what would the hp be?

[EvilAngel]

check www.cip1.com they have several kits there

[Veedub]

I know you guys recommended a 2007cc, which is cool and I know about the issues with slip in pistons, but my foots not heavy, a stroker would give me a heavy foot though So I was wondering if a 1641 or 1680cc would be a reliable motor with balls with the right heads and setup.
I was reading about the head in Aircooled.net and was thinking about there Level 5 heads with a cam and rockers combined to get a .450-.500 lift and was wondering what you guys thought. I know its a small motor but if it reved to like 6k would it be ok?I just always have liked little motors with a big bite, I guess its because I'm used to seeing the guys my age around in my area with small motors with nice takeoff.I dont want it for racing, just something that can get up and go when I need it.

forgot to mention heres the kit I was looking at http://www2.cip1.com/ProductDetails....10%2D5000%2DKT

[EvilAngel]

Well you certainly can have a lil' engine that bites, but there goes reliability. You won't get 150k miles if you rev it to 6k rpm often. Why don't you consider a 1776 (90.5 x 69). It's relatively small, 1.8, and it sure can bite at 6.5k rpm with proper heads.
I'd say that if you must rev it better go with 1776. Same thickness as stock, unlike slip-ins.
Just what i think
... And my foot IS heavy with my 100% stock 1584cc i get about 20 mpg at best

[Veedub]

Originally Posted by EvilAngel

Well you certainly can have a lil' engine that bites, but there goes reliability. You won't get 150k miles if you rev it to 6k rpm often. Why don't you consider a 1776 (90.5 x 69). It's relatively small, 1.8, and it sure can bite at 6.5k rpm with proper heads.
I'd say that if you must rev it better go with 1776. Same thickness as stock, unlike slip-ins.
Just what i think
... And my foot IS heavy with my 100% stock 1584cc i get about 20 mpg at best

well what I mean by reving to 6k, is that be the rev line, im not gonna rev it up to 6k maybe rev to 5k and shift..

[oasis]

If reliability is a component, the 1776 is the direction to go. I have heard several times from those I would consider experts that is what Volkswagen should have done themselves as the next step with the Type I engine.

(I don't think your distinction of 5k rpm shifts changes the answer any.)

[Veedub]

I know that the 1776cc is a good motor, but the 1641cc and 1680cc was just a thought.When I do start on the other motor I got, I might just buy a full rebuild kit that increases displacement that has everything.I have a case and Id just buy the heads last. That way I can buy the best heads I can afford.I would have done the same with the 1641cc or 1680cc.Just wondering about the 1641cc, the heads, Id want to find the 85.5 bore heads right, in performance wise, right?

[EvilAngel]

Oasis, I agree with you, but I'd say that a PROPERLY COOLED 2007cc would be as reliable,or at least very close, to a 1776, and being a stroker and therefore having more torque, would be funnier to drive

Veedub, the problem is that you just wouldn' get the same reliabiliy with slip-ins

[oasis]

When I was investigating engines for me, not one person mentioned a 2007cc Type I -- good or bad. If I had gone with a Type I instead of my 2056cc Type IV, I probably would have leaned towards a 2110cc.

The funny thing is after I described my joyful return with my new engine, a Type I enthusiast deadpanned that it sounded like a 2007cc. That was the first time I had heard of a 2007cc. It started a whole firestorm of opinions flying back and forth about Type I versus Type IV.

Anyway, I went through a lot of effort in investigating the different choices. I took a lot of notes. I mentioned the 1776cc and the 1915cc because those were my findings as opposed to my opinion. As I said in an earlier post, I am not an expert and I don't play one on the Internet.

I am sure a 2007cc would be funner than a 1776cc. Maybe funnier, too.

[Veedub]

Yeah I see what you guys are saying about the 2007cc and 1776cc.This is the first I've heard of a 2007cc too(well when you first mentioned it anyway) my problem with the strokers is well I am going to be using the stock 1600cc to learn to drive(i cant drive a manual) Thats why I was saying the motor would be a side project.It has to be reliable but then again, I have 2 motors.Build one as a 1641cc and put it in the bug then the other Im learning with since its and AE case, get serious on the power with that one, maybe?I was told the AE case is what everyone tries to find and build up. The other motor is a california AH case, with all the emission b.s. on it which is coming off.I could take that motor, put "slip ins" in it, dual kadrons, so-cal imports Outlaw big valve heads W110 cam, and header an muffler, just for a short time, then when that motors done and in the bug, take the AE case and build a 2007cc with the works, if you know what I mean.
Id use the AH case to learn to drive the manual with but it needs to be rebuilt, the AE case is altogether, was rebuilt professionally, and is together.It just needs pushrods and a tuneup and the 34pic to be rebuilt.

[EvilAngel]

Originally Posted by oasis

When I was investigating engines for me, not one person mentioned a 2007cc Type I -- good or bad. If I had gone with a Type I instead of my 2056cc Type IV, I probably would have leaned towards a 2110cc.

The funny thing is after I described my joyful return with my new engine, a Type I enthusiast deadpanned that it sounded like a 2007cc. That was the first time I had heard of a 2007cc. It started a whole firestorm of opinions flying back and forth about Type I versus Type IV.

Anyway, I went through a lot of effort in investigating the different choices. I took a lot of notes. I mentioned the 1776cc and the 1915cc because those were my findings as opposed to my opinion. As I said in an earlier post, I am not an expert and I don't play one on the Internet.

I am sure a 2007cc would be funner than a 1776cc. Maybe funnier, too.

Well I am no expert either, but i have read many things about this combo on thesamba, and several people claim that's it's a very good street engine.

And as you can see, english isn't my main language

Veedub: I find your plan excellent

Now some links, they're abou pros and cons of 2007 vs 1776
1, 2, 3, 4, 5

[Veedub]

I thought it was a good idea too.
The 1600cc will be stock.
The other I was thinking of buying the 1641cc rebuild kit i showed you in a previous post. So-Cal Imports sales a head called the Outlaw head, with 40x35.5 valves, high rev springs ,chromoly retainers and s/s sure grip, last I checked they cost 189.95 standard bore.A cam comes in the rebuild kit which is cool. Carberators Id probably just run dual 35mm solex carbs.Then for the one going in my car now ....maybe a 2007cc or whatever project.
I could always build a 1641cc and turbocharge it just playing

Edit: the rebuild kit comes with 85.5,87, or 88mm pistons'
new stock OEM connecting rods,I-beam con rods, or H beam con rods
new stock 69mm crank,scat 69mm cast crank, or 69mm 4140 forged c/w crank
8 x stock replacement cam lifters/followers,8 x 28mm HD Lube-a-lobe followers/lifters, 8 x 30mm HD cam lifters/followers, or 8 x 30mm HD lube-a-lobe followers/lifters
Stock dished gear 1971-1979 camshaft w/gear attached, Engle W100 camshaft W/O gear, Engle W110 camshaft W/O gear, or Engle W120 camshaft W/O gear
Bolt-on cam gear for Hi-Per. cams (optional)

[EvilAngel]

Turbo is not a bad idea. However, it's expensive and requires pretty much everything forged if you want reliability

[Veedub]

Yeah I see that its expensive, N/A is cheaper.

[vujade]

Originally Posted by Veedub

I know that the 1776cc is a good motor, but the 1641cc and 1680cc was just a thought.When I do start on the other motor I got, I might just buy a full rebuild kit that increases displacement that has everything.I have a case and Id just buy the heads last. That way I can buy the best heads I can afford.I would have done the same with the 1641cc or 1680cc.Just wondering about the 1641cc, the heads, Id want to find the 85.5 bore heads right, in performance wise, right?

A 1776 or a 1914 are going to be a more reliable motor then a 1641 or 1679
with slip in pistons. Both 1776 & 1914 have thicker wall pistons then the
other two.

[oasis]

Originally Posted by EvilAngel

And as you can see, english isn't my main language

Your English is much more goodly than my German, Spanish, or French.

I just enjoyed the typo creating a new word and a new meaning, that's all.