That timing mark on the vernier pulley just looks like tippex? Is there any indentation in the alloy as the pic may not be showing it in the best detail? Cam lobes look close to equal overlap as far as I can see, but the pic angle makes it difficult to compare them against the cam bearing post as a reference.
The splash shields only fit one way. Possibly they had fitted it the wrong way round and that has caused it to break.
So if it did break...where are the bits???? In answer to your previous post Danster, the white mark on the edge of the vernier looks like it has been added by the garage?? So I don't know what to think now???
With tdc set, we need to set the position of the lobes on #4 cylinder (gearbox end) close up! Going from your pic of how it lines up with the O.T mark, you can see that doesn't appear to line up. I suspect this is why the vernier is set so far from zero to try and compensate. On your 2nd pic down (inner face of cam pulley) is there another timing mark on that inner face??? This should line up with the top edge of the head when the outer mark is pointing to O.T Perhaps line up the outer White mark with the O.T then have a look on the inner side?
yeah agree with chrismc on this looking at the cam sprocket, its been rotated pretty far anti-clockwise and the timing mark still doesn't line up. This suggests to me the belt timing is 1 tooth out and/or marks on the sprocket are wrong. if it was me I would remove that sprocket, centralise it and lay it down on top of an oem sprocket. Then line up the keyways and transfer both the OT mark on the outside and the cylinder head mark on the inside. edit: also you have to ask yourself, do you even need and ajustible sprocket, only certain cams do. though it can be helpfull on a heavily skimmed head. on my kent GS1H it made loads of power with a bog std pulley, and pigbladder mentioned he had his GS2H running great on a std pulley above.
The numpty mechanic probably stood on it and broke it. Does it seem to fit better the way it was fitted, or the other way round, or is it so broken that it doesn't matter now? If there are any bits they'll be in the sump. I wouldn't worry about them, as they won't go through the pickup pipe strainer.
I cannot find answers that match up to the type of engine used here, a before reference, and if there are operational differences between tests and the fact that a comment was made that "the car pulled better after the RR session" yet still "the dyno result was not what I expect". This engine is a later post 93 1.8 casting as found on the MK3 1.8 litre cars i.e. ABS code. The give away is a newer style oil filter housing gasket. If I said something on here that is not understood, then simply ask me to explain myself. I not trying to be complicated. My questions and comments are driven by the fact I have run most vw engines on dyno in all sorts of configurations and also correlate to a drive feel either before arriving on the dyno or after on the road. This plot seems unusal for an 8v given the the way it is being reported by the owner. Perhaps my point of cam retardation being retarded to the point of diminishing returns is already true in this case. Hence the reason the car is peaking so high. In an environment that I am in control of with this camshaft choice, the torque on this vehicle should peak at 4000-4500rpm and have quite a lot of area around it. The peak power of the engine may be reduced slightly but the drive experience would be greatly improved. A typical case would be, if tested on the same dyno the engine may be 116bhp@5700rpm (98whp) and 128lbft@4500rpm (~106wlbft) with 'optimum' settings. Currently this graph shows your torque as ~120lbft@5600rpm (99lbft) and ~120bhp@6000rpm which is just around 105lbft for torque. That does not look right to me. Torque peaks and drops off too fast. In this hypothectical case the peak bhp we like to banter about is 4 bhp less but I would assure you the peak torque and increased area around it would mean this 8v would be very nice and responsive to drive. Remember this has to be on the same dyno. Ideally you would have to remap the ecu to tend towards more ideal circumstances. I do agree with a possible cam phasing issue influencing the shape of the torque curve here. Assume the dyno is reading sensibly then you can back calculate the torque from the power and work out if this is indeed a 1.8. In this case 120-130lbft flywheel is what I would expect for a std to mildly tuned 1.8 8v motor. A bit more around 130-140lbft+ and higher up the speed range in a 1.8 16v. If Paul were closer it would take one drive to really determine if this is set properly. Cam or no cam. I have another question that I could not find in this thread. How come this Digifant engine was revving to 7.2K rpm or more? Operational issue with dyno or actual high rev limit or no rev limit at all? Forgive me is I missed that...
I'm pretty sure all the MK3 1.8 8vs have an breather on the block as well? certainly can see the ABS lump has one on ETKA. The very late 8v and 16v MK2 blocks had the new MK3 shape filter housing, but are otherwise the same as a normal MK2 8v/16v block. edit: in case anyone cares the cutoff for the MK2 was sometime between 30.04.1991 and 31.05.91 edit2: oh and the changeover effected the cabrio and scirocco also, so that could explain why its a late style block but DX code. cutoff for cabby was just before 31.03.1991, so a little earlier than the MK2 edit3: scirocco cutoff was 31.07.1991, so a little later than cabby and mk2. edit4: why am i even bothering, just cant help myself with the ETKA geekery
No they do not have the crankcase oil seperator on the 1.8/1.6 8v engine such as an ABS motor. I have seen and worked on. I owned an L plate GL by the way. Mostly found on 2litre lumps and of course the 1.8 16v KR/PL/ADL. That type of breather housing came on post 92 engines around the MK3 era. I remember having to source one of these during ABF turbo build days and it was observed that the humble mk3 1.6 or 1.8 where the doners.
I'm not doubting you, just wanted to double check is all. all i can see is that etka tells me 2e, aam and abs all share the breather housing, normally if it was an age thing it would show me via chassis/engine code cutoff dates, but whatever! If you could get MK3 1.8 engines without a breather then this could well be the reason for the slowness, some of the MK3 1.8 motors are low compression units with 75bhp as std... however its possible it could be a late cabrio, MK2 or scirocco lump as per my post, only way to know is to check the engine code or strip the block and look. looking at the piccy on page 1 it looks like a cabrio/MK2/Scirocco lump as it has the old style 8v alternator bracket on it, although this could still have been fitted earlier in its life.
Post 46 As said before I have had first hand experience in tracking on of these down. And the pictures in the VW catalogue are references not always representative. The concern then was if this was a 1.8 block and I remembered my experience back in the days. So far it is thought to be a DX engine, but there is no concrete evidence to state it is, hence my suggestion it is a later MK3 block or even as suggested by Mike an industrial engine, which I have seen used as an LPG application in a small indoor sweeper. The engine oil breathing is set up as per a PB engine so cannot see how the lack of it would contribute in this specific case.
not sure what the point of your post is? I already agreed with you it could be early MK3 or late cabby/scirocco or MK2 and that there is no way to know for sure unless we have engine code or open it up to check? my point is if its an early MK3 lump, it could be a 75BHP lump which would explain why the power outputs arnt as high as he would like
It was a reconditioned GTi engine and the block was possibly MK3 1.8 based. If the supplied plot is to be believed it is certainly making 1.8 high compression torque. Might be in the wrong place though.
there was a 1.8 mk3 lump which was 75bhp, that was what I meant. power is quite high to be that though as you say, was just a thought but anyway doh. just spotted on page 1 he says the engine code is probably DX 181 553 engine number 18x xxx is definitly new enough to have the later style filter housing, according to ETKA from 1991 the DX engine was up to 14x xxx
Refitting a stock cam pulley isn't a bad idea. We need to see the lobes on #4 at TDC to make a definitive judgement but I, like you, suspect it's still a tooth out, hence the very peaky readings.. Should run lovely on stock timing as you have said.. Paul.....if you pm me your number il gladly have a chat with you about it if you like?
Is there a definitive answer on this??? Surely if my block was only a 75BHP Mk3 1.8 litre unit, then even with the ported head and GS2H cam it would not be making anywhere near the 121 BHP at the flywheel??? This would represent an increase of 46 BHP?? To reiterate. I bought the bottom end off a guy who had got it from Big Boys Toys as a complete replacement 1.8 gti engine but had never had it fitted before writing his car off. It then sat in his garage for 2-3 years. He advertised the engine on Ebay. I bought it off him for 100. I didn't use the head, as the Man in the Shed said it was no good. Instead I used a spare head off a J reg gti I was breaking, this was the head that was ported by him. When the local garage did the rebuild they told me that the bottom end had been run before, so they did a partial strip and clean before building up the new engine with the ported head. Someone on here has already stated that later 1.8 units used the different style oil filter housing. I hope this is true and that I haven't got some odd mongrel of an engine. This whole rebuild has been a nightmare and extremely stressful. I won't sell the car, but at the moment I am really fed up with things[:^(][:^(][:^(] It really is a curse living SO far away from decent VW Golf Mk2 specialists!! (I'm not even from this area)!! There are loads of very knowledgable people on this forum, but unfortunately you are all miles and miles away! I have spent a small fortune on my car, with the cost of the original rebuild, all the parts and all the expense since. Now I have a car which doen't drive as well as the with the old engine!! It is very disheartening..but I need to get to the bottom of this! Cheers Paul
The block is what gives the 1.8L or 1.6L etc. of capacity but doesn't matter which 1.8L really... The "75BHP" is from a different head & single point fuel injection or whatever so what you have is a reconditioned 1.8L ... with a gti head / pistons / intake / cam etc making your peak 121BHP you are getting confused between "block" and "unit" I refer to block simply as the crankcase... Unit would be short engine = block (crankcase with bores) fitted with crank, pistons, rings etc. Long block = as above plus head (no manifolds) What makes it a 1.8 or 1.6 in this case is the crankshaft & rods Using the block you have, and fitting all the guts of a PB short engine = Gti bottom end Add a PB head and you get a Gti long block
yeah I'd be pretty sure its a GTI type block, in fact forget I mentioned anything if i were in your shoes, the very next thing I would do is swap a std pulley on and retime the cam & crank, then reset the ign timing as per my guide, see where that gets you.
