Early 1.9 to 2.1 conversion - stop me if I'm being stupid!

Big lumps of metals and spanners. Including servicing and fluids.

Moderators: User administrators, Moderators

User avatar
itchyfeet
Registered user
Posts: 12427
Joined: 23 Jul 2007, 17:24
80-90 Mem No: 12733
Location: South Hampshire

Re: Early 1.9 to 2.1 conversion - stop me if I'm being stupid!

Post by itchyfeet »

Well that was an expensive afternoon :lol:
Carparts for less also have 20% off some very good prices already
1988 DG WBX LPG Tin Top
1989 DJ digijet WBX Holdsworth Villa 3 Pop Top
itchylinks

User avatar
kevtherev
Registered user
Posts: 18830
Joined: 23 Oct 2005, 20:13
80-90 Mem No: 2264
Location: Country estate Wolverhampton Actually

Re: Early 1.9 to 2.1 conversion - stop me if I'm being stupid!

Post by kevtherev »

CJH wrote:When I started the engine this morning all the tappets were nice and quiet. There may be something in this extra pre-load after all. Made me doubt whether I should touch them again, but nevertheless I warmed up the oil and then backed off all the adjusters to let the tappet plungers spring back to their natural position. The trouble is, whatever position the crank is in, two valves will always be under load, and even with the adjusters wound right out the rocker arm still rests on top of the valve and therefore puts some load on the corresponding tappets. I may have to do this in two stages - once to do the six tappets that are fully unloaded, and once more to do the last two. I guess I could have removed the rocker assembly.
I have always followed the Richard Atwell guide when adjusting lash
AGG 2.0L 8V. (Golf GTi MkIII)

User avatar
CJH
Registered user
Posts: 3018
Joined: 15 Jul 2013, 06:51
80-90 Mem No: 12576
Location: Nottingham

Re: Early 1.9 to 2.1 conversion - stop me if I'm being stupid!

Post by CJH »

kevtherev wrote: I have always followed the Richard Atwell guide when adjusting lash

Good advice to go back to the guide. There's a tip for dealing with my compressed plunger:

Richard Atwell wrote:Remember that when turning the adjusting screw on the engine you are working against the valve spring if the lifter is full of oil. You can test this by pressing on the knurled base of the rocker arm with a screwdriver. If there is any movement, then the lifter is soft and your adjustment will be compressing the spring inside the lifter instead of moving the valve spring (normal). If this happens, you should run the engine with a 0.006" (0.15mm) clearance on that lifter for 10-15 minutes then re-attempt a hydraulic adjustment when the hot valve cover cools enough for you to touch it again.
"I'm a man of means, by no means....King of the Road!"

1983 Viking Xplorer, 2.1DJ

User avatar
itchyfeet
Registered user
Posts: 12427
Joined: 23 Jul 2007, 17:24
80-90 Mem No: 12733
Location: South Hampshire

Re: Early 1.9 to 2.1 conversion - stop me if I'm being stupid!

Post by itchyfeet »

CJH wrote:
Good advice to go back to the guide. There's a tip for dealing with my compressed plunger:

Richard Atwell wrote:Remember that when turning the adjusting screw on the engine you are working against the valve spring if the lifter is full of oil. You can test this by pressing on the knurled base of the rocker arm with a screwdriver. If there is any movement, then the lifter is soft and your adjustment will be compressing the spring inside the lifter instead of moving the valve spring (normal). If this happens, you should run the engine with a 0.006" (0.15mm) clearance on that lifter for 10-15 minutes then re-attempt a hydraulic adjustment when the hot valve cover cools enough for you to touch it again.

you can set preload on a tappet with air inside but you need to be gentle and dexterous, you can feel the point it is just touching before compressing the internal spring but its subtle, you do need to make sure pushrod is seated correctly which is always the tricky bit.
1988 DG WBX LPG Tin Top
1989 DJ digijet WBX Holdsworth Villa 3 Pop Top
itchylinks

User avatar
CJH
Registered user
Posts: 3018
Joined: 15 Jul 2013, 06:51
80-90 Mem No: 12576
Location: Nottingham

Re: Early 1.9 to 2.1 conversion - stop me if I'm being stupid!

Post by CJH »

itchyfeet wrote: you can set preload on a tappet with air inside but you need to be gentle and dexterous, you can feel the point it is just touching before compressing the internal spring but its subtle, you do need to make sure pushrod is seated correctly which is always the tricky bit.

I don't think I've necessarily got air inside any of the tappets. I think the problem is that when one of the tappets is sitting on the top of a cam lobe the plunger inside is under pressure, and becomes depressed - i.e. the oil in the cavity leaks past the plunger or the check valve. When the cam is rotated to release that pressure (e.g. at TDC, while adjusting the pre-load), it's only the small internal spring that can then push the plunger out again, against some resistance from cold oil, so it doesn't return quickly.

I had a go on Friday evening, after letting 6 of the 8 tappets relax all day. On those 6 the touch point was easy to spot, and I set 2 turns of pre-load. On the other two, I *thought* I'd got it right, but when I tried to start the engine I had no compression. I didn't get to the bottom of that because it was cold and dark and I needed the van over the weekend, so I simply backed them all off 1 turn. I suspect the compression problem was because the 6 needed time to settle (letting them relax all day was like fitting them fresh), and the 2 had too much pre-load. But I've got two approaches now - either repeat what I did, but unload all 8 by removing the rocker shafts, or pre-load 6, gap the other 2, run the engine and pre-load the last two. The latter seems simpler.
"I'm a man of means, by no means....King of the Road!"

1983 Viking Xplorer, 2.1DJ

User avatar
itchyfeet
Registered user
Posts: 12427
Joined: 23 Jul 2007, 17:24
80-90 Mem No: 12733
Location: South Hampshire

Re: Early 1.9 to 2.1 conversion - stop me if I'm being stupid!

Post by itchyfeet »

If the tappets work well you won't have compression for hours after setting preload, if they are leaky tey will return to equilibrium much quicker
1988 DG WBX LPG Tin Top
1989 DJ digijet WBX Holdsworth Villa 3 Pop Top
itchylinks

User avatar
CJH
Registered user
Posts: 3018
Joined: 15 Jul 2013, 06:51
80-90 Mem No: 12576
Location: Nottingham

Re: Early 1.9 to 2.1 conversion - stop me if I'm being stupid!

Post by CJH »

I'm hoping that was the reason. And since these tappets tend to de-pressurise quite quickly I don't think it'll take very long to get compression back.
"I'm a man of means, by no means....King of the Road!"

1983 Viking Xplorer, 2.1DJ

User avatar
bigbadbob76
Registered user
Posts: 1733
Joined: 07 Nov 2016, 14:41
80-90 Mem No: 15707
Location: Isle of Skye

Re: Early 1.9 to 2.1 conversion - stop me if I'm being stupid!

Post by bigbadbob76 »

Hi CJH.
when you were doing the rolling road tests you mention drive train losses of 18.3hp which is well worth knowing. :D
Did you get any idea of air resistance/drag losses for a T25?
Ie: hp required to maintain a steady speed, say 60mph, on a flat road.
I know this is not something that's measurable on a rolling road but would be interesting to know.
'86 1.9 DG, 4 spd, tintop, camper conversion.
Split case club member.

User avatar
CJH
Registered user
Posts: 3018
Joined: 15 Jul 2013, 06:51
80-90 Mem No: 12576
Location: Nottingham

Re: Early 1.9 to 2.1 conversion - stop me if I'm being stupid!

Post by CJH »

I didn't, but it would be interesting to know. I've thought about this before, and I think it must be a huge number. Top speed is reached when air resistance (+ rolling resistance) equals the force being applied by the wheels. If you think about the force that the engine produces at the kind of engine speed associated with top (vehicle) speed, air resistance must be huge. This is why the tyres on the driven wheels wear out - at speed they are clawing away at the road to overcome air resistance. I'm sure it would be possible to do some basic sums, based on the cross-sectional area.
"I'm a man of means, by no means....King of the Road!"

1983 Viking Xplorer, 2.1DJ

User avatar
bigbadbob76
Registered user
Posts: 1733
Joined: 07 Nov 2016, 14:41
80-90 Mem No: 15707
Location: Isle of Skye

Re: Early 1.9 to 2.1 conversion - stop me if I'm being stupid!

Post by bigbadbob76 »

Good to know it's not just me that thinks about stuff like this while at work, :lol:
I'm guessing about 45BHP, based on a 1.6 petrol doing a top speed of what? 65mph? from it's 50BHP engine.
Pure guess work but I'll have a think about the maths. :ok
'86 1.9 DG, 4 spd, tintop, camper conversion.
Split case club member.

User avatar
marlinowner
Registered user
Posts: 1530
Joined: 28 Jan 2014, 12:02
80-90 Mem No: 13646
Location: Scottish Borders

Re: Early 1.9 to 2.1 conversion - stop me if I'm being stupid!

Post by marlinowner »

https://www.thesamba.com/vw/forum/viewt ... ght=visual" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
1993 SA VW T25/T3 2.5i Microbus/homebrew camper
1981/1968 Marlin Kitcar TR6 Engine

User avatar
CJH
Registered user
Posts: 3018
Joined: 15 Jul 2013, 06:51
80-90 Mem No: 12576
Location: Nottingham

Re: Early 1.9 to 2.1 conversion - stop me if I'm being stupid!

Post by CJH »

Reproducing the image from that Samba link:

Image

And of course there's an online calculator :ok

Using a panel van (unladen) for the figures (weight = 1395kg, frontal area = 3.11sqm, coefficient of drag = 0.44, and a guess for the Coefficient of rolling resistance of 0.01), the online calculator gives, at 60mph:
21.69hp aero resistance,
4.92hp rolling resistance,
so a total power requirement of 26.61hp.
On top of that there's the 18.3hp drivetrain losses, giving a total of ~45hp just to maintain 60mph.

Not a bad guess Bob!

The calculator also gives some estimates of fuel consumption. They depend on some more guesses, such as fuel energy density, drive train and engine efficiency. Fun to play with nonetheless.
"I'm a man of means, by no means....King of the Road!"

1983 Viking Xplorer, 2.1DJ

User avatar
bigbadbob76
Registered user
Posts: 1733
Joined: 07 Nov 2016, 14:41
80-90 Mem No: 15707
Location: Isle of Skye

Re: Early 1.9 to 2.1 conversion - stop me if I'm being stupid!

Post by bigbadbob76 »

Vielen dank Marlin und CJH. :ok
Meine Deutschkenntnisse sind schon etwas eingerostet, aber Ich glaube zu verstehen!
Interesting stuff, I wasn't sure if the 18bhp transmission loss included rolling resistance or not.
'86 1.9 DG, 4 spd, tintop, camper conversion.
Split case club member.

User avatar
CJH
Registered user
Posts: 3018
Joined: 15 Jul 2013, 06:51
80-90 Mem No: 12576
Location: Nottingham

Re: Early 1.9 to 2.1 conversion - stop me if I'm being stupid!

Post by CJH »

bigbadbob76 wrote:I wasn't sure if the 18bhp transmission loss included rolling resistance or not.

No, nor me, but I think rolling resistance is a function of the weight of the vehicle, which transmission loss would not be.
"I'm a man of means, by no means....King of the Road!"

1983 Viking Xplorer, 2.1DJ

User avatar
bigbadbob76
Registered user
Posts: 1733
Joined: 07 Nov 2016, 14:41
80-90 Mem No: 15707
Location: Isle of Skye

Re: Early 1.9 to 2.1 conversion - stop me if I'm being stupid!

Post by bigbadbob76 »

So factoring in headwinds and hills..... it's amazing a 1.6 petrol goes anywhere. :rofl
And an electric conversion would never get further than the bottom of my street. :lol:
'86 1.9 DG, 4 spd, tintop, camper conversion.
Split case club member.

Post Reply