Home  |  Forums  |  914 Info  |  Blogs
 
914World.com - The fastest growing online 914 community!
 
Porsche, and the Porsche crest are registered trademarks of Dr. Ing. h.c. F. Porsche AG. This site is not affiliated with Porsche in any way.
Its only purpose is to provide an online forum for car enthusiasts. All other trademarks are property of their respective owners.
 

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

2 Pages V  1 2 >  
 Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Short-stroke / big-bore, What's a 66mm x 96mm motor feel like?
Prospectfarms
post Mar 23 2012, 12:19 PM
Post #1


Member
**

Group: Members
Posts: 495
Joined: 7-March 11
From: Louisville, KY
Member No.: 12,801
Region Association: Upper MidWest
Saw a video of a 1911cc motor running and it sounded pretty good. It was carbureted and sounded "cammed." Makes me wonder what 96mm jugs do for a otherwise stock 1.7 engine.

Nothing wrong with 1.7 liters, but I really liked a 1835'ish cc type 1 put in a Beetle a few years ago. Torquey and very quick but reliable.

What happens if I increase piston diameter on this short stroke engine? (I'll cross the MPS bridge when I get there.) 96mm by 66mm sounds weird, I'm trying to imagine how it would feel. Maybe even not worth doing? Don't think the valve seats were ever replaced on this engine so I'll have to send the heads out regardless.

Ideally, I would increase stroke and displacement, but changing the cam, rods and crankshaft + everything else sounds like more than I'm willing to spend.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
TheCabinetmaker
post Mar 23 2012, 12:51 PM
Post #2


I drive my car everyday
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 8,300
Joined: 8-May 03
From: Tulsa, Ok.
Member No.: 666

Theres a lot of them out there. 1911 cc. Great upgrade to a 1.7.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Prospectfarms
post Mar 23 2012, 01:56 PM
Post #3


Member
**

Group: Members
Posts: 495
Joined: 7-March 11
From: Louisville, KY
Member No.: 12,801
Region Association: Upper MidWest
QUOTE(vsg914 @ Mar 23 2012, 02:51 PM) *

Theres a lot of them out there. 1911 cc. Great upgrade to a 1.7.


Thanks Curt, I speculate 66 x 96 feels like the 1.7 but your going faster. Compared to my experience with stroked motors of this displacement range where you get power earlier?

I loved Ham's suggestion I read a while back of building a 78 x 90(stock cyl.) 1985cc, but that is more work and $ than I'm looking for.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
914werke
post Mar 23 2012, 02:45 PM
Post #4


"I got blisters on me fingers"
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 10,082
Joined: 22-March 03
From: USofA
Member No.: 453
Region Association: Pacific Northwest
Very nice motor. less "lazy" than stock 2.0L but with equivalent pwr.
I mean lazy in that the stroke of the 2.0 provides torque w/o reving it, the 1.9 needs to be spun (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
02loftsmoor
post Mar 23 2012, 03:15 PM
Post #5


Senior Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 577
Joined: 26-June 11
From: Ft. Worth TX
Member No.: 13,243
Region Association: Southwest Region
That's what I've been checking on, big bore kit for my 1.7. keeping the stock FI and putting in a FI torquey cam. any thoughts?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
914_teener
post Mar 23 2012, 05:35 PM
Post #6


914 Guru
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 5,198
Joined: 31-August 08
From: So. Cal
Member No.: 9,489
Region Association: Southern California
QUOTE(02loftsmoor @ Mar 23 2012, 02:15 PM) *

That's what I've been checking on, big bore kit for my 1.7. keeping the stock FI and putting in a FI torquey cam. any thoughts?



That is my plan but:

I am not convinced to keep the stock D-jet. I have run out of spare parts.

Since the D-jet is hardmapped to the VE curve it will need to be adjusted. So my first plan is to install a wide band AFM to make sure I can adjust the MPS and get good at it if I keep the stock injection, or go with the M-squirt straight away.

Watching a few thread on this board until I make the decision.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
pete-stevers
post Mar 23 2012, 08:19 PM
Post #7


saved from fire!
****

Group: Members
Posts: 2,641
Joined: 10-October 04
From: Abbotsford,BC, Canada
Member No.: 2,914
Region Association: Pacific Northwest
this is my build plan for the future as well...but will be running a cis rabbit sys on mine...but would love to hear what the "Jake Miester" has to say about a build up of this sort and his thoughts for what components should be matched for optimum longevity or performance
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Black22
post Mar 23 2012, 08:53 PM
Post #8


Senior Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 886
Joined: 1-November 07
From: Creswell, OR
Member No.: 8,290
Region Association: Pacific Northwest
I just built a 1911 from a 1.8L. Going to keep the L-jet too. Rebuild is complete and I have yet to install it and break it in. Super excited! It should be back in the car in about a month. I only get 1 day a week to work on it and am waiting on two more parts for other areas of the engine bay.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Jake Raby
post Mar 23 2012, 09:16 PM
Post #9


Engine Surgeon
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 9,394
Joined: 31-August 03
From: Lost
Member No.: 1,095
Region Association: South East States
We've only built a few of these... The combo can be really fun, but its really easy to over cam them and I'd always keep a high speed port profile with this combo.

I have made 177HP with one of these combos as a race engine in the past..
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Prospectfarms
post Mar 24 2012, 12:07 AM
Post #10


Member
**

Group: Members
Posts: 495
Joined: 7-March 11
From: Louisville, KY
Member No.: 12,801
Region Association: Upper MidWest
Useful information. Thanks very much. Now we have to come up with a catchy name for it. "Big bore" is oversell. "Ricer," nah, that's taken. Maybe, "The Combo?"

177 HP???? That must have been a high-revving beast. Neat.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Prospectfarms
post Mar 24 2012, 12:12 AM
Post #11


Member
**

Group: Members
Posts: 495
Joined: 7-March 11
From: Louisville, KY
Member No.: 12,801
Region Association: Upper MidWest
QUOTE(Jake Raby @ Mar 23 2012, 11:16 PM) *

I'd always keep a high speed port profile with this combo.


AKA, smallish, or stock, (1.7) valves?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
messix
post Mar 24 2012, 01:19 AM
Post #12


AKA "CLUTCH KILLER"!
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 6,995
Joined: 14-April 05
From: between shit kickers and pinky lifters/ puget sound wa.north of Seattle south of Canada
Member No.: 3,931
Region Association: Pacific Northwest
QUOTE(Prospectfarms @ Mar 23 2012, 11:12 PM) *

QUOTE(Jake Raby @ Mar 23 2012, 11:16 PM) *

I'd always keep a high speed port profile with this combo.


AKA, smallish, or stock, (1.7) valves?

valves are not the concern, it would be the port volume.

the short stroke will have a slower piston speed compared to a longer stroke, this have an effect to where the intake pulse into the combustion chamber wont be as strong there by you would need a smaller port volume to encourage a higher velocity through the head. the valve can still be larger than stock to allow less restiction from the port to the combustion chamber.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Bleyseng
post Mar 24 2012, 04:15 AM
Post #13


Aircooled Baby!
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 13,034
Joined: 27-December 02
From: Seattle, Washington (for now)
Member No.: 24
Region Association: Pacific Northwest
QUOTE(914_teener @ Mar 23 2012, 08:35 PM) *

QUOTE(02loftsmoor @ Mar 23 2012, 02:15 PM) *

That's what I've been checking on, big bore kit for my 1.7. keeping the stock FI and putting in a FI torquey cam. any thoughts?



That is my plan but:

I am not convinced to keep the stock D-jet. I have run out of spare parts.

Since the D-jet is hardmapped to the VE curve it will need to be adjusted. So my first plan is to install a wide band AFM to make sure I can adjust the MPS and get good at it if I keep the stock injection, or go with the M-squirt straight away.

Watching a few thread on this board until I make the decision.

Pretty easy to do just install a Raby cam like a 9550.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
02loftsmoor
post Mar 24 2012, 09:30 AM
Post #14


Senior Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 577
Joined: 26-June 11
From: Ft. Worth TX
Member No.: 13,243
Region Association: Southwest Region
What's your thoughts on a cam profile with stock FI. And a big bore kit
Wes





QUOTE(Jake Raby @ Mar 23 2012, 10:16 PM) *

We've only built a few of these... The combo can be really fun, but its really easy to over cam them and I'd always keep a high speed port profile with this combo.

I have made 177HP with one of these combos as a race engine in the past..
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Prospectfarms
post Mar 24 2012, 11:30 AM
Post #15


Member
**

Group: Members
Posts: 495
Joined: 7-March 11
From: Louisville, KY
Member No.: 12,801
Region Association: Upper MidWest
QUOTE(02loftsmoor @ Mar 24 2012, 11:30 AM) *

What's your thoughts on a cam profile with stock FI. And a big bore kit
Wes





QUOTE(Jake Raby @ Mar 23 2012, 10:16 PM) *

We've only built a few of these... The combo can be really fun, but its really easy to over cam them and I'd always keep a high speed port profile with this combo.

I have made 177HP with one of these combos as a race engine in the past..



Search (+1911 +cam) and you'll get all the info you want. #9550, or similar. "Massive Type!V" used to sell a "kit." and I believe still stocks the correct cam. Ask him directly.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
749142
post Mar 24 2012, 02:15 PM
Post #16


Member
**

Group: Members
Posts: 254
Joined: 8-January 08
From: Bakersfield, Ca
Member No.: 8,545
great engine... very reliable and fairly powerful. i prefer the 1911's over the 2056's.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
02loftsmoor
post Mar 24 2012, 03:35 PM
Post #17


Senior Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 577
Joined: 26-June 11
From: Ft. Worth TX
Member No.: 13,243
Region Association: Southwest Region
why is that, smoother, easy revs ???
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Al Meredith
post Mar 24 2012, 07:35 PM
Post #18


Senior Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 960
Joined: 4-November 04
From: Atlanta, ga
Member No.: 3,061
I have both a 2056 and a 1911. The 2056 has much more torque. My 1911 has 1.8L heads and a raby cam (all the parts come from Jake). I think if you go to www.aircooledtechnology.com Jake has a dyno chart for both engines. You can compare for yourself.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Black22
post Mar 24 2012, 08:28 PM
Post #19


Senior Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 886
Joined: 1-November 07
From: Creswell, OR
Member No.: 8,290
Region Association: Pacific Northwest
I've got a stock cam and 2.0L heads. I wonder if that's on the chart?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
914werke
post Mar 24 2012, 09:53 PM
Post #20


"I got blisters on me fingers"
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 10,082
Joined: 22-March 03
From: USofA
Member No.: 453
Region Association: Pacific Northwest
That was the recipe I used.. stock cam, 2.0L heads, induction & exhaust
It Rocked!
Of course I had a little help from Geoff dialing in the MPS using his LM1.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
« Next Oldest · 914World Garage · Next Newest »
 

2 Pages V  1 2 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

Display Mode: Standard · Switch to: Linear+ · Switch to: Outline

Track this topic · Email this topic · Print this topic · Subscribe to this forum

- Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 21st May 2024 - 04:29 AM
Invision Power Board v9.1.4 © 2024  IPS, Inc.
All rights reserved 914World.com © since 2002
914World.com is the fastest growing online 914 community!
We have it all, classifieds, events, forums, vendors, parts, autocross, racing, technical articles, events calendar, newsletter, restoration, gallery, archives, history and more for your Porsche 914 ...