Engine sizing validation, 1.7 in a 2.0 case?! Options

[NickC809]

I finally tore down the extra engine I had laying around and have been slightly befuddled and bemused by my findings. Based on some very rudimentary measurements it appears I have a stroke of roughly 66mm and my piston/jug diameter is 90mm. The heads are also stamped with 1.7 part numbers. Interestingly, my case is stamped with GA. This is my first type 4 tear down and I am looking for my findings to be validated as it seems absurd to de-stroke and de-displace a 2.0.
Find an album of my rough measurements here.
Did I measure wrong? Am I a fool?
All things are possible.

https://photos.app.goo.gl/fV3hudrPNDsx4C9o7

[Shivers]

I finally tore down the extra engine I had laying around and have been slightly befuddled and bemused by my findings. Based on some very rudimentary measurements it appears I have a stroke of roughly 66mm and my piston/jug diameter is 90mm. The heads are also stamped with 1.7 part numbers. Interestingly, my case is stamped with GA. This is my first type 4 tear down and I am looking for my findings to be validated as it seems absurd to de-stroke and de-displace a 2.0.
Find an album of my rough measurements here.
Did I measure wrong? Am I a fool?
All things are possible.

https://photos.app.goo.gl/fV3hudrPNDsx4C9o7

Usually it is a W or EA 90x66 is a 1.7. I built a 2.0 from my 1.7, a brand new TRW valve let go and destroyed that poor little engine. So I went out and found a factory replacement with no numbers. I would have taken a 1.7 or a 2.0 case if that was what I found. So I would not worry too much about the GA. I built a 1911 with my 1.7 first, a cam and some head work and a set of 40 IDF's and that little engine sang.

[NickC809]

Usually it is a W or EA 90x66 is a 1.7. I built a 2.0 from my 1.7, a brand new TRW valve let go and destroyed that poor little engine. So I went out and found a factory replacement with no numbers. I would have taken a 1.7 or a 2.0 case if that was what I found. So I would not worry too much about the GA. I built a 1911 with my 1.7 first, a cam and some head work and a set of 40 IDF's and that little engine sang.

My plan for this engine was to bump it up to a 2056 assuming it was actually a 2 liter like the stamp claimed it was. My current 2.0 is starting to get a bit tired and having a spare known good engine built over the winter seemed like the move. Now it is just a bit of a disappointment to find I will need a whole lot of extra work and extra parts to get the small displacement bump I was hoping for.

On that note, anyone selling a known good 2.0 crank and con rods?

[Superhawk996]

it seems absurd to de-stroke and de-displace a 2.0.

Really not surprised in the least.

Welcome to the world of DAPO (IMG:style_emoticons/default/stromberg.gif) that is terribly common in the VW / 914 hobby.

These cars were cheap entry level cars often owned by people that just did what they had to do to keep them running.

If that meant you had a damaged 1.7L case and your buddy had a GA case sitting around - that’s what you used. Similar to how you find 914s all the time with VW Bus cases and/or low compression bus pistons in them.

[pfreiburger]

Boy, that is the truth. Tearing down the 1.7 and every vacuum hose is falling off. One of the previous PO's thought that electrical tape was the way to deal with vacuum leaks - it's everywhere, wrapped around pipes and hoses and elbows. Thankfully, all of this was getting replaced anyway, hopefully I don't find any keeper items that he "repaired" permanently.