Length comparison 915-shortnose G50

[Wally]

Finally today I had the opportunity to put the 915 and G50 ('87-'89 model) next to each other and I thought you guys might find this interesting as well.

Axles/CV-flanges on exactly the same level:
http://www.keversite.nl/fotoalbum/fotos/66166.jpg

Difference in length measured at the nose cone where it hits the torsion tube is then 3,5 cm.
http://www.keversite.nl/fotoalbum/fotos/66167.jpg

Scenario when belllhousing is level, but when the G50 has had its bellhousing shortenend up to the first rib, so I have put it one rib backwards:
http://www.keversite.nl/fotoalbum/fotos/66169.jpg

Difference in length is then a mere 1,5 cm:
http://www.keversite.nl/fotoalbum/fotos/66170.jpg

http://www.keversite.nl/fotoalbum/fotos/66173.jpg

So its still longer, but only a little, when you shorten the bellhousing (which may also implicate the need to have the input axis shortenend as well, which fyi requires complete disassembly..).

Other interesting fact was that the width from axle flange to axle flange is 25,0cm for the 915 and 24,8cm for the G50! So its virtually equally wide.

[Steve C]

Hi Wally

So does this mean that your going G50? It also appears that the centre of the CV mounting flange is closer to the bellhousing once the bellhousing has been shortened on the G50.

Steve

G50 next to a Type 1 box.http://www.clubvw.org.au/images/G50.2.jpg

[Sandeep]

Great pics and information Wally.

Thanks

Sandeep

[Wally]

Hi Wally

So does this mean that your going G50? It also appears that the centre of the CV mounting flange is closer to the bellhousing once the bellhousing has been shortened on the G50.

Steve


No, not going G50 just yet. The mag 915 is sooo much less weight that I would rather keep the 915. Only when it breaks (due to turbo drag starts or s/th like that), I'll probably need to switch.
Just exploring options :)

Yes, closer, but not in line, but that little would not be a problem at all with the CV's or axles.
Just want to show that if you would really put your mind to it, it would be possible to mount a G50 without cutting torsion tubes. Total extra length would be just under an inch compared to a stock type 1 gearbox. Most exhausts will allow for this, given you have the late model bulged rear apron.

I find it still very funny that even a high tech porsche G50 type gearbox, which was used untill about the end of the nineties, still fits directly (stud wise) onto a vw type 1 engine from the thirties :-)

[ricola]

Interesting info wally, I'm still going to have to do some serious cutting when going scooby and G50 though!

[Steve C]

Hi Wally

Are you able to give us weights on the 2 transmissions? What you said about VW Porsche sharing the same bellhousing bolt is very interesting, Porsche must have made compromisers with clutch size in the later years.

Steve

[Wally]

Interesting info wally, I'm still going to have to do some serious cutting when going scooby and G50 though!

Well, I just pointed out the cutting is entirely due to that silly subahru engine...:p

[Wally]

Hi Wally

Are you able to give us weights on the 2 transmissions? What you said about VW Porsche sharing the same bellhousing bolt is very interesting, Porsche must have made compromisers with clutch size in the later years.

Steve

Yeah, that is true and apperently possible as the stock G50 clutch size is 240mm and earliest clutches were 180mm IIRC. But you already knew that of course :rolleyes: ;)

Weight of the magnesium cased 915 was about 44kg without support beam and the G50 was about 25kg more heavy iirc.
The weight is due to the alu case and that HUGE ring and pinion of the G50. Size does matter when it comes to strenght in boxes is my understanding more and more. I think a Mendeola box for instance is about as heavy as it is strong. Bearing in mind it has only 4-speeds of course so it saves the weight of the 5th gear.

[Steve C]

Hi Wally

My Subaru motor came with a 240 mm clutch, I thought it might fit into the G50 bellhousing, no way.

Talking about stronger transmission, when I win the lottery I would love to fit one of these, the same people that make most of the gear sets for other manufacturers and are supposed to be stronger than Mendeolas http://www.albinsgear.com.au/pTransmissions.html

Steve

[Wally]

Its been a while since I had thought about the G50 tranny, but recent developments in the engine department made me have a second look at the conversion.
The drag slicks I now use in the 1/4 mile do give extra strain on the 915. My best 0-60ft is now 1.76 with a 2200 lbs (1000kg) car with me in it and it might get even lower with less air and more heat in the tires, which I anticipate to come next year.

Strengthening the 915 can be done with a heavy duty side plate with 930 bearing from WEVO as well as a combined bearing carrier for both shafts in the tranny, also from WEVO.
Both measures cost quite some and then it would still be no guarentee that the 915 will hold for any length of time.
The G50 will give this guarentee almost certainly, although I am not sure if my old well-used G50 is any good. Synchros for these are quite expensive as well.
It may also take a lot of time to adapt the new tranny and clutch to a type 4 and its 20-25kg heavier which is a lot.
I still think its the right way eventually as that stupid stock 2 ltr engine with a turbo gave 345 Nm and 270 hp. The new 2,2 turbo with more displacement (10% more), much better flowing heads and a dedicated turbo cam (at least another 10%) might easily have 20% more torque, so about 415 Nm could be expected at 1 bar or 14.7 psi boost.
Drag race starts and over 400Nm is not something a 915 is designed to cope with. Its as simple as that imho.
So I can wait till the 915 destroys itself or I can try to save the nice rebuild 915 and use it maybe in my daily 412 in the future. Not a difficult decision anymore when you reduce it to these simple facts.

As the engine is out now and the new 2,2 ltr parts are getting slowly ready, so now is probably the best time to remove the 915 and start investigating the G50 installation.

First of all, the shortening of the bellhousing I see as mandatory for how I want the gearbox to be positioned in the car. I.e. not cutting the torsion tubes and loose structural strength, which neccesatates new pieces of even heavier iron strcutures welded in elsewhere.
A local company wants to help me machine off the first rib of the bellhousing
Also the VW Bus 228mm flywheel seems the best solution, so i will probably order the aforementioned KEP clutch. An annual throw-out bearing still seems the best solution for that. Then I don't need to order the G50 update kit for the original G50 hydraulic relase arm bearings, which still works with a pull type TO-bearing system anyways and that doesn't supports my 228 VW flywheel and pp push TO-bearing idea.
With the conventional 228mm pp I also think I retain the option to have a double clutch plate option for future power upgrades without using a super duper costly porsche aftermarket G50 solution with double plates.

Ok, so far only ideas and words but I' ll keep you posted.Any ideas/ alternative solutions are very welcomed as nothing is in stone yet..

[Wally]

Found the shifter and shaft again :)

http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w112/fusca03/Chassis/001.jpg~original

http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w112/fusca03/Chassis/002.jpg~original

As you can see, its quite different from a 915 shifter and its operation.

[speedy]

Wally, sorry to hijack the thread , but as a side issue I am going to change my ignition to sequential on my fi , and intend to use a dizzy with a magnetic pickup for the crank sensor ,i think you have already done this so have you any advice or suggestions on the subject
cheers jon

[Wally]

Wally, sorry to hijack the thread , but as a side issue I am going to change my ignition to sequential on my fi , and intend to use a dizzy with a magnetic pickup for the crank sensor ,i think you have already done this so have you any advice or suggestions on the subject
cheers jon

Yes, that is a hi-jack indeed :eekno:
I used a wbx 2,1 dizzy as a pick-up. It has a Hall-effect sensor. You can hook that up to the DTA, but be sure to use a shielded 2-core wire for this.

[Wally]

Some pics when positioning the G50/01 between the forks. It seems that only some of the horizontal parts of the forks need trimming:

http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w112/fusca03/Chassis/007.jpg
http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w112/fusca03/Chassis/008.jpg
http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w112/fusca03/Chassis/010.jpg

I decided to order an organic disk from Kennedy, G50 center, 228mm and spring centered. Flywheel will be a lightenend bus 228mm unit and for now a stock pp to do some measurements.
Plan is to mount up a dummy type 4 case to see what needs to be done to get the clutch engagement working. I hope to be able to fit an annular hydraulic throw-out bearing instead of the pull style arm that is in there now.
Anyone know what the most shallow universal hydr. annular TO bearing is on the market?

[Steve C]

Hi Wally

I was going to use a Saab throughout bearing until I went full G50 clutch.

Steve

http://www.clubvw.org.au/images/G50_hc.jpg

http://www.clubvw.org.au/images/G50_hc.1.jpg

[Wally]

Hi Wally

I was going to use a Saab throughout bearing until I went full G50 clutch.

Steve



Hello Steve,

Nice parts! Why did you come up with the saab TO bearing originally? Does it fit over the original G50 bearing release shaft in the G50 bell-housing (inner diameter sufficient)?

How high is it from the ground up fully compressed and fully elongated?

Thanks in advance,
Walter

[Wally]

The type 4 case with crank and flywheel (with inserted bearing) fits like a glove to the G50 :D

http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w112/fusca03/Chassis/G50passingaanT4001.jpg

http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w112/fusca03/Chassis/G50passingaanT4002.jpg

Even the main shaft fits perfectly inside the flywheel nose bearing (411/412 bearing):
http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w112/fusca03/Chassis/G50passingaanT4004.jpg


So, if I shorten the bell housing and output shaft exactly the same for both, it should work.

[Wally]

Hi Steve,

I will go full VW clutch probably. I found a Luk hydraulic one from a VW/Audi that is lower than the Saab unit, which I also found. The Saab one can be shortenend some and is nicer though.

This is what I'll use as a pressure plate:
http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w112/fusca03/Chassis/001-1.jpg~original
http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w112/fusca03/Chassis/004.jpg~original

The tranny is almost dismantled:

http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w112/fusca03/Chassis/G50tandwielenverwijderen5enrev002.jpg~original
http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w112/fusca03/Chassis/G50tussenhuisdemontage010.jpg~original

[Steve C]

Hi Wally

Looks good, I didn't get a chance to get back to you with the dimensions, then the forum was down, look like you have it sorted.

I even thought about using the stock G50 fork and making it a push rather than a pull clutch.

Steve

[Wally]

Hi Wally

Looks good, I didn't get a chance to get back to you with the dimensions, then the forum was down, look like you have it sorted.

I even thought about using the stock G50 fork and making it a push rather than a pull clutch.

Steve

Thanks Steve. Well, not sorted all yet, I am close, but not there yet wrt the min. height of the hydr. bearing. Your idea of maybe using it as a push type release may just be another good idea of you ;)

Lee and Rich had another great idea as they told me that the front output shafts of the 4 wheel drive 964 (G64 tranny) fitted the G50 and were 100mm (944/T2 size)! So. if that works out, my problem of the axles looks almost solved :-))

[Wally]

Ok, further removal of all parts in order to be able to machine the housing and main shaft:

http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w112/fusca03/Chassis/G50removinggearsets003.jpg
http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w112/fusca03/Chassis/G50removinggearsets004.jpg
http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w112/fusca03/Chassis/G50removinggearsets007.jpg

Taking the diff out:
http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w112/fusca03/Chassis/G50Diffverwijderen003.jpg

http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w112/fusca03/Chassis/G50Diffverwijderen004.jpg

http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w112/fusca03/Chassis/G50Diffverwijderen005.jpg



Made an adapter plate to mount the Saab bearing onto. The TO bearing itself isn't shortenend yet:
http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w112/fusca03/Chassis/G50Saablageraanpassing003.jpg

http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w112/fusca03/Chassis/G50Saablageraanpassing001.jpg

[Wally]

Not sure anyone is still looking at all these weird complicated parts, but this is the clutch plate I'll be using:
http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w112/fusca03/Chassis/G50koppelingsplaat003.jpg~original

[Clatter]

Not sure anyone is still looking at all these weird complicated parts, but

Dude, total car porn... i think I'm in love.

That last pic with the disk, that's a Kennedy from the box in the background?
Always thought you had to go solid center at a big power level... guess not!

Keep it coming!
Can't wait to see how the annular throwout works for you.
Here i am struggling with making a 'slave saver' to keep a regular piston slave from binding...
You ever have binding problems on your current 915 slave setup?

[ricola]

Keep it coming Wally, my favourite thread on here at the moment!
Rich

[Wally]

Thanks for the feedback Clatter, Rich :)

That last pic with the disk, that's a Kennedy from the box in the background?
Always thought you had to go solid center at a big power level... guess not!

Yes, it comes from that box.
Well, I recently read a leaflet from Sachs where they explained the differences in clutch plate style. Was very informative and sort of opend my eyes as I never really understood what was what with all the availabkle clutches in the type 1 world.
Fact is that a solid center can indeed hold more torque. A 4 or 6-puck 'metallic' plate style can hold more torque than an organic disk. But...my own perception is that the diameter of the clutch has a large part in this as well. The type 1 guys always only work with 200mm, so you never hear about them using the diameter of the disk in the equesion. With that limited 200mm diameter, the organic disks have their limits for sure. Thats usually when 'they' step up to x-puck (semi)metallic disks and experience the on/off engagement of the metallic disks...

My own experience was that I could launch my 2200 lbs fat chick with me in it on full M&H drag slicks with 345Nm (255 ft lbs) on a stock 225mm (=organic) spring centered disk and stock 915 (old too) PP. Once I had the right leverage figured out on my tranny's clutch arm, I had a very acceptable pedal force and excellent progressive clutch grip.
So since I had not found any limits yet on the organic disk of that (similar) size, i hope with the special KEP plate and the HD Sachs PP that I can stretch the limits somewhat further and still enjoy the easy engagement of the organic disk.
After all, its a street car that drives on its own wheels to circuits and drag strips.
If the organic disk will not hold what I am making now, there is also a 6-puck spring centered disk from KEP in the same dimensions and same G50 center ;)
Even nicer wrt engagement and capable of transmitting huge torque is a two-disk set-up (with organic disks), but that involves a lot, so not yet neccesary


Can't wait to see how the annular throwout works for you.

You ever have binding problems on your current 915 slave setup?
Me too, but I still have not found enough room for the current ones I have, so nothing certain yet I can use an annular one...

As I wrote before, the right leverage of the arm is critical, so I would adjust that if at all possible to gain the right amount of throw of the TO bearing, which will prevent binding too. My SACO set with the CNC (its a mark) slave had enough trow in the end I found out. I needed to adjust and adapt quite some untill it was working as well as it finally did last year. Correctly bleeding the set-up is important too...:o
There are some old posts by Shad Laws where he writes about his Saco set and his 923 (basically a 915) tranny set-up. Maybe that helps some too.

[Steve C]

Hi Wally

Love reading this thread.

I believe that the sprung centre will also prevent some nasty harmonics on deceleration.

Steve

[Wally]

We did a lot today. A friend helped out machining down the bellhousing, nachined the bellhousing a tad bit wider afterwards so a type 4 fits again flawlessly on the bellhousing and shortenend the hardenend splines on the main shaft:

Before:
http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w112/fusca03/Chassis/G50inkorten001.jpg
After:
http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w112/fusca03/Chassis/G50lagervlakgevlakt002.jpg
http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w112/fusca03/Chassis/G50inkorten002.jpg
http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w112/fusca03/Chassis/G50inkorten003.jpg
http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w112/fusca03/Chassis/G50inkorten006.jpg
Case fits fine now:
http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w112/fusca03/Chassis/G50inkorten007.jpg
http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w112/fusca03/Chassis/G50inkorten008.jpg
http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w112/fusca03/Chassis/G50inkorten012.jpg
Result is super! I only need to shorten the shaft myself now but that is not a problem.
http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w112/fusca03/Chassis/G50inkorten015.jpg
Thanks John! :respect:

[Xellex]

extremely interesting thread! Keep going at it, and keep the pics coming!

[MX67]

Crazy freak! Keep on!

This is first time that I can see difference between G50 and 915...

Thanks for informing us with all this stuff! 8)

[Wally]

Right, a lot has happenend since the last post.
Time for an update!

I got the transmission back together again!
http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w112/fusca03/Chassis/G50vollediginelkaar002.jpg~original

The hydraulic VW/Audi (Luk) TO bearing has been used and mounted directly onto - or should I better say INto - the tranny casing (drill and tap 3x M6). Engagement of the clutch is VERY light, much lighter than the way I had the 915 converted with a hydraulic slave cylinder that worked on an arm an lever to engage.

Another thing to modify is provisions for the starter motor. After some measurements and looking at 964 starters (way different, I even bought one I can't use), I decided to try a 091 starter from a late bus. Its about 8mm longer and I need the extra length. I actually need 16mm more length, but that doesn't exist, so the CNC wizzerd machined the starter motor opening down some 8mm:
http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w112/fusca03/Chassis/Schakelstang1303003.jpg~original

It turned out that the original VW ring gear is NOT exactly the same diameter. Its about 3mm in radius smaller than the porsche. Who knew this huh? In hindside I better would have Kennedy make me a new chr-mo flywheel with the right 3,2 '87-'89 ring gear diameter, but for now I elongated the south hole of the starter itself so the starter rotates more towards the ring gear.
The rear hanger support needed about 2 cm (less than an inch) increasement in length to support the bellhousing being more out to the rear of the car.

http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w112/fusca03/Chassis/G50vollediginelkaar003.jpg~original

After some futile tries with an original 091 starter (bearing supported end), I ordered a Hi-torque from John at Powerhaus at a smacking price and super swift shipping and that works awesome. I have started a lot lately and it doesnt move or grind and turns the engine very quickly, so that works now!

http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w112/fusca03/Chassis/WaterinjectienozzleandIMI-104002.jpg~original

http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w112/fusca03/Chassis/WaterinjectienozzleandIMI-104004.jpg~original

[Wally]

In the meantime, I also adapted the gear lever to fit in the place where the 915 shifter was. I could use the same bolt holes!!
http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w112/fusca03/Chassis/Pookenstarterkrans001.jpg~original

Just needed a larger hole in the tunnel top. Remember that this shift system doesn't need adjustment at all (you can't even as there is no provision for it)as the shift selection is done INSIDE the tranny where some sort of gate shift selction mechanism works.
Its an awesome improvement over the 915 and actually makes this part of the installation a bit easier. Still, there is some slop in the original system of the linkage. Probably there must be in the factory car, but I probably will try to get rid of that lateron.

http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w112/fusca03/Chassis/G50schakel-stang-koppeling003.jpg~original

Thats it for the moment. When the new engine runs, I can only test then if and how the tranny works. As of now, I still have no clue if it all works as planned...

[wrenchnride247]

Great job (as always) with the install. Can't wait to here how different the G50 is compared to 915.

[chug_A_bug]

Wally... DUDE
I love it Keep up the Sweet Work :)
Some day I'll do the Same.... So thanks for doing the Grunt work ;)

Chris.

[Xellex]

yea Wally makes something totally unknown (at least to me) look so nice and simple to an extent. Thanks for sharing all this stuff. Without you and a few others, this GL world would be so much more dull (and in the dark).

[Sandeep]

I've been following your G50 installation from the first day that you started to post information.

Very inspiring Walter, your GL beetle is one of my favorites, both in form and function. :cup1:

Sandeep

[Wally]

Thanks guys :o

The G50 shifts fabulous! Very light and precise. Its also quite tall geared. The 915/40 I had before ran about 2800 rpm at 100 km/h in 5th. This G50 turns a littel less than 2500 rpm at 100 km/h in 5th! :eek:

http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w112/fusca03/Chassis/Harc1742009031.jpg~original

[kuleinc]

Wicked install! Those are some pretty tall gears... Does it still go like stink?

[Wally]

Wicked install! Those are some pretty tall gears... Does it still go like stink?

Yeah, just drop a gear and 'raw ****ing horsepower' does the rest :D

[ricola]

Well done Wally, glad it has lived up to expectations!
Rich

[Wally]

Thanks Rich,
Yeah, it really does.
Now I want to try to solve one little thing that could be improved upon and that is shift throw. The throws are pretty long, just like an original bug shifter, but there wasn't something to be had for short shifting besides the $$ Wevo and that one has an alloy shifter that cannot be bent in the straight position like I have done now with the original shifter..

Untill this recently developed baby:
http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w112/fusca03/Chassis/G50a.jpg~original

I hope it gets here SOOON! :D

[ricola]

I saw that one but none of them give much % reduction in throw, most being around 25-30%? I'll be interested to hear how you get on with that JWest one...

[Wally]

The 25-30% is fine with me, especially since there is virtually no viable alternative. I was VERY happy just to find this solution :)

[Scotts73SB]

I like the subtle Max speed 195.3 KPH! Thats "goes like stink!"
Great job great build and details.. thank you!

[tom'72]

Fantastic build, don't want to hijack the thread but I recently found these measurement of a G50 on a kitcar forum. Might be helpfull for some of you out there.

Someone on that site also put these ratio's for the G50 boxes:

G50/00 3.5 2.059 1.409 1.074 0.861 (after 1988 0.868) diff 9:31
G50/01 3.5 2.059 1.409 1.125 0.889 (after 1988 0.892)
G50/02 3.154 1.895 1.333 1.036 0.861 (after 1988 0.868)
G50/03 3.5 2.059 1.407 1.086 0.868
G50/04 3.154 1.895 1.333 1.029 0.868
G50/05 3.5 2.059 1.407 1.086 0.868 diff 3.333:1
G50/10 3.154 1.895 1.407 1.086 0.868
G50/50 3.154 1.789 1.269 0.967 0.756
G50/52 3.154 1.789 1.269 0.967 0.756

[Supercool]

CAR PORN of the highest order!
it does make me feel the Neanderthal , hoping to fit up a 915 in a 1303. absolute ancient technology!
Great job on the conversion, now how about the money shot?
:driving:A vid of rowing through the gears would absolutely send me over the top.

[Wally]

Welcome 'supercool'!
Whats your name and pls show some pics of your 1303/project!

Maybe next year when the cage is in, I can attach my picture camera to the cage and shoot a 1/4 mile run. That way you can see what it shifts like when your in a hurry ;)

[Supercool]

Here it is The day I bought it.
http://i168.photobucket.com/albums/u175/montemaniacal/th_03-18-09_1611.jpg~original (http://s168.photobucket.com/albums/u175/montemaniacal/?action=view&current=03-18-09_1611.jpg)
It doesn't look much different today, just much cleaner.
has around 30k miles and the only rust I've found so far is from long term storage with the battery still in the car. It appears to have rusted out and dropped completely through the battery tray.
The original 1600 was swapped with a 1964 motor, so I need to change that.

[Sandeep]

Great thread Wally.

I wanted to ask how did you deal with the front mount ? Did you use your original 915 (widened) front mount or did you adapt the G50 front mount ?

Do you have a part # on the Saab hydraulic TO bearing ? One last question :D

You mentioned the 964 100mm front output flanges from the 964 gearbox ... are the 915 100mm output flanges swapable or not (thinking not but just checking)

Thanks.

Sandeep

[Wally]

Great thread Wally.

I think you're just sucking up to get a detailed answer mate :lmao:

I wanted to ask how did you deal with the front mount ? Did you use your original 915 (widened) front mount or did you adapt the G50 front mount ?

Used the widenend 915 one. Just two holes redrilling, the other two holes were already in the right position. Plus it mounted on the exact same spot on the car also, so didn't need to relocate the car mounts either. How cool is that!

Do you have a part # on the Saab hydraulic TO bearing ? One last question :D

I didn't use the Saab part...

You mentioned the 964 100mm front output flanges from the 964 gearbox ... are the 915 100mm output flanges swapable or not (thinking not but just checking)

Thanks.

Sandeep
No, 915 are different, otherwise I would have used those of course ;)

[Sandeep]

Thanks for the answers Wally.

I just closed a deal on a G50/01 .... now to get that sucker to fit properly and remove the 915. Looks like I'll have to fab up another 915 front mount though :(

I'm sure I'll have some more questions for you once I get the gearbox dismantled for machining :eek:

Looking like the beetle will be on the road in 2012 now :lmao: Might as well paint the beetle white, put a duck tail on it and call it MythbustED, while I'm at it :D

Sandeep

[Wally]

Haha! Good one Sandeep :D :lmao:

Good call on the G50-01. Its very sweet, you won't regret it I'am sure!
Personally I am dubious of the 100mm CV's when you get over 450 hp or so and drag race now and then, but so far, so good and knock on wood.

[Sandeep]

Hi Wally,

I have a question about the LUK annular TOB. The bearing has an internal spring that keeps the bearing at maximum extension. I am not sure if this changes when hooked up to hydraulic lines (my next step after machining the bellhousing shorter) but would this mean that the bearing would always be engaged to the pressure plate fingers ?

I am not sure if this spring needs to be removed as I don't have any documentation on its operation / servicing. Can you please comment ?

Thanks

Sandeep

[Wally]

I left the spring in and it works fine. Spring still works the same when hydr.lines are on. There's just no real pressure on the bearing from the spring. I think thios was done intentionally by Luk. Just leave things stock if can be is my feeling ;)

[Clatter]

Maybe i missed it, but which throw-out did you use?
Do you have the part number?

You are still using the SACO master, right?

How did the travel/pressure ratio work out using that throwout?

(Send me a bill for the consulting..):D

[Wally]

Maybe i missed it, but which throw-out did you use?
Do you have the part number?

No part number, but its a VW Passat unit from Luk. Think its from a 3B/3BG model. Sandeep uses the same one I noticed.

You are still using the SACO master, right?

Yep, amazingly its still leak free and works extremely well with all the porsche trannies I used.

How did the travel/pressure ratio work out using that throwout?

(Send me a bill for the consulting..):D
:D Apperently, it just works. I don't know by what yardstick you want me to describe/measure this?
I think I just got lucky with ratios and travel lengths and such or maybe its just not as critical as one would think ;)

[Clatter]

After digging around a bit, i came up with LUK part# W0133-1841866
It also fits Golfs and Eos of a similar era.

Once it comes in, i will be copying your (brilliant) idea.
I hope it works out on my 923...

By the way,
How do you bleed that sucker, anyway?
You don't have to take the motor out to bleed the clutch, do you?:confused:

[Wally]

I hope it works out on my 923...

I would not be too sure about that as the 915 bellhousing has less room then a G50.
I looked back then and no porsche tuner I could find including wevo iirc supplied a kit for this...

By the way,
How do you bleed that sucker, anyway?
You don't have to take the motor out to bleed the clutch, do you?:confused:

External bleeding with a T-piece where a bleed nipple is screwed in the 3rd hole ;)

[rioprelude]

Wally - do you have the workshop manual for the G50? Just picked up a G50/01, and need to disassemble it, to shorten the bell housing.

Thanks!

[Wally]

Hi Alexandre,

Not sure I still have it, not on this computer anyways..
Due to moving house, it will be a small chance, but I'll check later this week.

a bientot!

[ricola]

I have the full 86-89 manual but it is nearly 300MB!

[rioprelude]

Ricola - I'll send you a pm. Thanks!

[Jim Andritsakos]

I have an correct shortened bellhousing and mainshaft that we can maybe trade ?

Jim

[graham]

Blimey another night not sleeping thinking about parts mods for my car :roll eyes:

Wally did you have to machine the gearbox for the TOB because you removed the first rib off your box ? if I am not removing the first rib do you think I will be able to just make an adapter plate to fit the Audi/VW TOB ?

out of my depth here again :rolleyes:

[Wally]

Yeah, when your engine sits further back due to not shortening the bell housing, I suppose that gives you more room for the hydraulic TOB.
Since you're using one of those inferior watercooled jap engines however :lmao:, your dimensions may change in more then one way, so carefull measuring with a (dummy) engine seems neccessary anyways.

The original G50 bellhousing does have a lot of room though, so you probably won't need to machine the area around the intake shaft ;)

[graham]

Thanks Wally much appreciated.

[rioprelude]

Quick question about mounting the G50 to the Beetle transmission cradle. It looks like the OEM rubber mounts are used, and then a metal plate with a tab, to connect the rubber mounts to the G50 bolt holes on the bottom of the transmission.

http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w112/fusca03/Chassis/BakrubberG50002.jpg~original

Is this plate custom, or is it from an OEM rubber mount (the bottom plate)?

[Wally]

I think it was a custom plate I fabbed up, actually just a piece of scrap metal ;-)

[Wally]

Since I heard a few of us use this thread for info on the G50 swap, I just wanted to give an umonth update on how it worked out over all the past years.

Reason to do this now is that something in my hydraulic clutch set-up has malfunctioned for some (still unknown) reason.
Sympton was a fall of hydraulic pressure so the clutch would not release. This happenend right after first start up of the newly assembled engine with the biral cylinders. Very annoying! But better in the garage then abroad as I did Santa Pod drag racing end of last season, where all was still good (10,58 quarter mile so it worked perfect then).

Main clutch cylinder (still the original Saco unit in the tunnel) looks leak free in the tunnel, so took a picture of the slave in the bell housing (G50 has an inspection hole, works perfect for a small I-phone hehe):

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52952586345_f42bb33b76_z.jpg

I suspected that it must be the slave, even though I could not see a leak.
So, removed the old unit, bought a new LUK slave, shortenend the arm, tapped NPT thread again, installed it all, but noticed I used a 'temporary' mounting back then, which had hold till now, but I was not assured it could be used as is the second time... (just a M6 tapped into the alu of the bell housing in 3 spots, one of them in too thin material).
Result was a sudden 'snap' after installing engine and a dramtic loss of hydrau fluid under the bell housing... The bottom of the unit was broken out of it due to maybe not seating flush or was it a quality control issue?
Oke... maybe the old unit was of better quality?
Mounted that, same result.. I was further from a solution now then before.
retrieved my old Saab (model 9000 I know now) out of the parts box and tried that again. Nice parts, didn't understand how that would seal itself after disassembling everything, but hey, I am no Saab TOB expert right?
As the Saab unit was about 8mm too high, I has a friend machine the parts so it would be smaller. As I need to start the operating range all out at the bottom of the 'stroke', trimming some excess stroke didn't seem a problem.
Looked good installed. Never knew M12x1.0mm connections existed, but thats what the Saab unit works with... Oke, got those suckers and installed them on some new lines.

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52952342029_9f8a67dcca_z.jpg

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52952654448_4b8c050c0c_z.jpg

Still here?

[Wally]

Right, turned out the Saab unit did indeed seal on the bottom with a rather complex rubber seal that sealed off the outer and inner sleave.
No matter how I mounted this: with little or a lot pre-load or with or without silicon sealing added, it would fail instantly pressure was put on it.
I have never removed and mounted the engine block so often this last week.

After 6 or so failed attempts, I binned the Saab TOB and ordered 3 others (I am pressed for time as a trackday (Bilsterberg, Germany) is in less then 2 weeks) which looked low enough form their pictures online.

One is a Ford Transit unit, the other two are SsangYoung and Deawoo units.

The Deawoo unit is actually great, but its diameter for the (G50) pinion axle (1.0 inch) is just a tad too small (24,0mm).
The Ssangyoung unit fits the diameter but its base is too wide for my adapter plate. Both seem low enough though!

The Ford Transit unit however is lowest of all, fits all around and only has a weird line feed (press-fit?), but I think/hope that M12x1,0mm thread can be cut into the arm at a lower position.
Ordered the M12x1,0 taps, so fingers crossed it all works and solves the problem I had..

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52952586355_f316280718_z.jpg

[Wally]

Well, I owed you guys (?) an update:
The old existing adapter plate I remade for the Ford Transit TOB:
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52955827000_717f538872_z.jpg

And it works perfectly! (finally)

and this is how it looks finished, not much to see, but there you go:
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52955827025_51fdfd9cd1_z.jpg

Lemmeknow if this was any help to somebody?

[Hulken]

Looking good! No G50 for me at the moment, but I rather go for a G50 instead of 915

[Wally]

Very much agree mate! I've driven both in my 1303 and the difference is such that you'd better skip the 915 all together ;-)
Dream of mine would be a G50 in a 412 2-door hatchback... but I sold my 412 long time ago..