piping of a turbocharged car anywhere in between the turbo and the throttle body. They are also known as dump valves, or vent valves. The blow off valve pictured below is made by Greddy and is the Type-S model.



A blow off valve has few purposes, but is still a very important piece.....

*The functions of a blow off valve*
Without a blow off valve, when you let off of the gas, the compressed air in your intake piping increases to great pressures as the turbines in the turbocharger are forced to a screeching hault. The extreme pressure forces the air back through the turbocharger, increasing the wear on the turbo.

With a blow off valve, when you let off of the gas the air pressure left in your intake piping is relieved as the blow off valve opens up. This allows your turbo to continue spinning in the proper direction, preventing damage to the turbo and allowing for a faster return to positive air pressure in the intake piping.

*How it works*
A small diameter hose runs from the intake manifold to the blow off valve. When the pressure in the intake manifold is positive (in boost), the pressure in the small hose keeps the wastegate closed.

Once you let off of the gas, the throttle plate closes, and all of the air in the intake manifold is sucked into the engine. With negative, or zero pressure in the intake manifold, the blow off valve opens up and releases all of the compressed air from the intake piping.


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

Hopefully by the time i get back from my deployment this thread, all my research and all the input from all you, will pay off greatly since i plan to do the "install" myself :laugh:


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

*Understanding housing sizing: A/R*

No better info than from Garret Turbo themself!! 

A/R (Area/Radius) describes a geometric characteristic of all compressor and turbine housings. Technically, it is defined as:

the inlet (or, for compressor housings, the discharge) cross-sectional area divided by the radius from the turbo centerline to the centroid of that area (see Figure). 



The A/R parameter has different effects on the compressor and turbine performance, as outlined below. 

Compressor A/R - Compressor performance is comparatively insensitive to changes in A/R. Larger A/R housings are sometimes used to optimize performance of low boost applications, and smaller A/R are used for high boost applications. However, as this influence of A/R on compressor performance is minor, there are not A/R options available for compressor housings. 

Turbine A/R - Turbine performance is greatly affected by changing the A/R of the housing, as it is used to adjust the flow capacity of the turbine. Using a smaller A/R will increase the exhaust gas velocity into the turbine wheel. This provides increased turbine power at lower engine speeds, resulting in a quicker boost rise. However, a small A/R also causes the flow to enter the wheel more tangentially, which reduces the ultimate flow capacity of the turbine wheel. This will tend to increase exhaust backpressure and hence reduce the engine's ability to "breathe" effectively at high RPM, adversely affecting peak engine power.

Conversely, using a larger A/R will lower exhaust gas velocity, and delay boost rise. The flow in a larger A/R housing enters the wheel in a more radial fashion, increasing the wheel's effective flow capacity, resulting in lower backpressure and better power at higher engine speeds. 

When deciding between A/R options, be realistic with the intended vehicle use and use the A/R to bias the performance toward the desired powerband characteristic. 

Here's a simplistic look at comparing turbine housing geometry with different applications. By comparing different turbine housing A/R, it is often possible to determine the intended use of the system.

Imagine two 3.5L engines both using GT30R turbochargers. The only difference between the two engines is a different turbine housing A/R; otherwise the two engines are identical: 
1. Engine #1 has turbine housing with an A/R of 0.63 
2. Engine #2 has a turbine housing with an A/R of 1.06. 

What can we infer about the intended use and the turbocharger matching for each engine? 

Engine#1: This engine is using a smaller A/R turbine housing (0.63) thus biased more towards low-end torque and optimal boost response. Many would describe this as being more "fun" to drive on the street, as normal daily driving habits tend to favor transient response. However, at higher engine speeds, this smaller A/R housing will result in high backpressure, which can result in a loss of top end power. This type of engine performance is desirable for street applications where the low speed boost response and transient conditions are more important than top end power. 

Engine #2: This engine is using a larger A/R turbine housing (1.06) and is biased towards peak horsepower, while sacrificing transient response and torque at very low engine speeds. The larger A/R turbine housing will continue to minimize backpressure at high rpm, to the benefit of engine peak power. On the other hand, this will also raise the engine speed at which the turbo can provide boost, increasing time to boost. The performance of Engine #2 is more desirable for racing applications than Engine #1 since Engine #2 will be operating at high engine speeds most of the time.


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

*Compression ratio and AFR with boost*

Before discussing compression ratio and boost, it is important to understand engine knock, also known as detonation. Knock is a dangerous condition caused by uncontrolled combustion of the air/fuel mixture. This abnormal combustion causes rapid spikes in cylinder pressure which can result in engine damage. 

Three primary factors that influence engine knock are: 

1.Knock resistance characteristics (knock limit) of the engine: Since every engine is vastly different when it comes to knock resistance, there is no single answer to "how much." Design features such as combustion chamber geometry, spark plug location, bore size and compression ratio all affect the knock characteristics of an engine. 
2.Ambient air conditions: For the turbocharger application, both ambient air conditions and engine inlet conditions affect maximum boost. Hot air and high cylinder pressure increases the tendency of an engine to knock. When an engine is boosted, the intake air temperature increases, thus increasing the tendency to knock. Charge air cooling (e.g. an intercooler) addresses this concern by cooling the compressed air produced by the turbocharger 
3.Octane rating of the fuel being used: octane is a measure of a fuel's ability to resist knock. The octane rating for pump gas ranges from 85 to 94, while racing fuel would be well above 100. The higher the octane rating of the fuel, the more resistant to knock. Since knock can be damaging to an engine, it is important to use fuel of sufficient octane for the application. Generally speaking, the more boost run, the higher the octane requirement. 
This cannot be overstated: engine calibration of fuel and spark plays an enormous role in dictating knock behavior of an engine. See Section 5 below for more details. 

Now that we have introduced knock/detonation, contributing factors and ways to decrease the likelihood of detonation, let's talk about compression ratio. 

The compression ratio from the factory will be different for naturally aspirated engines and boosted engines. For example, a stock Honda S2000 has a compression ratio of 11.1:1, whereas a turbocharged Subaru Impreza WRX has a compression ratio of 8.0:1. 

There are numerous factors that affect the maximum allowable compression ratio. There is no single correct answer for every application. Generally, compression ratio should be set as high as feasible without encountering detonation at the maximum load condition. Compression ratio that is too low will result in an engine that is a bit sluggish in off-boost operation. However, if it is too high this can lead to serious knock-related engine problems. 

Factors that influence the compression ratio include: fuel anti-knock properties (octane rating), boost pressure, intake air temperature, combustion chamber design, ignition timing, valve events, and exhaust backpressure. Many modern normally-aspirated engines have well-designed combustion chambers that, with appropriate tuning, will allow modest boost levels with no change to compression ratio. For higher power targets with more boost , compression ratio should be adjusted to compensate. 

There are a handful of ways to reduce compression ratio, some better than others. Least desirable is adding a spacer between the block and the head. These spacers reduce the amount a "quench" designed into an engine's combustion chambers, and can alter cam timing as well. Spacers are, however, relatively simple and inexpensive. 

A better option, if more expensive and time-consuming to install, is to use lower-compression pistons. These will have no adverse effects on cam timing or the head's ability to seal, and allow proper quench regions in the combustion chambers. 

5. Air/Fuel Ratio tuning: Rich v. Lean, why lean makes more power but is more dangerous 

When discussing engine tuning the 'Air/Fuel Ratio' (AFR) is one of the main topics. Proper AFR calibration is critical to performance and durability of the engine and it's components. The AFR defines the ratio of the amount of air consumed by the engine compared to the amount of fuel. 

A 'Stoichiometric' AFR has the correct amount of air and fuel to produce a chemically complete combustion event. For gasoline engines, the stoichiometric , A/F ratio is 14.7:1, which means 14.7 parts of air to one part of fuel. The stoichiometric AFR depends on fuel type-- for alcohol it is 6.4:1 and 14.5:1 for diesel. 

So what is meant by a rich or lean AFR? A lower AFR number contains less air than the 14.7:1 stoichiometric AFR, therefore it is a richer mixture. Conversely, a higher AFR number contains more air and therefore it is a leaner mixture. 

For Example: 
15.0:1 = Lean 
14.7:1 = Stoichiometric 
13.0:1 = Rich 

Leaner AFR results in higher temperatures as the mixture is combusted. Generally, normally-aspirated spark-ignition (SI) gasoline engines produce maximum power just slightly rich of stoichiometric. However, in practice it is kept between 12:1 and 13:1 in order to keep exhaust gas temperatures in check and to account for variances in fuel quality. This is a realistic full-load AFR on a normally-aspirated engine but can be dangerously lean with a highly-boosted engine. 

Let's take a closer look. As the air-fuel mixture is ignited by the spark plug, a flame front propagates from the spark plug. The now-burning mixture raises the cylinder pressure and temperature, peaking at some point in the combustion process. 

The turbocharger increases the density of the air resulting in a denser mixture. The denser mixture raises the peak cylinder pressure, therefore increasing the probability of knock. As the AFR is leaned out, the temperature of the burning gases increases, which also increases the probability of knock. This is why it is imperative to run richer AFR on a boosted engine at full load. Doing so will reduce the likelihood of knock, and will also keep temperatures under control. 

There are actually three ways to reduce the probability of knock at full load on a turbocharged engine: reduce boost, adjust the AFR to richer mixture, and retard ignition timing. These three parameters need to be optimized together to yield the highest reliable power.


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

Wastegates with screamer pipes.......any advantages to it??? or does it just sound badass and a possible huge fine for illegal emisions


----------



## One Gray GLI (Apr 2, 2007)

personal preference, although if it's recirculated in a bad spot, you'll lose power because of the turbulence in the exhaust. you'd want it to be recirculated downstream for example, not against a bend.

although, I believe there's some hard evidence floating around that a open dump would make a LITTLE bit more power. personally I believe it's negligible at best, and I've had both a open dump on my old "EIP" kit, and now a recirc on a different setup.


----------



## .SLEEPYDUB. (Jul 28, 2005)

Good job on googling everything, looks like youre on the right path to learning more about what you are getting yourself into.

Id rather have it recirc because I want to hear the turbo sound, and the exhaust, not a screamer pipe. But mine is a screamer pipe right now


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

.SLEEPYDUB. said:


> Good job on googling everything, looks like youre on the right path to learning more about what you are getting yourself into.
> 
> Id rather have it recirc because I want to hear the turbo sound, and the exhaust, not a screamer pipe. But mine is a screamer pipe right now


Do you think it adds any performance that makes it worth it


----------



## .SLEEPYDUB. (Jul 28, 2005)

Personally, I think it makes a negligible difference, if any at all.
If youre trying to squeeze every last drop of power out of your car, then it may be useful, otherwise it can become very annoying to some people very quickly.


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

So my next question(and this may be a noob question) but what are these added "catch cans" i keep seeing on F/I setups coming off the valve cover? ive seen some from having 1 can, all the way up to having 4 cans? google has not helped me on this topic.....


----------



## Norwegian-VR6 (Feb 6, 2002)

It is a oil catch tank- So you dont resirc the oil steam coming from the valve cover right back into the inlet housing. The turbo can get pretty soacked if you dont clean the inlet somethimes.

Thats why they use a catch tank, to avoid this and all the oil will be in the tank not in the turbo or inlet housing. 

Ive driven 50000km with my car from 15-30 psi and has never used a cath tank. But I clean everything up now and then.


----------



## .SLEEPYDUB. (Jul 28, 2005)

He is right, but he left one thing out.
Crankcase pressure can get pretty high in boosted motors, especially hondas. You need to relieve that pressure somehow, and the stock setup is only designed to relieve as much pressure as the motor produces naturally. Im a firm believer in this, thus why I run 2 SS lines with AN fittings welded to the valve cover straight to a large catch can that is ventilated. 

If you look at my build thread or FS thread you'll see it on the driverside of the engine bay.


----------



## PhReE (Sep 16, 2004)

Heh my breather hose just vents under the car


----------



## DannyLo (Aug 2, 2006)

*FV-QR*

Mine's still recirculated, but i'm going to do something about that because there's always a small like few drops of oil that form in the silicone coupler right before the turbo because of it. No likey.


----------



## One Gray GLI (Apr 2, 2007)

PhReE said:


> Heh my breather hose just vents under the car


 al gore would be mad.  

I've just got a simple little catchcan setup, no fancy -AN lines and such. hose off the valve cover to an ATP catch can.. also helps that I don't have a coolant ball I guess.


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

One Gray GLI said:


> al gore would be mad.
> 
> I've just got a simple little catchcan setup, no fancy -AN lines and such. hose off the valve cover to an ATP catch can.. also helps that I don't have a coolant ball I guess.


 So do you not have a windshield washer reservoir either? and what is that black reservoir for that is between the catch can and what looks like your inline fuel pump? is that the new Coolant reservoir? Nice setup also :beer: 

BTW lovin all this information guys, i cant even begin to tell you how much ive learned about F/I and even just engines in general since i became a member on the Vortex forum! you guys are the **** :laugh:


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

Nevermind i think its just a nicer looking power steering reservoir?? so just no more coolant or windshield fluid reservior either on your setup?


----------



## .SLEEPYDUB. (Jul 28, 2005)

mine 


































Regans the man


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

Interesting way to setup the intercooler piping


----------



## .SLEEPYDUB. (Jul 28, 2005)

Some people argue its less efficient, but I beg to differ. I just had to go with what I had, and I already had the intercooler, so I just made it the best I could.


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

Catch can looks awesome! is that a smiley face on it? lol


----------



## .SLEEPYDUB. (Jul 28, 2005)

Nah, thats the Secret Services logo


----------



## One Gray GLI (Apr 2, 2007)

joeeveryman87 said:


> So do you not have a windshield washer reservoir either? and what is that black reservoir for that is between the catch can and what looks like your inline fuel pump? is that the new Coolant reservoir?


 coolant "tank" is on the driver side, behind the intake. you can see the radiator cap on the polished tank.  it's easier than running the coolant lines across the manifold/turbo. 

and that's just a j-cap on the PS reservoir. and yes that's my fuel pump next to it. no need for the washer reservoir anyways.


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

So i found an R32 head for $500 +$100 shipping 80k miles.......questions 

1. is this a good deal? 

2. will my 2.8 head vvt gears fit the R32 head? 

3. what else will i need from the R32 to make this work on the 2.8Lit.....fuel rail, MAF, throttle body.....??? 

and is there even a point to get the R32's MAF, cause when i go F/I ill be getting a bigger one anyway, and same with the throttle boddy.... 

Thanks Guys!


----------



## PhReE (Sep 16, 2004)

Fuel rail and intake manifold are basically required. The fuel rail is quite different, and the intake manifold bolts arent the same (almost -- just one of the bolts is off). 

Then whatever intake mani you get, you just need to bolt up a throttle body, and the MAF housing should match your tune. 

On the exhaust side all the bolts are the same so no problems there.


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

PhReE said:


> Fuel rail and intake manifold are basically required. The fuel rail is quite different, and the intake manifold bolts arent the same (almost -- just one of the bolts is off).
> 
> Then whatever intake mani you get, you just need to bolt up a throttle body, and the MAF housing should match your tune.
> 
> On the exhaust side all the bolts are the same so no problems there.


 Thanks for the info Phree! Do you guys think the R32 head is worth the investment on a turbo application??


----------



## PhReE (Sep 16, 2004)

For $600, I would probably go for it. (But note that the r32 head takes different injectors, soooo it may complicate other things down the road. Make sure you can get all the stuff you need first.) 

Oh and I forgot to answer about the vvt stuff, yes your 2.8L stuff will all fit. The cams and cam gears are the same on 2.8L and 3.2L motors.


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

PhReE said:


> Fuel rail and intake manifold are basically required. The fuel rail is quite different, and the intake manifold bolts arent the same (almost -- just one of the bolts is off).
> 
> Then whatever intake mani you get, you just need to bolt up a throttle body, and the MAF housing should match your tune.
> 
> On the exhaust side all the bolts are the same so no problems there.


 Well ill be getting new injectors and a new maf along with the turbo so I think it should all work out


----------



## One Gray GLI (Apr 2, 2007)

you're forgetting..different head studs also. unsure on which HG you'd use though. spark plugs are different pitch/thread also.


----------



## PhReE (Sep 16, 2004)

One Gray GLI said:


> you're forgetting..different head studs also. unsure on which HG you'd use though. spark plugs are different pitch/thread also.


 Yes, that's correct, the R32 motor uses smaller head bolts than the 2.8L to gain room for a larger bore. However I believe I have heard that the 2.8L sized head studs will fit in the R32 head. 

I'd use the 2.8L headgasket unless it shrouds the valves but I kinda doubt it does, if you look around there are threads from a few people who have done this and I bet you will be able to find out what they did.


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

Yes I read up in tomtom's thread(rebirth quest), he used stock 2.8 head gasket and custom ARP head studs and R32 fuel rail other than that the head fit nicely


----------



## PhReE (Sep 16, 2004)

If you're going to build a spacer motor I will be selling my spacer (you will need a new OEM head gasket to go with it) shortly.


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

PhReE said:


> If you're going to build a spacer motor I will be selling my spacer (you will need a new OEM head gasket to go with it) shortly.


 Thanks for the offer Phree, but I'm gonna go with JE rods and pistons anyway:beer:


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

Just out of pure CURIOSITY has anyone ever heard of converting the FWD 24v to a RWD? Mostly this is just for ****s and giggles. Just off the top of my head I would think it may work by rotating the engine and tranni? Maybe just relocating the engine to the rear? Doin some sort of conversion from another car, maybe Porsche idk? Installing an R32 system and changing it to RWD only? And do you guys think this would just be totally rediculous, not because of money, but because of the geometry of the car as a FWD vehicle? 

Thanks guys, and like I said, I'm not trying this just curious on the idea, so let's hear your thoughts!! :laugh:


----------



## GTIVRon (Jul 24, 2009)

Turning the engine trans sidways won't help. You run a transaxle. You will need a transmission meant to be mounted longitudinally for front engine rear wheel drive setup.

There is a video of a company (yellow GTI, i believe, search RWD GTI on youtube). They put the engine in the back mounted transversely (and it's turbo!).

If you want to run the engine from the front you'll be cutting the middle part of the floor out to make a drive shaft tunnel, replacing the fuel tank to make room for the drave shaft and rear diff etc, and remember we have a solid rear axle. All that has to go too and you'll have to make custom mounting points for the diff as well as the independent rear suspension that you will need.

Going with the haldex setup is the same thing, alot of fabrication. And if you go that route, why would you want to go RWD and not take advantage of the AWD?


----------



## PhReE (Sep 16, 2004)

My 'Dream Swap' is currently this motor into a B5 S4 car with the audi 6-speed and the torsen setup, and of course a turbo (prolly the new GT37R  ) 

I bet with some time I could splice the stock ME7 into the B5 harness and get a working tach and maybe even traction control.


----------



## DannyLo (Aug 2, 2006)

PhReE said:


> My 'Dream Swap' is currently this motor into a B5 S4 car with the audi 6-speed and the torsen setup, and of course a turbo (prolly the new GT37R  )
> 
> I bet with some time I could splice the stock ME7 into the B5 harness and get a working tach and maybe even traction control.


USP is getting there now 24v turbo S4 ready for competition


----------



## PhReE (Sep 16, 2004)

I know I know, there are a few out there. 

One day I will find a S4 with a blown motor on auction and swoop it up. One day.

Mine would be a daily tho with all the plush creature comforts.

The VR just looks like it was MADE for that bay.!!


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

GTIVRon said:


> And if you go that route, why would you want to go RWD and not take advantage of the AWD?


In a drag race i would rather have more usable power, AWD is a waste of power around 25-35% drivetrain power loss as opposed to FWD at around 12-18% Loss(depending on if its a Longitudinal or Transverse set-up, Longitudinal being less efficient at around 18-22% loss) and RWD depends on the setup aswell. Front-engine, rear drive typically sees 15% loss for a manual, and 25% loss for an auto. Mid-engine, rear drive, transverse setup sees 12-18% losses like the FWD above. Mid-engine, rear drive, longitudinal setup sees 16-26% losses.

Example:
Veyron Vs. Ultima GTR.
---------
Veyron creates 1001 horsepower, and gets 720-ish to the wheel. (Mid-engine, all wheel drive)
Ultima GTR creates 720 at the crank, and still gets 635-ish to the wheel. (Mid-engine, rear wheel drive)

Yes, the Veyron does have about 85 more horsepower at the wheel, it's also starting with four turbos, 8 more cylinders, and 80 more cubic inches. The GTR is naturally aspirated, a V8, and only produces 85 less horsepower. Add a SINGLE turbo, and it's already out-doing the Veyron. You can simply blame drive-train losses. 

So with Regards to *efficiency* in this order.....
1) FWD
2) RWD
3) AWD

of course though, FWD is the worst at accelerating from a dead stop with large amounts of power......so how do we fix that problem??? Big drag radials and just throwing this out there would a nice stiff drag bar help eliminate all the weight transfer that is the biggest killer of its loss of grip.......interesting thoughts here:what:


----------



## GTIVRon (Jul 24, 2009)

Pretty sure the GT-R is a twin turbo V6...

And the veyron limits power output. I doubt at any point it puts it all to the wheels. Your comparison also nullifies your statement about power loss since both are the same drivetrain setup.

Also, show me an example of the 25% driveline power loss. Actually, show me where you got all those numbers from.


----------



## GTIVRon (Jul 24, 2009)

Also, heres that rwd vr6 i was talking about:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sxwpPm_Wsz0


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

Those numbers are from a general consensus among forum users after I did a lot of searching, they stem from the average difference crank hp, companies advertise and the actually wheel hp the car puts out. The difference being the percentage of power loss, that's my tak:laugh:e on it anyway. But any who what's the word on holding down the front end of a FWD?? Any takers...


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

Btw, badass yellow GTI!! and wow! That S4 is to sexy and sounds mean, I would love to know how to setup a FWD GTI TO A RWD leaving the engine in the front


----------



## Snitches Get Stitches (Jul 21, 2007)

The vr in an S4 is my next project in a couple years when i recover from my current situation. I overbuilt my motor for the day it gets a GT40 turbo and a new home in a 2001 imola s4....someday!!

And in regards to those numbers above from the op....longitudinal awd set-ups are typically more efficient than transverse awd set-ups. Think of the R32 driveline loss and the s4. Big difference between the torsen and haldex awd systems as well.
Check out the 034 Motorsports time attack s4 with a 24v hybrid motor. I planned my motor build off what those folks were able to accomplish with the 2.8l bottom end plus the R32 head. The useable powerband on these turbo'd VR motors is just an awesome thing to experience. 
I am with Phree, ill take mine as a 8-900whp daily driven, plush, leather wrapped, comfortable monster. Keep her under 3500rpm for local traffic ways, and unleash the wrath of the unholy VR when given the opportunity....wooohooo


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

Ummm and the Ultima GTR its a kit car it can have watever engine you want in it, but the stats I'm pulling are from American speed with a small block chevy V8 n/a engine in it


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

Snitches Get Stitches said:


> The vr in an S4 is my next project in a couple years when i recover from my current situation. I overbuilt my motor for the day it gets a GT40 turbo and a new home in a 2001 imola s4....someday!!
> 
> And in regards to those numbers above from the op....longitudinal awd set-ups are typically more efficient than transverse awd set-ups. Think of the R32 driveline loss and the s4. Big difference between the torsen and haldex awd systems as well.
> Check out the 034 Motorsports time attack s4 with a 24v hybrid motor. I planned my motor build off what those folks were able to accomplish with the 2.8l bottom end plus the R32 head. The useable powerband on these turbo'd VR motors is just an awesome thing to experience.
> I am with Phree, ill take mine as a 8-900whp daily driven, plush, leather wrapped, comfortable monster. Keep her under 3500rpm for local traffic ways, and unleash the wrath of the unholy VR when given the opportunity....wooohooo


Man everytime I come on this forum and start talking to you guys I wish I was a millionaire lol


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

Snitches Get Stitches said:


> The vr in an S4 is my next project in a couple years when i recover from my current situation. I overbuilt my motor for the day it gets a GT40 turbo and a new home in a 2001 imola s4....someday!!
> 
> And in regards to those numbers above from the op....longitudinal awd set-ups are typically more efficient than transverse awd set-ups. Think of the R32 driveline loss and the s4. Big difference between the torsen and haldex awd systems as well.
> Check out the 034 Motorsports time attack s4 with a 24v hybrid motor. I planned my motor build off what those folks were able to accomplish with the 2.8l bottom end plus the R32 head. The useable powerband on these turbo'd VR motors is just an awesome thing to experience.
> I am with Phree, ill take mine as a 8-900whp daily driven, plush, leather wrapped, comfortable monster. Keep her under 3500rpm for local traffic ways, and unleash the wrath of the unholy VR when given the opportunity....wooohooo


Man everytime I come on this forum and start talking to you guys I wish I was a millionaire lol


----------



## One Gray GLI (Apr 2, 2007)

by the way? awd > fwd. you can put 26" slicks on your car if you so please and still roast them. our platform sucks for power. mk4s are pigs.


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

One Gray GLI said:


> by the way? awd > fwd. you can put 26" slicks on your car if you so please and still roast them. our platform sucks for power. mk4s are pigs.


Oh I know awd is better than fwd for grip, my little list was just regarding efficiency, is there any way to address the gripping problem on the fwd GTI? I mean I saw a video on YouTube of the fastest civic hatchback (FWD) running a 8.50sec quarter mile! If that fwd can catch that much grip why can't ours?


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

btw this is the link to that civic......

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eX3D-himDZs&feature=related


----------



## GTIVRon (Jul 24, 2009)

That car probably weighs around 1600 lbs. You can do that too, but it's not a daily driver. Hes got probably nothing more than a seat, steering wheel, shifter, and tach in that car. He probably doesn't have any glass on the car either. I bet most of his body is of a composite material..


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

GTIVRon said:


> That car probably weighs around 1600 lbs. You can do that too, but it's not a daily driver. Hes got probably nothing more than a seat, steering wheel, shifter, and tach in that car. He probably doesn't have any glass on the car either. I bet most of his body is of a composite material..


ya your probly right....and i would still like to have somewhat of a daily driver....i guess all in all a practical fwd dragster car is just not practical lol now what about a fwd circuit car ??


----------



## One Gray GLI (Apr 2, 2007)

you'd go insane with the amount of things needed. incredibly stiff spring rates, which would probably murder your back with each bump you hit. huge slicks, boost by gear, all types of "traction" bars and such..lots of weight savings.

you'll have to reinvent the wheel on a lot of things, because no one goes into detail on these things for VWs. that's why I hate when people here hate on hondas and such, because they do it right, and have such an aftermarket following for those types of things..so much R&D as well on it.


----------



## GTIVRon (Jul 24, 2009)

I want to get into road racing, and started looking at the SCCA rules and cars. The only class the 24v can get into is GT2. And some of those people spend north of $100,000 dollars on their cars. And if your car didn't come turbo charged you can't turbo it.

IMHO, the MK4 chassis pretty much sucks for any kind of racing.


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

So, is the motor the only good part about the mk4 24v? lol


----------



## GTIVRon (Jul 24, 2009)

Yes. That is the general concensus.


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

well thats depressing :banghead: lol but i will still build up the motor (starting in T-MINUS 10months!!!!!!) and maybe someday swap it out into a better chassy, or who knows, maybe ill just be content with the way it comes out


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

Hey guys, I got my hands on a free Greddy catch can for the 24v. I want to mount it where the washer fluid is, my questions are.....the only two things I wanna worry about are the crank case breather and the valve cover breather right? And if so where is the crank case breather located? And I noticed the valve cover breather goes directly into my intake so can I just plug that hole in the intake since I'm gonna vent to atmosphere? And also there is a sensor plugged into the valve cover vent tube right near the intake, how do I bypass it without setting off codes? 

Once again thanks guys, and if there is anything else I should know feel free to tell me,


----------



## PhReE (Sep 16, 2004)

FWIW, a Turbo 24v MKIV is still a lot of fun on the street. I doubt you will be disappointed. It's a way nice day out today, with my car wasn't under construction, really wanna go for a drive.


----------



## TheDTS (Apr 7, 2011)

*ecu*

what type of software are you going to me running with this setup


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

TheDTS said:


> what type of software are you going to me running with this setup



im planning on going with C2, except with a precision or garret turbo not the rotomaster they advertise


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

*Ant the Building begins!!!*

Its been awhile but here are a few updates...... 

Welded new vent line to valve cover and sent off for chrome  along with 42 draft design catch can and fuel rail!! 

 

Got my new R32 head (on the right) :thumbup: just pulled all the valves out and sent the head in for a 3angle job, mill the head, and fix the one combution chamber that was slightly damaged by piston slap! 

 

Quick pic of bent intake valve vs a "not" bent one lol another product of piston slap :laugh: 

 

Empty R head!!! 

 

 

Alternative Man cave/Beat labratory when you dont have a garage, but you do have a spare room lol 

 

Im stuck on which valve spring set im gonna go with now.......my REV goal is atleast 8,000rpm's :laugh: so i can keep that big boi turbo spooled up! If you guys have some suggestions i would GREATLY appreciate it!!


----------



## DannyLo (Aug 2, 2006)

nice! Where do you plan to mount the catch can? I've been trying to figure out a place to put one in my bay for once. 2 years VRT now and still no catch can :laugh: Though I gotta say it's been awesome.


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

Lieutenant Dan said:


> nice! Where do you plan to mount the catch can? I've been trying to figure out a place to put one in my bay for once. 2 years VRT now and still no catch can :laugh: Though I gotta say it's been awesome.


 I got a 180degree bend that im gonna use off the valve cover thread, and the line will run from there to the catch can mounted where the windshield washer fluid is current sitting :laugh: windshield washer fluid is over rated anyway lol


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

Btw TT has the best deals on "R" valves, almost identical to OEM valves except the TT valves have single grove keepers, and not tripple (not a big deal IMO) and literally cost HALF as much, $30 vs $67 

OHHHHH and guys, if for whatever reason you have to remove the 24 damn valves from your head lol, dont let the machine shop rip you off!!! they wanted to charge me 4hrs of labor for each removal and install $700 :screwy: !!! i went and bought the VW tool for that head(a rail system) $130, and it took lil ol me all ALONE, a whole 40min wtf?? haha i got a really good deal on the rest of the work tho


----------



## .SLEEPYDUB. (Jul 28, 2005)

Why rev to 8,000? Theres really no reason.


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

.SLEEPYDUB. said:


> Why rev to 8,000? Theres really no reason.


 Never the less......


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

i mean theres really no reason to even put a turbo on a car, but we all still do it, just sayin :laugh:


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

New TT "LONG" intake valves!!!


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

*Pics Pics and more PICS!!!*

Heres some more pics of the body work me and a friend of mine did in his garage/paint shop while i am saving up for engine mods.........





























Reppin Deep in the heart of South Dakota, i miss my east coast home town


----------



## .SLEEPYDUB. (Jul 28, 2005)

but you probably wont be making power that high. I know I didnt and i ran a huge hot side


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

.SLEEPYDUB. said:


> but you probably wont be making power that high. I know I didnt and i ran a huge hot side


im sure your right, but still upgrading the valve train does still interest me :beer:


----------



## meengreenmachine (Oct 10, 2010)

I have about the same build you were looking for in my car and I posted it a while ago if you want to read what I did to it the thread is called m vr6 build I make around 500wph 

I would also suggest a bullseye power s362 double bat Turbo cause there awesome


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

meengreenmachine said:


> I have about the same build you were looking for in my car and I posted it a while ago if you want to read what I did to it the thread is called m vr6 build I make around 500wph
> 
> I would also suggest a bullseye power s362 double bat Turbo cause there awesome


Never heard of that turbo, thanks for the input tho ill def hit up your build thread :beer:


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

Polish polish POLISH!!!! helps pass the time while you waiting on other things to arrive i suppose


----------



## RBPE (Sep 4, 2011)

Cars coming on nicely! 
So did you lot across the pond only get fwd 24v's? Ours were only 4 motion and a bit over 200hp in the old A3 was bad enough with fwd (non ATB diff tho), let alone the 400-500whp+ some of you are running! 

Did you get the R32 in the States? Was thinking with the money you've spent on engine and prep you should look into sourcing Haldex for it.


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

Befor............ 

 

AFTER........... 

 

Boner!!!!! lol 

Big thanks to classic components, great quality even better price!!! :beer:


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

Little shot of it with my little 180degree turn around for the catch can!


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

Btw finally found a place who makes Custom equal length tube manifolds for the transverse mounted 24v VR's for 900-1,080euro (roughly $1,400 US) JBS makes them, im very strongly contemplating getting one for my build


----------



## Snitches Get Stitches (Jul 21, 2007)

Can u post a link or pics of such a manifold?
Thank you


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

Snitches Get Stitches said:


> Can u post a link or pics of such a manifold?
> Thank you


http://www.jbsautodesigns.co.uk/listing/174/custom-built?show=all

I already talked to them, you have to give them your entire performance setup, and they build your manifold custom to your specs :beer:


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

Got the Re-Done "R" head back today 



So many valve guides!!!! lol





And had to do a quick mock up of the fuel rail and chrome valve cover!!!!!








Ill be working on putting all the valves back into the head.........in the mean time i would really like some help from you guys, i need "R" injectors and an "R" throttle body, then it will be install time :laugh: i look in the classifieds everyday but maybe you guys have someone you know who has the things i need, Thanks ALOT!!! :beer:


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

Took me 40min to remove all 24 valves..........took me an hour to install 4 of them lol 

 

 

this is the tool that made my life during this so much easier! 

 

Do you guys think i can con TT into a sponsorship with this?? :laugh: 
COMPLETED


----------



## Jo|\| (Jul 3, 2011)

I have a few fuel parts you may be interested in. I was planning on doing a build similar to yours, but I decided to go an all motor route and don't need this big of a fuel system. 

PICS HERE: http://imgur.com/a/Hc7S0 

The FPR is http://aeromotiveinc.com/products-p...lators/13101-a1000-injected-bypass-regulator/, the injectors are Siemens 870cc, and there are 2 walbro gsl392. 

I've been looking for a stock rail and saw you had one for sale over in 3.2 technical, let me know if you want to do an exchange of some kind, or not I still want a stock rail either way. 

I also have enough AN fitting to convert the whole fuel system to AN, a Y fitting to run the two pumps in parallel, and two sets of upper/lower timing covers. 

Let me know if your interested in any of it, or if anyone else wants any of it. I'm not quite ready to go to the classifieds with it yet.


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

^^PM'd^^


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

Well financially i was gonna wait another 2-3months to start this head swap but a bad alternator is forceing me to start this weekend :bangheadconsidering i have to pull the front end off anyway)

-----ITEMS LEFT TO GET-----

-C2 SRI
-2.8head gasket
-Custom ARP head studs
-034 FPR housing
-4Bar FPR
-K&N Air Filter
-Battery Relo kit
-Alternator
-C2 Flash

AND THE ONLY THING I CANT GET MY HANDS ON FOR A DECENT PRICE(HEEEEEEEELP ME OUT!!!) an R32 Throttle Body, help me get one please guys!


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

swapped out the stock R rail for a New 034 CNC fuel rail, + twin walbro inline fuel pumps, stainless braided lines.......man super boner Haha


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

Few tear down shot 









Had only one slip up, we broke the lower chain guide on the head :facepalm: besides that it went pretty smoothly, took me about 5hrs to pull the head off! Next.......new head goes on :laugh:


----------



## GRN6IX (Jan 2, 2003)

:thumbup::thumbup:


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

couple issues......so far Napa, O'Rieleys, and autozone all have ordered the 12v version of the head gasket "kit" i need (def need the 24v version lol), dont know wtf the deal is. they order it under my specific engion (DOHC 24v 2.8lit V6 BDF) and still get the 12v "AFP" version!!!! WTF???? so i may just order the head gasket and valve cover gasket seperate, from TT, cause VW is WAAAAAAY to expensive! 

The only other issue is getting new O-Rings for the used "R" injectors, so far Napa is the only ones who can get some, and they can only get the "top" rings(.70cents a pop) for some odd reason, and fackin VW wants $6.35 per O-Ring (for the bottom rings) i mean cmon man....there fackin O-Rings :screwy: if anyone knows a different hook-up let me know! 

Thanks guys!!!! :beer:


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

hoooooooright! Got the gaskets! Next steps......

-Tap out 2.8lit block from 10mil to 11mil to accomodate new studs
-Relocate coolant tank for catch can, and run new lines
-Measure and aquire new vacuum lines (possibly get 42Drafts Inline vacuum line setup, not sure yet)
-Measure and aquire new fuel lines, and nesessary fittings
-Install new alternator
-Modify and clean up now visible heat shield

.........and the list goes on holy shatness :facepalm: its never ending lol

Another pic of the old versus new rail, crazy stuff!



and yet again another New fitment to head, once you start these projects, nothing goes as originally planned


----------



## Jo|\| (Jul 3, 2011)

Isn't the 2.8 block already at 11mm?


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

Jo|\| said:


> Isn't the 2.8 block already at 11mm?


haha so i just found out a few hours ago :facepalm: i bought the drill/tap kit from 034 for literally now reason(wasted $55 :banghead not really their fault, i suppose i didnt explain it well enough to them what exactly i was doin, they must've thought i had an R32, and not just doing an R32 head swap........whatever lol (fyi 034 also says you have to drill out the head itself for the bolts to fit.....nope the ARP bolts fit just fine, the "R" head is sittin on my car right now, ZERO drilling required) 

Anywho couple new pics..............

ARP HeadStuds 



R32 head sitting comfortably on the 2.8Block ZERO drilling required, slipped on like an OJ! also new alternator installed, and catch can and coolant reserve mocked up in their future spots!


----------



## Jo|\| (Jul 3, 2011)

I was just messing with the stock 2.8 head bolts. They fit in the 2.8 but not the 3.2 head. 034 must have meant if you run stock 2.8 bolts instead of studs.


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

Jo|\| said:


> I was just messing with the stock 2.8 head bolts. They fit in the 2.8 but not the 3.2 head. 034 must have meant if you run stock 2.8 bolts instead of studs.


ya the stock 2.8 bolts are clearly much bigger, but even if you go onto 034's website where they sell the 2.8lit 24v ARP kit, it says they wont fit the "R" head without drilling the head 1mm larger?? weird, but maybe my R head is unique idk :laugh: Isnt it Weird how the more powerful engine comes stock with smaller head studs?


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

*Progresssss*

Torqued, Timed and ready to go!



BlingBling



Here's sm i found interesting.....R32 Housing(left) 2.8lit Housing(right) notice their not very similar at all on the back side



Question, are the cam adjusters the same? cause im useing the ones off the 2.8, cause this "R" head came with everthing except those


----------



## Jo|\| (Jul 3, 2011)

Other then the position indicator ring thingy, the letter in the part number and other serial like numbers, they seem to be the same. The amount of rotation on the intake is the same, intake and exhaust on both sets are marked 24E on intake and 32A on exhaust.

Part numbers from adjusters in the pictures:
022109087K - 3.2 intake
022109088N - 3.2 exhaust

022109087E - 2.8 intake
022109088G - 2.8 exhaust

ETKA part numbers:









FYI on the exhaust adjuster there is a spring loaded internal locking pin that has to be depressed with oil pressure before it can rotate.

Album with big pics:
http://imgur.com/a/C673I

*Intake - 3.2 left / 2.8 right*









*Exhaust - 3.2 left / 2.8 right*


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

So do you fore see any issues with the difference in the adjusters? ive read up on other threads regarding this head swap, and no one really gets into the details of the difference between the two housing's and adjusters......guess it would just be good to know wether i need to get my hands on some "R" cam adjusters befor i button everything up, and throw a bunch of engine codes or sm, thanks!


----------



## Jo|\| (Jul 3, 2011)

With the amount of money you have in this build please find someone who knows, don't listen to me. 

I don't see a problem though. 

I've heard Jeff Atwood mentioned in some 3.2/2.8 hybrid post before and he definitely knows about VRs. I'd go ask him. Get one of his tunes while you're there also, he did write C2s when he worked for them.
http://www.unitedmotorsport.net/


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

Called united, and everyone is unsure wether it will cause any issues or not.......they suggest I get ahold of some R cam adjusters fml


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

Im coming to the conclusion that the R32 cam adjuster i have must've come off a euro "R" or sm ive look at a bunch of other threads doing this swap and all of them have "IDENTICAL" "R" cam gears and adjuster housings as the 2.8lit, im not sure why the cam gears in your picture are different, but my buddy back home sent a pic of his "R" cam gears (while he was tearing the engine down, from stock) and there are identical looking as my 2.8 ones, the "plate" on the backsides are the same EXACTLY, his "R" looks nothing like the one on the left in the picture. 

not only that, but i found that the upper timing chain cover that came with this head is completey different from the one that came off my car, the cam positioning sensors on it are smaller and screwed down in a different location and the plugs for them on my car dont fit??? also the "intake" adjustment valve (male end, on the adjuster housing) wont fit my plug for it aswell?? i have not heard of any of these issues and ive read through soooooo many threads on this swap, my bently manual(and VW themselves) also states that all VVT part numbers from the 2.8lit to the R32 are identical, this confuses the shat out of me....... 

Ive decided to tear everthing back down and put all my stock VVT stuff back on with the new head, and take my chances with that, if all the part numbers are the same i cant see it making a difference, and if it does, whats the worse that could happen? an engine light and runs rough? its not like i'll bend valves and blow the motor right...... 

Your thoughts are MORE than welcome at this point :thumbup:


----------



## Jo|\| (Jul 3, 2011)

The 3.2 head I have has the same vvt housing as yours, exposed oil passages, and the 2.8 head I have is also the same as your stock, internal oil passages. 

It could just be a revision change. Head over to the 3.2 forum and ask around. 

As for not running vvt I'm pretty sure it's ok. The standalone guys can't run it on their systems. I think the system fails/defaults in a safe position. It would be like cranking the motor by hand, no oil pressure to actuate the adjusters.


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

Jo|\| said:


> The 3.2 head I have has the same vvt housing as yours, exposed oil passages, and the 2.8 head I have is also the same as your stock, internal oil passages.
> 
> It could just be a revision change. Head over to the 3.2 forum and ask around.
> 
> As for not running vvt I'm pretty sure it's ok. The standalone guys can't run it on their systems. I think the system fails/defaults in a safe position. It would be like cranking the motor by hand, no oil pressure to actuate the adjusters.


 Thanks for your input man def been very helpful :beer: btw good tip off for the "R" TB on ebay, was def the best deal that i'd seen so far! and heres a comparison between the two, the "R" TB is actually so much bigger you can fit the 2.8TB inside of it :laugh:


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

These are the small differences i was reffering to just FYI...... 

on the upper timing cover, the cam position sensors are mounted different as well as being a different size all together(the R32 holes are bigger and screw mounting holes in different spots) the cam adjusting sensor ports are also smaller on the R32 

R32(top) 2.8(bottom) 

 

on the housing adjuster itself, besides the obvious physical differences there is one slight difference with the cam adjuster plugs themselves, on the "R" the intake adjuster plug is smaller than the one on the 2.8, so in other words the 2.8female plug end dosnt fit the R's if that makes any sense lol 

R32(top) 2.8(bottom)


----------



## Jo|\| (Jul 3, 2011)

Post the part numbers for the both covers and vvt housings. I'll take a look at the numbers I have and compare them to the parts system. 

The only thing I can think of is they came from a non R32 3.2L cars. Like the Touareg or Cayenne, they run Longitudinal (front to back) vs transverse (side to side) like ours. So they may just run different connectors and orientations.


----------



## Jo|\| (Jul 3, 2011)

Take a look at the upper timing cover on this MK5 R32 long block. 
http://forums.thecarlounge.com/showthread.php?4033812-FS-2008-R32-3.2-VR6-Long-block 

This Cayenne vvt looks like all the other 2.8 and 3.2 MK4 vvt setups. 
http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthread.php?3462005 

So I keep finding more info as I type this. It looks like my 3.2 adjusters and vvt housing came from a MK5. Look at the under side of the housing in this pic from a MK5 R32 build http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_oULNjMnJn...AAAmc/WvSO9WHUXAU/s1600/Further+stuff+047.jpg. Notice the little nubs of metal that point downward on the MK4 vvt housings are missing. 

Check the model number on your 3.2 head against these numbers. 
022103351F - MK5 3.2 head 
022103351D - MK4 3.2 head 

If your head is a mk4 one I think you're safe running 2.8 adjusters and vvt housing. I remember reading something about being able to run mk5 adjusters and vvt on a mk4 head, but I don't know about mixing MK4/5 adjusters and vvt. Either go full mk4 or mk5. 

Check vvt housing, timing cover and seals against these numbers. If they don't match post the numbers you have. The numbers on the seals are on the outside of the cover and a VERY tiny, probably .5mm or less tiny. 

Upper timing cover 
066109122H - MK4 R32 
066109122K - MK5 R32 

Upper timing cover seals 
066109091A - 2.8 & MK4 3.2 
03H109091 - MK5 R32 

VVT housing 
066109210AA - MK4 R32 
03H109210B - MK5 R32


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

Jo|\| said:


> Take a look at the upper timing cover on this MK5 R32 long block.
> http://forums.thecarlounge.com/showthread.php?4033812-FS-2008-R32-3.2-VR6-Long-block
> 
> This Cayenne vvt looks like all the other 2.8 and 3.2 MK4 vvt setups.
> ...


 
The vvt housing in the pic of that mk5 R32 is identical to the one i got with my 3.2 head, i think your right my head mustve come off a mk5 R32, its the only thing that makes sense. I will pull some numbers of the housing and cover tho just to cross reference out of curiousity. 

Since the actual head it self is the same mold as a mk4, i dought putting ALL my vvt components back on will be an issue at all, do you agree? since it will basically just make it a "mk4 R32" head correct?


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

This little thread basically sums up everything http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthread.php?5337272-R32-mk5-cylinder-head, basically my vvt housing IS off of a Mk5, using all 2.8 vvt stuff should NOT be an issue here considering the heads are identical :beer:


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

So Part numbers for the cover and vvt housing i have are as follows....... 

Upper timing cover 
066-109-147-F 


Upper timing cover seals 
03H-109-091 


VVT housing 
03H-109-210A 

:screwy:


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

Fuel lines hooked up!



Extneded ignition wires to come from the back instead of over the center, and MAF wires for the new MAF postion


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

Did a lil more work this weekend, fab'ed up a cool lil bracket to hold the outboard fuse box, vacuum manifold and jumper terminals(since the battery is in the rear now) and covered up the ingnition wires with a temperary idea untill i have time to fab sm nice up(at this point i just want the car to run again)


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

Phew i know its been a good minute, but i ran into more than enough issues, and still counting.....First i got the new R head on pretty easy(the HPA clone intake was the hardest fitment) started the car up and it ran like garbage :banghead: compression checks found nothing was sealing up. Pulled the head BACK off!!!! brought it to a different machine shop and found that the previous shop gave it a horrible valve job, never the less, new shop re-did the valve job, did a vacuum and pressure test, everything was holding. Put the head BACK on, hooked everything up(except water, just to make sure it ran better) started up beautifully! hooked up water and all the other lil things, and started her up and let it idle to temp, besides a few lil blips it idles really good, so i brought it around the block to find that under a load it has NO power and hesitates extremely bad, aswell as some weird wine/grind noise starting around 2000rpms and up getting louder as you speed up, but sitting in nuetral the noise never comes when you rev it(this being the least of my concerns considering the power loss) then i get back home and pull these codes off the ECM in this order......

-P0300(Random/Multiple Cylinder Misfire Detected)
-P1050(VVT Control Circuit Bank 1 Electrical Malfunction)
-P0304(Cyl. 4 misfire)
-P1364(Cyl. 4 ignition circuit Open Circuit)
-P0204(Cyl. 4 Injector Circuit Fault in electrical circuit)


Could the P1050 be an oil passage being blocked somewhere to the exaust cam adjusting gear? 

Theres seemingly alot going on with cylinder 4, but to be fair i new it was firing when i got back from around the block, so i did a compression check across the board and all cylinders were in limit and the were all getting spark so i figured it was an injector issue, so while it was running i pulled the injector plug wire and tested it with a node light to make sure it was getting power(it was) but because i pulled that plug while it was running thats more than likely the reason for the last two codes. I pulled the whole rail off and watched all the injectors spray(including Cyl. 4) so its not an injector problem.....so WHY is #4 doing little to nothing??(i swapped plugs and coil packs to so rule them out)

Just FYI changes.......

-Battery relocate to the back
-SAI Delete(pysical and software)
-Extended all the ignition coil wires(going to thoroughly check them, could a broken wire somewhere cause it to spark incorrectly?)

Engine sound @ idle
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGPYpyrwDKc&feature=youtu.be


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

Bump


----------



## joeeveryman87 (Dec 6, 2010)

i did a compression check, went as follows......

-Cylinder-

#1-100psi
#2-100psi
#3-100psi
#4-105psi
#5-100psi
#6-100psi

oddly enough cylinder 4(which is having most the issues) has the highest PSI wtf???

you think with such consistant compression numbers, this pretty much has to be a timing issue?

awaiting your thoughts.......


----------

