MC-1 MC-2 - Block any difference?

[JShadzi at aol.com]

Ben, just to be real clear on this issue (cause its close to my heart), *and I'm not saying you implied this*, but... I don't tune for big dyno #'s, big dyno #'s are the result of a powerful, well tuned car.  Any advice you get from me will be in the context of reliable, smooth, everyday power, and as much of it as you like (ie: the intended application or result of the project).

I commuted 60 miles a day in my 80tq for 3 years, 400hp and all, and got near 30mpg, never left me stranted once.

Again, not saying you accused me of tuning for "sloppy power", but making a 400hp 10v run smooth everyday isn't too difficult with the right management system (ie: not 3B Motronic, in a 10v anyway) and some attention to detail.

With that said, it doesn't sound like you're shooting for the moon wrt power, so I'd recommend the MC2 for you, because it will perform better in the range of power/use you're looking for.  A pinging motor is "sloppy" to me, so if you wanted to run 20+psi boost, then the MC2 may become more and more "sloppy", esp. w/o the right octange fuel or engine management system.  

And, IME, water injection will only take you so far, there is nothing like the proper octane fuel for the application.

3B - 9.3:1
MC2 - 8.4:1

Javad


>Javad,
>
>I'm trying to be realistic.  As much as I'd like to see this car on the
>track, I am really looking for streetable power.  So I am doing things more
>from the perspective of how the car is going to do with everyday driving the
>main priority.  I don't want to end up with something that runs sloppy or
>evewn compromized on the bottom end and below 5K just so I can get good dyno
>numbers once in the engines liftetime or that perhaps that like to see how
>it does on a drag-strip, however tempting.
>
>I guess if I ever feel the need, that is what the high octane is about.  I
>would think if I want to go over 300HP, then I could install a water
>injection system.
>
>Question: Isn't the MC-2 compression similar to the 3B?
>
>Ben
>----- Original Message ----- 
>From: <JShadzi at aol.com>
>To: "Ben Swann" <benswann at comcast.net>; ""Jim Green"" <jeg1976 at yahoo.com>;
><quattro at audifans.com>
>Cc: "Ben Swann" <benswann at comcast.net>
>Sent: Monday, February 23, 2004 2:02 PM
>Subject: Re: MC-1 MC-2 - Block any difference?
>
>
>> Sure, the MC2 really responds well in the low end, specially with turbo
>spool up, though if you're shooting for 350+hp, the extra 10 ft lbs of
>torque in the MC2 isn't really noticeable if you can make another 50hp in
>the power band.  I dynoed (in my MC2'd 80tq) about 250 wheel HP on street
>gas, and about 300 WHP with 1/2 100 octane, timing was maxxed out on the
>street gas.
>>
>> Javad
>>
>> >What about low-end torque? I'd expect to be getting some gains here with
>> >the MC-2. Correct?
>> >
>> >To add some more information - I plan to use the 3B Motronic fuel
>injection
>> >which I can chip as desired.
>> >
>> >I will also be using the T3/T4 turbo probably with factory 2-peice
>manifold
>> >and plenty-big exhaust.
>> >
>> >Intake will either be stock MC head or considering NG head and maifold -
>> >either way enlarged valveing, port and polish in the works.
>> >
>> >So I plan to do the MC-2 bottom end at this point, but looks like I can
>do
>> >this using an MC-1 block and install the MC-2 pistons and crank.
>> >
>> >Ben
>> >
><snip>
>
>_______________________________________________
>quattro mailing list
>quattro at audifans.com
>http://www.audifans.com/mailman/listinfo/quattro
>