# High Comp All Motor VR6's, our turn to come together....



## DUBZAK (Oct 27, 2009)

Hey guys, 
I recently completed my new 2.9l bottom end build, and have been enjoying a nice new feeling higher comp VR on cams. 

Ive been experimenting with software tunes and thought since we are the non boosted crowd (which btw, maybe one day....) I would like to see some of you sharing some details on what you are doing/did. (prefer the "did" part, but if your still building its ok).

Fun threads are needed here, post a few pics of the motor or motor and car, and the details I have exampled below. :thumbup:

Displacement or Bore:
Internals:
Management: example megasquirt, C2, TT, GIAC
Comp Ratio: 10.5 + 
Headgasket Type: example MK3 OE, MK4 Metal ect....
Headwork and Type: example BVH with +3 valves, porting, 3 angle
Cams: (manufacturer and duration degree)
Bolt on's: example 2.9 oem manifold, 2.9 tb, turn 2 intake
Exhaust: self explanitory, OE or other
Random: Any other mods used to attain a great running NA vr such as MSD coils, ect...

I'll go first....

















*Displacement or Bore: *82MM .040 overbore
* 
Chip Tune/Stand Alone Type: *Techtonics Cam Chip
*
Internals: *IE Balanced H-Beam Rods, ARP Hardware, Wiseco Forged Pistons, Ceramic coated piston tops

* Comp Ratio: *~11.2 to 1
* 
Headgasket Type: *MK4 OEM metal *

Headwork and Type: *stock* 

Cams: *Eurospec Sport 268's .440 lift 
* 
Bolt on's: *2.9l oem Euro Corrado manifold, 2.9l Heat Shielded TB, Custom Heat Shielded Intake w/ K&N Neuspeed P-FLO Filter, 10lb Flywheel, Aluminum Pulley Set, Godspeed Aluminum Radiator, BFI Stg. 2 mounts. 
*
Exhaust: *3" Stainless MBS Downpipe Back, with Test Pipe*, *EGR Delete with OEM Non EGR manifolds* 

Random: *Decked Block, B3 Passat Gearbox, 1st gen. Distributor VR6

All videos before cam chip added. :what: :laugh:
















_*Come together........*_



and here's a blank template to copy and paste your reply. :beer:

Displacement or Bore:
Managment:
Internals:
Comp Ratio: 
Headgasket Type: 
Headwork and Type: 
Cams: 
Bolt on's: 
Exhaust: 
Random:


----------



## petergiarrizzo (May 31, 2010)

12v or 24v??


----------



## acee_dub (Jun 12, 2008)

petergiarrizzo said:


> 12v or 24v??


----------



## wav3form (Dec 7, 2008)

acee_dub said:


>


:laugh:


----------



## TaintedRide (Mar 31, 2006)

I'll play 

Displacement or Bore: stock 2.8 bottom end
Comp Ratio: 10.5:1 (its not high compression but it is all motor )
Headgasket Type: MK4 metal head gasket 
Headwork and Type: 3-angle valve job, port and polish, gasket matched intake ports
Cams: DRC 268 cams/ HD valve springs
Bolt on's: LW crank/power steering pulleys, 4-bar FPR, Turn2 intake, autotech 10lb flywheel, neuspeed 8mm plug wires
Exhaust: TT 2.5 inch cat-back with borla muffler and 42dd 2.5 inch test pipe
Chip: GIAC 268 cam chip


----------



## need_a_VR6 (May 19, 1999)

I would post but 10.5:1 doesn't 'feel' high compression to me


----------



## WannabeVWguy (Sep 22, 2002)

Agreed that 10.5:1 isn't really considered high compression but to hell with it...i feel like posting my car  Maybe after i buy my head i'll build a 2.9L bottom end with 11:1 compression. Problem is that alot of these modification need some kind of standalone system or custom software to really take advantage of it and make it work to its full potential.

Displacement or Bore: Stock balanced/rebuilt 2.8L bottom end
Internals: stock
Comp Ratio: 10.5:1 
Headgasket Type: MK4 Metal Headgasket
Headwork and Type: Port matched head to lower and lower to upper intakes. Port matched exhaust ports with a mild polish to both intake and exhaust sides
Cams: 268 DRC cams, Lightweight Lifters, Autotech HD Valve Springs
Bolt on's: Turn 2 intake, S2 Metalwerks Header, 2.9 clone intake manifold
Exhaust: S2 metalwerks header, stock cat, modified single muffler 2.5 inch Scorpion catback
Random: C2 motorsports mk4 gasket and 268 cams software, BFI Delrin stage 2 motor mounts, 3.67 R&P with a Peloquin LSD

I wanna play around with the software a bit and try the 1.8T intake temp sensor. Also i am saving my pennies for SCCH stage 2 head. foaming at the mouth for that


----------



## -skidmarks- (Dec 31, 2006)

need_a_VR6 said:


> I would post but 10.5:1 doesn't 'feel' high compression to me



thats what i was thinking.


----------



## TaintedRide (Mar 31, 2006)

WannabeVWguy how do you like the s2 headers? Do you feel a big difference with them, and have you gotten any dyno's of your car?


----------



## KubotaPowered (Jan 27, 2005)

need_a_VR6 said:


> I would post but 10.5:1 doesn't 'feel' high compression to me


ditto, lets see some REAL high compression set ups


----------



## WannabeVWguy (Sep 22, 2002)

TaintedRide said:


> WannabeVWguy how do you like the s2 headers? Do you feel a big difference with them, and have you gotten any dyno's of your car?


I haven't driven the car with them on yet :laugh:

I am in the middle of doing brakes and changing my ABS unit as its acting up. If this ABS unit acts up again im pulling it out and deleting the ABS.


----------



## DUBZAK (Oct 27, 2009)

need_a_VR6 said:


> I would post but 10.5:1 doesn't 'feel' high compression to me


If the car is a AAA VR6, technically your higher than stock so it counts. 



petergiarrizzo said:


> 12v or 24v??


Hey....New guy.....the forum names are up top on the left. You must be lost. :laugh: 



KubotaPowered said:


> ditto, lets see some REAL high compression set ups


Yes please. 

:thumbup: for S2 metalworks.


----------



## Northren vr6 (May 29, 2004)

I'll play.

Stock bottom 
Crankscraper
ARP hardware rods/head/main
L/W stock Flywheel
3.94 R+P / Peloquin
Stock clutch / PP
Mk4 HG
42/36 P+P head
PS delete
AC delete
UR pulley set
schrick VGI
TT 288's
MSD coils
C2 PEM Big cam chip
TT 2.5 catback, Cat delete, removed 2.25" section

I'll post a dyno later, its pretty funny. :laugh:
NO power till 5500, peak HP 6600 rpm.

Best time to date is a 14.47 @ 94.6 before the head / 288's

Weakest link is between the steeringwheel and drivers seat.


----------



## black6ixxx (Mar 12, 2006)

I wont be playing, but ill def watch


----------



## need_a_VR6 (May 19, 1999)

As it was last run..

Displacement or Bore: 2.8/81mm
Internals: stock 141k miles
Comp Ratio: 10.5:1 
Headgasket Type: MK4 Meta
Headwork and Type: Race Shop 001 *ported* stock valve head, stock valve job
Cams: Schrick 268
Bolt on's: Turn2 intake, Schrick vgi with locked flapper, ported manifolds, ported downpipe, GIAC chip, 1.8t IAT, obd2 tb, light flywheel, UR pulleys
Exhaust: TT/Borla 2.5 with 42 draft test pipe
Random: Peloquin, 3.94, B&M, Race Shop side reduction, drag radials or slicks, 93 octane WAWA gas, weight reduced.










198whp no matter what I did, I think those pulls were with low #4 compression. 

Ran [email protected] with the 268s, [email protected] with 262s, and [email protected] on 262s and 225 BFG drag radials. Weight was 2450-2550 with driver depending on prep.

Now it's got a 'big' high comp motor but I cheated.


----------



## Scotty_2.0 (Jan 14, 2005)

Well since you since you opened the door to builds in progress, I suppose I'm allowed in....lol


My car:











My parts:

Top End:
TT 268 cams
Ferrea 41mm intake valves
Ferrea 36mm exhaust valves
Ferrea HD valve springs
Ferrea Ti retainers
Ferrea single groove keepers
TT oversized valve seats.
Autotech SS exhaust studs
APR UC head studs

Bottom End:
Wiseco 82.5mm forged pistons (10.5:1 comp - 11:1 with Mk4 HG)
ARP main stud kit
ARP rod bolt kit

Extra goodies:
BFI stage 0.5 poly mounts
Verdict Motorsports coilpack spacer
Verdict Motorsports shifter bushings
Mason Tech billet crack pipe
TT 2" downpipe
Gruvenparts alum tensioner pulley
Neuspeed UD pulleys
ACT 8.3lb 1pc flywheel
ACT 6pad spring disc
ACT HD pressure plate
42DD SAI plug
Low temp T-stat (70*)
Low temp fan switch

Some progress pics:


----------



## DUBZAK (Oct 27, 2009)

need_a_vr6, :thumbup: and nothing wrong with a "big block" VR6 in an older chasis. 

Scotty, made that rule up to make sure you were included. 

Oh, my proofreadng skills fail. I missed managment for the listing, but included it on my own. 

What are you guys running for tune?!?!?!


----------



## Scotty_2.0 (Jan 14, 2005)

Got a custom TT EPROM last week that I'll be using....


----------



## typeSLone (Feb 8, 2002)

Old picture before I changed a bunch of stuff.
Specs:
90K dizzy motor
Mk4 HG
Lightweight lifters
Autotech 262's
1.8T IAT
Turn2 clone intake
TT 2.5" magnaflow exhaust
Under drive pullies
LW flywheel
2.9L clone manifold
TT cam chip
Poly mounts
B&M shifter
Corrado trans brace
Aluminum shifter bracket bushings

Trans is said to be stock, case has definetly been opened before and it leaves two clear as day strips when you peel out but I don't see any signs of a diff in it, so who knows.
Motor was "stock" in pieces when I got it from a friend, it originally had schricks in it, so I dont know what valve springs it has, it was originally said to have a big valve head, my buddy took it apart, it didn't. May have had port work done, I didn't pay attention. I just slapped the motor back together, I did have to plug up the secondary air port on the head. It came from a non-egr, non secondary air 92 car so that leaves more questions to ponder.

Best I could muster up at show-n-go was a 14.85 @ 95 or 96mph, dont have the slip in front of me. 60ft' was a horrible 2.7. That was on aired down summer compound street tires with 2.25" exhuast, no 2.9clone or 1.8t iat sensor, spinning thru 2nd gear and weighing somewher around 2700lbs.


----------



## need_a_VR6 (May 19, 1999)

Added some more details to mine as well, best ET's on a few different setups there at the end. I was running a GIAC cam chip for all of them but switched to Megasquirt last season but had lots of motor problems, and yanked the twelver.


----------



## DUBZAK (Oct 27, 2009)

Sweet looking stuff in here. :thumbup:



need_a_VR6 said:


> I was running a GIAC cam chip for all of them but switched to Megasquirt last season but had lots of motor problems, and yanked the twelver.


I am testing some TT custom software right now due to the brand new in box GIAC 268 file chip that has a bad encryption board. 
I didn't end up installing the chip until after the warranty period to find it was no good.   

I wanted some of you to share to see what other options are available for managment besides looking at some sweet builds. I keep coming back to MS as a really viable alternative to chip tunes only "close" to my set up. 

And to all you 13.0 to 1 people, where the hell are you? :laugh: 

MOAR PLZ


----------



## typeSLone (Feb 8, 2002)

DUBZAK said:


> I am testing some TT custom software right now due to the brand new in box GIAC 268 file chip that has a bad encryption board


How is that working out for you? I had Collin @ TT send me a standard dizzy vr6 cam chip and modify it slightly for the raised compression with the mk4 hg when I build this car. Its been good for a year but with the addition of a bunch of other mods I've noticed its been running rich, the black puff of smoke when I shift at redline and the state emissions sniffer confirm it. Ive been thinking about having him remap it for me.

I had Collin @ TT write me a custom chip on my old 2.0 16v. That was an 11.5:1 comp motor with a laundry list of stuff done to it. The software worked out great, just had some pinging issues in the hot heat. Nothing a little 100 octance and playing with the timing couldn't fix.


----------



## jettaowner718 (Dec 23, 2004)

what is the point of using the 1.8t iat?


----------



## typeSLone (Feb 8, 2002)

jettaowner718 said:


> what is the point of using the 1.8t iat?


Taken from one of root beer's old threads.

The stock IAT sensor is closed element, and prone to heat soak in the vr manifold. The 1.8t sensor plugs directly in, and when wires are extended to a location that gets proper airflow, away from hot engine parts, proper Iat's are achieved. The ecu interprets this data, and gives a tick more ignition timing. Need a vr6 posted up a dyno a while ago showing his gains from this sensor.


----------



## 28 (Aug 29, 2001)

DUBZAK said:


> I'll go first....
> 
> *Displacement or Bore: *82MM .040 overbore
> *
> ...


Hows that 3" exhaust sound? I haven't heard of one on an N/A motor. Stock downpipe? 

going to do headwork next?


----------



## kraftaroni (Feb 1, 2005)

Displacement or Bore: 82MM 

Chip Tune/Stand Alone Type: GIAC

Internals: ARP Hardware, Blueprinted by myself all stock

Comp Ratio: 10.5 to 1

Headgasket Type: MK4 OEM metal 

Headwork and Type: Ported by me

Cams:264 drc

Bolt on's: 2.9l clone home made, 2.9l TB,  13lb Flywheel, Aluminum Pulley Set, 

Exhaust: 3" custom exhaust I just cut and welded together

Random: Custom made header made 12 whp with header and chip! Made 192whp before I did the euro T.B. full underdrive pully set, and MSD coilpack conversion


----------



## vw1320 (Jul 11, 2000)

Displacement or Bore: Stock
Managment: Haltech
Internals: Stock with ARP rod bolts
Comp Ratio: 10.x:1
Headgasket Type:mk4 metal
Headwork and Type: Stock
Cams: 288's
Bolt on's: yes
Exhaust: 3"
Random: As driven on the street minus the front slicks


----------



## DUBZAK (Oct 27, 2009)

very nice,and I see them there 288's :laugh:



typeSLone said:


> How is that working out for you?........... Nothing a little 100 octance and playing with the timing couldn't fix.


Same tune I believe. :thumbup: I had to run 100 octane before the tune came! 

I wish vr timing was as easy to adjust as a 16v 

Ill get back to you on the drivability once I can really smash on it and see.




28 said:


> Hows that 3" exhaust sound? I haven't heard of one on an N/A motor. Stock downpipe?
> 
> going to do headwork next?


Like a 100ft chewbacca getting raped. Yup stock dp.
Ill have a rippin vid soon. :laugh: Added some to my post. 

Headwork will come after more traction . See my sig for the real build thread (kinda....) :laugh:


----------



## vdubxcrew (Jul 25, 2004)

My turn:

93 dizzy Corrado:


Displacement or Bore: 2.8 stock

Managment: custom TT chip

Internals: stock bottom end internals with the exception of a crank scraper

Comp Ratio: about 10.6:1

Headgasket Type: MK4 metal

Headwork and Type: ported/worked Robert Allen BVH w/ 41mm Supertech int valves, Supertech stock exh valves, HD springs, titanium retainers

Cams: DRC 268's

Bolt on's: ported & polished SCHRICK intake manifold and ported/gasket matched lower mani, p & p'd throttle body, billet 9.5lb F1 Racing flywheel, ACT upgraded pressure plate with stock clutch disc, OBX lightweight underdrive pulley kit with AC deleted, generic/copied Turn2 CAI w/ AEM dryflow filter, BFI stg 1 and VF eng mounts, O2A trans w/ 3.94 r&p, Peloquin diff, early VR6 trans brace, B&M short shifter w/ Race shop S2S kit, aluminum shifter bracket bushingsInnovate LC1 wideband, alot of weight reduction

Exhaust: ported and ceramic coated stock exh mani's, ceramic coated TT downpipe, 42DD test pipe, custom 2.5 staight pipe 

Random: About a few years ago I experimented with a Water Meth kit on the motor and have to say I was pleased with the results. It was during the summer during a very hot spell and with the meth it felt like the car was running strong like a spirited drive on a crisp November morning. I would drive it hard then pull over and pop the hood, the intake manifold would be cold to the touch and covered in perspiration. For those who say WM is only for forced intuction, you are wrong. It's very worth it for keeping temps down on hot days and keeping ignition timing as max as possible. Plus it cleans your combustion chamber, etc.


----------



## need_a_VR6 (May 19, 1999)

DUBZAK said:


> keep coming back to MS as a really viable alternative to chip tunes only "close" to my set up.


It beat out GIAC by 3-4whp everywhere (see above dyno) on the day I did back to backs. Considering the GIAC chip is pretty good, I'd say it's worth something.


----------



## TaintedRide (Mar 31, 2006)

Vdubxcrew what size water/meth nozzle do you have on your car? I have been setting up a kit for my car so that it will run on a window switch style set-up and so when I give it half or more it will come on. Im just not sure what size nozzle to run because I dont want to cause misfires.


----------



## vdubxcrew (Jul 25, 2004)

I'll have to go check. The kit came off when I took the motor out of the GTI and put it in the Corrado. It was the stock size nozzle from a generic kit.


----------



## dubbinmk2 (Jan 15, 2008)

the amount of money you spend on NA motor might as well boost it.... i just cant see spending 5 grand on NA motor to get 190 HP or something


----------



## DUBZAK (Oct 27, 2009)

dubbinmk2 said:


> the amount of money you spend on NA motor might as well boost it.... i just cant see spending 5 grand on NA motor to get 190 HP or something


 
find a different thread to troll on then since you have nothing to contribute. 

I personally want to enjoy my car as I build it up before I add boost.


----------



## bmxsic (Apr 9, 2008)

That's really the best way to go though.
Build your block up with certain things cause once 
its enough hp NA. You boost it and you'll have MUCH
more gains then just adding a turbo. Its really
much more efficient that way. Big valve head,
port an polished too. forged pistons and lightened crank
and balanced. Bigger injectors for the air an such. ECU.
Its just better that way. then boosting after that's been 
done means less work and more power.

But sorry guys, AWESOME thread, but for now
I have nothing to contribute.


----------



## DUBZAK (Oct 27, 2009)

bmxsic said:


> Its just better that way.


Exactly why I chose to run IE H beams on a N/A motor. My piston choice was also selected to have a happy medium, and go boost or N/A.  8.5 to 1 spacer will make me around ~9.2 to 1 comp and the bottom end is ready for boost. 



bmxsic said:


> But sorry guys, AWESOME thread


 

gotta be more than this out there....:sly:


----------



## Mk4 VR6 (Jun 11, 2004)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UpbsrzJ9fHM
post specs later


----------



## kraftaroni (Feb 1, 2005)

I built my motor and put a lsd in my tranny for under 2,500. I built it almost 3 years ago since then all I have done is changed my oil and cleaned my air filter. I put my slicks in my car and drive to the track by-weekly. The only thing I have broken is a motor mount bolt which I upgraded to an ARP. Sure you can get more power out of a turbo car. In the long run your going to spend more money period. All a N/A VR6 needs to run low 13's high 12's is head work, cams, exhaust, chip, a R&P and weight reduction. Mine runs low 13's with a stock R&P. I have a full kinetic kit at home sitting in the garage and I haven't put it on because I see all the transmission/motor mount/clutch problems the turbo guys run into at the track. Honestly, I may still put the turbo kit in but I'm sure I'll start breaking parts right away! I don't understand why people always have to comment about, "Why be N/A when turbo is faster". keep you comments in the forced induction forum then!


----------



## TaintedRide (Mar 31, 2006)

dubbinmk2 said:


> the amount of money you spend on NA motor might as well boost it.... i just cant see spending 5 grand on NA motor to get 190 HP or something


Not everyone spends 5 grand on their all motor VR's, if you take your time and wait to find some deals out there it is possible to build one for a lot less and most of the upgrades double as maintenance. After you have done a few upgrades/maintenance it will prepare your car for FI or just allow it to run longer. Now when people up their displacement that can get expensive and with very little improvement because with these motors the results are kind of diminishing. Here is a breakdown of what I spent on my car just for an example. I had been buying parts for about a year before I actually had everything ready to install. 

Rebuilt head with a P&P, 3-Angle valve job, gasket matched intake- *700*
DRC 268 cams- *275*
HD valve springs- *70*
LW pullies- *75*
4 Bar FPR- *FREE*
GIAC 268 Cam chip-*75*
Turn2 Intake- *100*
Autotech 10lb flywheel- *75*
MK4 Headgasket kit- *90*
OEM clutch kit- *80*
OEM coolant hoses- *150* 
Timing chain kit- *60*
Test pipe and 2.5 inch Borla cat-back- *190*
B&M short shift- *65*

All of these items where brand new never installed except for the turn2 intake and flywheel, in total I spent about 2k and saved well over 500 dollars by searching the classifieds. With this set-up I am pretty close to 200whp and the engine is very solid. 

I just did a compression test last week and the numbers were pretty impressive, highest was 180 and lowest was 165. The block has 115k miles on it and doesnt show any signs of giving up soon. Hope this helps some people, and yes you build one even cheaper yet.


----------



## .T.o.n.y. (Apr 3, 2003)

bmxsic said:


> That's really the best way to go though.
> Build your block up with certain things cause once
> its enough hp NA. You boost it and you'll have MUCH
> more gains then just adding a turbo. Its really
> ...


Have you noticed the NA guys being just as fast 1/4 mile if not FASTER that turbo? Its preference on how you like your power, i have my VRT and its fun and all rolling into burn outs in 3rd gear... but my buddy who had all bolt ons with MK4 HG would keep with me until roughly 60-70mph... granted once this speed was reached i blew by him at the speed of sound but the point being it was dumb. Here i have a well built VRT and a bolt on VR is keeping up 0-60? Im currently building a mild NA VR to swap into my daily because theres something about all motor power thats intoxicating.


----------



## bmxsic (Apr 9, 2008)

2.Quick said:


> Here i have a well built VRT and a bolt on VR is keeping up 0-60?


Exactly. I'm currently in the build of an NA motor, but will be boosted later.
Details:
Stock cams[best for boost]
Big valve head with port an polish.
Ported throttle body and intake manifold.
Stronger pistons[not sure which yet]
WOT box.
metal head gasket.
probably around 9.5:1 or 9:1 compression.
ARP head bolts an studs.
Block bored to 2.9 or new 
block thats 3.6vr


Eventually:
Kinetic Motorsport Stage2 turbo kit
pushing around 20-25 psi.


----------



## TaintedRide (Mar 31, 2006)

Do you any of you guys have your times at the track?


----------



## typeSLone (Feb 8, 2002)

TaintedRide said:


> Do you any of you guys have your times at the track?


Haha, I went 14.85 @ 97, IIRC. 2.7 60' at spring show n go. Wasn't a good day.

Mk2 with aired down street tires. Dizzy motor had the standard bolt on (Cai, pullies, l/w flywheel, and chip). Stock ccm trans with open diff with a 2.25" 4 cylinder exhaust on the car. I weighed in around 2750lbs, rather heavy. For the record I weight only 155lbs, I had alot of junk in the car and couldn't get traction out of the hole. Spun thru second everytime. I launched about 2k rpms and rode the clutch out thru first. My trap speed says I should be faster. Ive since put a proper exhaust on the car, 2.9 manifold, 1.8T IAT, 13.5 lbs wheels instead of 22 lbs wheels and some other weight reduction. No diff or r&p swap yet though, Hoping for high 13's next round out regardless.


----------



## DUBZAK (Oct 27, 2009)

Mk4 VR6 said:


> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UpbsrzJ9fHM
> post specs later


Its later.  

Bump for moar.


----------



## need_a_VR6 (May 19, 1999)

TaintedRide said:


> Do you any of you guys have your times at the track?


Once or twice. The last time I went was only a [email protected] completely blowing the 22" slicks up in 1st and some of 2nd. Threw the serp belt on the next pass and haven't been back in a bit.


----------



## carsluTT (Dec 31, 2004)

ill dig around and find what ive put into my motor....


----------



## DUBZAK (Oct 27, 2009)

Lack there of shows the NA to VRT ratio is askew :what: :laugh:


----------



## Scotty_2.0 (Jan 14, 2005)

DUBZAK said:


> Lack there of shows the NA to VRT ratio is askew :what: :laugh:


Yeah, it's unfortunate, but I can see why. Even with my big $$ NA build, I know I won't yeild anything close to the numbers VRT buys are getting. The way I look at it, at least I'll be even better prepared for boost if/when I go that route...


----------



## quickyg60 (Dec 21, 2002)

did anyone take a look at the video that 1320 posted on here


----------



## TaintedRide (Mar 31, 2006)

Yes that video was very impressive. Anyone else have something similar


----------



## VeedubR6 (Nov 12, 2008)

i'll play. it's a work in progress (block at the machine shop, i'm working on the head right now, etc..) 

Displacement or Bore: *82mm* 
Management: *i'll let you know when i figure it out* 
Internals: *stock rods, OEM 82mm pistons, polished and balanced crank* 
Comp Ratio: *aiming for around 11:1* 
Headgasket Type: *mkIV metal* 
Headwork and Type: *OEM valves, guides, retainers, lifters, etc., TT poly valve seals, HD springs, mild port and polish, gasket matched* 
Cams: *haven't decided yet, thinking of going w/ 262s or 264s. any thoughts?* 
Bolt on's: *neuspeed intake, 2.9 euro manifold, OBDII polished TB, EGR delete planned* 
Exhaust: *42DD test pipe to stock exhaust right now, planning on some custom 2.5" work coupled with a TT downpipe probably* 
Random: *block decked, rebuilt GTI trans, BFI stage 1 mounts* 

my humble beginning to an NA build :thumbup:


----------



## XracerX (Jan 18, 2002)

i got my motor back from the machine shop yesterday...so its time to start my build. 
my specs 
Displacement or Bore: 82mm 
Managment: oem with giac chip 
Internals: oe 2.9 corrado pistons 
Comp Ratio: should be somewhere around 10.5 to 1 
Headgasket Type: mk4 metal gasket 
Headwork and Type: oe valves, mild port and polish and gasket match 
Cams: tt 268 
Bolt on's: clone 2.9 manifold, cheap ebay cold air(cant find a used turn2) 
Exhaust: custom 2.5" (was on the car when i got it), ported stock manifolds 

im hoping to get somewhere around 200whp with this setup. i've only got abput $1500 into it so far, but i am doing all the labor myself. :thumbup:


----------



## Nuzzi (Oct 18, 2001)

i guess ill put my pos up here just to help out the numbers, its a 90 corrado vr swap, obd1 coilpack 
Displacement or Bore: stock 
Managment: Giac 268 file 
Internals: stock, full ARP hardware 
Headgasket Type: mk4 metal 
Headwork and Type: 3 angle valve job, lightweight lifters, titanium retainers, nitrite coated undercut dished valves, high rev springs 
Cams: DRC 268 
Bolt on's: deleted-sai, isv, p/s, a/c, egr and aux water pump, lw UD crank pulley, lw water pump pulley, 2.9 tb, abd big bore intake, ITG filter, relocated iat, custom intake heat shield, intake mani heat spacer, GM coilpack, coilpack heat spacer, low temp thermo and switch, single row timing chains, autotech 10lb flywheel, crank oil scraper, walbro high flow fuel pump, completely gutted and lightweighted. 
Exhaust: custom 3" side exit down pipe back, high flow cat 
random: diesel geek short shifter, every upgraded bushing and mount, dual slim rad fans, 7lb batt relocated to back seat location, only use full synthetic oil.


----------



## Nuzzi (Oct 18, 2001)

any of you running larger injectors? if so what size? im curious to see if going a step up from the stock 21lb to say 24lb would give any power, stock displacement.


----------



## DUBZAK (Oct 27, 2009)

VeedubR6 said:


> i'll play. it's a work in progress (block at the machine shop, i'm working on the head right now, etc..)
> 
> Displacement or Bore: *82mm*
> Management: *i'll let you know when i figure it out*
> ...


 Be carefull decking that far. I know the deck work on mine was small, but I was left with barely over .006 of clearance after decking. Hitting 11:1 on OE pistons is going to be a lttle tough to do. Otherwise, solid set up. 



XracerX said:


> i got my motor back from the machine shop yesterday...so its time to start my build.
> my specs
> Displacement or Bore: 82mm
> Managment: oem with giac chip
> ...


 200WHP might be a longshot, depending on how "mild" that headwork is.  :thumbup:



Nuzzi said:


> i guess ill put my pos up here just to help out the numbers, its a 90 corrado vr swap, obd1 coilpack
> Displacement or Bore: stock
> Managment: Giac 268 file
> Internals: stock, full ARP hardware
> ...


 :thumbup:


Nuzzi said:


> any of you running larger injectors? if so what size? im curious to see if going a step up from the stock 21lb to say 24lb would give any power, stock displacement.


 Im playing around right now with the 24# Audi V6 injectors. Red tops I believe. I only want to run them because of better atomization. Weather or not they will work for a semi-stock set up is kind of in the air, hell not even sure if they will work at all on a VR, but I will try and let you know.

Im glad this thread is alive. :beer:


----------



## Nuzzi (Oct 18, 2001)

cool man, i just figure with all the extra flow a little more fuel would gain some power, but not so much as to run rich.


----------



## VeedubR6 (Nov 12, 2008)

DUBZAK said:


> Be carefull decking that far. I know the deck work on mine was small, but I was left with barely over .006 of clearance after decking. Hitting 11:1 on OE pistons is going to be a lttle tough to do. Otherwise, solid set up.


 10.5 ish it is then haha. i was just assuming with the mkIV metal head gasket plus however much they take off with the decking that i would be close to 11:1. the machine shop is only taking off what they need to get it straight though. thanks for the advice in my build thread a while back too :thumbup:


----------



## DUBZAK (Oct 27, 2009)

:laugh: Decking might make you 10.6:1 or 10.7:1, not bad at all. :thumbup:

And no sweat on the advice, :beer: just get it done!  :beer:


----------



## Scotty_2.0 (Jan 14, 2005)

DUBZAK said:


> Im playing around right now with the 24# Audi V6 injectors. Red tops I believe. I only want to run them because of better atomization. Weather or not they will work for a semi-stock set up is kind of in the air, hell not even sure if they will work at all on a VR, but I will try and let you know.


 That reminds me about a friend of mine that was running BMW E36 injectors from a 325 engine (M50 or M52 can't remember) in his 12V. The engine was stock other than his GIAC chip and he swore it made more power although I'm not sure if I believed him. Although the BMW injectors had a different spray pattern from the stock VR. Believe the Bimmer ones were a cone spray and the VR ones are a 6 pin hole arragement. Either way, I think the main difference would be atomization like you said....:sly:


----------



## XracerX (Jan 18, 2002)

DUBZAK said:


> 200WHP might be a longshot, depending on how "mild" that headwork is.  :thumbup:
> 
> 
> :thumbup:


 i know that it is.....thats why im "hoping" for 200. the setup i have now made 194ish at the wheels. which is pretty good for a na vr6. im using the same head with a bit more displacement, and a better intake manifold. we'll see what happens when i get the build done. got the block painted today.....not as much work as i would have liked but it needed to be done. all the guys i work with say im crazy for not going turbo....but i just love the sound of a na vr6 at full throttle.


----------



## DUBZAK (Oct 27, 2009)

XracerX said:


> the setup i have now made 194ish at the wheels.


  "Mild port work"  :laugh:
Thats one healthy VR. :thumbup:



XracerX said:


> guys I work with say im crazy for not going turbo....but i just love the sound of a na vr6 at full throttle.


 :screwy: they should read this thread then and see how N/A VR6's are keeping up with the boosted kids o-60ish. 

To all the naysayers of NA VR6's who drive a VRT. "Tractions a Bitch huh?"  :laugh:


----------



## XracerX (Jan 18, 2002)

the 194ish dyno was from the previous owner. he did have proof of the run...so im hoping. the car did pull pretty hard when i got it so it could be right. he told me the head was stock with just the tt cams. i think he said it still has the stock springs in it.:sly:


----------



## VeedubR6 (Nov 12, 2008)

DUBZAK said:


> And no sweat on the advice, :beer: just get it done!  :beer:


 working on it! heading to my garage to start the port work today :thumbup: i may finally have an update in my thread soon haha 

also, anyone here running 262s or 264s (don't think i saw any)? the trans that i had rebuilt is from a GTI so i think the 1 and 2 ratios are a bit taller than the corrado 02A so i don't want to lose too much more down low...


----------



## Scotty_2.0 (Jan 14, 2005)

VeedubR6 said:


> the trans that i had rebuilt is from a GTI so i think the 1 and 2 ratios are a bit taller than the corrado 02A so i don't want to lose too much more down low...


 All the gears in a Mk3/Passat VR6 02A tranny are taller than a Corrado VR6 02A. The speed gears themselves are the *exact* same in both trannys but the final drive ratios are different. The Mk3/Passat 02A's have a 3.389 final while the Corrado 02A's have 3.647 final drive. 

http://www.zelek.com/diagram_Charts/diagramlist.htm


----------



## VeedubR6 (Nov 12, 2008)

oh i gotcha, good to know! thanks for the help :thumbup:


----------



## hendrikbmx (Oct 12, 2009)

does the Gruven parts Pulley KIT give any noticeable gains on a NA VR6? 
and the intake gasket that should lower the temperature of the manifold ( aka colder air, more power ) 

thanks.


----------



## typeSLone (Feb 8, 2002)

The gruven pulley kit isn't an underdrive set short of the power steering pulley. They are just lightweight pullies which is still good. The stock vr crank pulley is a brick on it owns. Your not gonna see these massive gains with any pulley kit but you will notice how much smoother and snappier the motor revs up and gruven's quality is top notch. 

I am looking into to getting there alternator and water pump pullies so I can complete my pieced together mismatched underdrive pulley kit on my motor.


----------



## Deezy (Jan 3, 2009)

Displacement or Bore: stock

Chip Tune/Stand Alone Type: schrick

Internals: stock bottom end 175k

Comp Ratio: unknown

Headgasket Type: stock

Headwork and Type: stock

Cams: schrick .266

Bolt on's: schrick vgi

Exhaust: super sprint cat-back, heat wrapped header.

Random: b&m short throw


15.6874 @ 88.64 91 octane. 

not happy with the results. something (maybe the miles) is robbing my power.

1997 GTI VR6 5-spd

i bought it partially modded and i plan on taking it to the max. anybody know what "Schrick vgi with locked flapper," Locked open or closed? and how to ? disconnecting it locks it open?

im looking for things to improve on here. i have an extra motor im going to start rebuilding. it came from an mk4 jetta 12v. for sure wanting to do the msd coilpack convert throw some ideas to me guys i want to make this a track car without a turbo.


----------



## need_a_VR6 (May 19, 1999)

If you disconnect the vacuum line to the actuator, it would work just like mine was locked. 

Something is wrong with your setup, or your car is very heavy.


----------



## root beer (Jun 22, 2004)

83mm 11:1 motor
ported head, drc 268's
2.5" exhaust
2.9clone

vs.

Stock block 170k motor. ~10.5:1
ported head, schrick 268's
2.5" exhaust
2.9clone

The car went [email protected] with the big motor when the car was heavy. It went [email protected] with the smaller motor, much lighter.


----------



## Deezy (Jan 3, 2009)

need_a_VR6 said:


> If you disconnect the vacuum line to the actuator, it would work just like mine was locked.
> 
> Something is wrong with your setup, or your car is very heavy.


car is factory weight im sure. single driver 180lbs gas tank was a quarter. im thinking its the setup as well though. in other words if i disconnect the vacumn hose to the flapper i can just tear that crap out and it will lock open? i thought it only opened over 4500rpm. tell me where i can shed some weight without being too drastic. its still a street car just not a daily. could the CEL from the SAI be a problem in HP?


----------



## gtizzle67 (Mar 10, 2008)

Displacement or Bore: stock 
Managment: giac 268 chip
Internals:stock
Comp Ratio:10.5:1 
Headgasket Type: mk4 hg
Headwork and Type: stock
Cams: drc 268 w/ supertech valve springs
Bolt on's: turn 2 style, 2.9 clone manifold, 4 bar fpr, 
Exhaust:srock ported manifolds, 2.5in straight pipe to magnaflow muffler
Random: trans-peloquin diff with 3.67 r&p, vf trans mount, hockypucks everywhere elese, arp headbolts, a/c and p/s delete,


----------



## root beer (Jun 22, 2004)

Are you running a 4bar fpr on an obd1 or obd2 car?

If you're obd1, that came stock. If you're obd2, you're down on power.


----------



## gtizzle67 (Mar 10, 2008)

obd 2, ive been told i should go to a 3 bar, i just haven't gotten around to it


----------



## V-dubbulyuh (Nov 13, 2005)

gtizzle67 said:


> obd 2, ive been told i should go to a 3 bar, i just haven't gotten around to it


What does GIAC spec for their software (regardless of what was original or OBD2)?


----------



## root beer (Jun 22, 2004)

He needs a 3 bar.


----------



## dubbin95 (Mar 18, 2007)

4 bar isnt better on obd2? no improvement? and obd1 came stock with this??


----------



## need_a_VR6 (May 19, 1999)

No, fuel trims just remove the 'extra' fuel that you'll get and in some cases it'll throw a code and run worse then with the 3bar. OBD1's use a 4bar due to having less tight pulsewidth/injection timing control and needing the extra headroom.


----------



## DUBZAK (Oct 27, 2009)

I am glad to see this thread still around.....:thumbup::thumbup::thumbup:

So, I am about to do some experimentation with the 24# injectors and a 3.5 bar FPR should my oe 4bar be too much.... (I am obd1 and already have the 4 bar, 4 bar pump)
My math tells me It should be almost the same with a 3.5 Bar when jumping from 19# to 24#. 
Anyone else ever experiment with something like this?


----------



## V-dubbulyuh (Nov 13, 2005)

root beer said:


> He needs a 3 bar.


Why?

Hence my question about what the tuning software requires. OBD1/2 is irrelevant if the ECU is tuned for something other. I have only run GIAC on a Mk4 so I have no idea what their Mk3 OBD2 software is tuned to run on.


----------



## root beer (Jun 22, 2004)

The chips for our cars are written for a particular injector and a particular fuel pressure. Changing either of those can make the car run leaner or richer. As Paul said, the ecu will trim some of it out, but not all of it. If the chip is written for an obd2 car, it's written for all things obd2, which includes a 3bar fpr. More fuel is not always a good thing, just as eating 4000 calories a day isn't better than eating 2000 a day.

C2 is an exception for most if not all of their chips.


----------



## need_a_VR6 (May 19, 1999)

V-dubbulyuh said:


> OBD1/2 is irrelevant if the ECU is tuned for something other.


OBD1 comes with a 4 bar stock and most (all?) of the chips require this
OBD2 comes with a 3 bar stock and most (all?) of the NA chips require this

The only things that should differ are custom tunes and people running standalone.


----------



## V-dubbulyuh (Nov 13, 2005)

need_a_VR6 said:


> OBD1 comes with a 4 bar stock OBD2 comes with a 3 bar stock
> 
> The only things that should differ are custom tunes and people running standalone.


All the above is correct, however many tuners do *specify *fuel pressure requirements (c2 has done this in the past as has EIP & ATP). This was especially true in applications where the tuner was attempting to "stretch" the injector. One of these such tuners is listed above in this post.


Regardless, use whatever FPR you feel to. I'm ignorant to Mk3 GIAC software. :thumbup:


----------



## need_a_VR6 (May 19, 1999)

The only ones that I can think of that use a non stock FPR are all boosted. This is the high compression thread


----------



## Scotty_2.0 (Jan 14, 2005)

need_a_VR6 said:


> *This is the high compression thread*


Exactly.....


----------



## dubbin95 (Mar 18, 2007)

So is it pointless to upgrade the FPR on a obd2 car? My friend and i are building a obd2 motor and doing mk4 HG and 276 TT cams and a few other little goodies. Would this be something pointless to do? Or shud it be fine. He has a c2 chip for the cams and HG specific. So should it adapt to that stuff and run pretty good, or run like a a$$?


----------



## mk3pete (Jan 16, 2010)

i only ran a 14.9 for my first drag attempt
weight is stock
cai
BVH hard springs port and polish
eurospec 268
GIAC cam profile
obd2 tb
msd
1.8t iat
peloquin
3.94
stock tires

il be going back soon though
with semi slicks
ported exhaust mani and downpipe
light pullies
and a wotbox
im aiming 13.5 maybe better hopefully


----------



## DUBZAK (Oct 27, 2009)

DUBZAK said:


> I am glad to see this thread still around.....:thumbup::thumbup::thumbup:
> 
> So, I am about to do some experimentation with the 24# injectors and a 3.5 bar FPR should my oe 4bar be too much.... (I am obd1 and already have the 4 bar, 4 bar pump)
> My math tells me It should be almost the same with a 3.5 Bar when jumping from 19# to 24#.
> Anyone else ever experiment with something like this?


 Well the 24# Audi injectors did not fit, and I'm not about to make a custom fuel rail.


----------



## rubencito (May 6, 2009)

Nice thread


----------



## DUBZAK (Oct 27, 2009)

rubencito said:


> Nice thread


 Indeed. 

added the 1.8T AIT sensor, and lets just say on these hot days in Florida it is most certainly making a big difference. 
and a short little Video....we all like those. If the dude wasnt drifting into my lane, I might have gone faster than 80.


----------



## Deezy (Jan 3, 2009)

Where can I get a 1.8t air sensor? Anyone have a part number?


----------



## crazysccrmd (Mar 31, 2006)

Deezy said:


> Where can I get a 1.8t air sensor? Anyone have a part number?


http://www.worldimpex.com/parts/genuine-part-air-temp-sensor_6174.html

you can probably find it cheaper than that if you search around a bit


----------



## CasuallyWreckless (Aug 27, 2007)

How much are you guys decking theses blocks? I work with a guy that builds nastyyy fas wheel standers and runs nhra.. I'm tryin to get em to help me with building a na all motor and we were discussing how much u could take off... He was telling me it all depends on your valve size duration and all of that Im looking to go monster big. But I don't ever wanna go boost with this one either maybe in the jazz but not my ginster:thumbup:opcorn:


----------



## gtizzle67 (Mar 10, 2008)

we dont really shave our blocks or heads, just use a thinner headgasket or different pistons
the easiest way on a vr to up the comp is to use the mk4 headgasket on an AAA vr6. goes from 10.0:1 to 10.5:1


----------



## Scotty_2.0 (Jan 14, 2005)

gtizzle67 said:


> we dont really shave our blocks or heads, just use a thinner headgasket or different pistons
> the easiest way on a vr to up the comp is to use the mk4 headgasket on an AAA vr6. goes from 10.0:1 to 10.5:1


That's exactly what I did. I dropped in 10.5:1 comp pistons and then added the Mk4 HG to end up somewhere close to 11:1.


----------



## DUBZAK (Oct 27, 2009)

gtizzle67 said:


> we dont really shave our blocks or heads, just use a thinner headgasket or different pistons
> the easiest way on a vr to up the comp is to use the mk4 headgasket on an AAA vr6. goes from 10.0:1 to 10.5:1


 Decking the block at the limit (it cannot be cleaned up any more) like I did should have netted me a few more. I figure at .006" from piston to deck, I am at about 11.2:1 comp.

Deck the head all you want, it just makes the valves closer to the pistons and does not raise compression. :thumbup:


----------



## jettagli_guy (Dec 12, 2007)

So can someone school me about this 1.8t air sensor? I've heard a little bit about it but nvr Gota a good soils answer on y and how it benefits u.. I'm runing and obd1 Vr


----------



## xhopesfall24 (Jul 2, 2009)

More pics, less discussion!!!


----------



## crazysccrmd (Mar 31, 2006)

jettagli_guy said:


> So can someone school me about this 1.8t air sensor? I've heard a little bit about it but nvr Gota a good soils answer on y and how it benefits u.. I'm runing and obd1 Vr


its open element instead of the solid piece that the mk3 uses. it reacts faster to changes and isnt prone to heat soak from the intake manifold. you can extend the harness and mount it in the intake for better IAT readings (less timing pull)


----------



## Deezy (Jan 3, 2009)

crazysccrmd said:


> http://www.worldimpex.com/parts/genuine-part-air-temp-sensor_6174.html
> 
> you can probably find it cheaper than that if you search around a bit


Thanks. Im going to give it a shot.


----------



## jettagli_guy (Dec 12, 2007)

crazysccrmd said:


> its open element instead of the solid piece that the mk3 uses. it reacts faster to changes and isnt prone to heat soak from the intake manifold. you can extend the harness and mount it in the intake for better IAT readings (less timing pull)


^^ just curious anyone have pics of it being done or lik a "how to thread" on it?! Very intrested


----------



## crazysccrmd (Mar 31, 2006)

i couldnt find any pictures, but it's pretty self explanatory. drill a hole in your intake that is the same size of the sensor, tap a second hole where the bolt fastens it, cut the IAT wiring harness, extend both wires as far as needed to reach the new location, plug it in. thats about all there is to it


----------



## need_a_VR6 (May 19, 1999)

root beer's thread in the mk3 forum has the details on the 1.8t temp sensor.


----------



## cabbievr6 (Aug 18, 2009)

ok, Ill throw mine up here! Not to much done just bolt ons. I want to do more and threads like this are a big help so thanks!! Once we get settled in our new place I can play with the car again!:thumbup:

Displacement or Bore: stock
Managment: C2 emissions delete
Internals: stock
Comp Ratio: stock
Headgasket Type: stock
Headwork and Type: stock
Cams: TT 268
Bolt on's: Euro sport CAI, 11lb flywheel, wires...
Exhaust: OBX header, 42 draft bypass, TT 2.5, Remus muffler
Random: 

What do you guys think of the dyno numbers it did? should it be more or is it about right?






..oh btw it did [email protected] 169tq


----------



## VR6DPLMT. (Mar 1, 2003)

Numbers seem kind of low but what kind of dyno did you get your car dyno'd on? As we all know certain dynos will read high and certain ones will read low.


----------



## cabbievr6 (Aug 18, 2009)

This was done at NGP, I dont know what kind theirs is


----------



## vw1320 (Jul 11, 2000)

NGP uses a Dynojet and for a while the dyno at NGP was "the" dyno when it came to all motor vr6's. Numbers look about right considering the parts used. Yes others have made more but its the combination of parts that makes the whole and I see a couple of things listed that aren't normally seen on the higher hp builds. Post a graph if you have one.


----------



## mk3pete (Jan 16, 2010)

cabbievr6 said:


> ok, Ill throw mine up here! Not to much done just bolt ons. I want to do more and threads like this are a big help so thanks!! Once we get settled in our new place I can play with the car again!:thumbup:
> 
> Displacement or Bore: stock
> Managment: C2 emissions delete
> ...


is that at the wheels??
thats a pretty healthy number considering the head is stock.


----------



## cabbievr6 (Aug 18, 2009)

yes that is at the wheels!! 
I will have to post the graph after we move its packed up in boxes
I know each VR6 is different and most of my friends were saying that those numbers were low since I had cams. 
I am grateful for threads like this that way I can optimize the power without killing my bank bal.! :thumbup:

Keep 'em coming guys!!


----------



## DUBZAK (Oct 27, 2009)

cabbievr6 said:


> ok, Ill throw mine up here! Not to much done just bolt ons. I want to do more and threads like this are a big help so thanks!! Once we get settled in our new place I can play with the car again!:thumbup:
> 
> Displacement or Bore: stock
> Managment: C2 emissions delete
> ...


Not bad, but where is the _*High Compression*_? 

I know people love to pic and vid whore, but this is not the thread for you to whore it in unless you change your head gasket to a mk4 one at THE VERY LEAST. Nice set up though. 

BTW, that OBX header is a piece of junk. I'm an sure you would obtain better numbers with ported stock manifolds and a TT downpipe, or the S2 Metalwerks header.


----------



## cabbievr6 (Aug 18, 2009)

yeah need a VR6 is a friend of mine and he told me about the OBX, I did the swap without breaking the motor, so once I go back in I will do it right! I just wanted a starting point. 
Oh and I didnt mean to get off topic just wanted some experienced opinions on the work and numbers. I followed your build thread on your car and it has opened up my eyes on the true potential of the 12V. 

Thanks for help. Lets see some High Comp. 12V motors!!!!!:thumbup::thumbup:

opcorn:


----------



## Wayne92SLC (Mar 1, 2001)

Nothing too exciting...

Displacement or Bore: 3.0L (Schimmel long block)
Managment: GIAC "cam" chip
Internals: ARP main and rod bolts, ARP head studs
Comp Ratio: 10.5:1 
Headgasket Type: mk4
Headwork and Type: stock
Cams: Autotech 262s with TT high lift valve springs
Bolt on's: Turn2 intake, Velocity bored TB, 2.9 clone manifold, adjustable FPR, UO underdrive pulleys, Gruven WP pulley, my own tensioer pulley 
Exhaust: Swain Tech coated S2 header, TT high flow cat, TT SS 2.5" cat back (2 resonators and a Borla muffler) 
Random: trans-Peloquin diff with 3.64 r&p (Corrado), VF-Engineering trans mount, Turn2 engine mounts, port-matched lower intake and upper intake, Setrab oil cooler, low temp T-stat and fan switch.

Last time I dyno'd it was without the S2 header and I was at 185 to the wheels on a Dyno Dynamics dyno. I am going to hook the LM-1 back up this spring, tune the FPR for 12.8:1 at WOT and hit the dyno again to see where I'm at. I'm gonna ditch the A/C system since it doesn't work anyway and also modify the exhaust. I'm going with a "event system" for auto-X that will be a v-band connection from the TT high flow cat directly to a 17" Burns Stainless muffler with a turn down--that's it. The rest of the TT cat back system will be hooked back up via v-band connection for normal daily driving.

-Wayne


----------



## euro.lo (Oct 19, 2010)

^ Build looks great. Can I ask why your running Autotechs and not a set of Shricks or DRC's though?


----------



## need_a_VR6 (May 19, 1999)

mk3pete said:


> is that at the wheels??
> thats a pretty healthy number considering the head is stock.


I made 187whp with a stock head, block and manifolds on that dyno.  Car went 13.17 in race trim and 13.35 w drags.


----------



## root beer (Jun 22, 2004)

cabbievr6 said:


> yeah need a VR6 is a friend of mine


No, he's my friend!

That NGP dyno suddenly started reading lower after i dynoed my 83mm motor i remember.


----------



## cabbievr6 (Aug 18, 2009)

root beer said:


> No, he's my friend!
> 
> That NGP dyno suddenly started reading lower after i dynoed my 83mm motor i remember.


Both of you are like VR gods to me anyway!! Me and Paul go way back to his white MKII with the VR in it from RPI!!! :laugh:

Hey Root, I wanted to ask on the 1.8tIAT where would you suggest I mount that?


----------



## root beer (Jun 22, 2004)

Anywhere in the front of the car. Near the filter's a popular choice.


----------



## need_a_VR6 (May 19, 1999)

cabbievr6 said:


> Me and Paul go way back to his white MKII with the VR in it from RPI!!! :laugh:


Back when I first got it even. That's WAY back. :wave:


----------



## Wayne92SLC (Mar 1, 2001)

euro.lo said:


> ^ Build looks great. Can I ask why your running Autotechs and not a set of Shricks or DRC's though?


They came recommended by Bill Schimmel when I had him build the long block. Good enough for Bill, good enough for me!  

I have nothing to compare to except stock and I can say that the pull in the midrange and the top end is significant. No regrets (other than having zero headwork done).

-Wayne


----------



## GTIVRob6 (Jan 28, 2010)

Deezy said:


> Where can I get a 1.8t air sensor? Anyone have a part number?




got mine from autohauz.com for $25.


----------



## Deezy (Jan 3, 2009)

GTIVRob6 said:


> got mine from autohauz.com for $25.



Looks like they are going to make $25. Thanks.


----------



## zachass o2 (May 6, 2009)

DUBZAK said:


> Decking the block at the limit (it cannot be cleaned up any more) like I did should have netted me a few more. I figure at .006" from piston to deck, I am at about 11.2:1 comp.
> 
> Deck the head all you want, it just makes the valves closer to the pistons and does not raise compression. :thumbup:


you can deck it a bit more my pistons lightly kiss the deck and im at about 12.5:1 and i run eurospec 278 cams with just about NO room between them and the pistons. i just hate how everytime my cam jumps timing i have to yank the head and replace the back 3 intake valves  EVERYTIME.....


----------



## zachass o2 (May 6, 2009)

Displacement or Bore: 2.9
Managment: giac custom 278 cam chip with 93 octane tune
Internals: 2.9 hi comp pistons
Comp Ratio: 12.5:1
Headgasket Type: mkiv metal
Headwork and Type: 5 angle valve job, port and polished intake and exhaust manifolds, and 2.9 clone upper manifold with 2.9 tb stock port cylinder head (if i could do it over again i would have ported it while i had it all at the shop the first time)
Cams: eurospec 278s
Bolt on's: lightweight titanium intake and exhaust valves with all titanium lifters, valve springs, clips and retainers and guides
Exhaust: ported exhaust manifold with ported stock downpipe welded on the outside
Random: no ps or ac heater hoses taken off the tb and lsd geared down one size smaller than stock for a little extra power for cheap (i didnt want to go turbo or sc) 7lb flywheel, sachs stage 2 clutch and engine performance circuits to eliminate revv limiter and every saftey feature/power hinderance that came from the factory

its a blast to drive and the only all motor vr (that isnt in a mkii) that will easily spin 3rd gear and pull to 7500 rpm when the fuel cutoff on the stock ecu is :beer:


----------



## Scotty_2.0 (Jan 14, 2005)

zachass o2 said:


> Displacement or Bore: 2.9
> Managment: giac custom 278 cam chip with 93 octane tune
> *Internals: stock
> Comp Ratio: 12.5:1*
> ...


How you get up to 12.5:1 on stock internals....? :what:


----------



## zachass o2 (May 6, 2009)

Scotty_2.0 said:


> How you get up to 12.5:1 on stock internals....? :what:


i messed that up its not stock internals, its a 2.9 because of the pistons i have in and those bumped up the compression :beer: sorry for the mix up and like i said above my pistons kiss the cylinder head the flat part on top is still perfect bare metal from hitting it


----------



## Scotty_2.0 (Jan 14, 2005)

zachass o2 said:


> i messed that up its not stock internals, its a 2.9 because of the pistons i have in and those bumped up the compression :beer: sorry for the mix up and like i said above my pistons kiss the cylinder head the flat part on top is still perfect bare metal from hitting it


Yeah but which pistons? Highest I've seen are the Wossner 11.0:1 pistons and even with a Mk4 MLS HG you're only at about 11.5:1.


----------



## zachass o2 (May 6, 2009)

custom weisco pistons that the po of the car spent a fortune on before he sold it to me :beer:


----------



## root beer (Jun 22, 2004)

I can't wait to build another block...


----------



## DUBZAK (Oct 27, 2009)

^ cant wait for that!!!!


----------



## Scotty_2.0 (Jan 14, 2005)

zachass o2 said:


> custom weisco pistons that the po of the car spent a fortune on before he sold it to me :beer:


Oh $hit... well that def explains it :beer:


----------



## allmotormk3vr6 (Dec 28, 2008)

*mad rabbit....*

Displacement or Bore:2.8l
Managment: giac cam chip (268)
Internals:stock bottom end
Comp Ratio: 11:1
Headgasket Type: mk 4
Headwork and Type: ported head
Cams: 268
Bolt on's: vf eng. motor mounts, 3.94 r&p, quaife lsd, 13lb lightweight flywheel, 1.8t iat, CAI w/velocity stack.
Exhaust: 42 DD test pipe, 2.5 straight pipe, magnaflow muffler
Random: (mad rabbit track times will be posted soon:laugh


----------



## DUBZAK (Oct 27, 2009)

allmotormk3vr6 said:


> Displacement or Bore:2.8l
> Managment: giac cam chip (268)
> * Internals:stock bottom end
> Comp Ratio: 11:1*
> ...


Stock bottom end???? 11:1 Comp????? How?


----------



## Scotty_2.0 (Jan 14, 2005)

DUBZAK said:


> Stock bottom end???? 11:1 Comp????? How?


Must be the "extra extra thin" mk4 HG.... lol.


----------



## need_a_VR6 (May 19, 1999)

You can probably take one more layer out and have it still seal...


----------



## Deezy (Jan 3, 2009)

Almost time to get these cars out to the track. Im excited to see what im going to run since I have made.some repairs. Throwing 3 codes related to throttle body issues I ran a 15.6 I didn't know those codes were up as im used to seeing the cel. Still smoked vtecs daily. Hoping to pull on mustangs now!

Sent from my HTC Glacier using Tapatalk


----------



## DaBeeterEater (Aug 17, 2007)

has anybody ever CC'd some stock pistons in the bore ?? 

this makes me want to start builing my rabbit now badd lol, 


nobody has built a 13.0:1 + motor ??


----------



## root beer (Jun 22, 2004)

I've never heard of a 13:1 motor



Deezy said:


> Still smoked vtecs daily.


Lol, a true test of performance.


----------



## Scotty_2.0 (Jan 14, 2005)

root beer said:


> Lol, a true test of performance.


lol..... yes


----------



## DaBeeterEater (Aug 17, 2007)

root beer said:


> I've never heard of a 13:1 motor


i just meant has anybody done a 13+ compression motor, im gonna try one as soon as i get some money to expirament with a stock bottom end

i now there was that one dude with that white rabbit that had a 15.0:1 motor in it with solid lifter 308's in it, that went in the 11's at like 116mph ish, 

im gonna do a very high compression build soon with a 100 shot and see what happens :laugh:


----------



## root beer (Jun 22, 2004)

I never knew the specs on Bernd's rabbit, but i'm not impressed by a 1750lb rabbit with that much work in the motor only trapping 116. I wouldn't necessarily call that direct proof of a well performing engine.


----------



## croniccorrado (Jan 8, 2007)

i was going to do a 13:1 motor but didn't want to pay for the gas...lol so sold the pistons. new build

block:
stock, balanced and rebuilt
w/ arp hardware, gruven lw crank pulley 

head:
p&p
ferrea +1mm valves and springs
tt 288
custom home made sri
eip tb
mk4 gasket 

other:
eip stg 3 chip for now,2.5'' exhaust, 3.94s, quaife lsd, clutchnet clutch, bfi mounts....i think thats it??

and going in a gutted corrado when ever i get the head but from the machine shop.


----------



## DUBZAK (Oct 27, 2009)

croniccorrado said:


> i was going to do a 13:1 motor but didn't want to pay for the gas...lol so sold the pistons. new build
> 
> block:
> stock, balanced and rebuilt
> ...


Solid sounding set up but where is the HIGH COMPRESSION?


----------



## zachass o2 (May 6, 2009)

croniccorrado said:


> i was going to do a 13:1 motor but didn't want to pay for the gas...lol so sold the pistons. new build
> 
> block:
> stock, balanced and rebuilt
> ...


 sorry if im coming off as an idiot or d*** here, but if your going to piss away all that money doing that to your motor then why in the hell are you b******* about gas??? :screwy:


----------



## DaBeeterEater (Aug 17, 2007)

he is bitching bout race gas man if he was to do a 13:1 motor ya need to run race gas all the time


----------



## croniccorrado (Jan 8, 2007)

Piss away? I didn't piss away anything its a reliable set up I can go anywhere in I didn't want a one. Purpose car. I can street the car or track it. U try driving around one race gas or looking all over for E85 and see how long that last. So yes you are a idiot...just saying.


----------



## zachass o2 (May 6, 2009)

theres a website that sells 130 octane 30% tetreathol lead octane booster for 5 bucks a quart..... 
i run 93 pump gas in my 12.5:1 compression vr and it doesnt have any problems at all :beer: how would another .5 make you have to run race gas???? still failing to see how im an idiot here :screwy:


----------



## root beer (Jun 22, 2004)

I can't see much of a reason to go higher than 12.5:1 when planning on 93octane. You'd just have to detune it alot. 

Not hating on anybody though.


----------



## croniccorrado (Jan 8, 2007)

Octane boost? Really...look all I'm saying is if I'm going to do it I'm going to do it right and take full advantage of it. A 12v. With 12.5:1 really pushing it.


----------



## zachass o2 (May 6, 2009)

croniccorrado said:


> Octane boost? Really...look all I'm saying is if I'm going to do it I'm going to do it right and take full advantage of it. A 12v. With 12.5:1 really pushing it.


 http://www.kemcooil.com/specials.php 
dump a quart in each time you fill up and for an extra $10 a tank you can have 100 octane fuel with lead in it to help keep the head and valves carbon deposit free and running like a champ! :beer: you should have let me get those 13:1 pistons


----------



## JohnStamos (Feb 3, 2010)

Not to mention the increase in efficiency from the compression bump helping to offset the cost of the fuel additive...



...not saying I'd daily a 13:1 engine though.


----------



## DaBeeterEater (Aug 17, 2007)

JohnStamos said:


> Not to mention the increase in efficiency from the compression bump helping to offset the cost of the fuel additive...
> 
> 
> 
> ...not saying I'd daily a 13:1 engine though.


 
i would and will if i can build one like i want to :laugh: and its going in a rabbit or a caddy :laugh:


----------



## croniccorrado (Jan 8, 2007)

Maybe its me but would never run or trust octane boost to run that much compression but more power to ya


----------



## Wayne92SLC (Mar 1, 2001)

croniccorrado said:


> Maybe its me but would never run or trust octane boost to run that much compression but more power to ya


 Yup. Hot Rod Magazine did a big test on this a few years ago. Octane boosters were pretty good at getting really crappy fuel (87 octane) up to premium levels (92 or 92). But the same effect was NOT true by adding it to premium to get it up to "race" fuel octane. Basically, diminishing returns once you hit a certain octane level. And the cost to turn 87 octane into 91 was pretty much not cost effective versus just purchasing premium fuel. Plus, having the state measure and confirm what octane level you're getting is probably better than guessing how much to put in and assuming an octane level.


----------



## need_a_VR6 (May 19, 1999)

Having tuned a bunch of high compression cars, I wouldn't go past 11:1 on a true street 12v motor on 93. You can get away with more if you up the cam size, or play with intake valve closing timing a bit, but that's my practical limit. If you have E85 available and the means to run it, then by all means go higher.


----------



## DaBeeterEater (Aug 17, 2007)

has anybody tried to put some squish groves in a vr piston, i think they are a prime canidate for them and it would help tremendously with detonation, which vr's are prone to in certian situations, like in a high compression apps, since the crown of the pistons is slanted away from the combustion chamber, if u were to take that away and angle it towards the combustion chamber and put some groves and curves in it it should take away the detonation and be able to run higher timing with much higher compression


----------



## 92rado2.8 (Jul 12, 2004)

DaBeeterEater said:


> has anybody tried to put some squish groves in a vr piston, i think they are a prime canidate for them and it would help tremendously with detonation, which vr's are prone to in certian situations, like in a high compression apps, since the crown of the pistons is slanted away from the combustion chamber, if u were to take that away and angle it towards the combustion chamber and put some groves and curves in it it should take away the detonation and be able to run higher timing with much higher compression


 If I understand you correctly you want to flatten out the surface of the piston. The piston actually is the combustion chamber, so if you were to flatten the crown you would actually loose compression. So no, that probably wont work. Neat idea though:thumbup:


----------



## DaBeeterEater (Aug 17, 2007)

not quite dude, u need to actually look at a vr piston to know what im talking about, the crown or quench area on the vr is the little half moon shaped piece that sticks wayyy up on a vr and the towards the inside of the block, if u had the pistons already out it woudl be no big deal to take a little bit off the top and deck the block, u could probably end up with 12:1+ compression and run it on pump gas with a bunch of timing


----------



## 92rado2.8 (Jul 12, 2004)

Decking the block will give you the increase in compression, cutting the crown off of the top of the piston alone will not as you stated in your post prior. Honestly, unless you are a machinist and have some spare time, it would be cheaper just to get some JE's at 11:1 and call it a day. 

But this isn't the place to discuss that, this is a thread on high compression builds, not theory.


----------



## DaBeeterEater (Aug 17, 2007)

gues ur not gettting what im saying, or i just cant word it right, and im not talking about cutting the crown off that would be retarted, im taking about shaving like 3 thousands off the top and the opposite angle, , and honestly i dont think it would cost very much. becasue everybody on here can drop 1000+ on some je pistons for a na motor. this would be a pretty cost efficient way to get a low budget high compression motor and make some power with it on pump gas, 

but here is a idea of what im talking about 

http://www.rexresearch.com/singh/singh.htm 

check down at the bottom for a pic 
if u look at fig 1 and #1 or #2 would be ideal to put something like that in the crown of a vr piston to help with detonation, it would blow the trapped air and fuel out of the squish area that would normally get trapped back there cause of the ****ty design and atomize the fuel a lot better,


----------



## need_a_VR6 (May 19, 1999)

Yeah this http://www.somender-singh.com/ 

Interesting but I've never seen conclusive results from it. I don't think much can be trapped in the squish area, considering thats exactly why it's there.


----------



## DaBeeterEater (Aug 17, 2007)

i dont know man if ya read some of the stuff on there and some of the other sites, looks like there is plenty of gains from it, and i think on a vr there is a lot that can be trapped there because of the way the crown is angled away from the combustion chamber, and any aftermarket vr piston i have seen is angled towards the combustion chamber, 
im gonna try it out on the next motor i build, hopefully here sometime soon,


----------



## root beer (Jun 22, 2004)

Don't think too hard


----------



## zachass o2 (May 6, 2009)

root beer said:


> Don't think too hard


 x2 

that dudes research only works on cars with the combustion chambers in the cylinder head, we have flatheads :beer:


----------



## JohnStamos (Feb 3, 2010)

root beer said:


> Don't think too hard


 
Comments like this are why the VR6 is still in the dark ages...








The groves have been used on turbo bricks with great success, turbo mopars with great success, and alot of high compression BB's.

It has been proven to ward off detonation and increase VE, allowing more timing/boost per octane.


----------



## euro.lo (Oct 19, 2010)

JohnStamos said:


> Comments like this are why the VR6 is still in the dark ages.


 Really? You realize he has a fully built all motor VR running 12.5's....


----------



## Deezy (Jan 3, 2009)

Sick burn. 

Saw a 800hp vr6 on YouTube. In guess what? A s4.
Tearing out my vr real soon to rebuild. I have an extra mk4 vr im going to toss in while doing the build. 180k my motor is tired.


----------



## dawgpound (Jan 24, 2006)

Dark Ages ? 

There is a few guys on her running low 12s on a stock motor with bolt ons. How is that dark ages ? Hell there is even a cat on here running 11s with a fairly simple motor.


----------



## root beer (Jun 22, 2004)

JohnStamos said:


> Comments like this are why the VR6 is still in the dark ages..


 The vr6 is in the dark ages in terms of performance aftermarket because vw culture doesn't support a large performance aftermarket. 

I'm also comfortable saying that i have made plenty of information common knowledge that wasn't before. 

That guy's talking about shaving a block and modifying pistons instead of just spending $700 on something forged. He was thinking too hard. Use the tools and parts that we have readily available before reinventing the wheel, they might be this way for a reason. Got to follow before you can lead. 

So don't get a stick up your ass. 

On a side note, my motor isn't fully built by any means.


----------



## euro.lo (Oct 19, 2010)

I stand corrected, stock block with some quality add-ons.


----------



## dawgpound (Jan 24, 2006)

how a about kurtis almost touching 12s with almost no bolt ons. lol


----------



## Deezy (Jan 3, 2009)

How about the vr haters find there own thread. There will always be a better engine to tweak. This thread is for vr6 enthusiasts who love the sound and powerband coming out of a abnormally designed engine. Which by the way is small for a v6.
Hats off to a engine/car that gets driven to the track. Beat on. Than driven home and back to work on Monday.


----------



## need_a_VR6 (May 19, 1999)

He made it to my house Saturday... and made it to the track Sunday.. not sure about after that!:wave:


----------



## dawgpound (Jan 24, 2006)

get a grip bud.


----------



## allmotormk3vr6 (Dec 28, 2008)

took the middle part of the mk4 HG out.


----------



## allmotormk3vr6 (Dec 28, 2008)

DUBZAK said:


> Stock bottom end???? 11:1 Comp????? How?


 took the middle layer out the MK4 HG.


----------



## euro.lo (Oct 19, 2010)

allmotormk3vr6 said:


> took the middle layer out the MK4 HG.


 Someone explain to me why i shouldn't do this to my mk4


----------



## zachass o2 (May 6, 2009)

euro.lo said:


> Someone explain to me why i shouldn't do this to my mk4


 no ones telling you not to do it


----------



## euro.lo (Oct 19, 2010)

zachass o2 said:


> no ones telling you not to do it


 ha, I'm just kinda looking for some opinions, it doesn't sound that safe....


----------



## DaBeeterEater (Aug 17, 2007)

why, its just a flat shim it does not do anything but take up space, just copper spray it and u will be fine


----------



## zachass o2 (May 6, 2009)

the middle layer is just a piece of metal, the two other pieces are what actually make the seal from the head to the block. go wild and do it its just as safe as a regular headgasket if done correctly, as said above use copper spray for insurance to guarantee a good seal :thumbup:


----------



## thephotographer (Feb 27, 2009)

DUBZAK said:


>


That is a beautiful Corrado. I am not high compression, but do have a strong basically stock OEM NA VR. My car was dyno'd in 2002 and made 172.1 whp and 172.1 wtq bone stock with 32k on it. At that point I only owned the car for about 2 weeks. That same day bolt on VR's with 268's, 2.5" exhausts and VGI's were making in the realm of 186 whp or so. 

I ran the car at Etown in stock form, original bald tires, removed the pass, rear seat and spare and did a 14.7 @ 93.7 MPH with a crappy 2.4 60'. The car weighed in at 3180 lbs (I am a big guy).

After a few months I added a TT stainless 2.5" exhaust (2 resonators) and a Borla straight through. I also gutted the airbox, removed the screen on the maf and added a K&N panel filter. When I dyno'd the car again it made 187 whp and 184 wtq.

The car came off the road for a couple of years after I bought a B5 S4 Avant. In that time I did chains, guides, OEM clutch kit, preventative head gasket (MK3 - almost kicked myself cuz after I installed it I realized that I ordered it for a 98 and not a MK4 - I really wanted to bump the compression a bit lol) I replaced just about all of the gaskets and seals, water pump, etc.

Now that my S4 is off the road and I sold a 2nd S4 I had bought to fill the void... I brought the MK3 out again. The car feels very strong! I actually brought it down to Show and Go last Sunday and ran it again.

I removed the rear seats and spare (left the pass seat in), the car has a cf hood now and a/c delete. I didn't weigh the car, but I am sure it is heavier than it was with the pass seat in and I am a bit heavier now too. I ran the car on a set of 16" BBS RS's with slightly stretched 205-40 falkens... Needless to say traction was an issue and launching hard was not an option. 

My 1st run was Horrible. I was the 4th car down the track and prep was AWFUL! I launched hard and spun all of 1st, al of 2nd and 1/2 of 3rd to about 85 lol... A 3.3 60 ft and a 19.6 @ 86 was the result :laugh:

My 2nd run I toned it down and basically rolled off the line and pulled a 14.8. I did 8 consecutive runs (hot lap style) and managed 5 14.6's @ 95-96 mph.

My best and final run of the day was my last. I did a 14.61 @ 96 MPH with a 2.33 60'. At this point I was happy. I managed to do better than the previous time at the track over 9 years ago! I honestly think with a real launch the car has a low 14 second pass in it. My best 60' was a 2.30, decent for street tires, I just wish I could have come out of the hole harder at a higher RPM. Though I was catching excellent lights .012, .086, .124, a lot of time was wasted rolling off the line trying to keep traction. The car was basically running from 1800 RPM up which really sucked!

Here are a couple of pics:









At the track Sunday:









Sorry for the long post, feedback is welcome.


----------



## root beer (Jun 22, 2004)

Nice, track days are always fun. Hot lapping actually helps these cars go faster! If you make pull after pull on the dyno it will continue to make more power as the ecu acclamates to the exact running situation.


----------



## DUBZAK (Oct 27, 2009)

Thanks man, that is a beautiful GTI you got there yourself.


----------



## thephotographer (Feb 27, 2009)

DUBZAK said:


> Thanks man, that is a beautiful GTI you got there yourself.


Thanks!


----------



## Deezy (Jan 3, 2009)

What kind of shocks you guys run? My billsteins blew out in the front.


----------



## DUBZAK (Oct 27, 2009)

Deezy said:


> What kind of shocks you guys run? My billsteins blew out in the front.


Stay on topic!!! Try the MK3 forums or suspension forums.


----------



## RAREgtI97 (Nov 18, 2008)

i saw this run at show and go and thought to my self someones running on bbs wheels.. thats balling


----------



## Deezy (Jan 3, 2009)

DUBZAK said:


> Stay on topic!!! Try the MK3 forums or suspension forums.



Every high comp engine has.a.car with 4 wheels and 4 shocks.


----------



## Jckl (Aug 29, 2004)

Not really high comp but is 10.5:1

Displacement or Bore: stock
Managment: BFI PEM stg2 HC Cam
Internals: stock 220K
Comp Ratio: 10.5:1
Headgasket Type: MK4 OEM
Headwork and Type: Autotech 262 cams, Autotech HD valve springs, TT Titanium Retainers, Full Gasket Matched Port and Polished Head, Intake manifolds, exhaust manifolds, SuperTech 42MM Intake valves & 36MM Exhaust valves, Custom sized valve seats, ARP Headstuds, ARP SS Exhaust studs
Cams: Autotech 262
Bolt on's: 3" CAI, No Cat, No SAI, Custom 2.5 SS exhaust with borla, removed 2nd O2, 2.9 Clone Intake, 1.8T IAT, Autotech 10lb FW, BFI Stage .5 Motor Mounts
Exhaust: Ported manifolds, Deleted Cat, Custom SS 2.5 with Borla
Random:


----------



## DUBZAK (Oct 27, 2009)

Bump it. 

Anyone else doing big things N/A while swimming in a sea of VRT's? (They are everywhere!!)


----------



## Deezy (Jan 3, 2009)

I've got a block I'm about to tear down!
:thumbup:

Sent from my MB860 using Tapatalk


----------



## Lord_Verminaard (Apr 6, 2004)

I'm tearing one down... not sure what I am going to put back in it yet. (gotta sell my CQ too!) Getting some ideas from the forum and this thread. Thanks everyone for all of your hard work and sharing your builds/results. Good stuff! 










Brendan


----------



## veeyarrSUPERsix (May 5, 2009)

Displacement or Bore: stock w/ 120k on block 
Managment: GIAC reflashed by AWE for all mods and 93 
Internals: stock 120K 
Comp Ratio: 10.5:1 
Headgasket Type: MK4 OEM 
Headwork and Type: refreshed stock setup, 3-angle valve job, Schrick 268's, heavy duty dual valve springs 
Bolt on's: 2.75" exhaust no res and magnaflow old-style baffled muffler with stock DP and 42DD test pipe, old style Autotech CAI, 7lb flywheel, 
Random: ported lower intake manifold and TB, lots of weight reduction, deleted sai, egr and evap 

last time at track was with yokohama advan a408's and ran 13.9, but i build my cars for autocross and im not the best at dragging :snowcool: 










the car is up for trade, let me know if someone's interested! hate to get rid of it but i need a d/d that ISNT an 87 olds cutlass supreme with no exhaust and a deer-sized hole in the front of it


----------



## Lord_Verminaard (Apr 6, 2004)

DUBZAK said:


> :laugh: Decking might make you 10.6:1 or 10.7:1, not bad at all. :thumbup:


So I'm looking for more information on block decking, how much are people taking off? How much does that change CR? I am going with mkIV head gasket, OEM pistons, and now I think I will have the block decked a tad as well. Will this cause any timing issues with the chains?

Anybody who has done it, post up the infoz. :thumbup:

Thanks-
Brendan


----------



## DUBZAK (Oct 27, 2009)

As stated CR might change by .1 or .2, and measuring the piston to deck clearance is what I was advised to do. 

I have 0.006" from piston to deck, and my block cannot be cleaned up any more because of that I am guessing. 

need_a_vr6 was advising me during that part of the build. 

And no, timing chains and everything else will be fine.


----------



## somebodynowhere (Feb 11, 2010)

at this point I really wish I knew exactly what my CR is...

Specs are:

3.0L 83mm Je 10:1
Heavily worked head:
port and polish 
5 angle valve job
back cut stainless valves (Sit slightly below the surface of the head)


----------



## DUBZAK (Oct 27, 2009)

CR will not get changed by the valves or by decking the head. Only the decking the block or different pistons will change it. 

BTW, I better not ever come over while you work, or that raceland header will be missing and you will have a new metal ornament for your garden. :laugh:


----------



## somebodynowhere (Feb 11, 2010)

hahahahaha you have to remember I'm going turbo(hell probably before this thing gets running again) so who cares what's on there now :laugh:



DUBZAK said:


> CR will not get changed by the valves or by decking the head. Only the decking the block or different pistons will change it.


The distance between the valves and pistons will not affect CR?


----------



## DUBZAK (Oct 27, 2009)

Distance between valves and pistons is already determined by the head. So immeasurable amounts I suppose, but decking the head just makes the valve sit closer and the lifter will probably absorb that difference hydraulically.


----------



## somebodynowhere (Feb 11, 2010)

Looks like it's only a minute distance anyways... some more all motor goodness


IMG_3181 by somebodynowhere, on Flickr


IMG_3188 by somebodynowhere, on Flickr


IMG_3191 by somebodynowhere, on Flickr


IMG_3195 by somebodynowhere, on Flickr


----------



## 98GTI_VR6 (Jan 21, 2011)

*my turn*

*Displacement or Bore:*
STOCK 12V
*Managment:*
BFI STG. 2 CAM PROFILE CHIP
*Internals:*
STOCK
*Headgasket Type: *
MK4 METAL OEM
*Headwork and Type:*
PORT N POLISH, MATCH PORTED INTAKE AND EXHAUST SIDE, HD SPRINGS, CAM FOLLOWERS, LIGHTWEIGHT VALVES
*Cams: *
AUTOTECH 262'S .440 LIFT
*Bolt on's:* 
42 DRAFT DESIGN UPPER INTAKE ELBOW, BFI STG. .5 MOTOR MOUNT INSERTS W/ CORRADO TRANS MOUNT, NEW TIMING CHAINS, GUIDES, AND TENSIONERS, K&N CUSTOM INTAKE(3" PVC FROM LOWES), TALOR 8.2MM WIRES, NGK IRRIDIUMS, ALLUMINUM CRACKPIPE, 99' PASSAT 5 SPEED TRANSMISSION (100K MILES), STOCK CLUTCH, TOB AND FLYWHEEL, OBX O2 SENSORS, NEW STOCK SHIFTER BUSHINGS(UROTUNING.COM), DURALAST CERAMIC PADS ALL THE WAY AROUND W/ NEW CALIPERS AND FUILD., NEW POWER STEERING FLUID(NOW I'M BROKE), KONI SHOCKS AND SPRINGS, 17" WHEELS, CARBON FIBER HOOD
*Exhaust:*
HEADER PIPE, 2.5 MAGNAFLOW W/ 42 DRAFT DESIGN TEST PIPE 2.5 IN., HEADER AND TEST PIPE ARE WRAPPED, EGRLESS
*Random:* 
HEADER(MATCH PORTED),MATCH PORTED & POLISHED UPPER AND LOWER INTAKE MANIFOLD,


----------



## JohnStamos (Feb 3, 2010)

DUBZAK said:


> CR will not get changed by the valves or by decking the head. Only the decking the block or different pistons will change it.



It absolutely does.

This is one of those many, long time Vortex myths, that just get passed around as fact.





Decking the head alone, without sinking the valve seats, and trimming the valves, will not only RAISE compression (a small amount), but will also help to unshroud the valves, and also have the effect of making the cams useable area to be larger.



Sinking the valves, will shroud them, lower the compression ratio, mess with the quench of the chamber, and lessen the useful area of the cams.


----------



## 98GTI_VR6 (Jan 21, 2011)

*Any comments*

Any thing anyone suggestes i should look into doing on my gti? Its my dd i dont want to go turbo or supercharged...i like n/a!
My head was decked as you see in the picture of the head the machine shop!


----------



## somebodynowhere (Feb 11, 2010)

JohnStamos said:


> It absolutely does.
> 
> This is one of those many, long time Vortex myths, that just get passed around as fact.
> 
> ...



IMG_3182 by somebodynowhere, on Flickr

Example of un-shrouded valves?


----------



## DUBZAK (Oct 27, 2009)

JohnStamos said:


> It absolutely does.
> 
> This is one of those many, long time Vortex myths, that just get passed around as fact.
> 
> ...


:thumbup: Thanks for clarification on that, I had assumed a small amount of change but did not believe it enough to be measurable. 

And if the head is decked and valve seats/lapping of valves done correctly, would that correct the differences in the combustion chamber?


----------



## JohnStamos (Feb 3, 2010)

DUBZAK said:


> :thumbup: Thanks for clarification on that, I had assumed a small amount of change but did not believe it enough to be measurable.
> 
> And if the head is decked and valve seats/lapping of valves done correctly, would that correct the differences in the combustion chamber?



Yep, rule of thumb, is to get a valve job when having it decked, and all is well. But if the valves just need lapping in, there are gains to be had, by not sinking the valves, albeit small. But with 12v's, anything helps.


We get lucky on that front, as most heads with the combustion chamber built in, everytime you do a valve job, on stock seats, the head flows less, and less, from shrouding.






somebodynowhere said:


> http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/5892385678/
> Example of un-shrouded valves?


Yep, that pic shows it well. :thumbup::thumbup:


----------



## DUBZAK (Oct 27, 2009)

So anyone doing anything fun? 

I am now running a g60 gear stack and final drive, with a CTN 5th gear. 1-3 are short, 4th and 5th are long. 2nd gear launches are the biz for traction. :thumbup:


----------



## jhines_06gli (Feb 3, 2006)

JohnStamos said:


> Yep, rule of thumb, is to get a valve job when having it decked, and all is well. But if the valves just need lapping in, there are gains to be had, by not sinking the valves, albeit small. But with 12v's, anything helps.
> 
> 
> We get lucky on that front, as most heads with the combustion chamber built in, everytime you do a valve job, on stock seats, the head flows less, and less, from shrouding.
> ...


 With the VRs........is there a general rule for decking the head? Usually a machine shop will take the minimal off to make everything true. When running a MK4 headgasket and 268+ cams, is it safe to do any more decking that say 0.005"? Or would this just be pushing it too far out of the comfort/safe zone? I'm a rookie still when it comes down to all the engine internals on the older VRs. Machine shops around here will do what you ask them to, but very few know VW stuff. 

Getting ready to start building my head to swap out and curious if I should have nay more than the "normal" machined off. I'm going 10.5:1 compression and then will being slapping a low-boost turbo on there in the near future to make a high-compression VR-T and make things very interesting! :screwy: 
Thanks, 
-J. Hines


----------



## need_a_VR6 (May 19, 1999)

It doesnt change the compression, and the limit is in the bentley.


----------



## der_Architekt (Jul 5, 2005)

All this talk begs the question, how much can you shave the head to gain the best deshrouding results? Bottom of the valve seat too much? 

Granted the limit would ultimately be decided when the valve contacts the piston, depending on cam of course.


----------



## Scotty_2.0 (Jan 14, 2005)

Nice to see this thread pop up again... opcorn: 

As for me, not much has changed. Car should be back on the road soon. Lots of small isht to take care of.


----------



## Jckl (Aug 29, 2004)

been about a year for me and I think I may be getting some chain noise again already  Last time was a broken guide, I hope there is not one broken already :sly:


----------



## JohnStamos (Feb 3, 2010)

der_Architekt said:


> All this talk begs the question, how much can you shave the head to gain the best deshrouding results? Bottom of the valve seat too much?
> 
> Granted the limit would ultimately be decided when the valve contacts the piston, depending on cam of course.


 
Far enough that you don't contact/ruin the combustion chamber side valve seat cut angles after the valve contact angle. Basically dictated by your valve job.



need_a_VR6 said:


> It doesnt change the compression


 It absolutely does. Depending on who/how the job is done, the chamber can be +/- a few CC's from 0. 

Decking the head .030, and without changing the valve tip height and sinking the valves, will result in an increase of...

[π(1.54/2)².03]+[π(1.35/2)².03]=.099³ in = 1.6cc change in chamber volume. 

This causes a compression increase of ~.3:1 on a 82mm bore, 90mm stroke, stock deck height engine.

After doing this, decking the block .035, and running a Mk4 gasket, you are at ~12:1.


----------



## need_a_VR6 (May 19, 1999)

I would not run the valves like that for a street car. Sink them to stock depth via the valve job. If you dont you will want to relief cut the pistons and lose the little bit you just gained and more for "safety." Especially with a decked block and mk4 gasket.


----------



## Lord_Verminaard (Apr 6, 2004)

Porting head right now, block is at the machine shop. Yeah, I work slow too.  I really can't do anything else with it right now until the CQ is sold. 

Brendan


----------



## JohnStamos (Feb 3, 2010)

need_a_VR6 said:


> I would not run the valves like that for a street car. Sink them to stock depth via the valve job. If you dont you will want to relief cut the pistons and lose the little bit you just gained and more for "safety." Especially with a decked block and mk4 gasket.


 
I already have assembled one this way. Clears fine with DRC 268s with stock pistons. 288's would need some massaging to fit forsure, but even having to increase the valve relief, you only add 1/3 of the CC gain to the piston in the process, due to the placement of the valve relief. 

With mine, after taking a little off the valve reliefs, and getting rid of all the heat risers on the pistons, I only increased the piston dish volume .5cc each.


Easy compression increase, net valve lift increase, and decreased shrouding of the valve. I see no downsides.


----------



## need_a_VR6 (May 19, 1999)

Good to know the drcs clear, and the 288s wouldnt. You dont get all that comp due to the valve shape not being cylindrical but ~half the gain. Still good stuff just not what I would recommend to others that would inevitibly do something wrong


----------



## 98GTI_VR6 (Jan 21, 2011)

98GTI_VR6 said:


> *Displacement or Bore:*
> STOCK 12V
> *Managment:*
> BFI STG. 2 CAM PROFILE CHIP
> ...


my custom made cai and 1.8t sensor relocation picture








all 3in. pvc and pvc coupler i spent about 20$ minus the filter and sensor
also new rims just updating my car

















other mods done recelty are ecs pullies, and 42dd sai plug
and 2m im running it on the dyno if i dont like the numbers i'm getting rid of the 262's for drc 268's


----------



## 98GTI_VR6 (Jan 21, 2011)

*dyno graph*

201.8 i'm stoked








decent....?:laugh:


----------



## AlexiGTIVR6 (Jul 21, 2000)

nice #'s:thumbup:


----------



## Ziptied (Dec 1, 2009)

:thumbup:awesome numbers


----------



## 98GTI_VR6 (Jan 21, 2011)

*thank u*

that was my goal to reach 200whp and i did so i'm happy 
maybe i'll still end up getting the 268's.....well c


----------



## V-dubbulyuh (Nov 13, 2005)

Good job. :thumbup:


----------



## need_a_VR6 (May 19, 1999)

98GTI_VR6 said:


> that was my goal to reach 200whp and i did so i'm happy
> maybe i'll still end up getting the 268's.....well c


 I would have done that a dozen times if I posted graphs with the corrections off. What kind of dyno was that on?


----------



## root beer (Jun 22, 2004)

Might have just dynoed in P.R.


----------



## JohnStamos (Feb 3, 2010)

*FV-QR*

The whole curve looks off for 262's on a stock intake manifold. And the fact the operator let off at 6800, when the curve was still flat. And the fact it says RWHP.


----------



## DUBZAK (Oct 27, 2009)

opcorn: :laugh: 

Video or it never happened?


----------



## mx3autozam (Nov 24, 2010)

Something is not right about that dyno graph. 262"s do not make power up that high yet alone will a vr make 200whp with those cams and a stock manifold. Also the obx headers are probably making the car slower 

post a video or pics of it on the dyno or go to another shop that has a proper dyno


----------



## max302 (Apr 7, 2010)

Indeed, looks kinda fishy. Club 200 seemed much harder to get into for us NA guys.


----------



## Deezy (Jan 3, 2009)

mx3autozam said:


> Something is not right about that dyno graph. 262"s do not make power up that high yet alone will a vr make 200whp with those cams and a stock manifold. Also the obx headers are probably making the car slower
> 
> post a video or pics of it on the dyno or go to another shop that has a proper dyno


 Obx Headers make the car slower... hmm I wonder what brand my car has? 
I was hoping to be somewhere close to the 200 NA club with schrick 272 Cams, mk4 head gasket, schrick vgi intake. Still a full interior car with AC so the track times are not awesome.

Sent from my MB860 using Tapatalk 2


----------



## 98GTI_VR6 (Jan 21, 2011)

*i have the video but it wouldnt send to my email too large*

i'll figure a way to get it to youtube and post it


----------



## 98GTI_VR6 (Jan 21, 2011)

*btw*

it was a mustang dyno 
and the 1st 3 pulls where at 197 everytime 
then we looked at it and the a/f ratio wasd too lean through the power band 
when i reset the ecu the fuel trims went to obviously a good setting 
this was my best dyno the next one after this one was 200 flat 
but i had the best of the best do my head.... and maybe you should try and wrap your headers you dumbasses to keep velocity up thats why you loose power..........:screwy:


----------



## VWpowa (Mar 4, 2000)

@98gti_vr6 who is the best of the best


----------



## Scotty_2.0 (Jan 14, 2005)

98GTI_VR6 said:


> it was a mustang dyno
> and the 1st 3 pulls where at 197 everytime
> then we looked at it and the a/f ratio wasd too lean through the power band
> when i reset the ecu the fuel trims went to obviously a good setting
> ...


 Dude... seriously... chill... you're talking to guys that have done, dyno'd and raced every form of 12V you can imagine (not talking about myself). Many have done more than what you have and not been able to break 200whp. It's not speculation, it's been done and proven. 

To be honest it's part of the reason I'm nervous to dyno my 12V. Not sure I wanna see sub 200whp numbers after all the time and $$ I've spent.


----------



## need_a_VR6 (May 19, 1999)

I made similar power on a dynojet with the 262s with "almost everything" optimized around it. Possible to crack 200, just not easy. Mustangs can be set up to read any number, set up for tuning they are heartbreakers. Run "like a dynojet" they are generally pretty generous, like a dynojet. 

I am with John the power should be dropping quicker after peak with those cams if its making that power.


----------



## 98GTI_VR6 (Jan 21, 2011)

Im simply saying they are not doing something right cause I ran it on the dyno 7 times and all the numbers were in the same ball park from 197-201.8 nothing under that. And I wasn't in the car the guy at the shop who does it for a living ran it. Maybe you should get the guys number who did my head he's got a shop off us1 in Melbourne everyone around here knows him as being the best but he isn't cheap I payed over 2500 for what he did to my head not including the cams and cam followers I purchased. Also I don't see too many ppl using the BFi chip, and no one I've seen either ceramic coats their exhaust. Mine is wrapped all the way through the test pipe. One other fun fact is no 2 motors are built exactly the same, to of my buddies have camaros, both have the exact same mods done and are the same year same motor, the one pushing 200k miles on it dynos higher than the one with just over 100k on it. Not saying anyone is wrong here but the place i got it done at is called trick pro they have a website and have videos of all the cars dynos


----------



## 98GTI_VR6 (Jan 21, 2011)

But also there isn't many places to dyno your car at around here is either trick pro or a place beachside that I was told sucks


----------



## 98GTI_VR6 (Jan 21, 2011)

*dyno video*

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h5HlMYtDMoA 
just posted it


----------



## 98GTI_VR6 (Jan 21, 2011)

*heres a 2nd-3rd pull at night so the quality kinda sux but here*

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g9MFfR0s4MU&feature=g-upl 
:laugh:ya ran outa room to keep goin,....


----------



## loopship (Aug 18, 2003)

*my 2 cents and dyno results*

For those following this thread this is my car on the same dyno. I have stock cams and block, any gains are from bolt-ons and a general freshening of the head. 

http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthread.php?5660204-VR6-Dyno-Results&p=77094396#post77094396 

I was suprised to see the numbers I got based on what I have read here, so maybe the dyno is generous. But If he has done a lot more work to his motor, it seems to show.


----------



## 98GTI_VR6 (Jan 21, 2011)

*that seems about right acually depending on your bolt ons*

180 whp 
not bad i think dead stock should dyno 172 i believe anywhere around that.... 
8whp gain could easily be made from a exhaust system, cia and 1.8t iat sensor... 
or lightweight flywheel and light pullies help put the power to the ground.... 
any chip?:laugh:


----------



## 98GTI_VR6 (Jan 21, 2011)

*btw*

there is a meet on stack between palm bay road and eber, in the shopping center behind fusion bistro every thursday night after 9 pm come join us we need more vw's theres too many hondas and 240sx's but alot are badass i raced a 1992 honda accord with the h22a motor from japan his r&p gear is like 4.30 or some bs like that..highway pull he is door to door with me kinda rediculous coming from a n/a honda hes faster than half the turbo hondas at the meet....he just took it to the track and ran mid 13's


----------



## 98GTI_VR6 (Jan 21, 2011)

*herd he just got a new transmission with tighter gears tho*

hell probly take me now i may have to invest in the 268's or a r&p gear for myself go from 3.34 to 3.96 then i'll be like this:wave:


----------



## fourthchirpin (Nov 19, 2004)

oh how far we have come, how far we have to go.


----------



## DUBZAK (Oct 27, 2009)

98GTI_VR6 said:


> 180 whp
> not bad i think dead stock should dyno 172 i believe anywhere around that....
> 8whp gain could easily be made from a exhaust system, cia and 1.8t iat sensor...
> or lightweight flywheel and light pullies help put the power to the ground....
> any chip?:laugh:


 Nope, dead stock is about 150 WHP on a DynoJet. Unfortunately the Mustang Dyno you ran on is going to rate it higher because it just is not as accurate of a Dyno reading. 

However, if it is cheap enough, I might have to make the drive to that shop and see what my set up is doing with 0 head work. :thumbup:


----------



## billyVR6 (May 8, 2000)

98GTI_VR6 said:


> it was a mustang dyno


 Looks like it's a SuperFlow AutoDyn 30 dyno; check the website and video. The fact that an engine with stock cams, breathing through a drilled airbox mind you, managed 180whp on the same dyno should put things into perspective.


----------



## JohnStamos (Feb 3, 2010)

DUBZAK said:


> Nope, dead stock is about 150 WHP on a DynoJet. Unfortunately the Mustang Dyno you ran on is going to rate it higher because it just is not as accurate of a Dyno reading.
> 
> However, if it is cheap enough, I might have to make the drive to that shop and see what my set up is doing with 0 head work. :thumbup:


 
I wanna try this dyno. According to it, I should be making 210whp on stock cams. :laugh:

Then I can bench race all day long.


----------



## 98GTI_VR6 (Jan 21, 2011)

*150 is def. wrong*

your motor is wore the phuck out then.... 
heres a bone stock dyno on your kinda dyno 
http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthre...ne-Dyno-Vid-and-Plot&highlight=stock+12v+dyno 

159 
so it varies on who broke it in and other variables 
but your saying i cannot go from 159-201 with what ive done?:screwy:


----------



## DUBZAK (Oct 27, 2009)

98GTI_VR6 said:


> your motor is wore the phuck out then....
> heres a bone stock dyno on your kinda dyno
> http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthre...ne-Dyno-Vid-and-Plot&highlight=stock+12v+dyno
> 
> ...


 OMG a 9 HP difference (which for a stock motor, I can see about a 10 HP variance in VW's motors in the same motor). :screwy: 


No I am not saying that you cannot go from xHP to XHP, just stating that that a Mustang Dyno is a WEEEE BIT OFF and maybe you actually haven't broke the 200WHP Barrier. Don't go getting all butt hurt because we want to see you break it, you just need a dose of reality that you may not actually have not broken that barrier yet. 

My apologies for doing VW's for oh 15 years, I guess I know nothing at all.....


----------



## JohnStamos (Feb 3, 2010)

*FV-QR*

262's and stock intake manifold won't make peak power at damn near 7000rpm. It's just not gonna happen... especially with a header that has been proven time and time again to drop power over the whole powerband, AND cause power to drop off like a rock after peak. Something is up with the graph. What did they use to synch RPM? Was the tach pickup messed up(like stated in the other thread), and they estimated based off of wheel speed? 



This is why dyno discussions are annoying when dealing with someone who takes them too literal. 


According to a STOCK car, dynoed on the same dyno as yours, you are making 11% more power then stock, so ~180whp/200bhp on a dynojet. That is EXACTLY where I would expect you to dyno, and exactly where 268's on your setup with stock headwork would usually dyno. Swap 268's on yours with no other change and you are in the mid/high 180's. Build a good intake manifold, dump the OBX for ported manifolds and a ported/TTDP and you are knocking on 200whps door. 



Your "pull" video just affirms this. That is not 200whp in a Mk3 with stock gearing, unless there are 3 people and luggage in your car. Plus, 200whp on stock gearing, in a stock weight car, and rolling into the throttle in 2nd causes large traction issues on street tires.


----------



## 98GTI_VR6 (Jan 21, 2011)

*here try this*

number one its not a obx manifold number 2 i ported it and number 3 they are wrapped to keep velocity up which none of you obviously have done because you would see gains.....my car feels better with it then without no dyno to prove this but i can feel the change, and my upper is match ported and polished...................also this was my 1st time at a dyno cause i'm not rich but it may be off but not 20whp off........:screwy: and i'm not butt hurt i'm simply saying i drive it all the time look at the 2nd video its a little blurry but tell me when my power band drops like i rock i dont really see it till maybe 6800-7200 and not like a rock...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g9MFf...&feature=g-upl this is my 2nd and 3rd all the way through both gears 
i got 115 cause i let 4th ride for a few seconds


----------



## 98GTI_VR6 (Jan 21, 2011)

*this is my 4th build btw*

just saying im not like new at this stuff im not a expert but i know how to make power


----------



## DUBZAK (Oct 27, 2009)

98GTI_VR6 said:


> just saying im not like new at this stuff im not a expert but i know how to make power


 You still want to use a dynojet for an accurate reading. If the header is anything other than EStyles's, it's a paperweight. 

Also, just some advice, 2.5" is too small for wanting all the power, a 3" has no problem keeping velocity up as you say.


----------



## 98GTI_VR6 (Jan 21, 2011)

*agreed but my pockets arent deep right now*

i have plans on going to a 3" but for now the wrap does the job, i'd still either ceramic coat it or wrap the 3" all the way to the catback system after the test pipe...but i erg some1 to try what i did on a headerpipe and dyno the difference you will get gains............i had to cut the flange to the test pipe cause the donut gasket was bull**** and leaked so i welded a small flexpipe between the header pipe and the testpipe...


----------



## need_a_VR6 (May 19, 1999)

For reference, 262s, bad-ass stock valve head by Race-Shop Joe, gutted VGI, OBD2 tb, ported manifolds/dp, 2.5" exhaust, T2 intake, GIAC, pulleys, lwfw, etc. 










The lower dyno here is the same car but without the ported manifolds, dp, VGI but had Schrick 268s. You can see the benefits of the porting and manifold change even vs the bigger cams. 

However I don't see a car with a stock IM making 'flat' power up top, even if supported with a good head.


----------



## billyVR6 (May 8, 2000)

98GTI_VR6 said:


> and maybe you should try and wrap your headers you dumbasses to keep velocity up thats why you loose power..........:screwy:





98GTI_VR6 said:


> they are wrapped to keep velocity up which none of you obviously have done because you would see gains


----------



## 98GTI_VR6 (Jan 21, 2011)

*I like.....lol*

My head isn't stock lw lifters, donahuegh baught the valves from who he trusts not sure if they are lighter or bigger but he did port n polish the head for me and do a 3 angle valve job I just know him very well and told him to make my head badass and here's the cams and lifters do your thing.....but yea my headers do make power.....it is a stock upper but it's ported n polished my next step is to get rid of the restriction at the inlet cut the bitch off n weld a new inlet that's much less restrictive


----------



## 98GTI_VR6 (Jan 21, 2011)

*Where around here is there a dyno that you approve of*

Melbourne, fl


----------



## DUBZAK (Oct 27, 2009)

98GTI_VR6 said:


> *.....but yea my headers do make power....*


 Why are you so afraid to tell us which brand they are then? Probably Raceland garbage.....You already confirmed it is not OBX.


----------



## fourthchirpin (Nov 19, 2004)

DUBZAK said:


> Why are you so afraid to tell us which brand they are then? Probably Raceland garbage.....You already confirmed it is not OBX.


 
i love how you ass-u-me.


----------



## DUBZAK (Oct 27, 2009)

:laugh: I am the Ass who started this thread so.....yeah.... 

I just want to know which one.


----------



## billyVR6 (May 8, 2000)

A real quick search says they're M2 Performance brand, PN# TP074; Race Design Imports is the vendor.


----------



## DUBZAK (Oct 27, 2009)

billyVR6 said:


> Paper Weight


 Exactly what I thought. :laugh: 

I love seeing EBAY stuff presented as "Dyno Proven" in their adds.


----------



## 98GTI_VR6 (Jan 21, 2011)

Yes that's the brand but I also ported it and chopped the flange off and welded a flex pipe in and welded it to the rest of my exhaust I wasn't afraid of telling u the brand I just am using my cell phone and its a bitch to look it up while im at work


----------



## 98GTI_VR6 (Jan 21, 2011)

I'm getting it dynoed again at beachside automotive just talked to him and it's a mustang dyno and he just got it recalibrated and he also says dyno jet gives you higher numbers than a mustang dyno


----------



## 98GTI_VR6 (Jan 21, 2011)

He did say the trick pro dyno isn't a mustang dyno


----------



## need_a_VR6 (May 19, 1999)

The header is a copy of the Brospeed (read: worse collectors and finish) which did *absolutely nothing* on a few fast cars when there were a few fast cars.:wave: 

Track it and weigh it or put it on a dynojet.


----------



## 98GTI_VR6 (Jan 21, 2011)

Have any of you actually tried using these headers? I saw that other brands were worthless but these looked nice and with a little modification they could show improvement. Don't nark until you try this


----------



## DUBZAK (Oct 27, 2009)

98GTI_VR6 said:


> Have any of you actually tried using these headers? I saw that other brands were worthless but these looked nice and with a little modification they could show improvement. Don't nark until you try this


 No because anyone with half a brain knows the cheap ebay garbage has no R&D Behind it, and is meant to rip off fools who want show cars for cheap. They make it shinny, you buy. 

You were better off with a TT Downpipe and ported OEM Manifolds than that garbage I have called a paper weight for a reason.


----------



## need_a_VR6 (May 19, 1999)

98GTI_VR6 said:


> Have any of you actually tried using these headers?


 Not those ones, just the original ones of much higher quality they were copied from that you didn't need to modify :banghead: 

About a year ago I bought a Supersprint copy just to see what they were like and its not even worth giving a second thought. The fit and finish is horrible compared to the original Supersprint that didn't make power, there is *no way* that they would produce a positive gain.


----------



## MKVmyfast (Sep 16, 2008)

I'll be posting mot motor and stats as soon as it finished. Everything is together just waiting on ARP piston rod bolts to come in from mjm autohaus. So far its a

Port and polished head with a 12:1 CR
268 eurosport cams
TT HD dual valve race springs
C2 stage 2 software to match motor wrk
3 angle valve job
New keepers retainers blah blah blah
Mk4 metal HG
Gasket matched head ports
Real OBD2 2.9 intake manifold
Cleaned the throttle body and intake tube
"Special" lower intake manifold gasket (lol bought it a LONG time ago still brand new forgot the name brand but I'm sure some of you guys know exactly which one I'm talking about. 
Honed cylinder walls
New Pistons rings
New rod bearings and everything else in the bottom end including ARP everything like rod bolts (when ever they decided to show up :angry ARP mains ARP head stud kit
Mk5 R32 oil pump and oil pan 
Stock exhaust manifold
42DD 2.5 test pipe
Autotech 2.5 cat back and there's prob some other things I'm forgetting to mention. Way too much stuff to remember it all -_-


Sent from my HTC Sensation 4G using Tapatalk 2


----------



## MKVmyfast (Sep 16, 2008)

Transmission is full of brand new gears and a quaife LSD  gear ratios are my secret but no surprise to anyone I'm sure its been done PLENTY of times

Sent from my HTC Sensation 4G using Tapatalk 2


----------



## 98GTI_VR6 (Jan 21, 2011)

nice............ i bet that car is nasty! 

i want to bring it to the track but i herd the one in orlando is getting ****ty for people with street tires


----------



## DUBZAK (Oct 27, 2009)

MKVmyfast said:


> I'll be posting mot motor and stats as soon as it finished. Everything is together just waiting on ARP piston rod bolts to come in from mjm autohaus. So far its a
> 
> Port and polished head with a 12:1 CR *???? Head or Piston Comp Ratio*
> 268 eurosport cams
> ...


 Have some q's in bold..... 

I thought all OBD2 Manifolds weather 2.8 or 2.9 were all the same? Maybe not. Have pics? 

What pistons did you use in this build to attain Comp Ratio of 12:1, and is that factoring in the MK4 Head Gasket? 

Get a 3" on that sukka. :thumbup: :laugh: 



MKVmyfast said:


> Transmission is full of brand new gears and a quaife LSD  gear ratios are my secret but no surprise to anyone I'm sure its been done PLENTY of times


 I would like to know so if you want to pm me what is what.  :laugh: 

I am running a G60 Gear Stack from an ATA in a VR6 Case with a .756 MK3 Diesel 5th Gear, 3.68 Ring and Pinion. Intense gearbox. Not as much as a say 4.24 or 3.94 Puller, but I can drive it long distances.


----------



## need_a_VR6 (May 19, 1999)

There is a 96 only 2.9 manifold that has the big plenum on it, quite rare. Still the plenum isn't the only problem on the top end. 

The 4cyl gearstacks, especially 1st gear, aren't really good for a VR6 that makes power. You are better off with the CCM/CDM gearstack (maybe 02J 4th if you're feeling saucy) and a bigger final drive.


----------



## DUBZAK (Oct 27, 2009)

need_a_VR6 said:


> There is a 96 only 2.9 manifold that has the big plenum on it, quite rare. Still the plenum isn't the only problem on the top end.
> 
> The 4cyl gearstacks, especially 1st gear, aren't really good for a VR6 that makes power. You are better off with the CCM/CDM gearstack (maybe 02J 4th if you're feeling saucy) and a bigger final drive.


 The Corrado Storm comes with the same 1st as my ATA box, but with the 3.38 Final Drive. I have enough transmission parts to make it a similar transmission, but I like having the 3.68 Pinion because it was close to the OEM Corrado 3.64. Was running a CCM box, and while it was ok, I feel the shorter gears in my car def made it quicker on the low end, and having a longer 4th and 5th for top end. Have not dyno'd it yet though. 

3.778	2.105	1.345	0.971	0.795 (Removed and replaced with 0.756) 
Vs. 
3.300	1.944	1.308	1.034	0.838


----------



## need_a_VR6 (May 19, 1999)

Start making some power and the 3.77 1st is not your friend, it also makes you need to rev to the MOON on the 1-2 shift.


----------



## DUBZAK (Oct 27, 2009)

need_a_VR6 said:


> Start making some power and the 3.77 1st is not your friend, it also makes you need to rev to the MOON on the 1-2 shift.


 I realized that the very fist time I drove it. So short in 1st, but being a mild N/A  I am not worried too much about it. 

I have contemplated doing something close to the AGK Euro Corrado Box, and I have the gearing parts to do at least the 1st with CCM Final dirve. 2nd and 3rd from the ATA stack, 4th from the CCM and the Diesel 5th 

Custom VR6 ATA 
*3.687 Final Drive 
1st:3.778 
2nd:2.105 
3rd:1.345 
4th:0.971 
5th:0.756 * 

Vs. European Corrado 2.9L AGK 
*3.338 Final Drive 
1st:3.778 
2nd:2.118 
3rd:1.458 
4th: 1.034 
5th:0.838 
* 
Vs. ??? Crazy 
*3.338 Final Drive 
1st:3.778 
2nd:2.105 
3rd:1.345 
4th:1.034 
5th:0.756 * 

With an NA Power band I don't foresee that 1st being too horrible. Currently the drop between 3rd and 4th is about 1,000RPM which is nice when wanting to hammer it. 

I hear "Do the 3.94 ring instead" a lot. But I like a challenge. :laugh:


----------



## JohnStamos (Feb 3, 2010)

need_a_VR6 said:


> Start making some power and the 3.77 1st is not your friend, it also makes you need to rev to the MOON on the 1-2 shift.


 I made the mistake of trying a 3.625 first on a 3.65 final. Won't do that again.:laugh:

I couldn't imagine how bad a 3.77 is.


----------



## MKVmyfast (Sep 16, 2008)

@DUBZAC its a real 2.9 manifold here's some pics of my old 2.8 that I just have in my room








(for sale or trade btw)
And here's the one I'm running now








Also that 12:1 CR is including the mk4 headgasket and its all with milling the head Pistons just got new rings and blah blah. Pretty much I made my bottom end back to OE factory specs like the car came from the factory all the extra power ill be making is coming from the head 

Sent from my HTC Sensation 4G using Tapatalk 2


----------



## DUBZAK (Oct 27, 2009)

MKVmyfast said:


> @DUBZAC its a real 2.9 manifold here's some pics of my old 2.8 that I just have in my room
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 If they only made it for 1 year, that is indeed a rare part. Not a retapped OBD1 Manifold though right? If it is legit OBD2, wow.. nice manifold. 

Running the OEM 2.9 Round Collared Manifold Corrado one personally. 




MKVmyfast said:


> Also that 12:1 CR is including the mk4 headgasket and its all with milling the head Pistons just got new rings and blah blah. Pretty much I made my bottom end back to OE factory specs like the car came from the factory all the extra power ill be making is coming from the head
> 
> Sent from my HTC Sensation 4G using Tapatalk 2


 Only one problem, I do not see you raising compression 1.5 Points on Head work alone. I am certain others with more experience than I are willing to chime in, but yeah, unless you changed pistons, that comp ratio is not accurate.


----------



## MKVmyfast (Sep 16, 2008)

It's not retapped. If you look at mine and your near the oil cap its different that how's you can tell if the manifold is OBD1 or 2. And if your running a tapped manifold you should have just bought the adapter plate to make it work for your obd2 from bfi.

You would have to ask my mechanic that's built my motor he's the one who decided to have the head milled to 11:5:1 and then with the mk4 HG he said ill be at 12:1

I should have started my own build thread today since I was sick with a fever and didn't go to work. 

Sent from my HTC Sensation 4G using Tapatalk 2


----------



## DUBZAK (Oct 27, 2009)

I've own both 2.9s. The round collared off of early 2.9 Corrado, unenscribed; and an obd1 version of the non round collared you do from a 94 UK Corrado. 

Unfortunately, your compression would not be raised that high without pistons. If you read back a page or 2 we discuss this with what happens when machining, and valves slightly raising compression, but also having other effects on the valve seat. 

After my machine work on both deck and head, I maybe picked up .2 mostly (if not all) from the block being decked. 

:thumbup:


----------



## fourthchirpin (Nov 19, 2004)

is there anyone out there with high compression pistons in their motor?


----------



## Scotty_2.0 (Jan 14, 2005)

fourthchirpin said:


> is there anyone out there with high compression pistons in their motor?


 I'm running the Wiseco 82.5mm 10.5:1 pistons with Mk4 MLS HG. Should put me around 11:1. No dyno yet, will be sure to post when car is back on the road.... soon.


----------



## DUBZAK (Oct 27, 2009)

fourthchirpin said:


> is there anyone out there with high compression pistons in their motor?


 Similar to Scotty, I also run a 10.5:1 Pistons with a MK4 HG and and had the block decked. Comp should be about 11.2:1.


----------



## need_a_VR6 (May 19, 1999)

fourthchirpin said:


> is there anyone out there with high compression pistons in their motor?


 Nope, everyone cleans the carbon off.


----------



## 98GTI_VR6 (Jan 21, 2011)

Lol this is true


----------



## fourthchirpin (Nov 19, 2004)

need_a_VR6 said:


> Nope, everyone cleans the carbon off.


 

this leaves me feeling lonely


----------



## JohnStamos (Feb 3, 2010)

need_a_VR6 said:


> Nope, everyone cleans the carbon off.


 :laugh:


----------



## root beer (Jun 22, 2004)

I just did 9.75ftlbs over on the old headbolt torque, got me up to 12:1 :thumbup:


----------



## Scotty_2.0 (Jan 14, 2005)

root beer said:


> I just did 9.75ftlbs over on the old headbolt torque, got me up to 12:1 :thumbup:


 Thx for the tip.....


----------



## DUBZAK (Oct 27, 2009)

I am sensing some smoke and mirrors in here. :sly: :laugh:


----------



## BTEK Fab (Feb 8, 2007)

Displacement/bore: 2.9l/82mm
Management: TT chip with apexi safc-ii
Internals: stock crank, polished rods, wiseco 82mm 10.5:1
Comp ratio: 11.3:1
Head gasket: mk4 MLS
Headwork: drc 268's, ti retainers, schrick springs, stock valves, my own p&p.
Bolt ons: under drive pulleys, AC delete, wrapped obx header( modified) 2.5" exhaust, custom tubular intake manifold.

This was my old motor I have used for 5 years road racing, I put down 214whp and 202 ft lbs on a carpack hub dyno a few years ago. I don't know where that fits relative to mustangs or dyno jets but I just use it for a reference for changes...


My motor that is currently under construction is going to be 13:1, 83.5mm pistons, r32 crank, ie rods, 288 cams, solid lifter heavily modified head with 42/36 valves, custom long tube BTEK header and custom BTEK manifold running MS 3 management. Should have some numbers for it later this summer. Anyone have any leads on a decent r32 crank?


----------



## need_a_VR6 (May 19, 1999)

Nope all the ones I have are cracked.


----------



## BTEK Fab (Feb 8, 2007)

Is that a hint at something? Lol or is it just a common problem?


----------



## need_a_VR6 (May 19, 1999)

Both. Anything you buy, get magnafluxed.


----------



## BTEK Fab (Feb 8, 2007)

I was planning on it, but thanks for the heads up! I know some of you guys have a lot of experience with the VR6, is there really a major concern on going to an 83.5 or 84mm bore? If there is then I will likely have to boat tail the base of the cylinders to clear the swing of the R crank. Anyone here have any experience with this?


----------



## SLC4EVER (Oct 7, 1999)

It will clear, no modification to the block at all.


----------



## need_a_VR6 (May 19, 1999)

Depends on the pistons you might need to notch the skirts.


----------



## BTEK Fab (Feb 8, 2007)

Anyone used Wossner pistons with any luck?


----------



## DUBZAK (Oct 27, 2009)

BTEK Fab said:


> Anyone used Wossner pistons with any luck?


 You can get any forged pistion you want and the only differences would be metal grades, or coating options. Wossner is a reputable brand, and I am sure someone has ran them before but being that general of a question, I thought I might help you out. 

If you plan on running that .:R32 Crank you might want to contact the different piston makers and see if anyone else has built a motor the same specs. 

If you are doing other things to compensate for stroke, then you can run any 12v forged piston the aftermarket has: 
JE 
Wiseco 
Wossner 
ECT..... 

Remember stock compression 10.0:1 On All 12v VR6's because the MK4 makes up for it with gasket. Base your compression selection upon that and if using the MK4 gasket, compensate the extra approx 0.5 Compression into your final comp + decking, removing middle gasket layer ect. 

:beer:


----------



## masterqaz (Oct 5, 2007)

Need to see someone go nuts and try for something up in the 14-1 comp ratio.


----------



## 98GTI_VR6 (Jan 21, 2011)

*little help with my build*

i have A ISSUE, my car overheats when full throttle for long sprints, dyno sheet a/f ratio said it running a tad lean in the 12's when it should be in the 14's i have the bfi stg. 2 chip for 262's should i get a 3 bar fpr or send my chhip back n have them reprogram it


----------



## fourthchirpin (Nov 19, 2004)

masterqaz said:


> Need to see someone go nuts and try for something up in the 14-1 comp ratio.


 these people are still debating about if a header will add power. lol u expect them to try some REAL compression....:screwy:


----------



## Pwagondraggin (Nov 20, 2009)

This thread has a bunch of solid information :beer: DUBZAK your Rado sounds great.


----------



## need_a_VR6 (May 19, 1999)

98GTI_VR6 said:


> i have A ISSUE, my car overheats when full throttle for long sprints, dyno sheet a/f ratio said it running a tad lean in the 12's when it should be in the 14's i have the bfi stg. 2 chip for 262's should i get a 3 bar fpr or send my chhip back n have them reprogram it


 I am convinced you have no idea what you are talking about. 

Max power afr should be between 12.5-13.3:1 for almost any setup posted here. 14.x:1 is really lean for wot. 

If you have a cooling problem look to your waterpump, rad, belt, oil cooler, etc. depending on what "long" is the stock stuff will not cut it.


----------



## typeSLone (Feb 8, 2002)

fourthchirpin said:


> is there anyone out there with high compression pistons in their motor?


 I had 11.5:1 compression pistons, but that was in a 16V. 

I wouldn't mind building a 12.5:1 compression 12V........do people still build 12v's?


----------



## DUBZAK (Oct 27, 2009)

98GTI_VR6 said:


> i have A ISSUE, my car overheats when full throttle for long sprints, dyno sheet a/f ratio said it running a tad lean in the 12's when it should be in the 14's i have the bfi stg. 2 chip for 262's should i get a 3 bar fpr or send my chhip back n have them reprogram it


Um...if you are OBD2 you already have a 3.0 Bar FPR. You should not be running a 4.0 Bar unless you are OBD1. 



fourthchirpin said:


> these people are still debating about if a header will add power. lol u expect them to try some REAL compression....:screwy:


:laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh: 



Pwagondraggin said:


> This thread has a bunch of solid information :beer: DUBZAK your Rado sounds great.


Thanks but the timing was indeed f**ked in those videos. I tried to advance the timing on the crank 1 tooth, all it did was make it sound like a subie. 

I will get some new videos as soon as I clean up the car a bit more. 


typeSLone said:


> I had 11.5:1 compression pistons, but that was in a 16V.
> 
> I wouldn't mind building a 12.5:1 compression 12V........do people still build 12v's?


Yeah, some of us old people do. Nostalgia I think.  

I would have gone 12:0 to 1 If I had no plans on boosting it later on but the T04E turbo is sitting in my living room as a piece of art. I am certain I am one of a few (if not the only one) running IE H Beams on an N/A Motor. :screwy: :laugh:



need_a_VR6 said:


> I am convinced you have no idea what you are talking about.


I almost needed a little more convincing. Almost. :laugh:


----------



## billyVR6 (May 8, 2000)

masterqaz said:


> Need to see someone go nuts and try for something up in the 14-1 comp ratio.


That's already been done.

Also, it looks like the 2.9 manifold is still talked about...
Anyone dyno that back-to-back and justify it?


----------



## V-dubbulyuh (Nov 13, 2005)

billyVR6 said:


> Also, it looks like the 2.9 manifold is still talked about...
> Anyone dyno that back-to-back and justify it?


Poke around on the Tex a little, there were back to back comparissons done (the last one was within the past 2yrs or so) and the 2.9 did not show any significant gains. Dyno'd same day, only variable was stock vs 2.9 manifold.


----------



## vw1320 (Jul 11, 2000)

V-dubbulyuh said:


> Poke around on the Tex a little, there were back to back comparissons done (the last one was within the past 2yrs or so) and the 2.9 did not show any significant gains. Dyno'd same day, only variable was stock vs 2.9 manifold.


I would be curious to see that comparison just for informations sake. Lots of talk over the years but I don't every recall a same day back to back test.


Good to see there is still some interest in the old boat anchor 12v. Still my favorite motor. Maybe one day I'll knock the cobwebs off of mine.


----------



## DUBZAK (Oct 27, 2009)

I only have the 2.9 Round Collar for a few Reasons. 

1) Looks Cool
2) Euro Corrado Part
3) To Broke to afford a Real VSR
4) Not buying a new Schrick when I want a Gutted Schrick. 


Anyone have a Gutted Schrick they want to sell? :laugh:


----------



## need_a_VR6 (May 19, 1999)

I had a round collar on the 2.9, and that motor didn't do a thing considering what was in it. I blame the manifold.


----------



## billyVR6 (May 8, 2000)

V-dubbulyuh said:


> Poke around on the Tex a little, there were back to back comparissons done (the last one was within the past 2yrs or so) and the 2.9 did not show any significant gains. Dyno'd same day, only variable was stock vs 2.9 manifold.


Thanks, that pretty much sums my experience, I just never did they dyno part to confirm...


----------



## V-dubbulyuh (Nov 13, 2005)

I spent a few mins this morning looking for the old post and have not found it... I will search again though because I know it was a highly debated subject and it was good when the actual graphs were posted up to see performance/lack thereof.


----------



## billyVR6 (May 8, 2000)

My straight A to B experience was enough to seal the deal, it was such a decent looking manifold though, and for that reason alone I left it on there. As vw1320 mentioned it would be interesting see the dyno runs, I did search for a few minutes only to find people arguing with that need_a_vr6 guy...


----------



## V-dubbulyuh (Nov 13, 2005)

billyVR6 said:


> I did search for a few minutes only to find people arguing with that need_a_vr6 guy...



Yeah and what does he know? He's only been tuning and racing 12v's longer than some folks have been on Vortex. 

I know it is always a hot topic so I will keep looking for that old thread.


----------



## need_a_VR6 (May 19, 1999)

The only thing I know is that Billys 2.9 manifold was meticulously polished.


----------



## 98GTI_VR6 (Jan 21, 2011)

*i want to know your opionions*

which limited slip dif. do you all recommend getting?


----------



## DUBZAK (Oct 27, 2009)

98GTI_VR6 said:


> I want to know your opinions, which limited slip dif. do you all recommend getting?


Why not ask this question in the appropriate thread/forum rather than thread jack in here?

From the looks of your previous purchases, I'd tell you to get that OBX Diff off of ebay you were probably eyeing already. :wave:

Wavetrac
Pelequin
Quaife

Anything other than these 3 are probably junk. Also you need to ask yourself which diff fits what you are trying to do. 

Moving along to getting back on topic here, anyone else have some VR6 Wizardry they would like to share?


----------



## BTEK Fab (Feb 8, 2007)

Kaaz is also a good choice for road racing applications, but price and availability is an issue. 

On another note I have been doing so research on intake manifold and exhaust manifold design for the vr6 using CFD and have found some pretty interesting stuff. Using flow bench data and calculating coefficients it seems that the staggered runner length to equalize the overall runner length is a bit overrated. The shape of the ports plays a big part in compensating for the different runner length and volumetric efficiency of each port. I will throw up some data later. Basically the short ports are pretty terrible and keeping the runner short helps it flow a bit better to keep up with the long ports. I am building a manifold that is modular and easy to build to any runner length that space will allow. I am going to play with a few concepts on the dyno to see if I can back up the calculations.


----------



## DUBZAK (Oct 27, 2009)

:thumbup: Interested in seeing.


----------



## SLC4EVER (Oct 7, 1999)

BTEK Fab said:


> Kaaz is also a good choice for road racing applications


Slightly OT, but I would recommend the Gripper over the KAAZ. Plus you have options of HD drive flanges. There are installation "issues" with a KAAZ as well. Then there is the Gemini LSD...good luck getting one. Or the Kalmar, which is similar to the Gemini in that it has two sets of ramp angles, HD drive flanges and still available.


----------



## 98GTI_VR6 (Jan 21, 2011)

*Thanks for the replies*

But I found myself more interested in something else 1st I found a 97 vr6 passat with 65k original miles and I am going to buy the motor for 400 2day bc I want to build the bottom end! .. My only question is how much can I deck the block with my current setup bc I am looking to just use the bottom end a hopefully make my money back by selling the head


----------



## DUBZAK (Oct 27, 2009)

Bump.

I am still messing with this thing a little. :laugh:


















Changed up my gearing to a 3.38 Final Drive with the G60 ATA 1st-4th, Still with TDI CTN .756 5th. 110MPH @ 4K RPM is nice.....and now the car has a ~close to European Spec 2.9L Corrado Gearbox. 

Polo Shifter Box to run the late 02J Shifter Selector, and ease of swapping the 02M in when it's ready to go in with the Haldex. 


















New Beru Ignition Coil, Bosch Distributor, 4.0 Bar VDO Fuel Pump, NGK BKR6EK's (One Step Colder), Autotech 10.4 Wires. 

Can't wait to see how this comes together. :thumbup:

Anyone else Du W3rk3?eace:


----------



## GTIVRon (Jul 24, 2009)

What compression ratio are you running again?

I did some head work (mainly polish, deepened bowls, smoothed everything, short runners ported just enough to have equal volume to the longer ports) with TT 268 cams, euro 2.9 upper intake manifold, port matched the lower intake manifold, and MK4 head gasket. Still running the stock airbox, stock exhaust manifolds, stock downpipe, and 3" MBS exhaust with the high flow cat. Pulled 164.3 HP on a Dyno Dynamics dyno. It supposedly reads about 18% lower than the same shops DynoJet.


----------



## DUBZAK (Oct 27, 2009)

Approx. 11.2:1 after pistons, block deck, and mk4 gasket. Hence the one step colder plug. Going to try it, I previously had detonation issues with BKR5E.


----------



## ajhvw93 (Oct 26, 2009)

Will, did you deck the block -VS- head ,due to the fact your running 268's with an MKIV HG?. BTW Interior is looking awesome...your kind of turning me into a CF Junkie:thumbup::beer:


----------



## DUBZAK (Oct 27, 2009)

You know I did, with .440 Eurospec 268's, I have that little bit of clearance needed.


----------



## hendrikbmx (Oct 12, 2009)

hello, I just bought a spare 2.8L upper intake manifold to mess around with, I don't want to cut up my 2.9L one just yet. 
Today I cut it in half and removed the spark plug holes , next step is to weld the ignition lead holder holes that will be exposed after I have grinded the bumps down on the inside .also I made some wrong cuts and I'll fix those too :screwy: . then sand all the edges and generally try to smooth everything. 










now I have a bit of a dilemma , should I reconstruct the triangular part , or go with a horisontal straight plate ( like the one I'm holding ). it looks like the triangular part was there to help increase flow for the rear cylinders, since there were sparkplug holes restricting them. removing it would also make the plenum abit smaller, but the removed sparkplug holes have increased it again  this pic explains 










I would have to relocate the IAT sensor (will be the 1.8T one ) and the tiny vacuum hole. I don't know how it will affect the vacuum, its drilled in a really lonely corner like this 
( I put a match thru, so you can see it better ) 










after I have done this, I need to think of the the part that comes after the throttlebody into the intake. it looks and probably is really a flow killer. I mean that O to rectangle section. 
pic of my 2.9L one 










maybe I can make my valve cover ( aluminum ) a bit deeper in that section, so it would allow for a better transition. I dont really know how much room there is as everthing is taken apart right now and am too lazy to check. other thing is , I was going to get a plastic valve cover , because I've read it doesn't let the intake mani heat up as much. 

please let me know what you guys&girls think and if there is anything else I can do or you would do ( differently) , while I'm in there . I will be gasket matching also, so you don't have to suggest that. 
sorry for my weird explanations, I did the best I could. English is not my first language. 

thanks 
Hendrik


----------



## DUBZAK (Oct 27, 2009)

Reconsider Port matching the manifold vs. Gasket Matching. Sometimes too big will slow the air down too much. 

Also, start the port match at the Throttle Body, and do it all the way to the Exhaust manifolds. :thumbup:


----------



## billyVR6 (May 8, 2000)

I've seen these manifolds opened up to the point where they needed to be re-welded. 

As far as too big, slowing air down, etc., there really isn't a lot of material to work with, I think you'll poke through the casting long before acheiving runners that are detrimental in size. 

I say go nuts; big piles of aluminum dust is what you want...


----------



## hendrikbmx (Oct 12, 2009)

What about the triangular part on the bottom. Should I delete it?


----------



## billyVR6 (May 8, 2000)

I say leave it, they cast it like that for a reason...


----------



## hendrikbmx (Oct 12, 2009)

billyVR6 said:


> I say leave it, they cast it like that for a reason...


 I think the reason was to allow better flow to the rear cylinders, because the sparkplug holes were in front of them, but they are not anymore.


----------



## brian500 (Mar 24, 2008)




----------



## DUBZAK (Oct 27, 2009)

That's one way to get more air in the plenum!!!! 

Nice work. :thumbup:


----------



## max302 (Apr 7, 2010)

brian500 said:


>


 Interdasting. Do you have a backstory on that manifold, is that yours? I'm looking into doing something similar in addition to removing the spark plug holes.


----------



## need_a_VR6 (May 19, 1999)

I have always wanted to do a big tapered plenum with a tb that faces the firewall. Hood problems though. There is an upper limit to plenum size helping, the above one might be pushing it.


----------



## brian500 (Mar 24, 2008)

My buddy raced world challenge back in the day. I took his head, cams etc etc. Not to sure about the mani it was made in 1999-2000. By the looks of it they just stretched the mani for added Tq and just welded a plenum. The mani needs to come off since my valve cover is leaking ill take more pics for you once its off.

http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthread.php?5800754-Mk3-Jetta-VR6-Racing-in-Speedvision-WC-Back-in-99


----------



## brian500 (Mar 24, 2008)

The head is worked. And flow benched.


----------



## max302 (Apr 7, 2010)

I'm gonna go ahead and cross-reference my other thread about intake mani modification, in case any of you guys are interested. 

http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthread.php?5927461-Requesting-feedback-on-modified-intake-manifold 

Brian, be sure to post those pictures on either threads once it's off! I would also be cool to get a volume measurement out of that manifold too. :thumbup:


----------



## brian500 (Mar 24, 2008)

Pics no prob. Volume measurements ill see what I can do.


----------



## brian500 (Mar 24, 2008)




----------



## 16k.Redline (Feb 21, 2013)

'92 SLC Corrado 

Displacement: 3000cc, 3.0 liter 
Internals: Fresh top and bottom end, Wiesco 83mm forged pistons, Eagle H rods, ARP everything 
Management: GIAC cam chip 
Comp Ratio: 10.5:1 (before the MKIV HG) 
Headgasket Type: MK4 Metal 
Headwork and Type: Schimmel head, +1 Ferrea valves, Titanium retainers, HD springs 
Cams: Schrick 268's 
Bolt on's: Euro 2.9 oem manifold, deramped ported and polished TB, custom intake and heat shield, Neuspeed UDP's, 
Exhaust: 2.5" custom w/ Brospeed muffler, (Suitcase & resonator delete), bored downpipe 
Random: Quaife LSD, EuroSport wires, Gasket matched intake and runners, Passat intake elbow, AC delete


----------



## the mad conductor (Nov 12, 2009)

ill play.... 

obd1 head with TT valve springs 
mk4 lifters 
TT 288 cams 
mk4 headgasket 
8lb flywheel with stock clutch 
ported exhaust manis 
ported intake mani 
TT tune (im still obd1 dizzy motor) 
stock CCM gearbox 
AC delete 
mk4 IAT located 12 inches before maf 
true cold air intake 
bfi stage 1 motor mounts 
was on BF goodrich Drag radials for a while.. 









might be forgetting a few things... lol


----------



## crannky (Jun 24, 2006)

hendrikbmx said:


> hello, I just bought a spare 2.8L upper intake manifold to mess around with, I don't want to cut up my 2.9L one just yet.
> Today I cut it in half and removed the spark plug holes , next step is to weld the ignition lead holder holes that will be exposed after I have grinded the bumps down on the inside .also I made some wrong cuts and I'll fix those too :screwy: . then sand all the edges and generally try to smooth everything.


 Been thinking about cutting back the stock manifold like this with runners about 2.5 inches shorter and having the plenum rewelded and reshaped slightly, with a taper, to make something a little closer to a SRI. 

I've gone through all the threads on here and it seems, on a budget, the most enticing option.


----------



## Lord_Verminaard (Apr 6, 2004)

the mad conductor said:


> ill play....
> 
> obd1 head with TT valve springs
> mk4 lifters
> ...


 How do you like that setup? My build is going to be pretty close to that. What 8lb flywheel did you go with and is it too light or ok? 

Thanks! :thumbup: 

Brendan


----------



## the mad conductor (Nov 12, 2009)

Lord_Verminaard said:


> How do you like that setup? My build is going to be pretty close to that. What 8lb flywheel did you go with and is it too light or ok?
> 
> Thanks! :thumbup:
> 
> Brendan


 love it, you lose a little torque down low but its worth the top end. my car revs so fast, rev matching is 10 times easier and more precise. im willing to bet im at 199whp.. its night and day with the cams. next is obd2 swap or standalone.


----------



## JohnStamos (Feb 3, 2010)

*FV-QR*

People have been sleeping on the 288's for way too long. 


Going from 268's to 288's feels like going from stock to 268's. 

Add a real intake manifold designed for the 288's, and its even better.


----------



## mx3autozam (Nov 24, 2010)

Not quite 288's but im running Colt 280's and it pulls like its on steroids in the top end. Can't wait untill Megasquirt and possibly a short runner.


----------



## Lord_Verminaard (Apr 6, 2004)

I thought even 272 cams were awfully close to the pistons, any additional modifications required for 280 or 288 cams?

Great info guys, keep it coming.

Brendan


----------



## need_a_VR6 (May 19, 1999)

TT 288 exhaust valves hit and Schrick 276 does the same w a mk4 gasket. Not sure of others. After hitting the pistons are dented and I have never seen further issues.


----------



## tasty danish (Nov 29, 2009)

need_a_VR6 said:


> TT 288 exhaust valves hit and Schrick 276 does the same w a mk4 gasket. Not sure of others. After hitting the pistons are dented and I have never seen further issues.


I've seen you say this though when I installed my 288's with a mk4 gasket I had no resistance turning it by hand and with a checker spring rigged up always was able to get at least .1" on both sides.


----------



## need_a_VR6 (May 19, 1999)

Do you know the exact part number 288 you had? There are two versions. Early ones definitely hit, and I have had that happen multiple times. The later ones I ran with a "rebuilt" motor that might have been decked and those hit also. I am sure there are combos that yield some clearance here, and that everyone should check it or plan for the worst.


----------



## billyVR6 (May 8, 2000)

tasty danish said:


> I've seen you say this though when I installed my 288's with a mk4 gasket I had no resistance turning it by hand and with a checker spring rigged up always was able to get at least .1" on both sides.


My results with the older spec camshafts; piston contact topic. There was no resistance during install, no issues ever, and the engine ran and performed great. It's really been a hit or miss situation and a tough call...


----------



## the mad conductor (Nov 12, 2009)

JohnStamos said:


> People have been sleeping on the 288's for way too long.
> 
> 
> Going from 268's to 288's feels like going from stock to 268's.
> ...


and what real intake manifold would that be?


----------



## 16k.Redline (Feb 21, 2013)

Schrick, or SR


----------



## the mad conductor (Nov 12, 2009)

16k.Redline said:


> Schrick, or SR


hes saying "designed" for the 288s.. didnt know someone made this mani for these cams.


----------



## max302 (Apr 7, 2010)

I'm wondering by how much machining off additional valve delete clearance would offset the compression gains of a decked block. 288s with 11:1+ would be awesome. 

I'm getting a spare block somewhere next week, hopefully by then I'll be finished with school would and will be able to calculate that stuff.


----------



## billyVR6 (May 8, 2000)

the mad conductor said:


> hes saying "designed" for the 288s.. didnt know someone made this mani for these cams.


Most likely a custom, or modified, intake manifold with the intake runner length and diameter tuned for a certain powerband. Think about resonance tuning, pressure waves, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, all that good stuff...


----------



## need_a_VR6 (May 19, 1999)

the mad conductor said:


> and what real intake manifold would that be?


The one that you design, fabricate and test of course!


----------



## the mad conductor (Nov 12, 2009)

need_a_VR6 said:


> The one that you design, fabricate and test of course!


ive designed one, just need to do the math and make it.


----------



## RedFuFuG60 (Jul 1, 2001)

Hey guys I don't quite have my motor yet but it's in the works and pending some configuration decisions, I tried posting a thread with my questions but 60 something views later & no replies  I am now here after having stumbled across this thread & I thought if anyone can help me, they are going to be here.

I'm considering picking up a motor from a friend of mine, it's been bored out to 3.0L & has Forged 8:1 pistons, he had it built with turbo in mind but plans changed and he no longer wants to run it. I want this motor and the only thing getting in the way is the compression ratio since my plans are going all motor.

I know you're supposed to bore the block after you buy the pistons, but in this case if I buy same size 10:1 pistons to replace the 8:1 set already installed do you think I could get away with it? I don't want to bore/hone the motor again since everything was just done and it has never even been fired up with the low-comp configuration.

I haven't really looked at too many different forged pistons but how consistent are the manufacturers with piston diameter? if they are extremely accurate I'd imagine all I have to do is pull out rods/pistons, replace pistons & button it all back up! or worse case scenario perhaps I can order custom pistons to match the existing bore w/ .025mm ring gap!

of course this is all considering it's running standard stroke, the crank is aftermarket too but for now let's say it's all stock specs except for the bore since my buddy can't recall what internals he ordered :screwy:.

Also what are chip options for this motor; 3.0L 10:1 or 10.5:1 (if I go w/ MKIV HG) + mild cams running '95 Coilpack OBDI, I was reading GIAC has something that works well for guys w/ 2.9L motors but I couldn't find details on OBDI option.

I am not set on 10:1 CR specially after seeing some of your builds I would love to go higher, I figured I'd do 10:1 pistons + MKIV HG so I'd end up w/ 10.5:1 and this is due to the fact that I live in Cali & 91 octane is the best I can get, also I do not plan to run standalone, best case scenario I would swap to OBDII but not for a while so it has to run reliably as a daily w/ whatever chip that can work best on OBDI. Ideally I'd like to run 11:1 but I've read that ratio is pushing it when it comes to 91 octane + OBDI since it can't pull timing as aggressively as OBDII, though I'm open to have my mind changed if anyone has more experience with this.

Thanks in advance :thumbup:


----------



## kraftaroni (Feb 1, 2005)

I know you're supposed to bore the block after you buy the pistons, but in this case if I buy same size 10:1 pistons to replace the 8:1 set already installed do you think I could get away with it? 

Yes, Just make sure to gap your rings correctly you will be fine. 

I have a giac obd 1 chip I picked up on vortex and soldered in myself. It was like 60$ but if your gonna run 11 to 1 comp. you might run into running a little rich on that chip. You might end up needing a megasquirt or other stand alone. My car passed smog with all of this with the appearance of a stock motor. Good luck.


----------



## DUBZAK (Oct 27, 2009)

Nope, I ran fine with a custom TT Chip for 268's and Higher Comp. Runs even better on 100 Octane.


----------



## EnIgMa '06 (May 13, 2004)

Does anyone have experience with CAT 283 cams? I have a spare set of new Autotech 262s in the garage and a local wants to trade his CAT 283s. I plan on running a ported head, Ti retainers, HD springs, five angle valve job, port matched manifolds (intake and exhaust), Velocity TB, Turn2 intake, and MKIV gasket on MS.


----------



## the mad conductor (Nov 12, 2009)

DUBZAK said:


> Nope, I ran fine with a custom TT Chip for 268's and Higher Comp. Runs even better on 100 Octane.


i wish we had 93 out here, the highest we have is 91  they have race gas 100oct.. but its $6xx a gallon


----------



## the mad conductor (Nov 12, 2009)

****, back home we had C16 at the pumps.. i filled my turbo aba rabbit with it a few times


----------



## root beer (Jun 22, 2004)

I tried leaded 110 a number of times, as my family owns a pump and an underground tank full of it. It never made any difference. Car ran fat if anything.


----------



## tasty danish (Nov 29, 2009)

need_a_VR6 said:


> Do you know the exact part number 288 you had? There are two versions. Early ones definitely hit, and I have had that happen multiple times. The later ones I ran with a "rebuilt" motor that might have been decked and those hit also. I am sure there are combos that yield some clearance here, and that everyone should check it or plan for the worst.


I wasn't aware there were different versions of the TT288's so as such I have no idea what number I have. 

My engine is a stock 12V out of a 94 passat, the runners/seats/valves etc had some mild work done to them, with a mk4 gasket, arp studs. No block decking. Minimal on the head just to give it a good surface (my machinist said he just kissed it as slight as his machine would allow). 

I rigged the head up with light valve springs because of what I'd read on here however, every few degrees I'd check and I have plenty of clearance. Not like, 1950 Harley Davidson large, but enough that it wasn't even worth writing the numbers down. I was puzzled as everything always goes totally wrong for me, so I double and triple checked my TDC marks and rotated the engine over multiple times, everything always lined up perfect. Maybe I just got lucky?

I will say, that if you're building engines you should always be doing this check, or have a damn good reason why you aren't.


----------



## need_a_VR6 (May 19, 1999)

If the head had been decked but with a valve job you could have wound up with more clearance then normal.


----------



## the mad conductor (Nov 12, 2009)

the real question is, has anyone gotten custom pistons with valve reliefs for 288s and higher comp ratio? the block im building is begging for some 2.9 or 3.0 pistons. but i want higher compression. i feel 10.5 is weak.


----------



## need_a_VR6 (May 19, 1999)

I know Bernd had 13-14:1's with 288s. One flaw with big comp is the chamber design. It has to be a big factor in things making power or falling on their face.


----------



## billyVR6 (May 8, 2000)

the mad conductor said:


> the real question is, has anyone gotten custom pistons with valve reliefs for 288s and higher comp ratio? the block im building is begging for some 2.9 or 3.0 pistons. but i want higher compression. i feel 10.5 is weak.


Most aftermarket pistons come with deeper valve pockets.


----------



## RedFuFuG60 (Jul 1, 2001)

I have another question;

so with a properly put together setup in cali what's a daily usable comp ratio? can you get away with a custom chip & 11:1 comp ratio on 91 octane pump gas?


----------



## max302 (Apr 7, 2010)

Ok, so I got my spare engine and I've been crunching some numbers. 

The easy answer to the 288 piston to valve clearance issue is obviously to machine some deeper valve pockets in the stock pistons. Problem is, you'd be removing meat from the piston and therefor theoretically increasing combustion chamber volume, reducing compression. Here's my math. 

A 0.030" (0.762mm) deck gets you an addition additional 0.5 pt of compression according to both Mr. Stamos and simple math. My target is 11:1, useable compession on pump gas. I've worked out compression to go up 1 pt every 6.5ccs of volume removed. 

If we consider Billy's valve clearance to be 0mm (which i think it is safe to consider it is), decking the block for another 0.5pt of compression would mean having to machine the valve reliefs an additonal 0.762mm to be at 0mm valve clearance again. 

The area of the existing valve relief is more or less 137.1mm^2 from my calculations. Dig it in an addition 0.762 and you have an added combustion chamber volume of 0.104cc. Converted to compression, that's a 0.03 pt loss, which is totally negligible. Heck, add more relief for piece of mind while you're at it. This also gives us some room to experiment with head-decking and the valve-deshrouding benefits that this supposedly gives, without the danger of bending valves.

Now, I know that the fact that the relief is slanted makes the calculation for volume a bit different, but honestly, I don't see the compression loss being huge in any scenario. As far as weaking the piston goes, there seems to be LOTS of meat around the bone, at least to my untrained eyes.

*Moral of this story: get pistons machined ---> 288s ---> haul ass*. Hopefully these cams are the key to easily getting an NA VR to 200hp.


----------



## need_a_VR6 (May 19, 1999)

There is tons of meat in the piston for that. I wouldnt mess too much with the head decking, all can be done in the valve job. With a built head ypu wpuld want new seats at the right height anyway. 

The big advantage as I see it with this method is that you are sure that you keep the chamber geometry correct. Big downside is that you are locked to stock or 1mm over with stock type pistons.


----------



## root beer (Jun 22, 2004)

How many licks with a mini grinder does it take to get .752mm, that's what i need to know.


----------



## billyVR6 (May 8, 2000)

max302 said:


> Ok, so I got my spare engine and I've been crunching some numbers.
> 
> The easy answer to the 288 piston to valve clearance issue is obviously to machine some deeper valve pockets in the stock pistons. Problem is, you'd be removing meat from the piston and therefor theoretically increasing combustion chamber volume, reducing compression. Here's my math.
> 
> ...


I’ve thought about this quite a bit, plans for fly cutting the pistons and all that, and I honestly can say that in the end I would just leave it all alone, especially if your target is just 11:1 compression. These engines have made decent power at 10.5:1 using the mk4 gasket (available, reliable, cheap, and easy). There are those who have had results with even less than that…

Here’s a quick, easy, and cheap solution (see a theme?) for clearance, big cams, with a slight bump in compression; ad one extra center section to the mk4 head gasket. Do that and just call it a day, move on. You’ll still see a bump in compression and still have the benefits of a better gasket (metal). The set up, on paper, has the clearance to run the 292’s @ .466” lift and will have zero issues and give peace of mind with the 288’s @ .455” lift for sure.

I had plans to back-to-back both of those camshafts for data which was the reason for finding a solution.


----------



## ajhvw93 (Oct 26, 2009)

Guys running 276 288's etc. What management are you using? Standalone??


----------



## billyVR6 (May 8, 2000)

I ran a GIAC chip.


----------



## Lord_Verminaard (Apr 6, 2004)

billyVR6 said:


> I ran a GIAC chip.


OBD1? Pretty sure that's what is in mine come to think of it....


Brendan


----------



## max302 (Apr 7, 2010)

billyVR6 said:


> Here’s a quick, easy, and cheap solution (see a theme?) for clearance, big cams, with a slight bump in compression; ad one extra center section to the mk4 head gasket. Do that and just call it a day, move on. You’ll still see a bump in compression and still have the benefits of a better gasket (metal). The set up, on paper, has the clearance to run the 292’s @ .466” lift and will have zero issues and give peace of mind with the 288’s @ .455” lift for sure.
> 
> I had plans to back-to-back both of those camshafts for data which was the reason for finding a solution.


If I were on any sort of deadline, I'd normally have to agree with you on the "stick with the easy and proven methods" point. However, this is a spare block and I'm not in a hurry, and since I've got other things I wanted machined (flywheel, head work, block), I figured why not. I'm also not a fan of the stacked gaskets deal... I know it's proven to work, but if just feels ghetto, know what I mean?

Besides, if the half point of compression of the MLS gasket is worth it, another half is bound to give it more go, no?

Anyhow, I'll update as needed.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD


----------



## billyVR6 (May 8, 2000)

Just to clarify, what I'm saying isn't stacking complete gaskets; just adding a center section. That combo paired with head studs and copper spray would take it all and then some. This is just adding another layer to an already multi-layered head gasket. There really isn't anything ghetto about it; if Cometic sold this people wouldn't even think twice about it.

Personally, with 200whp being the goal I wouldn't even think about touching the bottom end. I would say the same thing if the goal was higher, like up towards 250whp; which I honestly feel could be done using stock block.

I do hear you though, if you have the spares and nothing but time.. then give it a shot.


----------



## JohnStamos (Feb 3, 2010)

root beer said:


> How many licks with a mini grinder does it take to get .752mm, that's what i need to know.



My current pistons were done pretty ghetto. Wooden dowel rod the size of the relief, glued a stud in one end to chuck in the drill, and 320 grit glued with 3M super77 to the other side. Magnetic base and dial indicator on the deck to measure how much was being removed. 
Did them in the block, just taped off the entire deck, then taped off around the piston->bore and ran the shop vac in the bore as well. Took forever, but still way less time then popping out the rods/pistons.


----------



## billyVR6 (May 8, 2000)

There is an older post on a domestic forum where a guy does something similar by using a valve and running through the guide. He bolts the head down each time and uses a drill stop collar to get the desired cut depth and keep some sort of consistency.


----------



## cabriosnap (Apr 24, 2009)

this thread needs more HP numbers with build specs. I'm trying to see what all motor specs people have pushing the 200 and over mark.


----------



## need_a_VR6 (May 19, 1999)

I have posted tons of data at 198whp over the years. Some topped 200 uncorrected. Too bad I didnt keep going.


----------



## DUBZAK (Oct 27, 2009)

I feel I should quote your signature with the 12v vs. .:R32 motor 1/4 mile times and traps, but I like it when people put effort into finding stuff out on their own.  :beer:


----------



## Lord_Verminaard (Apr 6, 2004)

JohnStamos said:


> My current pistons were done pretty ghetto. Wooden dowel rod the size of the relief, glued a stud in one end to chuck in the drill, and 320 grit glued with 3M super77 to the other side. Magnetic base and dial indicator on the deck to measure how much was being removed.
> Did them in the block, just taped off the entire deck, then taped off around the piston->bore and ran the shop vac in the bore as well. Took forever, but still way less time then popping out the rods/pistons.


 
Not ghetto, brilliant! Do you remember how much you cut? 

Thanks for sharing. 

Brendan


----------



## need_a_VR6 (May 19, 1999)

DUBZAK said:


> I feel I should quote your signature with the 12v vs. .:R32 motor 1/4 mile times and traps, but I like it when people put effort into finding stuff out on their own.  :beer:


 There are big differences between the two: R setup was 130lbs heavier, not dyno tuned and ran that ET with 122deg track temps on the third pass I ever ran with it. It took a few years, hundreds of passes and lots of dyno time and some favorable conditions to get the 12v to go anywhere near that quick.


----------



## max302 (Apr 7, 2010)

Lord_Verminaard said:


> Not ghetto, brilliant! Do you remember how much you cut?
> 
> Thanks for sharing.
> 
> Brendan


 From my calculations (see a few posts up) you would have the cleareance to run any cam with some headroom on an 11:1 motor by taking just 1mm off.


----------



## the mad conductor (Nov 12, 2009)

I posted this somewhere else but I figured it would be good here...










Sent from my iPhone while inside your mom


----------



## RedFuFuG60 (Jul 1, 2001)

Time for me to actually add my build ... 

11:1 C/R 
Block bored out to 3.0L 
Polished Crank 
Arrow Rods 
83.5MM Wossner Pistons 
Stock HG 
ARP hardware everywhere. 
264/260 Cams 
Light P&P head w/ all new parts 
Spec Stage 3 clutch kit w/ lightened flywheel 
Quaife 

My rods are sitting looking pretty on the bench, block sitting on the floor, ARP hardware & crank are all installed & ready to goy. 

Dyno figures will be presented after break-in & final adjustments as needed, talked to TT about a chip and they have custom software that suits my build available so that's convenient.


----------



## JohnStamos (Feb 3, 2010)

*FV-QR*

All that work, and then running 260/264's doesn't make alot of sense. You would make the same power with a stock 2.8 shortblock and 288's for a 1/5th the cost. 

You have the bore size to run larger valves without worrying about shrouding, so to choke off the main power limiting factor of a 12v with a set of tiny cams, on a bottom end that will love 8000rpm, is confusing. Then to further castrate it with a canned tune is more confusing. 


There is another easy 30whp bump over a 2000rpm span in that setup begging to come out. 


What are your intake manifold plans?


----------



## RedFuFuG60 (Jul 1, 2001)

JohnStamos said:


> All that work, and then running 260/264's doesn't make alot of sense. You would make the same power with a stock 2.8 shortblock and 288's for a 1/5th the cost.
> 
> You have the bore size to run larger valves without worrying about shrouding, so to choke off the main power limiting factor of a 12v with a set of tiny cams, on a bottom end that will love 8000rpm, is confusing. Then to further castrate it with a canned tune is more confusing.
> 
> ...


 
I would have a completely different build if this was going to be a race car, in fact it almost made it there since my first set of JE's is 8:1 83.5mm (sitting on the bench till I put them up for sale) plans changed and now this car is going to be a daily driver, so now all the machining is already done, bunch of high performance parts purchased and it makes more sense to simply go with high-comp pistons and keep everything else rather than throwing a bunch more $$ at it or sell the whole thing. Same goes with the cams, they were intended to be used with the turbo setup. 

Now I figure I'll have a bullet proof 200whp car that I can take to the auto-x track and rip on it stress-free then drive it to work on Monday. The cams will work great for street driving since they're more of a bottom end-mid to range of the power band cam, big valves won't really benefit me in a daily car and probably will be less important on the auto-x track than suspension, big cams are pointless as well since I almost never drive above 5k RPM. 

Bottom line - this motor will be more fun & more usable on the road than the best running 2.8 big cam version, the displacement is definitely not going to be unnoticed as it will certainly add low end torque. It may seem that I'm wasting money but since driveability & reliability is my main concern, so obviously the most logical decision was to work with what I already have :laugh: 

I'm going to run stock intake (this car will pass smog like any other vehicle on the road) I actually even have a brand new electromotive TEC3 sitting in a box that I planned to use w/ this motor but instead I will be using on my balls-out car instead of my daily, also for smog reasons. 

Don't worry though my plans aren't all vanilla stock looking motors haha, my next project is to strap a disco potato to a built 1.8T & drop it in my Corrado w/ the TEC3 standalone & have a blast w/ a lighter and better performing chassis than my MKIII


----------



## the mad conductor (Nov 12, 2009)

End gap is .005, at least that's what Mitchell says.

Only reason I know is I'm building a block as we speak. Lol


Sent from my iPhone while inside your mom


----------



## RedFuFuG60 (Jul 1, 2001)

I have a Bentley Manual but I don't want to follow OE spec on the rings because I'm pretty sure JE rings are different than stock  

Careful w/ Mitchell, I've noticed discrepancies when compared to the Bentley, I used to use it but I can't remember what the discrepancies were, I think it was in their electrical diagrams...


----------



## vw1320 (Jul 11, 2000)

Sell all the 3l stuff and do a stock motor with your other mods and a 3.67 rp or a 3.94 with a tdi 5th. The car will be just as much fun on the street and just as quick with a lot less money invested. If you are going to hamper the motor with small cams, a generic chip, and stock intake there is zero point in building a 3l. Also arp anything besides rod bolts is a waste money. With the redline on most chips even those might be overkill but they are cheap insurance at least. I'd take a stock bottom end over most 3l from a reliability standpoint as well.


----------



## the mad conductor (Nov 12, 2009)

I use shop key, Mitchell and identifix. All 3 said the same thing. And most of the specs I get off of Mitchell are official Vw documents.


Sent from my iPhone while inside your mom


----------



## the mad conductor (Nov 12, 2009)

And on another note. I was driving home last night and the car started to misfire. Then I lost all power and the car shut off. Then it wouldn't even crank. Something seized. I removed the oil cap and I smelled some "burnt" metal. ****in Racecar problems.. Lol


Sent from my iPhone while inside your mom


----------



## RedFuFuG60 (Jul 1, 2001)

vw1320 said:


> Sell all the 3l stuff and do a stock motor with your other mods and a 3.67 rp or a 3.94 with a tdi 5th. The car will be just as much fun on the street and just as quick with a lot less money invested. If you are going to hamper the motor with small cams, a generic chip, and stock intake there is zero point in building a 3l. Also arp anything besides rod bolts is a waste money. With the redline on most chips even those might be overkill but they are cheap insurance at least. I'd take a stock bottom end over most 3l from a reliability standpoint as well.


 You probably didn't read my whole post  
my block is already bored out & honed to 83.5mm 
My rods came w/ ARP bolts, every other bolt in the block is already replaced w/ ARP bolts 
I have all the parts except for the 10:1 pistons (ordering them tomorrow) 

Where am I going to find a more reliable motor? no junk yard or fellow enthusiast is going to hand me a brand new block so I highly doubt anything else is going to be more reliable than what I'm building... unless I pick up a whole other block machine it, buy new pistons bearings etc. etc. long long list before I can call it dependable, I've replaced every bolt, nut, gasket, washer, seal, sensor, I even have new cam sensor, crank pick up, oil pump, I literally have a brand new motor here lol so why would I waste time with anything else?  

The only question in reliability left w/ a 3L is the oversized bore, but I've seen & read about plenty of turbocharged 3L motors that had no issues w/ internals, my measly 200whp is definitely not going to strain this bottom end, so I still don't see how a stock short block would be any stronger. 

Look at the bright side, if I decide to build the motor further, it's half way to greatness. :laugh:


----------



## vw1320 (Jul 11, 2000)

I guess you didn't read my whole post. Sell the stuff you have and put that money in your pocket. 

Search how many 3l end up with spun rod or main bearings and you will see what I mean about reliability. 

You you still need pistons so this motor is not currently assembled. I don't see how it's any less work to start with a stock bottom end. The only thing any 12v with good compression needs to be reliable in an na daily driver situation is fresh rod bearings, new timing chains and guides, a metal hg, and new crack pipe/thermostat housing. Anything else is a waste of time and money. 

Responses like yours are one of the reasons I don't post more information on here. Bunch of never done it but know everything askholes that don't realize when someone is trying to help. Sorry for trying to save you several thousand dollars. 

Let me know when your big turbo race car corrado is quicker than my stock motor 12v street car. 

Oh yeah take a moment to read your own sig as it perfectly sums up your build.


----------



## RedFuFuG60 (Jul 1, 2001)

I'm glad at least you realize that you shouldn't be posting info here... 
I can talk about my 12 years & 6 VW's of ownership but I'm not getting into a pissing contest with you, enjoy your "stock motor 12v street car" & if this makes you feel better then why the heck not; _YOU are the done it all know everything and I am not, I also extend my dearest apologies for having an opinion/preference_ :wave:


----------



## the mad conductor (Nov 12, 2009)

any good info on e85 for a vr? 

any na motors running this setup?


----------



## need_a_VR6 (May 19, 1999)

How does the thread go to **** when the guy with the quickest 12v na street car posts some good points?


----------



## max302 (Apr 7, 2010)

need_a_VR6 said:


> How does the thread go to **** when the guy with the quickest 12v na street car posts some good points?


 Because he does so like a jackass?


----------



## need_a_VR6 (May 19, 1999)

Its only jackass if he's not right. 

No 3l build I have seen was worth it. I personally did up a really nice 2.9 before I knew better and it was a total cluster and mine turned out ok just big $$ for no real gain. My stock block 2.8 made more power and I didnt have to replace the crank once due to bad machine work and redo a bunch of other things that didnt turn out as planned. 

Sell the built motor to some turbo guy who doesnt need one anyway and put everything together with stock stuff for way, way less.

One day everyone will learn.. after spending thousands. Then you get called a jackass for stating your experience. Nice.


----------



## vw1320 (Jul 11, 2000)

What part of my original post was written like a jackass? My reply sure but I only returned the attitude I received. Maybe if Redfufug60 didn't have a thread complaining about the lead time and cost of the custom pistons required to put his motor together it would make more sense. Instead when he got sound advice that would save him a ton of time and money he responded with an attitude. I only repaid the courtesy or lack of I was given. Show me one part of my original post that was untrue or impolite? 

I learned a long time ago you can't help those that don't want to help themselves. Sadly the majority of this forum falls into this category.


----------



## max302 (Apr 7, 2010)

vw1320 said:


> [..] Bunch of never done it but know everything askholes that don't realize when someone is trying to help. Sorry for trying to save you several thousand dollars.
> 
> Let me know when your big turbo race car corrado is quicker than my stock motor 12v street car.
> 
> Oh yeah take a moment to read your own sig as it perfectly sums up your build.


 I didn't read any of Fufu's other threads, I figured this might not be the first time you answer him. I also don't have the credentials to argue with neither you nor Paul on building a VR. However, the part I quoted could have been more tactful. I don't know you, but you really came off as an arrogant SOB on that post, as if you were then end-all of 12v knowledge. 

It's no use getting angry on the internet. Let the guy use whatever pistons he fancies, it's his loss not yours anyways. Some people have to bleed to learn; keeping it at just the first part of your reply would have been enough. 

How about we just keep this on track and just share the knowledge? eace:


----------



## RedFuFuG60 (Jul 1, 2001)

I paid a fraction of what everyone ends up paying for a 3L build, THAT'S how I can afford to do this and I need a car ASAP so I don't have the luxury of time, this is the 3rd motor I'm building, one blown, one carbed and this one is oversized and I do all the work except for machining, whatever the part combinations and if they work or not it's simply fun for me and I know how to find deals for dirt cheap. Nothing I said in here projects any negative attitude towards anyone and I certainly didn't call anyone vulgar names, I was clear & concise, granted I didn't include the history and what I paid for my parts because it was off topic, on that note let's get back on topic please and leave egos & emotions at the door step... 

My build has changed, UPS just dropped off a set of Wossner pistons, they are 11:1 CR instead of the 10:1 that I intended with JE's, I decided not to go with JE pistons after all since Wossners fit my application better and customer service was night & day difference. Now I have all the main parts and a little more CR than planned but hey that's why I'm on this thread  

I've spent quite a few hours measuring everything on this short block, so far everything is exactly what it should be for a slightly "tight-tolerance" build now I need to finish the head & bolt everything together. 

I was surprised to notice this but Wossner pistons appear to be 30 grams lighter than JE :what: (weighed piston together with wrist pin)


----------



## CasuallyWreckless (Aug 27, 2007)

Care to elaborate on the 3.0l spun bearing 

I've personally read numerous accounts of SP built blocks spinning bearings as well. I'm not here for a pisding contest just to learnopcorn: 

What exactly causes a spun bearing? Crank walk, poor assembly, just wear? 
I was planning on building a 3.0 vrt now I'm second guessing  the Rocco's staying na:thumbup: 
Which reminds me. Can someone point me in a good direction of a write up for valve spring replacement?:thumbup:


----------



## vw1320 (Jul 11, 2000)

max302 said:


> I didn't read any of Fufu's other threads, I figured this might not be the first time you answer him. I also don't have the credentials to argue with neither you nor Paul on building a VR. However, the part I quoted could have been more tactful. I don't know you, but you really came off as an arrogant SOB on that post, as if you were then end-all of 12v knowledge.
> 
> It's no use getting angry on the internet. Let the guy use whatever pistons he fancies, it's his loss not yours anyways. Some people have to bleed to learn; keeping it at just the first part of your reply would have been enough.
> 
> How about we just keep this on track and just share the knowledge? eace:


 

And what part of what you quoted was in my original post? I didn't get angry as I said I only returned the courtesy I was shown. People not taking the time to read fully nor comprehend what the do read is yet another problem. I digress. 
Glad to hear Wossner was able to get you something in a timely manner. Who did you order them from? The weight may be a function of the JE's being a turbo piston. Hard to say without comparing apples to apples but in this case lighter should be better. Wossner has a good reputation though. 

Depending on what gas you have access to I would be leary of running those pistons with a mk4 hg. Knock could be an issue. I'd think about a stock compression shim or similar. Make sure whatever gasket you do use has a large enough bore for that motor. 

As for 3l and spun bearings I don't know the correlation I just know many of them end up that way. It would be pure speculation or guessing to say why. 

Glad to see people still messing with these old boast anchors in any case. :thumbup:


----------



## fourthchirpin (Nov 19, 2004)

all i will say is this, no replacement for displacement LOL


----------



## max302 (Apr 7, 2010)

CasuallyWreckless said:


> Care to elaborate on the 3.0l spun bearing
> 
> I've personally read numerous accounts of SP built blocks spinning bearings as well. I'm not here for a pisding contest just to learnopcorn:
> 
> ...


 I'm in the same situation, need to take the valve-train apart to save on labour for a head job. :laugh: 

I've found this DIY valve spring compressor, the rest should be pretty straightforward really, if you know what parts are involved. If you don't look around on Youtube: most valve setups are going to be similar, so you'll get the idea. I've been told quality valve spring tools can be had for little money if you shop around... but the only thing I found locally is an 800$ bench-mounted type deal from NAPA. :screwy: 

If you aren't going to be ripping heads apart every week, best bet is to borrow one local for a case of beer. Have a machine shop put it back together and get a 5-angle cut while you're at it!


----------



## RedFuFuG60 (Jul 1, 2001)

*CasuallyWreckless*, I have not heard of or read about a lot of 3L builds spinning bearings, the increased displacement has no effect on the rod bearings, pistons are bigger yes but they are also much lighter than stock so the internals are not working any harder, considering we are strictly talking NA, boosted engines are going to be a different story. 

On any rebuild most people overlook the symmetry of their old parts, I am using brand new forged rods so I'm not worried about this aspect, what can and does tend to happen in many motors is that the crank side of the rod becomes oval due to wear and being removed & re-torqued, if you reuse a stock rod, you MUST have it measured for trueness then if it is oval a good machine shop can "line bore" the rod thus allowing the bearings to seat and function properly. 

Crank walk will only occur if you use the wrong type or size main bearings, a buddy of mine is re-rebuilding his G60 because he used one piece main bearings so now his crank has play. 

In any case 90% of failures after a rebuild occur due to either bad machining or error in assembly, you really have to know to measure everything and assemble everything properly within proper spec & torque, that's the bottom line. If a machine shop is doing the work don't just base your choice on their good reputation make sure they have a good reputation with your specific motor, a shop I once used was very very good at most american & japanese motors but they had no clue that the VR6 aftermaket valve guides can be the wrong size and the result was a waste of a head build, definitely learned from that mistake. 

For your valve springs, are you replacing them with the head on or off the block? 

*vw1320*, Wossner was awesome, they had what I needed in stock, the guy there who helped me actually walked from his office to the warehouse to physically take extra measurements of the pistons for me, was on the phone with him for at least 25 minutes and he did not mind taking the time at all he actually was previously employed by JE so he had a good knowledge in the differences between JE & Wossner, which is why I learned that Wossner pistons are made of a different alloy which expands a little less than JE thus allowing the tighter tolerance I was looking for. Talked to 3 or 4 different people at JE which were all helpful except for the last guy the "specialist" who pretty much was set on not helping me buy his product so I just hung up & called Wossner, the set was $823 w/ free shipping from top-end in L.A. 

I too thought maybe the JE's are beefier because of the compression ratio but the wossners look pretty meaty too, but they still weigh less and the Wossner wrist pins are also lighter and they're colored black where as the JE ones are shiny steel  

I am no longer using the MKIV HG because the 11:1 CR is already pushing it on 91 octane fuel & factory ECU thus I'm going to use stock HG and I'm going to make sure my fuel system & software are dialed in. 


*max302*, I've used a Snap On valve spring compressor for years on both 4 cylinder as well as VR6 motors and have no complaints at all, it cost me $150 I think at the time that I bought it... 

http://buy1.snapon.com/catalog/item...roup_ID=675631&store=snapon-store&dir=catalog


----------



## the mad conductor (Nov 12, 2009)

quick question for the ones who are good with math (im not..lol) 

if i get a head milled @ .002 , what would be my compression ratio with a mk4 headgasket?


----------



## Jckl (Aug 29, 2004)

the mad conductor said:


> quick question for the ones who are good with math (im not..lol)
> 
> if i get a head milled @ .002 , what would be my compression ratio with a mk4 headgasket?


 the same as you would get without milling


----------



## need_a_VR6 (May 19, 1999)

the mad conductor said:


> quick question for the ones who are good with math (im not..lol)
> 
> if i get a head milled @ .002 , what would be my compression ratio with a mk4 headgasket?


 Insignificantly changed the only thing that "moves" is the valves and you should have a valve job done after to sink them that far deeper into the head.


----------



## the mad conductor (Nov 12, 2009)

Jckl said:


> the same as you would get without milling





need_a_VR6 said:


> Insignificantly changed the only thing that "moves" is the valves and you should have a valve job done after to sink them that far deeper into the head.


 i just wanted to make sure. and im gonna get a valve job on this.


----------



## Ronny_due (Aug 30, 2011)

tok the time to test the compression before i put on the manifold.
got this readings:








dont mind the wet-test. i think that it's inaccurate because i didnt "fill" the cylinders equally. will be doing this again after break-in










specs: total rebuild.
new main and rod bearings
honed and new pistonrings
mk4 headgasket
lapped valves
new valvestemseals
HD valvesprings and titanium retainers
schrick 268 cams
schrick vsr manifold.
mk4 airtemp sensor
neuspeed billet pulley kit
oilpump
OBD2
ported head, exhaust and inlet
and so on.

thoughts? how much WHP would this generate? opcorn:


----------



## 12V_VR (Aug 11, 2010)

Ronny_due said:


> thoughts? how much WHP would this generate? opcorn:


199.9whp


----------



## max302 (Apr 7, 2010)

^^^

Sounds about right. It's a proven setup, but still not past the 200whp wall.


----------



## Lord_Verminaard (Apr 6, 2004)

max302 said:


> I've found this DIY valve spring compressor, the rest should be pretty straightforward really, if you know what parts are involved.


I used the "harbor freight" spring compressor for my VR. Go to local harbor freight and get:

1. The biggest and cheapest C-clamp they have.
2. The cheapest 02 Sensor socket they have.
3. (optional) the cheapest angle grinder they have unless you already have one.

Use grinder to cut a window in the 02 sensor socket big enough to fit the keepers and a magnet pick up tool through. Put head on it's side, either intake or exhaust side depending on which valve you are working on. Compress 02 sensor socket on top of upper retainer with C-clamp, (positioned so the clamp is pressing on the valve head on the head gasket side) flip head right-side up and compress further until keepers are released, pluck keepers with magnet. Release clamp, repeat 11 more times. 

It's cumbersome but it works and it's the cheapest way I can think of to do it. Plus it works for 8-valve engines too. 

Brendan


----------



## 98GTI_VR6 (Jan 21, 2011)

Updating my build......


Displacement or Bore:3.0L

Managment:BFI chip stg. 2 cam profile

Internals:arp hardware, hd valve springs, wiseco pistons

Comp Ratio: 11:1

Headgasket Type: mk4

Headwork and Type: p&p and resurfaced 

Cams:262's

Bolt on:1.8t iat, lw pullies, BFI stg 2 clutch kit, a/c delete, alluminum radiator

Exhaust:wrapped header pipe and test pipe, 2.5 cat back magnaflow

Intake: cold air intake in fender, mk4 lower intake manifold(plastic), custom short runner upper manifold

Random: bfi .5 mm inserts, mk4 fuel rail and fuel injectors, 4 bar fpr


----------



## the mad conductor (Nov 12, 2009)

you guys run some weak cams in here... i think its time for everyone to get on the 288 program, everyone has been sleeping on these cams for too long.


----------



## need_a_VR6 (May 19, 1999)

*FV-QR*

LOTS of people have run 288s.


----------



## 98GTI_VR6 (Jan 21, 2011)

I'm Gona be gettin some 268's here soon lookin for a nice set of used ones


----------



## ajhvw93 (Oct 26, 2009)

I'm seeing good deal here on Vortex lately for Schrick 268's


----------



## ajhvw93 (Oct 26, 2009)

the mad conductor said:


> you guys run some weak cams in here... i think its time for everyone to get on the 288 program, everyone has been sleeping on these cams for too long.





need_a_VR6 said:


> LOTS of people have run 288s.


Guys enlighten me. I know of several people whom cannot even run 276's. They claim better management is needed? 
I believe they are OB1


----------



## RedFuFuG60 (Jul 1, 2001)

98GTI_VR6 said:


> Updating my build......
> 
> 
> Displacement or Bore:3.0L
> ...



Hey that looks almost identical to what I'm doing minus a few small things, my build specs are on the page before I think. What made you choose 262's just curious?


----------



## RedFuFuG60 (Jul 1, 2001)

ajhvw93 said:


> Guys enlighten me. I know of several people whom cannot even run 276's. They claim better management is needed?
> I believe they are OB1


288's are not going to be fun for a daily car, but a track car that spends most of its time at 3k+ RPM 268 288 should be right at home. That is not to say some drivers wouldn't love that type of driving style (high RPM power range) and You don't need to go standalone or anything for these cams unless you're running 288's & super high CR, of course stand alone does yield some benefits regardless of cam choice. 

OBD2 should technically be better than OBD1 (coilpack) and I'm not sure about dizzy OBD1 I simply hate it, but from my experience no major HP difference, in fact when I called TT to order a custom chip for my car they said I can easily run whatever cam I wanted with the right chip on my OBD1 coilpack system but idle & smog will be problematic. He actually said they've seen great results from OBD1 coilpack chips they've developed with not much difference from the same application using OBD2, I don't doubt that claim as they probably have more experience than any of us here, specially since they've developed much of their software together with GIAC, the other major name who spent some energy developing this stuff.

End of the day if you're like me & like low end torque in city traffic big cams aren't for you and as to engine management I have a BNIB electromotive TEC3 sitting on the shelf and granted I'm not running big cams, regardless that thing is never going to be installed on my car simply because I'm not building a track car and would prefer the convenience & smog-ability of the factory engine management.


----------



## need_a_VR6 (May 19, 1999)

I daily drove 288s with a block with almost no compression (swapped blocks and the 'rebuilt' one was worse than the one with a bent rod). Ran a little rough, but I have been in V8s with way worse behavior than those cams on a stock ECM, OBD1 with GIAC cam chip. All depends what you want to put up with. 

AT 262s, Schrick 268s and the DRC's all have near stock behavior at idle to early midrange. All have gains past that, with those two 268 variants being the more aggressive. I am not sure how the TT cams stack up, somehow I have never seen dynos of strong examples compared to the Schrick or DRCs.

I made good power with the 262s and ran 12s with them. Took a lot of work, but they can be made to work well if the rest of the setup is tweaked to help them out up top.


----------



## RedFuFuG60 (Jul 1, 2001)

That makes sense, along the same lines as my previous post...

I decided on 264/260 for the same reasons and they technically should yield the best low end torque gains and I figured if I build the internals properly cams are something I can always switch out in the future if I don't like them. I wonder how the 264/260's compare to 262's I might try to trade them before I finish up this motor if 262's are better low/mid range torque cams!!


----------



## JohnStamos (Feb 3, 2010)

RedFuFuG60 said:


> 288's are not going to be fun for a daily car, but a track car that spends most of its time at 3k+ RPM 268 288 should be right at home. That is not to say some drivers wouldn't love that type of driving style (high RPM power range) and You don't need to go standalone or anything for these cams unless you're running 288's & super high CR, of course stand alone does yield some benefits regardless of cam choice.
> 
> OBD2 should technically be better than OBD1 (coilpack) and I'm not sure about dizzy OBD1 I simply hate it, but from my experience no major HP difference, in fact when I called TT to order a custom chip for my car they said I can easily run whatever cam I wanted with the right chip on my OBD1 coilpack system but idle & smog will be problematic. He actually said they've seen great results from OBD1 coilpack chips they've developed with not much difference from the same application using OBD2, I don't doubt that claim as they probably have more experience than any of us here, specially since they've developed much of their software together with GIAC, the other major name who spent some energy developing this stuff.
> 
> End of the day if you're like me & like low end torque in city traffic big cams aren't for you and as to engine management I have a BNIB electromotive TEC3 sitting on the shelf and granted I'm not running big cams, regardless that thing is never going to be installed on my car simply because I'm not building a track car and would prefer the convenience & smog-ability of the factory engine management.




A 12v with 288's (properly setup) still makes more TQ from idle to 4k rpm, then 90% of cars in its class.

It is still more tq then you can use on street tires in 1st/2nd gear. What more do you need for daily driving?


----------



## RedFuFuG60 (Jul 1, 2001)

I wouldn't say I'd want more low end torque, stock cams give you the most low end torque and nearly all aftermarket cams do not increase that if anything slightly decrease it in most practical cases. My perception of this is formed mostly by the many that say idle is simply far from smooth and also when the car is rarely driven in the top range the benefits are consequently rarely seen, these aspects pretty much make top end cams useless for my intended purposes for this car. Again I'm not saying this'll be true for everyone but these are determining factors that I don't find insignificant especially when cost difference is notable by comparison.

I've driven both configurations and the biggest cams really open up in top end where the motor just sounds even happier (haha didn't know how else to describe it) and mild configurations are simply that, a slight increase from mid range & up based on specific cam. So for those who drive a car daily and most of their time is spent <4k RPM this is something to think about when upgrading...

I know talking about idle & low rpm performance just might sound crazy to some, trust me spend time commuting in the bay area and little things like that become a big deal.

Inn my case going 3 liter + CR bump should yield a small gain at the bottom end and mild cams will give it an extra breath in the mid range of course I could be wrong but we'll find out when it's finished :laugh: not looking for the biggest hp figure but a torque curve rising as low on the range as possible.


----------



## ajhvw93 (Oct 26, 2009)

RedFuFuG60 said:


> 288's are not going to be fun for a daily car, but a track car that spends most of its time at 3k+ RPM 268 288 should be right at home. That is not to say some drivers wouldn't love that type of driving style (high RPM power range) and You don't need to go standalone or anything for these cams unless you're running 288's & super high CR, of course stand alone does yield some benefits regardless of cam choice.
> 
> OBD2 should technically be better than OBD1 (coilpack) and I'm not sure about dizzy OBD1 I simply hate it, but from my experience no major HP difference, in fact when I called TT to order a custom chip for my car they said I can easily run whatever cam I wanted with the right chip on my OBD1 coilpack system but idle & smog will be problematic. He actually said they've seen great results from OBD1 coilpack chips they've developed with not much difference from the same application using OBD2, I don't doubt that claim as they probably have more experience than any of us here, specially since they've developed much of their software together with GIAC, the other major name who spent some energy developing this stuff.
> 
> End of the day if you're like me & like low end torque in city traffic big cams aren't for you and as to engine management I have a BNIB electromotive TEC3 sitting on the shelf and granted I'm not running big cams, regardless that thing is never going to be installed on my car simply because I'm not building a track car and would prefer the convenience & smog-ability of the factory engine management.


Thanks, I wasn't planning on running 288's or even 276's. I get what your saying about cams with longer duration. 
I just wanted to know if you guy's were using an off the shelf cam chip or a custom chip.
Colin, is the man to talk to at TT . He does all their mapping


----------



## ajhvw93 (Oct 26, 2009)

need_a_VR6 said:


> I daily drove 288s with a block with almost no compression (swapped blocks and the 'rebuilt' one was worse than the one with a bent rod). Ran a little rough, but I have been in V8s with way worse behavior than those cams on a stock ECM, OBD1 with GIAC cam chip. All depends what you want to put up with.
> 
> AT 262s, Schrick 268s and the DRC's all have near stock behavior at idle to early midrange. All have gains past that, with those two 268 variants being the more aggressive. I am not sure how the TT cams stack up, somehow I have never seen dynos of strong examples compared to the Schrick or DRCs.
> 
> I made good power with the 262s and ran 12s with them. Took a lot of work, but they can be made to work well if the rest of the setup is tweaked to help them out up top.



^^^^Agreed, I tell people ( with concerns about idle ) with a chip the 268's idle almost identical to stock. The difference is so minute but,I know my car since it's been my daily for 16 yrs. I did notice a slight change in lump with the Schrick mani added which makes sense to me. Again, very minute though.
Autotech 262 are a nice performing cam at a good price. Flat out love the 268's with DRC I noticed an increase in torque and throttle response...even down low. TT ,Schrick, and DRC all are all close. I'm sure you know about Schrick's no's vs DRC
^^^^Agreed, I tell people ( with concerns about idle ) with a chip the 268's idle almost identical to stock. The difference is so minute but,I know my car since it's been my daily for 16 yrs. I did notice a slight change in lump with the Schrick mani added which makes sense to me. Again, very minute though.


----------



## HaydenVR6 (Jul 21, 2011)

Quick question. 

What is the highest comp possible with 288's? 

Seen that aftermarket pistons (wiseco) have valve reliefs cut in allowing to run a bit more. 

Would you be able to get away with 12-12.5:1 On pump fuel? 


"I only post on Facebook if I know i am going to get likes" - M


----------



## need_a_VR6 (May 19, 1999)

The relief depth is the limiting factor. With a flat top piston and reliefs The comp is over 20:1, add chamber dish and 14-15:1 is easy still. 

I have tuned 4/5v motors at 12.5 on pump that ran hard but never a vr6. Might be ok with good squish clearance and 93/94 aki with the bigger camsets.


----------



## max302 (Apr 7, 2010)

http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthre...e-together&p=81459574&viewfull=1#post81459574

See this for my calculations on clearancing the piston's valve pockets. Your setup will require around 2.4mm of decking and equivalent valve pocket deepening. Might want to redo the math with that much piston volume removed though. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## need_a_VR6 (May 19, 1999)

Decking that much will change the timing more than I would like.


----------



## root beer (Jun 22, 2004)

Sounds like a lot of work. Pistons aren't that expensive.


----------



## HaydenVR6 (Jul 21, 2011)

My thought process is; valves 'touch' with MK4 HG. Added security, instead of losing out on a little compression get aftermarket ones, maybe not 12-12.5, but at least 11.5-12:1. 


"I only post on Facebook if I know i am going to get likes" - M


----------



## AnT0 (May 23, 2012)

Let's get this topic back on track. To the top


----------



## need_a_VR6 (May 19, 1999)

Someone will eventually build a bad ass one. Someday.


----------



## CasuallyWreckless (Aug 27, 2007)

need_a_VR6 said:


> Someone will eventually build a bad ass one. Someday.


Could you elaborate a lil on the setup you ran with the 262's? I run them in my daily and t
I will say they pull good 2800+rpm but I almost feel as though some bottom end was sacrificed.


----------



## need_a_VR6 (May 19, 1999)

I ran enough different things with the 262s to warrant a coffee table book, full of slips and dyno graphs. For the full story look for the 12s and 13s threads in the mk3 forum and anything with ALLMOTOR in the title. It's all there somewhere.

The 262s lose NO torque down low, I've even started the dyno under 2k and there's no difference on a car with a stock/chipped ECU. 

What you feel down low is likely a lack of fueling due to the car not being in open loop until later in the rpm band. Throw standalone at it and you can gain 2-3+ whp with more fuel and a little timing. You can see it here @ 3200. It's more the lower you go.










That dyno is of GIAC on a 95 ECU vs Megasquirt.


----------



## Jckl (Aug 29, 2004)

I ran 262's with a cam specific chip and didn't feel a noticable loss. I also ran them with standalone and made a noticable gain however it was pretty aggressive..


----------



## root beer (Jun 22, 2004)

I miss my ~11:1 big motor. Strong 200 ft lbs even with a 2.5" exhaust was so nice in a daily.

For the numbers, there's better things to do of course, but the drivability of that motor was just awesome.

If I had 1000 dollars to spend on top of buying a house, I'd even have to choose bodywork before standalone. Forever in the stock ecu combo....


----------



## RedFuFuG60 (Jul 1, 2001)

root beer said:


> I miss my ~11:1 big motor. Strong 200 ft lbs even with a 2.5" exhaust was so nice in a daily.
> 
> For the numbers, there's better things to do of course, but the drivability of that motor was just awesome.
> 
> If I had 1000 dollars to spend on top of buying a house, I'd even have to choose bodywork before standalone. Forever in the stock ecu combo....



What was your displacement? almost done with mine  11:1 3.0L and can't wait to see what it's like...


----------



## root beer (Jun 22, 2004)

83mm, 2928cc


----------



## vw1320 (Jul 11, 2000)

Still waiting for one of these big motors to beat my times 😃


----------



## fourthchirpin (Nov 19, 2004)

rofl. 

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk


----------



## need_a_VR6 (May 19, 1999)

vw1320 said:


> Still waiting for one of these big motors to beat my times 😃


Don't make me start trying again!


----------



## fourthchirpin (Nov 19, 2004)

im still wondering how 11:1 is high compression lol.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk


----------



## Mark Morris (Dec 15, 2001)

need_a_VR6 said:


> Someone will eventually build a bad ass one. Someday.


Someday...


----------



## root beer (Jun 22, 2004)

I'm making passes again at least. 

But yea, I think everybody figured out at some point that the block isn't the best place for your money if you're going racing....

Sean, successfully assemble a motor with compression, then talk down on 11:1, lol


----------



## RedFuFuG60 (Jul 1, 2001)

probably asking to be flamed for mentioning the T word in this thread but I did have a new set of custom JE 8:1 pistons and stand alone installed in my car already and was ready to bolt on a turbo but because I quit caring for HP figures and more about 100% road driveability I actually ended up posting my build here.
As to compression I can still swap to MKIV gasket & get 11.5:1 comp but on my last build that .5 CR did nothing noticeable, this is because I don't judge an engine by a dyno sheet but rather how it drives, the whole range and what it does out in the world. This is why I decided against turbo and instead spent money and time on things like a bulletproof bottom end & a Quaife LSD, about 3 different sets of suspension to play with... etc. it's more involving and fun to dial a whole car around the Grip/HP rather than "I want this much power" lol

If my 3.0 gets me anything over 180 Tq I'll be happy and stop working on the motor, instead I'll shop for rubber so I can go to the Auto-X track and enjoy my build, hopefully I'll find a turbo vr to pick on there and see if I made the right decision


----------



## Jayme F (Apr 7, 2018)

jhines_06gli said:


> JohnStamos said:
> 
> 
> > Yep, rule of thumb, is to get a valve job when having it decked, and all is well. But if the valves just need lapping in, there are gains to be had, by not sinking the valves, albeit small. But with 12v's, anything helps.
> ...


Question. I know this is an old post but, did you ever do a high comp VRT? Reason I’m asking is that i have a spare block (12v) and I was planning to do a 11:1 comp rebuild and my mk3 is already running a stock comp VRT but I wanted to experiment with doing a high comp set-up. Anyone have any experience with this. I’m sure that standalone and W/M injection is a must and probably E85. I just like to hear of anyone else that’s gone this route.


----------



## Ajfrassetto (May 17, 2017)

need_a_VR6 said:


> Someone will eventually build a bad ass one. Someday.


That day is upon us


----------

