Any progress on V8 engine swap options?

[B6T]

Yes the tensioner is in the stock location but the belt routing is entirely different and follows what I was saying before.

Anyway, just trying to help out and prevent a headache for you in the future.

[titaniumdave]

Originally Posted by B6T

Yes the tensioner is in the stock location but the belt routing is entirely different and follows what I was saying before.

Anyway, just trying to help out and prevent a headache for you in the future.

Ah, got it. Thanks for the pic, I had gotten so excited that things fit I lost track of this point. My guess is this will work fine because I have taken almost all the load off the system, it was designed to run with the full load of AC, PS, cooling fan and the alternator. Now all I have is the alternator, I’m guessing load is a 10th of what it was so think it will work. I have spent years working on NSXs with Comptech supercharger kits, they also had the belt tensioner on the ‘wrong side’ of the belt run. The crazy thing with them was they would work fine up to 6 lb. of boost and then just gently slip and hold that boost level. I make locking tensioner for that application that replace the spring loaded tensioner and customers will see 1 lb. + in boost at high RPM.

Thanks again...forest through the trees.

[B6T]

No problem man.

I doubt it would be a problem based on what you said but you don't want to have to worry about it.

On the subject of supercharging... the guys doing this swap and removing PS and AC sure are opening up a lot of space for a centrifugal supercharger on the LH side of the engine.

Do you use CAD or Solidworks for any of your designs?

[titaniumdave]

Originally Posted by B6T

No problem man.
Do you use CAD or Solidworks for any of your designs?

I have the hard points in AutoCAD, but I’m a Luddite and have them only in 2D.

[thstone]

While a V-8 conversion isn't something that I think I'd ever do, I have enjoyed following your progress and definitely appreciate the effort that has went into this build.

Keep up the good work!

[titaniumdave]

More progress, modified the 987 trans to accept the crank position sensor for the Audi V8.

[B6T]

Originally Posted by titaniumdave

More progress, modified the 987 trans to accept the crank position sensor for the Audi V8.

Hey Dave,
That metal piece under the crank angle sensor is actually a spacer. It is used depending on whether you have an auto engine or manual engine. I can't remember which is which, but if memory serves I believe I had to remove it when I swapped an automatic 2.7t into my manual B6 A4.

Otherwise the crank sensor may not read and you'll be chasing no-start issues for weeks and probably end-up pushing the car off a cliff.

[titaniumdave]

Originally Posted by B6T

Hey Dave,
Otherwise the crank sensor may not read and you'll be chasing no-start issues for weeks and probably end-up pushing the car off a cliff.

Yes, I just stuffed the whole part in the hole for a place keeper. I do not have the clutch worked out yet, the Valeo 2.7/4.2L is close but I need a 3mm spacer behind the flywheel to get the starter ring in the correct location AND the whole set up seems to be too close to the throw out bearing even with the motor/trans spacer ring. This gets worse with the 3mm spacer so the solution may be to make the flywheel thinner by 5-8mm depending on how it all measures. An easy but time consuming job on the mill. Keeps the tone ring in the correct position as well as dropping 2-3LB. off a very heavy clutch and makes it so I can swap discs and pressure plates in future rebuilds with off the shelf parts.

Once the clutch is worked out, then the depth of the sensor will be obvious. Looks like you are correct about not needing the spacer, I agree.

[B6T]

Originally Posted by titaniumdave

Once the clutch is worked out, then the depth of the sensor will be obvious. Looks like you are correct about not needing the spacer, I agree.

So it seems to me like the 987 transmission introduces some issues that maybe haven't been foreseen? Maybe these arise from a difference between the distance from the transmission flange and the throw out bearing and/or the distance from that flange to the CL of the crank position sensor?

I thought the crank position hole was a standard location across all VAG product transmissions. If they've moved it longitudinally, this also brings up the possibility that it is in a different location radially as well. This would throw off the ignition timing, and everything else that runs off that signal... obviously. Did you notice anything like that?

The good news here is that I'm picking up a flywheel and clutch from a 2.8L 30V this weekend. This is the flywheel setup that is recommended for B5 A4 V8 swaps where guys retain the original 01A transmission (I'm using the FWD variant of that).

This setup does not need the spacer between the engine and the transmission and yet is interchangeable with the same transmissions that the B5 S4 flywheel/clutch is, when the spacer is used for the S4 stuff of course (because we know that you can use the B5 S4 stuff on the 01A if you use the spacer).

So the conclusion here is that the S4 flywheel and clutch necessitate the spacer to increase the distance between the throw out bearing and the pressure plate face. The S4 stuff is very long in other words.

I suppose in theory if you use 2.8L flywheel you will be gaining that distance that the spacer adds. If you use the spacer in combination with the 2.8L flywheel, you'll be gaining even more distance yet.

2.8 30v Clutch Questions...

I shall install said flywheel and provide you with measurements good sir!

[B6T]

Originally Posted by Escy

Yeah, that thought crossed my mind. The way I approached my first 2.7t build, I could have put a turbo V8 in there. I don't think a naturally aspirated V8 with a turbo kit would do the numbers I wanted out of the V6 (was looking for 600bhp) without the bottom end being built and the RS6 V8's are expensive.

Yeah but 600hp is really really really pushing it on even a BEL code 2.7tt which had the better block, and at that point you're well past the point where rods are the weak point.

Originally Posted by Escy

I'm building another 2.7t and plan on keeping the turbos in the standard location this time.

You could have kept the turbos in the stock location with this swap?

[titaniumdave]

Final fitting for the cradle, happy with how it goes in for the race car, I will be cutting the engine cover. Here are the heads' corners and how things are looking in the OEM compartment. Left side:

[titaniumdave]

Right side:

[titaniumdave]

Cradle and oil pan are inline with the bottom of the chassis, happy with the clearance down here too.

[titaniumdave]

Cradle is getting powder coated, I will post pics when it come back. I'm ready to take orders if anyone is serious about getting one of these. Make sure you are okay with the way the motor fits...I'm still looking for a convenient way to make the TB connect to an air filter. It will be easy with my race car, not sure how to make it work with the OEM engine compartment. Any one know if ABZ 32 valve intake will bolt on the 40 valve motor? The TB seems quite a bit lower on the ABZ motor and might clear with just tipping it down in the rear...

[78F350]

Originally Posted by titaniumdave

... I'm ready to take orders if anyone is serious about getting one of these. Make sure you are okay with the way the motor fits.....

Hi Dave, Found your post buried a page or two back. I am going to want one, but am in no hurry. Have you worked out the final install yet?

[Smallblock454]

Hi,

nice project.

Have a question: how much will be the offset of the drive shaft at the gearbox compared to the stock configuration? Or won't there be any offset?

Regards

[titaniumdave]

Maintains the OEM transmission location so no change in the axle angles.

[Escy]

That's the engine you should be fitting

[titaniumdave]

Originally Posted by Escy

That's the engine you should be fitting

It's up next...turbo packaging in stock location is bad. Wish there was a way to just pop it in and use the Audi routing for the turbo, nice and clean, just in the wrong places to clear the engine bay.

[Escy]

I'm interested to see how you go about doing the 2.7t