Just take the tops of the air cleaners off, fit the stacks and put the covers back on.
You must maintain at least 36-38mm between the top of the stack and the bottom of the air filter!
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/44-IDF-WEBER-Velocity-Stacks-VW-and-other_W0QQitemZ320204210558QQcmdZViewItem?hash=item320204210558
Thanks again guys,
Marty
Marty
This is probably a difficult question to answer but here it goes. What is the average longevity of a type 1 versus a type 4? I know everyone does different mods to each and have different driving habits but if you use them as daily drivers how long before a rebuild is necessary?
Thats impossible to answer.. Too many variables and the engines are not similar enough in enough aspects for direct comparison..
Which will go bad first, an Apple or an Orange if exposed to the Sun for the same amount of time?? :-)
Which will go bad first, an Apple or an Orange if exposed to the Sun for the same amount of time?? :-)
Boy you resurrected an old post! T4 has a bottom end that probably will never need align boring and will last 100k miles. When you use oversize P/C on a type 1 (94mm) the head studs get extremely close to sleeve --- not so on a T4 where 103mm is common. Check Jake Raby's site for more. Unfortunately, a T4 can cost 4x rebuild of a T1 engine BUT if displacement and HP is top priority then T4 is way to go.
Go Suby and save yourself a whole lot of time and money. And no, I don't currently run one, but my next car will...
The high cost of importing parts to make a type 1 or type 4 make decent power is just too expensive. My scooby motor makes huge power by comparison to the modded motors. Theoretically the scooby motor should be more reliable. Mine sounds just like a beetle motor with a big pipe until it starts boosting! Up to 3000rpm it pulls pretty strong and when on boost all hell breakes loose!
I say theretically it should be more reliable, I have managed to kill 2 already. One put a rod through the block (broken rod bolts) and the second developed a light knock and i shut down emediatly. The number one big end ran a bearing but the crank was still good.
The reason the bearing went was the oil pickup tube bolts worked there way loose one was lying in the pan! i guess the oil pressure must have dropped of. Didn't have a oil pressure guage installed.
Everything else looks brilliant though. By the way this motor cost a wopping US$500!! (engine and all ancilleries: turbo,alternator,power steering pump and aircon) I will probably spend just over US$200 for new bearings, and gaskets to put it together again.
I say theretically it should be more reliable, I have managed to kill 2 already. One put a rod through the block (broken rod bolts) and the second developed a light knock and i shut down emediatly. The number one big end ran a bearing but the crank was still good.
The reason the bearing went was the oil pickup tube bolts worked there way loose one was lying in the pan! i guess the oil pressure must have dropped of. Didn't have a oil pressure guage installed.
Everything else looks brilliant though. By the way this motor cost a wopping US$500!! (engine and all ancilleries: turbo,alternator,power steering pump and aircon) I will probably spend just over US$200 for new bearings, and gaskets to put it together again.
WOW, that was informative post. I have a Type 4, D type injected in my 1971 914 and I have a type 1 stock from Vintage (2001). I have to admit the Type 4 in the 914 is way more powerful feeling at least in the 914 but then again, it was bored out to 2.0 from 1.7 and peaked out by a local Porsche shop. I drive the speedie casually. I push the 914 since it handles like on rails. Wolfgang, believe me you don't ever want the FI for you type 4. At least the D type they made in 1971. It is the one used then but finding parts is an adventure. I have pieces from Australia, the Netherlands and France so far. Dave Darling at Pelican Parts is really good at making the old parts right again by sending them to him but the nightmare of pressure run stuff in that mechanical D type will drive you nuts. I love both of them, type 1 and type 4. A simple solution to a simple problem.
Fred Adler
San Diego
Fred Adler
San Diego
Attachments
Images (2)
I see the Type 1 vs Type 4 debate has slowed down. So, I thought I would post an update. I was getting my Type 1 tuned up for the year and heard some interesting news... Jake Raby's Type 4 got beaten badly by a Type 1 built by Kurt Mezger of Vintage Performance on the dyno at a speed event down in Georgia last week. Vintage only needed one turn on the dyno to do it. I know we all have our preferences and that's cool, but Jake goes on and on about dynos and how his Type IV's perform better than Type 1's. Well, it's not true. Just thought I'd share...
Are you INSANE . . . he'll HEAR you, you know ? ! ? ! ? ! ? !
He just might... but just wanted those members thinking about a Type IV based on Jake's disdain for Type I's and his dyno claims to do a little more homework. Here you have a Type I that won an event and spanked a Raby Type IV in the process... and rumor has it that Jake cried. :-)
Holy Crap! Where have you been hiding, Stranger?
Still got your car?
~WB
Still got your car?
~WB
Gloat all you want, The TIV was made to do it better longer faster stronger. Thats not Jake , thats VW/Porsche talkin.
Sure you can do it cheaper with T1.
Whats your beef ?
Sure you can do it cheaper with T1.
Whats your beef ?
That was my thought to - can the T1 do it again and again --- and keep on ticking!
Yes, it can.
But only for a while at that power output level.
After the T-1 has given it's all and imploded, the T-4 will still be in there going,
and going,
and going........
And that's the way it is.....
But only for a while at that power output level.
After the T-1 has given it's all and imploded, the T-4 will still be in there going,
and going,
and going........
And that's the way it is.....
Excellent observation, Mr. Nichols. And yet....
95% of us will drive our cars less than 2500 miles this year. Exactly how long will an engine need to last before a guy is ready to tear down and "freshen up"? If an engine "lasts" for 50k mi- that's 10-20 years of driving for most of us, and I'll be ready to "tinker" long before then.
The perception that Type 4s are "torquey" and Type 1s are "peaky" is hogwash, by and large- either engine can be built to move the power up or down the RPM register based on the choices made in the design. Big torque requires giving up something and generally means larger displacement or forced induction.
Type 4s have several inherent advantages in getting from here to there, primarily: increased bore centers (so that 4" cylinders and 3L motors are possible), and an extra crankshaft support. The bottom exit exhaust limits flow, but also aids in cooling. The rest of it is pretty much how you build the engine.
Type 1s get the bad rap because most people build them with the cheapest junk possible. Most builders are notorious for this. When the engine scrambles at 10k mi, it is seen as the problem of the engine Type, not the decisions made to get to that point: inadequate cooling, restrictive exhaust, sloppy construction, etc. A reliable 120 h/p Type 1 costs money most of us are pretty reluctant to spend.
My new Type 1 2332 dynoed at 201 hp and more importantly made 180-190 lb/ft of torque from 2500-5500 RPM (with a belt and through a muffler). I took every precaution I could to keep engine temperatures down- Nickacil cylinders, Raby DTM, welded VW heads with good valves for better cooling, etc. Heat is the #1 killer of air cooled engines, either Type 1 or Type 4- keeping heat under control is something Jake spends a lot of money on with his clients. Doing the same thing on high-end Type 1s would be a great idea for everybody.
It's quite a bit less expensive to do a Type 1 right as compared to a Type 4, but it is by no means "cheap". I could easily have built a 500+ h/p small block Chevy for what I've got in a Type 1, but this stuff turns my crank. I suspect that most of us got into this hobby like I did ("its a VW- how expensive can it be?"), but have now grown accustomed to writing checks with at least one more zero than we initially thought possible.
George Brown used to say, "you spend your money, and you take your chances"- how many chances is usually a direct result of how much money.
Unfortunately, there's no free lunch.
95% of us will drive our cars less than 2500 miles this year. Exactly how long will an engine need to last before a guy is ready to tear down and "freshen up"? If an engine "lasts" for 50k mi- that's 10-20 years of driving for most of us, and I'll be ready to "tinker" long before then.
The perception that Type 4s are "torquey" and Type 1s are "peaky" is hogwash, by and large- either engine can be built to move the power up or down the RPM register based on the choices made in the design. Big torque requires giving up something and generally means larger displacement or forced induction.
Type 4s have several inherent advantages in getting from here to there, primarily: increased bore centers (so that 4" cylinders and 3L motors are possible), and an extra crankshaft support. The bottom exit exhaust limits flow, but also aids in cooling. The rest of it is pretty much how you build the engine.
Type 1s get the bad rap because most people build them with the cheapest junk possible. Most builders are notorious for this. When the engine scrambles at 10k mi, it is seen as the problem of the engine Type, not the decisions made to get to that point: inadequate cooling, restrictive exhaust, sloppy construction, etc. A reliable 120 h/p Type 1 costs money most of us are pretty reluctant to spend.
My new Type 1 2332 dynoed at 201 hp and more importantly made 180-190 lb/ft of torque from 2500-5500 RPM (with a belt and through a muffler). I took every precaution I could to keep engine temperatures down- Nickacil cylinders, Raby DTM, welded VW heads with good valves for better cooling, etc. Heat is the #1 killer of air cooled engines, either Type 1 or Type 4- keeping heat under control is something Jake spends a lot of money on with his clients. Doing the same thing on high-end Type 1s would be a great idea for everybody.
It's quite a bit less expensive to do a Type 1 right as compared to a Type 4, but it is by no means "cheap". I could easily have built a 500+ h/p small block Chevy for what I've got in a Type 1, but this stuff turns my crank. I suspect that most of us got into this hobby like I did ("its a VW- how expensive can it be?"), but have now grown accustomed to writing checks with at least one more zero than we initially thought possible.
George Brown used to say, "you spend your money, and you take your chances"- how many chances is usually a direct result of how much money.
Unfortunately, there's no free lunch.
Hey Bill, doing well, thanks. Still have my car. Finally getting it out this year.
As far as the debate goes, all great observations, always loved this topic and it will never be the same without George Brown.
No beef, I just wanted to share the news that Jake Raby's "MassIVe Type IV" (as he likes to call it) that is so big and extensively dyno'ed got torched by a Kurt Mezger/Vintage Performance built Type I on a dyno at a speed week event down in Georgia.
As far as the debate goes, all great observations, always loved this topic and it will never be the same without George Brown.
No beef, I just wanted to share the news that Jake Raby's "MassIVe Type IV" (as he likes to call it) that is so big and extensively dyno'ed got torched by a Kurt Mezger/Vintage Performance built Type I on a dyno at a speed week event down in Georgia.
THAT is tooooo funny! Thanks for sharing that, Colton!
Yeah, it's as funny as it is enlightening and informative. Here is Kurt at last year's Dyno Day putting out over 297hp and 229.19 of torque in a 2176cc Ghia.
Hold on just a minute!!!!! Lots of misinformation here..
Do you even have a clue as to what you are talking about??? Do you know that the car that beat us so "badly" was Turbocharged when the engine I had at the event was normally aspirated and running on 89 octane? My engine also logged 6,000 miles in 4.5 months last year and averaged 25 MPG in my Wife's car, and it put down 35HP more than any other normally aspirated "non race" engine in attendance. The engine also put down 206lb/ft of torque, thats more than a 20 lb/ft more than a 300 HP Pro Stock VW Drag Racer that was in attendance.
The engine that supposedly beat us so badly was pushing almost 20 PSI boost, in fact when I asked Kurt himself he stated that it had 18 PSI.
This event was also over a solid year ago!!! This year I simply attended the event and did not have any vehicles entered.
I'd be willing to bet that your source of information didn't tell you that our entry into the competition also made peak power at only 5,500 RPM while the Type 1 engines in attendence were turning 7,000 RPM to make their power.. Heck I never even took our entry above 5,800 RPM on the dyno.
The information you have been fed is no where near true, I would certainly hope that any boosted engine running race gas with near 20 PSI boost could beat a pump gas normally aspirated engine runnng on mid grade without any power adders.
All that being said, it doesn't really matter how much peak power which person made, what matters is I built an engine for my Wife's car that was easy to drive, powerful and didn't need wide open throttle to have fun. It averaged 25 MPG, ran head temps cooler than a stock engine and didn't need any maintenance at all for 6,000 miles- not even an oil change was performed.
I don't specialize in huge peak numbers or drag race type performance, what my Wife's engine did is exactly what it was designed to do. It did this while making 195 RWHP and 206 lb/ft of torque and it idled at 800 RPM at the same time.
Its good to see them going out of their way to say negative things about us, makes me feel even better. I don't go out of my way to say negative things about what Kurt does, and I really don't care... I have a different primary objective than he does and I respect what he has created and I'd appreciate it if they did the same for my program.
Oh and just to clear something up, the only reason I would have been crying was from all the unburnt fuel in the air after the Turbo car was on the dyno.. I could have cared less about the dyno numbers, unless you are making 400 HP on boost its not really impressive.
Did we get beat? Absolutely
Was it an apples to apples comparison? Not even close!
Do I care??? Not at all, this was 13 months ago and I would have expected to be beaten by any engine running boost!
Do you even have a clue as to what you are talking about??? Do you know that the car that beat us so "badly" was Turbocharged when the engine I had at the event was normally aspirated and running on 89 octane? My engine also logged 6,000 miles in 4.5 months last year and averaged 25 MPG in my Wife's car, and it put down 35HP more than any other normally aspirated "non race" engine in attendance. The engine also put down 206lb/ft of torque, thats more than a 20 lb/ft more than a 300 HP Pro Stock VW Drag Racer that was in attendance.
The engine that supposedly beat us so badly was pushing almost 20 PSI boost, in fact when I asked Kurt himself he stated that it had 18 PSI.
This event was also over a solid year ago!!! This year I simply attended the event and did not have any vehicles entered.
I'd be willing to bet that your source of information didn't tell you that our entry into the competition also made peak power at only 5,500 RPM while the Type 1 engines in attendence were turning 7,000 RPM to make their power.. Heck I never even took our entry above 5,800 RPM on the dyno.
The information you have been fed is no where near true, I would certainly hope that any boosted engine running race gas with near 20 PSI boost could beat a pump gas normally aspirated engine runnng on mid grade without any power adders.
All that being said, it doesn't really matter how much peak power which person made, what matters is I built an engine for my Wife's car that was easy to drive, powerful and didn't need wide open throttle to have fun. It averaged 25 MPG, ran head temps cooler than a stock engine and didn't need any maintenance at all for 6,000 miles- not even an oil change was performed.
I don't specialize in huge peak numbers or drag race type performance, what my Wife's engine did is exactly what it was designed to do. It did this while making 195 RWHP and 206 lb/ft of torque and it idled at 800 RPM at the same time.
Its good to see them going out of their way to say negative things about us, makes me feel even better. I don't go out of my way to say negative things about what Kurt does, and I really don't care... I have a different primary objective than he does and I respect what he has created and I'd appreciate it if they did the same for my program.
Oh and just to clear something up, the only reason I would have been crying was from all the unburnt fuel in the air after the Turbo car was on the dyno.. I could have cared less about the dyno numbers, unless you are making 400 HP on boost its not really impressive.
Did we get beat? Absolutely
Was it an apples to apples comparison? Not even close!
Do I care??? Not at all, this was 13 months ago and I would have expected to be beaten by any engine running boost!