Things to consider:
- Street drive-ability / predictability/ power delivery
- Race circuit drive-ability / predictability / power delivery
- simplicity / maintenance
- Gas mileage
- Both motors would run efi
I reckon the best thing is to answer this one by one... I've owned 2 vws about the same hp in the end. One was a Subaru 2.5l (10:1 comp ratio) and the current one is a 1600 DP turbo. Both are/were EFI.Dan Dryden wrote: ↑Thu Aug 03, 2017 6:30 pmI'm specifically talking type 1 engines here and realise a lot of people will not have experienced both, but I'm trying to gauge people's preference when it comes to a performance Type 1 to be used in a street beetle with occasional circuit track use.
Things to consider:
What you're missing is mega $$$$$$$.
Do you know what you're milage was?Dan Dryden wrote: ↑Wed Aug 30, 2017 4:06 pmThe reason I mentioned gas mileage was purely to settle my own theory.
A friend of mine runs a 9.5:1 compression NA 2109cc engine with FK8 cam and CB 044 heads on dual Weber 44IDF carbs.
My engine is 1776cc, 7.5:1 compression turbocharged (21psi full boost), CB 044 heads, TCS 10 cam, single 48mm throttle body on EFI management.
We both went on a road trip in our cars, which are similarly geared (my gears being slightly taller due to larger wheels), but his car was far better on fuel than mine.
My theory on this was that his high compression gave a more complete burn whilst at cruising speed, whereas mine was running little to no boost and therefore only 7.5:1 compression for most of the journey, making it far less efficient. - Anyway, I'm fully aware that performance and fuel economy don't come hand in hand, it was just food for thought.
Not to criticize, but I always have my AFR gauge on. Additionally, not to criticize, but some of the best tuning you can do is closed loop on road driving with an autotune function like MS has. Dyno sessions can iron out kinks and tune the top end, but even factory ECUs tune themselves as you drive using AFR targets.Dan Dryden wrote: ↑Sun Sep 03, 2017 12:39 pmHi Pete, I don't currently monitor my AFR's. My car was tuned professionally, so it has pretty much been set and forget.
The road trip was around 3 years ago, but I think I averaged around 28mpg.
What do you think of the TCS10?
I would definitely build my engine differently if I were to do it again. The biggest changes would be a higher compression of around 8.5:1 and an FK8 cam with 1.4:1 ratio rockers. - I think this would give me some more "pep" off boost and also an extra 1000-1500rpm.
The geometry was causing spring bind. I had double valve springs going in, but my engine builder and the head specialist were concerned about seat pressure as well as the bind.
Yes, I've always been aware that the TCS10 can be used with 1.25:1 rockers but stick with the same 1.1:1 setup that my engine was mapped with. The reason is purely to protect my bank account, because professional mapping sessions aren't cheap!petew wrote: ↑Mon Sep 04, 2017 3:27 amWell that's weird. I just looked up this...
http://www.englecams.com/downloads/2010 ... atalog.pdf
Page 27. Top of the page specifically says 1.25:1 rockers. Hmmmm....