Jump to content

Welcome to 205GTIDrivers.com
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
 
 

1449cc


  • Please log in to reply
31 replies to this topic

#21
Mattsav

Mattsav
  • Veterans
  • 1,280 posts
Joined: 27 Jun 2003
  • Location:Brighton, East Sussex
It loved to rev. The only thing holding the engine back was the crap cam it had fitted.
Hence we looked for something better and found Catcams ;)

It used a 1600 16v crank with quicky rod and pistons. The rods wouldn't be my ideal choice as they are very thin but its what we had at the time.

The tops of the piston needed machining but on the Quicksilver engine they sit below the deck as std which helped a bit.

We also put the lager valves (39mm) into the quicksilver head but the ports are not big enough and we scrapped 2 heads but grinding into the waterways!.

With a decent cam (Catcams 280deg) and a 1300/1400xsi/1600 head you can make a nice light/powerful 8v.

#22
Guest_JasonS_*

Guest_JasonS_*
  • Guests
Joined: --

Basically, you have to add half the stroke, rod length between bore centres and piston crown height from pin centre to crown edge. Whether this adds up to mote or less than the height of the block from crank centreline to deck will tell you where the piston crown will be at TDC.


Sandy, What do you mean by rod length between bore centres? Is that full rod length? This is why i thought using shorter rods (i think the 1360 ones from quicksilver 106/saxo westcoast are shorter than TU5 ones) would mean less material to be removed from piston crown, when comparing the measurement to the crank centreline to deck length.

I thought it would have been half the stroke+full rod length+piston crown height from pin centre to crown edge. Then like you said, taking this value from the crank centreline to deck will give the measurement to be machined.

With a decent cam (Catcams 280deg) and a 1300/1400xsi/1600 head you can make a nice light/powerful 8v.


Matt, did you machine the pistons level with deck, if so what kind of CR were you getting? Any need for cutouts with the 280deg catcam? I have the 270deg 10.8mm lift catcam already and hoping this would work well in a similar setup


Cheers for all the informative replies

Edited by JasonS, 15 December 2006 - 10:51 AM.


#23
Sandy

Sandy
  • Pitcrew
  • 4,308 posts
Joined: 21 Oct 2003
  • Location:Nr Truro, Cornwall
Rod length between bore centres as in between the big end bore centre and the small end bore centre.

#24
TB_205GTI

TB_205GTI
  • Veterans
  • 908 posts
Joined: 03 Jan 2004
  • Location:Denmark
Matt what is the engine type of the Quicsilver? Is it a 1.4 MPI engine? (TU3JP)

#25
Guest_JasonS_*

Guest_JasonS_*
  • Guests
Joined: --

Rod length between bore centres as in between the big end bore centre and the small end bore centre


Oh right, thats what i mean by full rod length, between centres, not actual full rod length.

#26
Sandy

Sandy
  • Pitcrew
  • 4,308 posts
Joined: 21 Oct 2003
  • Location:Nr Truro, Cornwall
I always hope i'm understood, but you can never be sure ! :P

#27
Guest_JasonS_*

Guest_JasonS_*
  • Guests
Joined: --
Yea, i made that a bit hard to understand by saying full rod length being distance between centres :P

Going back to what i was suggesting, about the choice of rods therefore. I was saying that using the shorter TU3J rods (like matt has done) would leave you with better/stronger pistons, rather than the longer TU5 ones. I have both, and even though the TU5 rods might be stronger rods, it will result in weaker pistons. There's a compromise from choosing one or the other, Stronger Long Rods-Weaker Crown or Weaker Short Rods-Stronger Crown. I'm slightly pushed towards the second option, as i think that a richer mixture could be needed to prevent the crowns from being burnt/melting in the first option.

#28
Sandy

Sandy
  • Pitcrew
  • 4,308 posts
Joined: 21 Oct 2003
  • Location:Nr Truro, Cornwall
I've not yet come across a piston failure in these, at least one that isn't directly related to to something else, like overheating. Rod failures with the later engines however seem quite common and the one's I've seen dismantled appear to have been straight forward break failures of the neck, no spun or seized bearings or seized pistons etc. So i'm not awfully keen on using the later slimmer rods in any build, but especially a long stroke one.

Edited by sandy309, 15 December 2006 - 04:08 PM.


#29
Guest_JasonS_*

Guest_JasonS_*
  • Guests
Joined: --
Good point. Thinking about it again the first option could suit the setup better considering the change in bore/stroke ratio and the retention of a high rpm limit. I think the best bet would be to calculate the amount of decking required in both cases and go from there.

#30
bren_1.3

bren_1.3
  • Drivers
  • 1,057 posts
Joined: 19 Apr 2004
  • Location:Blackpool @ home. Manchester @ uni
is this for a road engine or for a class / CC limited race/rally engine?

#31
Mattsav

Mattsav
  • Veterans
  • 1,280 posts
Joined: 27 Jun 2003
  • Location:Brighton, East Sussex
The Quicksilver is a late (2000) Tu3Jp engine.

The rods and pistons are very light (the pistons is tiny compared to the XSI's) and they lasted Ok at 7500rpm but I have to say they didn't look very strong. As for Compression, we made a balls up with the calcs the first time and ended up with 12.??:1.

Then we dropped it to approx 11:1 from memory

The 270deg cam should work well on the 1400. Check the piston/valve clearance though as I can't give any guarantees!!!

#32
Guest_JasonS_*

Guest_JasonS_*
  • Guests
Joined: --

is this for a road engine or for a class / CC limited race/rally engine?


Its only for a trackday car, no cc limitations.

The rods and pistons are very light (the pistons is tiny compared to the XSI's) and they lasted Ok at 7500rpm but I have to say they didn't look very strong. As for Compression, we made a balls up with the calcs the first time and ended up with 12.??:1.

Then we dropped it to approx 11:1 from memory

The 270deg cam should work well on the 1400. Check the piston/valve clearance though as I can't give any guarantees!!!


I think i might chance the standard TU3J Pistons and Rods. Matt, out of interest, with the 280 catcam you used, was piston/valve clearance ok with just decking or were cutouts required? What lift was that cam?