[urq] AAN or 3B swap

Patrick Carlier p.carlier at pandora.be
Mon Feb 24 23:09:27 PST 2014 

I'm in the process of the AAN conversion right now .

Give me another week or so and I'll have pictures of a
modified intake and a large front mounted intercooler .

If all goes well that is ..... :)

Pat



Give me another week and I'll have pictures of
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "John" <johnkarasaki at msn.com>
To: "Scott Justusson" <qshipq at aol.com>
Cc: <urq at audifans.com>
Sent: Tuesday, February 25, 2014 7:10 AM
Subject: Re: [urq] AAN or 3B swap


> 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/
>>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/
>
>

More information about the urq mailing list