2.3L NG conversion in my 84 4KQ

[Larry C Leung]

BTW, the '85 GTi/GLi engines (don't recall the code off hand, Bentley not
here) were the 10:1, knock sensor set up, but with CIS-E not Motronic.
Rated at 100 HP in '85, a different ignition map changed it to 102 HP in
'86 (GTi/GLi) through '87 in the GT/GLi. GTi in '88 had the 1.8 16V
(123HP), and the Motronic Engines were phased in in '88.

LL - NY

On Wed, 18 Jul 2001 09:13:18 -0400 "Swann, Benjamin R.  (BSWANN)"
<BSWANN at arinc.com> writes:
>Javad,
>
>I understood that the higher compression comes from the Head on the 
>NG
>setup, not the Block.  The high compression is largely what buys the
>additional Torque and HP across the RPM spectrum.  Someone correct me 
>if I'm
>wrong.  I seriously doubt that the VW/AUDI engineers went through all 
>the
>trouble to modify the 4 and 5 cyl. setups with these changes for such 
>a
>limited return.
>
>Data Point:  this is similar to two 4 cyl swaps I did on Type 1 
>Scirocco:
>1) used 1.8l '85 Scirocco/GTI setup with lower compression and CIS 
>with oxy
>and no knock sensor.
>2) used 1.8l '88 Jetta GLI engine with Motronic setup(I broke out 
>portions
>of the systems to support CIS with oxy) and included the knock
>sensor/ignition portion from the '88 Jetta setup.
>
>The '85 1.8 8:1 was good.  The '88 1.8 10:1 and knock sensor blew the 
>'85
>setup away.  A 268 cam and Gillette exhaust and header was later 
>installed
>to sweeten it up even more.  
>
>I had considered putting in a turbo engine and did not for a few 
>reasons:
>1) The NG motor was available for low cost, and I could have just 
>plopped
>the thing in.
>2) The Turbo setup requires more retrofitting than just a wiring 
>harness
>swap, including fitting of the Intercooler, and turbo oiling and 
>cooling
>lines, etc.  It was just beyond the scope of what I wanted to do for 
>a
>street car and my very limited time and budget.
>
>Maybe someday, if my wife doesn't kill me, I'll take on a turbo swap, 
>but it
>will probably be in a newer car.
>
>Anyway, this is just to clarify and verify my sanity that what I am 
>doing is
>in order, and that certainly the 2.3 swap you guys did was also.
>
>Happy Quattroing!
>
>Ben
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: JShadzi at aol.com [mailto:JShadzi at aol.com]
>Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2001 6:11 PM
>To: BSWANN at arinc.com; mdg3369 at altavista.com
>Cc: quattro at audifans.com; red4000quattro at aol.com
>Subject: Re: 2.3L NG conversion in my 84 4KQ
>
>
>Ben, don't worry, you are not raining on the parade, let me explain 
>where
>the extra power is coming from in a 2.3 swap:  the NG/NF is rated at 
>130hp,
>the JT is rated at 115hp, both use high flow down pipes, the only 
>real
>differences are:
>
>1) 40mm valve vs 38mm valve
>2) 2.3 vs 2.2
>3) 10:1 vs 8.5:1
>
>Ben, the majority of that 15hp increase is from the higher 
>compression, and
>a little from the disp. increase.  The 40mm vavles surely help 
>increase flow
>at higher RPM, but a properly ported head with 38mm valves (with 
>1.5mm
>removed from the ID of the valve seat) will flow just as well, if not 
>better
>than a 40mm head stock.
>
>Theoretically, I suppose a swap using the NG head/ induction and 
>CIS-3
>*could* be worth another 5 hp at the top end, MY argument is that the 
>effort
>required to fit the harness and components is not worth 5 hp, when a 
>turbo
>conversion is not far off from that level of effort.
>
>Though the NG conversion is nice, and results in a good, torquey motor 
>that
>also revs, it is still a SLOW car.  IMHO, it is not worth spending too 
>much
>time building a 145 hp over a 140 hp that is 1/5th the effort.  The NA 
>I5
>just does not offer that much potential...
>
>Not to rain on your parade, Ben, but for the amount of work you are 
>putting
>into these swaps, you could almost have done a turbo conversion that 
>would
>result in close to 240hp, a more worthwhile venture IMO.  
>
>Javad
>www.80tq.com
>
>In a message dated Tue, 17 Jul 2001  4:54:45 PM Eastern Daylight 
>Time,
>"Swann, Benjamin R.  (BSWANN)" <BSWANN at arinc.com> writes:
>
>> Fellow Quattro Swapaholics,
>> 
>> Regarding the below, I beg to differ that it made little difference
>swapping
>> in the NG head and CISEIII components.  That is really what gives 
>you the
>> extra power, or so as I understand.  You may have gained a tad with 
>the
>> extra .1 litre, and the porting and the cam, surely helped.  Exhaust 
>also?
>> If you decked the head, the higher compression would also be 
>helping.  All
>> of these incremental gains, plus the fact it is refreshed has surely 
>given
>> the car a rejuvinated feel.  
>> 
>> I certainly don't want to rain on the parade, as what you did was 
>good.
>> Indeed, I have had notable gains in the first iteration of upgrades 
>to
>> 4000Q#1: 264 cam, new lifters, Stebro exhaust, advanced timing - all 
>good
>> quick upgrades that I did to tide me over while I got around to 
>prepping
>the
>> 2.3NG.
>> 
>> On 4000Q#2 I am doing the entire conversion, and am putting a lot of 
>extra
>> time up front porting and polishing the head and matching the 
>manifolds,
>272
>> CAM, new lifters, autotech springs.  Ultimately this will be coupled 
>to
>> Stebro exhaust, and the lighter 200Q flywheel assembly.
>> 
>> It surely would have been a simple matter to install the extra 2.3l 
>bottom
>> end I have (refreshed of course) to the existing head and be done 
>with it.
>> Otherwise, I have been wasting my time.
>> 
>> I just felt I had to comment as I can't wait to get around to my 
>own
>engine
>> swapping parties.
>> 
>> Salud,
>> 
>> Ben
>> '85 4Kcsq(s) - Project(s) GTQ - more pics coming:
>> http://www.homestead.com/Ben_Swann/files/GTQswap.txt
>> '87 5kcstqw
>> http://www.homestead.com/Ben_Swann/myaudi.html
>> 
>> p.s. Have the extra 2.3 bottom end and complete 2.2 engine if anyone 
>wants
>> them.
>> 
>> [[> Hey Listers!
>> > 
>> > Last weekend was a glorious weekend for my 1986 4KQ!  Friday night 
>my
>> brother, Javad (80tq.com), and I set out to drop in a 2.3L NG bottom 
>end
>> with my 4KQ ported head and a 270degree cam shaft in my tired old 
>Audi.
>> After a few trips back and forth to our local hardware store, we 
>pulled
>out
>> the old 2.2L and carefully dropped in the beautiful new engine.  
>The
>engine
>> had come off Javad's 80 with 80,000 miles on it, so we replaced the 
>seals,
>> lifters, valve springs, and gaskets.  I just wanted to drop you all 
>a
>quick
>> email telling you how cool of an experience it was and what a great 
>feel
>the
>> car has after the swap.  Thanks to Huw's and many other lister's 
>websites
>> that showed us great pointers and tips.  And if you ever see a 
>loud,
>bright
>> red Audi putting around in the Bay Area, feel free to throw a hand 
>and
>wave!
>> > 
>> > Peymon
>> > 1986 4KQ 2.3L 
>> 
>> >BTW-we only swapped in the bottom end, but left the JT >inductions 
>system
>> as is, the best way to do it I 
>> >belive, no real advantage to swapping in all the NG 
>> >head stuff too.
>> 
>> [Its an '86 BTW bro!
>> 
>> Yup, it was a good swap and a good time, a 2 day engine conversion
>> hurricane!  Thank God for the pizza and lemonade that nourished us!
>BTW-we
>> only swapped in the bottom end, but left the JT inductions system as 
>is,
>the
>> best way to do it I belive, no real advantage to swapping in all the 
>NG
>head
>> stuff too.
>> 
>> For others who  are also considering this swap, a few pointers to 
>make it
>> easier for now, and the future:
>> 
>> -Pull the battery tray and move the battery to the trunk, makes 
>accessing
>> the downpipe, tranny bolts, and even CIS airbox much easier.
>> -We cut out the upper support, but left the lower support intact, 
>the
>engine
>> easily raises out the top with the lower core suppport in place.  I
>modifed
>> the cut out piece to neatly, and strongly bolt back into place, 
>maybe
>Peymon
>> will take some pics??
>> 
>> -We pulled the AC, raised the front of the car over 1" so now we 
>will put
>in
>> coilovers to even things out.  You may NEED the AC in other 
>climates, but
>in
>> Ca its not too bad, and its a pleasure to work on the car without
>> condensors, compressors, and lines getting in the way.
>> 
>> Javad]
>> 
>> The NG has the bigger intake valves 40mm vs. 38. Is the JT head 
>good
>enough?
>> I am thinking of swapping a 2.3 into my sisters car but still 
>deciding
>> between the whole thing w/ CIS-EIII or just the short or long 
>block.
>Anybody
>> with any comments?
>> Thanks
>> Mike]]
>