[urq] AAN or 3B swap

Mon Feb 24 22:10:51 PST 2014

This has been great information this week!

I have a complete running '91 200tq that's been over maintained and never chipped as my donor and a 944t intercooler, so I should be good to go.

Any and all suggestions are appreciated.

I plan to use the 4.11 torsen trans with either a stock 4kq rear or a 4kq rear diff pumpkin with a ur-V8 torsen in it.

On Feb 4, 2014 9:02 AM, Scott Justusson <qshipq at aol.com> wrote:
>
> Bottom Line:  3B is a no brainer, in time and dollars.  AAN involves a lot more fabrication and dollars.  To intake tract length and IAT, those differences on the dyno tend to be not significant factors.  More specifically, they can be overcome by turbo, Exhaust Manifold, chipsets, and tuning.  A better strategy would be to pick a HP target, then your choices become clearer.  For ~300ATWHP (bolt on RS2 powa), the 3B is fine.  Above that, the  AAN advantages start to tip the scale advantages to COP, larger FMIC, Intake Manifold changes, etc....
>
> I have worked on both the AAN and the 3B installs in the urqs and the 4kq.  Save the PITA of the distributor cap and rotor access in the 3B (offset by pos-POS and coil pack issues in the AAN), the 3B makes for a clean install, and the 944turbo intercooler properly shrouded gives little to a much more conspicuous FMIC well into the mid 300hp range.  
>
> To anyone making the consideration, IMO the overwhelming decisive factor between 3B and AAN would be the target HP levels of the engine. 
>
> Cheers, my .02 and btdt
>
> Scott J
> 84 urq AAN project
> 87 4ktq 20vt 3B 944 IC
> 20vt Install team member
>   83 WB Urq Pikes Peak Car 5 - AAN
>   84 urq VEMS>Motronic retrofit - 3B
>
>
>  
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Steve Mills <s.b.mills at gmail.com>
> To: Mike Sylvester <mike at urq20v.com>
> Cc: urq <urq at audifans.com>
> Sent: Mon, Feb 3, 2014 12:10 pm
> Subject: Re: [urq] AAN or 3B swap
>
>
> It all depends on what you're starting with. I am not suggesting you go
> this route if you have a 3B and you're happy with it. However, if you're
> starting with an AAN, I'd argue it's cheaper and easier to swap in a SQ
> style intake ($950 from 034-
> http://store.034motorsport.com/034efi-high-output-intake-manifold-20655.html)
> than to swap everything over to 3B/ADU/ABY style intake, because so
> many
> other parts need to be changed to suit (water manifold, vacuum, cruise,
> etc.) BTDT many years ago- I bought all the big RS2 bits back when they
> were relatively cheap from Germaly (intake & exhaust manifolds, valve
> cover, oil pan) and sold them off when I decided it would be far cheaper
> and easier overall to just buy an ABY or ADU.than completely convert an AAN.
>
> Steve
>
>
> On Mon, Feb 3, 2014 at 12:59 PM, Mike Sylvester <mike at urq20v.com> wrote:
>
> > When doing the conversion it becomes an issue of cost.
> > Sure SQ intake routing may be a more sound solution, but what are you
> > willing to pay for the minimal gain.
> > The 3B parts are bolt on and relatively inexpensive.If the AAN intake
> > worked that world be nice but it doesn't. A intake that has a front
> > mounted throttle body that will work in the small body car will be a
> > custom part.
> >
> > Mike
> >
> > > -------- Original Message --------
> > > Subject: Re: [urq] AAN or 3B swap
> > > From: Steve Mills <s.b.mills at gmail.com>
> > > Date: Mon, February 03, 2014 8:51 am
> > > To: Martin Pajak <martin at quattro.ca>
> > > Cc: "urq at audifans.com" <urq at audifans.com>
> > >
> > >
> > > Again, I'm not saying the increased intake tract length is a huge
> > problem. However, the engineer in me hates the 3B/ABY/ADU packaging both in
> > terms of intake tract length/volume and how the compressed charge is routed
> > back over to the hot side and passed over the exhaust manifold only to be
> > rerouted around the back of the engine to the cold side. Like most designs,
> > I'm sure the tradeoffs were made for sound reasons, but my preferred
> > solution is still the SQ-style intake manifold, which eliminates both
> > issues.
> > >
> > > Doesn't mean the 3B and it's variants won't run great and transform an
> > UrQ- it's just my preference.
> > >
> > > Steve
> > >
> > > > On Feb 3, 2014, at 7:55 AM, "Martin Pajak" <martin at quattro.ca> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > For what its worth my old '85 with 3B and a huge 944 turbo intercooler
> > had
> > > > no issues building instant boost (with stock K24).
> > > > Throttle responce was excellent as well.
> > > >
> > > > HTH
> > > > Martin Pajak
> > > >
> > > > http://www.quattro.ca
> > > >
> > > > 1981 VW Scirocco, all original
> > > > 1982 Audi Ur-quattro, SQ project
> > > > 1983 Audi 80 quattro, Euro 2-Tür
> > > > 1993 Audi 90 CS quattro, 2.5 TDI with 6-speed
> > > > 1993 Audi 80 quattro Avant, 2.5 TDI with 6-speed
> > > > 1994 Audi S2 Avant, stock
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: urq-bounces at audifans.com [mailto:urq-bounces at audifans.com] On
> > Behalf
> > > > Of David Glubrecht
> > > > Sent: 3-Feb-14 00:36
> > > > To: s.b.mills at gmail.com
> > > > Cc: urq at audifans.com
> > > > Subject: Re: [urq] AAN or 3B swap
> > > >
> > > > That is what I thought the concern was, but being as how a turbo is
> > not a
> > > > positive displacement devise, I don't see how it could have much of an
> > > > effect.  I suppose it could affect where the turbo is in the
> > compressor map
> > > > while spooling up, but in practice (in an extreme case) Huge volume
> > and old
> > > > school turbo motor (MC) that is known to have significant lag, I do
> > not see
> > > > any effect.   I mean this vehicle really does have about the same post
> > > > compressor intake volume as a remote mount turbo.
> > > > Perhaps it might have a noticeable effect on a newer motor with minimal
> > > > lag.
> > > >
> > > > This is somewhat academic, as I can't/won't change this vehicle and
> > will try
> > > > to minimize the 3B UrQ anyway.
> > > > But I do want to understand the significance of this.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >  David Glubrecht
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Intake tract length is a major factor in turbo lag. The turbo has to
> > work to
> > > > compress and maintain pressure on the intake volume, and the larger it
> > is
> > > > the longer it takes. It's not the end of the world, but it's desirable
> > to
> > > > minimize it.
> > > > On Feb 2, 2014, at 4:13 PM, David Glubrecht <daveglu at hotmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Another 3B swap here.  Will definitely be doing the 3B as I have two of
> > > > those and no AAN's.
> > > > I also plan on going stand alone with the adaptronics 1280 and this
> > will run
> > > > COP.
> > > > While I feel free and able to modify mostly anything I want, intake
> > track
> > > > length is only a concern due to room constraints.
> > > > I was concerned a little on my last project about intake track length
> > > > (volume) as it is very long/large.
> > > > This is a MC running CIS with 3' cis to turbo, 2' turbo to intercooler,
> > > > large intercooler, 3.5' intercooler to intake. All plumbing is ~2.75id.
> > > > I have not seen anything with this much post airflow meter volume and
> > was
> > > > concerned, but I have not noticed any adverse effects.
> > > > What is the concern with intake volume?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >  David Glubrecht
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >> I do believe the AAN is a better engine, but the AAN can require a
> > lot of
> > > > fabrication to install. I personally would go with an ABY (late S3) or
> > ADU
> > > > (RS2) sourced from Europe, or installing an SQ style intake on the AAN
> > that
> > > > moves the throttle body to the front of the engine. This should
> > minimize the
> > > > required modifications and also minimize the length of the intake path.
> > > >
>
>
>  
> _______________________________________________
> Audifans urq mailing list
> Manage your list connection: http://www.audifans.com/mailman/listinfo/urq
> http://www.audifans.com/kb/List_information
>
> Pictures/Polls/Database at: http://autos.groups.yahoo.com/group/urquattro/
>