Ideal Buggy Engine

[markmark]

What's the ideal buggy engine in your opinion?:2cents:

[jlowery]

I think it depends on what you want to do. Street only, on/off road, hard core off road, etc. I do a little street and a lot of off road. I would choose an air cooled VW built with quality parts. Simple, easy to maintain and reliable. We do a fair amount of traveling in Baja and it's easy to find replacement parts for a VW in Mexico. As far as other engines, I say go for it. It's great to see how creative people can get in adapting different engines.

[Gene-C]

"big" Type IV VW.........lot's of low end torque... :2cents:

[ROSSDC]

T'is the season to rebuild the motor. An ideal engine for me is a stock 1600 dual port. If I go bigger it will be a Subaru engine but I am trying to keep it simple and just have simple fun. I have started on the body work and my son is going to do the engine. It is a low mileage stock 1600 dual port with a stock carb and Mexico AS41 case. It leaks oil between the case and cylinder otherwise it runs good. I don't want to get out of hand, and plan to keep it at the stock 1600 displacement. I have thought about maybe a different cam, 1.25 ratio rockers, counter weighted crank and raising the compression, but I am not really sure if any of those things would make a noticeable difference when using the stock 34 carburetor, any thoughts?

[jsturtlebuggy]

I like air cooled engines. They are simple for the most part. Plus I have worked on them for more than 35 years now. It all depends on what you want to do with your buggy. A good running 1600cc get you most places without costing lots of money. I have one engine that I use for backup now which is a 1776cc with stock cam and stock 34PICT carb, vacuum/mechanical advance distributor,and stock dualport heads. Have to have case and heads machined to fit larger cylinders.It is a good running engine and can run on 87 octance gas with no problems. Main engine that I use is a 1955cc using a 76mm stroke crank by 90.5mm bore, stock cam now with 1.25 rockers. Had larger cam that was going flat so change back to stock to see what it would do. This ran great on the Bishop run where we went from 3,000 ft to over 10,000 feet without any problems with the dual 40IDF carbs. It also runs on 87octane with no problems. Will probaly go back with a WEBCAM close to the Engle 110 specs eventually when I have time to tear the engine back down. My other buggy uses a type IV 2liter in it. It has alot of torque. They are not cheap to build. Almost 3 time the amount of money to do one compared to a type I style engine. Just a gasket set alone is around $35.00. You can spend over $10,000 on parts alone to build a big one. It may be more cost effective to go with another type of engine unless you are a purist. A complete Subaru engine setup is less just have to find a place for the radiator and modifly the oil pan for clearance if you going off road.

[manxdavid]

1776cc, stock 1600 heads machined to suit, Engle W110 cam, bolt-together rockers and chrome moly rods topped with dual 40 Webers. Just about unbeatable for nost uses IMHO.

[newmanx59]

I have been running 1914 cc engines in my buggys for close to 20 years. The one in my current buggy has a welded C/W crank, Web Cam 86B w/Pauter 1.5:1 rockers, ported big valve heads from A.J.Sims, 8.3:1 compression, dual 44 IDF's, stock rods and everything has been balanced. It pulls like a tractor from 1000 rpm up to 6500 rpm. It will pull away without a hiccup from 1200 rpm in 4th gear. It has been on several 500 mile road trips in 95 deg. heat and it will run 70mph all day without a problem. I'm the one that can't take the 70 mph all day.

[joemama]

On my buggy, I run a 1914, stock heads, 110 engle with stock springs, stock rockers on solid shafts, counterweighed crank, lightened flywheel, 009, single weber 40 idf. Have run this engine with a single zenith 32 before, and was very smooth and tractable, but lacked top end, with the 40 idf its better on the top end, dual 40's would be perfect, but my body is cut for a single carb, and the paint is good, so for now its a single carb. This engine provides all the power to go anywhere offroad, and quite quick on the street, it pulls from about 1200 to over 5500 rpm, no fuss. I am currently building a 1776, stock heads and cam, c.w. crank, stock rockers with solid shafts, stock weight flywheel with 8 dowel, heavy 5 lb. front pulley, all balanced, stock 34pict carb, and stock vaccum dist. This will go in a bug, but I think would also be perfect for a mild offroad buggy engine. Joseph, what jetting are you using on your 34 pict on your 1776? Would help to know. Thanks.

[ROSSDC]

Joemama Your 1776 engine sounds real interesting. You said a C.W. crank, stock weight flywheel, heavy 5 lb. front pulley. I am gathering ideas to build an engine and I hear allot about lightening the flywheel and aluminum pulleys, is it maybe better to keep the weight on those components? Raising the compression ratio instead of increasing the displacement. I was looking at some numbers that compares the actual dyno torque and horsepower, 0 to 60 time and ? mile times. Two engines, an 1835 and a 2276, both with 44idf carbs and built by the same guy. The smaller 1835 makes more HP but at a higher RPM, with less torque and the 0-60 and 1/4mile times for both engines are almost exact. The small 1835 has a higher 10.6:1 compression ratio and the 2276 is at 8.5:1. I have heard recommendations to run a lower compression ratio when you increase your displacement so I was thinking why not increase the compression ratio and keep the displacement the same? The drivability maybe the reason to go with a larger displacement because it will add the low end torque. If I understand it correctly a lower compression ratio will run cooler but if it?s in a 1300lb buggy and your not running wide open all day long in sand, is heat really going to be an issue? I would think the smaller high compression engine would get better fuel economy over the larger displacement in normal driving? I have built more motorcycle engines than VW so that might be were I get this desire for a high revving small displacement engine. Any comments appreciated.

[joemama]

rossdc, most engines use a harmonic balancer, a vw does not, I think mostly because it was meant to be cheap, a heavy pulley should help balance and smooth out the engine. This engine is for my 16 year old sons first car, and I live in a very hilly town, so I am building an engine to make low end power, and hopefully with all the momentum created by the stock weight flywheel, and heavy pulley, easier to take off from a stand still, up a hill, for a new stick shift driver. For this same reason, I think this would be a good low speed crawler for rough trail driving. It might be a couple of months before this engine is on a drivable car, but when it is, I will let you know my driving impression. On my buggy, I love the snappy acceleration that the lightened flywheel gives me, but it does seem that I depend on rpm's to get me up sand dunes. In terms of compression, I dont think it would be advisable to go much higher than maybe 9 to 1, probably better to go 8 1/2 to 1 or there abouts. I suspect that in the example you gave of those 2 engines, the smaller one probably also had a more radical cam, and probably wont run for long, and it probably needs high octane gas, maybe even racing fuel. High compression and v.w. do not usually make for reliability.

[jsturtlebuggy]

Joemama, I am using a 1.30mm main jet with a .55mm idle jet. (also known as a pilot jet) The tiny ilde jet under the brass plug right next to the bigger idle jet I opened up to .50mm Engine compression ratio is set a 6.9 to 1. Using a modified early bus air cleaner setup coverted to a K&N filter.

[joemama]

Thanks Joseph, the info will get put to good use.

[tpinthepack]

A 1971 1700cc engine from a stock 914 porsche has 86hp from the factory. that year had slight pop up pistons, with around 8:1 compression. I had one of these engines with super low original miles, and all I did was add MSD distributor with 6al box, and a set of Weber 44IDF. I had poor low end at first, and then changed to venturi's from weber 40's, and then it was perfect. I drove it in my 66 vw bus from Florida to California for the Classic on my first drive. It has been running flawlessly since 1996.

[markmark]

Has anyone ever ran a stroker crank with a standard or near standard bore (type 1 engine)? Can you run a longer stroke crank without machining the case?

[jsturtlebuggy]

About the biggest you can go and be reliable without having to machine inside the case is 76mm stroke. Still have to notch for rod bolts. In Dune Buggies & Hot VWs Magazine they are building a milage motor using a 76mm stroker crank with 85.5mm pistons. Started with the November 2006 issue. Drino Miller won the Baja 1,000 years ago with a 82mm SPG rollercrank by 85.5mm pistons. Made for a reliable engine with a lot of torque. He had to do machine work on the case and machine the skirts on the pistons for clearance. Clearancing the case for a larger stroke crank can be done with a die grinder an carbide burrs. It is what I did many years ago building my first 2180cc engine. I even seen people a Dremel type tool to do it. Just takes more time.