VWDiesel.net The IDI, TDI, and mTDI source.
Engine Specific Info and Questions => IDI Engine => Topic started by: Jetmugg on January 05, 2012, 06:27:47 pm
-
It feels great to be here. I am working on a diesel truck project (actually an '84 Dodge Rampage) to run in the H/DT (1.5L or less Diesel Truck) class at Bonneville. I'm currently working on the chassis, but my mind is constantly racing (no pun intended) about the powerplant. This is not a high budget operation for me. Low-buck is crucial to get this program done without raising my wife's blood pressure too high.
Anyway, I need to build/buy a diesel engine displacing 1.5L or less, capable of propelling my Rampage up and over 105 mph over a 3 mile measured course on the Bonneville Salt Flats. 105 is the current record, set by a VW Rabbit pickup. My goal is to beat the existing record.
For the bottom end, I figure I will need a 1.6TD block with a 1.5L rotating assembly. I'm open for suggestions on the top half of the engine. It will be a turbocharged, intercooled setup to take full advantage of the rules.
A VW 5-speed manual trans will transfer the power to the wheels.
Some custom pump work will most likely be required, as will a bigger than stock turbo, and an oil cooler is in the plan as well.
One idea that continues to interest me is the "Franken" diesels, using the 1.6L TD bottom ends and the 1.9L IDI heads. I understand that the static compression is lowered with this setup, but that top-end power is good, and higher boost levels are usable. However, I'm still open for input as to whether a 1.5L bottom end will see any advantage to using the 1.9L IDI head. Will there be enough static compression to get the engine started? I have heard differing opinions about this combination, but so far no one has stepped up and said - "I've built a 1.5L Franken Diesel", and here's how it runs....
Please - let me hear your suggestions, keeping in mind that I don't have money to burn on a hyper-exotic set of parts.
Thank You,
Steve M.
-
Steve, welcome.
I think you need to look at that record holder a little closer. Go for the GVW of the Caddy and compare it to your Dodge. Dropping a 1.5L engine in is going to get you into the class but unless you cut weight heavy you aren't going to get top end like they did. You may very well be using the same transmission too.
-
The aerodynamics play a much bigger role than the static weight. It's not quite a 3 mile drag race, you get 2 miles to get up to speed, then you are measured over the 3rd mile. A lot of guys actually add weight to their vehicles for better traction on the salt. Both Rabbit Caddies and Rampages have a good history of LSR racing, as they are among the smallest vehicles that qualify as trucks.
-
i dont think you would need much of an engine to get above 105. i would imagine a 1.5 with a turbo diesel setup added to it would easily beat that with out even turning up the boost assuming it was geared properly
-
Very cool project. There are a lot of differences between the 1.6 and 1.5 engines, but of course the additional displacement comes from the 86.4 mm vs. 80.0 mm crank. If I were you, I'd find the best 1.6 long block (e.g. 12mm head bolts), and then toss the 80 mm crank in there. Obviously the connecting rods would also need to be replaced with longer/stronger. I'm not sure if the 1.5 rods would work, because I don't know if the piston pin height and diameter is the same between the 1.5 and 1.6 pistons.
Keeping the 1.6 head and using an 80.0 mm stroke should lower your stataic compression ratio from ~23:1 to ~21.3:1 as well. You could use hot air from a heat gun to help get the engine started for the race though, so lower compression ratios (i.e. 1.9 head) aren't out of the question either.
You probably want to scrap the TD intake manifold and use one from a gas application, like possibly from the Corrado 1.8 S/C engine. The TD intake isn't much of a breather.
Have you considered water/air intercooling with an ice box instead of a FMIC?
I've been wanting to do a Bonneville run myself, but with an Audi 5-cyl TD in a Porsche 924. One day...
-
Welcome. I posted a ton on your vortex thread and all that still applies. There is a guy here by the name saurkraut ... I may have misspelled... I will link to. He is the one on here that used to play with the 1.5 and get it to really run. ROR and fatmobile had the 1.5 as well, but I think saurkraut was the only one with a 1.9 L head or atttempting to.
As said before 1.6 hydro block, aaz head, porting and swaintech coating. If the 1.9 gives you issues you can always get a 1.6 head and swap it back. "most" people running a 1.6 with 1.9 head say if you run the correct head gasket starting isn't an issue even in cold temps. Some have had a really smokey start, but it starts right up. If you are building it all from new it should be tight and not much problems starting. IDK how cold it is when racing there, but one guy on here claims to start his down to -14F. Probably runs rough and smokes like crazy but it starts. You should be fine.
-
Good feedback all around. TheMan53- yes, thank you for your input on both forums. I know that a lot of guys are members on both forums, and now I am also.javascript:void(0);
The good news about the weather is that it is generally warm to hot at Bonneville during Speed Week and World of Speed. One is in August, one in early October (I forget which is which at this time).
Right now, I don't have any of the engine parts. I want to learn as much as I can while keeping my eyes open for "good deals" on complete engines or key components.
Rabbid- I have investigated the compatibility of bottom end parts. As far as I know, there are no off-the-shelf rods that will allow using the 1.6 pistons with a 1.5 crank. The pin height is different. Custom rods are probably not in the budget, either. That means using the 1.5 crank, rods, and pistons as an assembly and living with the lower compression.
I definitely plan to run water/air intercooling, and possibly water/oil cooler as well. The plan is to have a tank of icewater in the bed of the truck to pump and circulate for cooling the air charge and possibly the oil.
I've been "into" Mercedes diesels for several years. At one point, I wanted to run a 190-series Mercedes using a 3.0L Mercedes turbodiesel at Bonneville. The main issue is that there is no separate category for diesel powered automobiles. (there is for diesel trucks). That means that with a 5-cyl Audi TD in a Porsche 924 (let's say 3.0L for arguments sake), that you would have to compete against blown gas sports coupes (turbo or supercharged 3.0L gasoline engines), or even worse, blown fuel sports cars (super or turbocharged 3.0L methanol engines), some of which can make a lot more power for less money than a diesel. Check the current record for F/Blown Gas Modified Sports Car (F engines are 3.0L or less). The record is held by Kahler's Porsche Service at just over 220 mph. VERY FAST for 3.0L or under. Where the existing record is over 200, the rules requirements mean a much more expensive build as well.
The diesel truck records (especially with the smaller engines) appear to be much more in-reach with respect to technology and dollars.
Back to the Franken-possibilities - is it a requirement to use a hydraulic block and head when building a "Franken", or does it make the job somehow easier?
Thanks again,
Steve.
-
I've been reading through the Saurkraut posts about the 1.5 TD / 1.9 head setup. Some promising information that I found very interesting was related to the rod and piston compatibility.
I haven't gotten to the bottom of it yet, but it looked like he was going to use a 1.5 crank with 1.9 rods, and 1.6TD pistons that would need to be "shortened" on the top side about 0.062". If that works, it will definitely open up more possibilities. I need to dig a little deeper into the Saurkraut archives to see if he got that combination to work.
Steve.
-
1,5 crank has smaller rod journals, you can't use 1,9 rods.
-
Thank You, MJF. Has this difference in dimensions been confirmed? I never saw enough follow-up posts on Saurkraut's engine plan to know if the 1.9 rods would work or not.
It seems I have seen conflicting information about the rod journal sizes. Some have said that the 1.5, 1.6, and 1.9 crankshafts all use 50.6 mm rod journals. I don't have a good way to verify in either case.
Thanks again,
Steve.
-
I have these dimensions. (http://www.kotinet.com/matti.farm/img01.jpg) It's in finnish, but I believe you guys understand numbers :) Con rod dimensions are underlined. To be exact, 1,6 etc rod journal is 47,75mm and rod big end is 50,6mm. Main bearings are same size.
-
You can use a 1.6 mechanical engine but then the problem of sealing the head gasket if you run a 1.9 head or metal head gasket needs plugged. If you don't have the block then I would buy the one that is easiest to work with. 53 willy's bought a custom gasket to work on the mech head that was plugged already. Personally I like the way the mech head runs over a hydro head.
I think you could have some custom bearings made to make the 1.9 rods work if I understand it correctly. If the 1.9 has a bigger con rod then you could get a bearing made to take up the difference possibly??? Just thowing it out there.
-
I'm still learning (a lot). What years were the hydraulic 1.6 TD's available in the USA?
-
Well... It should be starting in 85, BUT some were and weren't in 85 and 86. IIRC CRSMP5 has said that 87 and up were for sure hydro, but that is only with the original engine. If someone swapped it in the last 20 years it could be different. The usual way to tell is there are 2 returns on the front of the block and head if it is hydro. 1 if it is not. I have NEVER seen or heard of a hydro that didn't have 12mm head bolts, so all hydro should have 12mm head bolts. NOT all 12mm head bolts were hydro though. Kinda like the all squares are rectangles, but not all rectangles are squares deal.
Pic of said humps on head
(http://www.poscarclub.com/vw_stuff/MechVSHydra%20Head.jpg)
I forgot but the FAQ is about 10 pages of FAQ's that might help, but there is a bunch of info in them. It is good bored reading if you have nothing better to do. I got the pic from this thread over there and it has pics of the blocks in it too.
http://www.vwdiesel.net/forum/index.php?topic=16688.0
-
:D
was hoping i would see you over on this board here soon!
great project!! been following it on vortex for a bit now..
-
It's good to be here. I learned some valuable information today about 1.5L Diesel rod journals, and how to identify a 1.6 hydraulic lifter engine, among other things.
If anyone is interested, here is my build thread on landracing.com, which is the main hangout for Land Speed Racing stuff.
http://www.landracing.com/forum/index.php/topic,10625.0.html
I'm as busy as I can afford to be working on the chassis right now, but that doesn't stop my mind from constantly thinking about the drivetrain setup.
Right now, my fantasy is a water-to-air intercooled turbo setup, using a 1.5 rotating assembly in a 1.6 TD block, a 1.9 hyro head, and a custom injection pump. Daily driveability is not a concern. The ability to move around under it's own power will be needed, but the real need is for enough reliable power to put this thing in the record books.
I need to get the drivetrain right. I don't want to spend thousands of dollars, only to get on the race course and come up 1 or 2 mph short of a record.
Steve.
-
It's good to be here. I learned some valuable information today about 1.5L Diesel rod journals, and how to identify a 1.6 hydraulic lifter engine, among other things.
If anyone is interested, here is my build thread on landracing.com, which is the main hangout for Land Speed Racing stuff.
http://www.landracing.com/forum/index.php/topic,10625.0.html
I'm as busy as I can afford to be working on the chassis right now, but that doesn't stop my mind from constantly thinking about the drivetrain setup.
Right now, my fantasy is a water-to-air intercooled turbo setup, using a 1.5 rotating assembly in a 1.6 TD block, a 1.9 hyro head, and a custom injection pump. Daily driveability is not a concern. The ability to move around under it's own power will be needed, but the real need is for enough reliable power to put this thing in the record books.
I need to get the drivetrain right. I don't want to spend thousands of dollars, only to get on the race course and come up 1 or 2 mph short of a record.
Steve.
i would just use a 1.6 head..
you will probably never get it to run with 1.5 displacement under a 1.9 head..
talk to Theman53.. he had an AMAZING port job done to his 1.6 head..
-
I think it would run I dunno if it would e an advantage or not to have such low compression. Probably is tho but he's only trying to break a 105mph record I went much faster with just increased boost and fueling. Huge improvements can be made on a 1.6 head for sure tho
-
I think it would run I dunno if it would e an advantage or not to have such low compression. Probably is tho but he's only trying to break a 105mph record I went much faster with just increased boost and fueling. Huge improvements can be made on a 1.6 head for sure tho
i bet i could take my jetta down there as it sits and break a 105mph average speed..
-
The way it goes is you have run it for at least 3 miles. They only measure 1 mile, but you have to do 3 IIRC. It isn't a I hit this number for a split second, I think they do the mile that they measure and take the speed of that run. 105 could be done easily for a couple seconds. I have had my 1.6 over that *closed course...cough cough* won't say how far but I was over 105 in the jetta. I wouldn't want to hold it for 3 miles though.
It will not be daily driven, so starting and drivability aren't really important. I don't know the numbers for sure, but I have seen it stated that the optimum CR for diesels is around 17:1 give or take .5. They claim below that there is fuel burn issues regaurding performance and above you have losses as the engine is fighting the compression to make power. It makes sense, BUT I don't have that as factual info, just reasoning from what I have heard.
-
The way it goes is you have run it for at least 3 miles. They only measure 1 mile, but you have to do 3 IIRC. It isn't a I hit this number for a split second, I think they do the mile that they measure and take the speed of that run. 105 could be done easily for a couple seconds. I have had my 1.6 over that *closed course...cough cough* won't say how far but I was over 105 in the jetta. I wouldn't want to hold it for 3 miles though.
It will not be daily driven, so starting and drivability aren't really important. I don't know the numbers for sure, but I have seen it stated that the optimum CR for diesels is around 17:1 give or take .5. They claim below that there is fuel burn issues regaurding performance and above you have losses as the engine is fighting the compression to make power. It makes sense, BUT I don't have that as factual info, just reasoning from what I have heard.
thats only for direct injected engines tho..
indirect injection takes inherently higher compression to start and run good.
thats why VW engines always start nice and run good, from the high compression.
look at all the old isuzu and nissan engines that were lower compression IDI engines.. they took glow plugs to start them after they were up to temp!!
-
[/quote]
i bet i could take my jetta down there as it sits and break a 105mph average speed..
[/quote]
For cars, there is no special diesel class. You have to run against the gas records. If you have a turbo, then you have to run against records set by turbo or supercharged gassers. Your Jetta with a 1.6L turbodiesel would have to run against blown gas Grand Touring cars in the F engine category (1.5-3L). The existing record in that category is 224 mph. The rules get a lot more complex and demanding for any class where the existing record is over 200.
The 105 record only applies to diesel trucks with engine displacement under 1.5L. Engine swaps are allowed, which is why I want to run a VW diesel in my Rampage.
Part of the "fun" of land speed racing is finding a class where you think you might be able to beat an existing record.
Steve.
-
I don't know the numbers for sure, but I have seen it stated that the optimum CR for diesels is around 17:1 give or take .5. They claim below that there is fuel burn issues regaurding performance and above you have losses as the engine is fighting the compression to make power. It makes sense, BUT I don't have that as factual info, just reasoning from what I have heard.
If my math is accurate, a 1.9 head on a 1.5 bottom end works out to about a 17.7:1 compression ratio. If memory serves, losing the glow plug drops it about another full point. I'll bet you could get that baby to fire with enough hot air (e.g. heat gun(s) directed into the intake manifold).
If you do end up going with such a low compression ratio, you'd want to push/pull it all the way to the starting line before starting it to keep the black smoke to a minimum. I think there's a couple of really low compression ratio diesels on YouTube. They smoke like hell until the boost comes on and then they're clean as a whistle.
It's too bad there isn't a diesel car class. The reason I want to run a less than 2.0 TD in a 924 is in case the 1.9/2.0 TDI guys get on the band wagon and start to race their cars. I don't want to be over 2.0 incase that eventualy happens, and they eventually have a less than 2 liter diesel class. At this point if I were to do it, it would be about breaking personal records.
I think the diesel car class is coming though. For the world's car manufacturers, diesel fuel economy is low hanging fruit, and we'll see many more of them in the US soon.
-
Well... It should be starting in 85, BUT some were and weren't in 85 and 86. IIRC CRSMP5 has said that 87 and up were for sure hydro, but that is only with the original engine. If someone swapped it in the last 20 years it could be different. The usual way to tell is there are 2 returns on the front of the block and head if it is hydro. 1 if it is not. I have NEVER seen or heard of a hydro that didn't have 12mm head bolts, so all hydro should have 12mm head bolts. NOT all 12mm head bolts were hydro though. Kinda like the all squares are rectangles, but not all rectangles are squares deal.
Pic of said humps on head
(http://www.poscarclub.com/vw_stuff/MechVSHydra%20Head.jpg)
I forgot but the FAQ is about 10 pages of FAQ's that might help, but there is a bunch of info in them. It is good bored reading if you have nothing better to do. I got the pic from this thread over there and it has pics of the blocks in it too.
http://www.vwdiesel.net/forum/index.php?topic=16688.0
Just for clarification purposes, many of the newer aftermarket mechanical heads have two humps of which only one is a drain. They appear outwardly to be hydraulic.
To all of you who think I could take my caddy down there and drive faster than 105mph the thing you must understand is that this is not a road course, not tarmac but rather a salt flat, it's like driving in firm sand. It's not easy to do and there's not much traction. I had a friend who was researching building a motorcycle/sidecar to race and came to understand a lot of the rules. It's an interesting endeavor, Good Luck! And keep us updated on the build.
-
does it have to be 1.5L?
Benz makes a 800cc inline 3 Common rail motor used in the smart car
-
does it have to be 1.5L?
Benz makes a 800cc inline 3 Common rail motor used in the smart car
Mucho pesos senor. (figured you'd know some espanol being in AZ. lol)
-
17:1 compression in an IDI is going to be almost impossible to start.. i guarantee it.
-
I really don't think so, especially in warm climate. My uncle has a perkins I think in a tractor that he rebuilt and said the spec was around 16:1 and it is an IDI, starts slow but starts fine. New rings, starter, block heater if needed even when warm out, and all fresh it should be fine. Guys on here have engines that started with under 250psi compression. I am sure there is some formula to figure out compression numbers to a corrisponding compression ratio. Heck that mark the miser guy had an engine that had .100" + ring gaps and he said it still started and ran fine. 17:1 lights diesel in a TDI, it should light it in an IDI, just might smoke some for a bit.
The good thing is that if he tries it and fails we will know and I won't have any money in it, lol. But seriously if he tries it and it doesn't work he could then trade his aaz to someone that wants one and has a 1.6. Probably even make some on it as many want the aaz for the performance on a 1.6.
Bigger question is will the performance really be there in the 1.9 aaz head over the 1.6? He should probably do both to compare it.
-
Cr on a Franken engine is 19:1 and they start fine just smoke lots when cold. Built tdis go really low on compression. I think something like 14.5-15:1 is the ideal compression ratio for gas and diesel regarding compression loss but I'm not sure there. That doesn't mean its the best starting compression ratio
-
Cr on a Franken engine is 19:1 and they start fine just smoke lots when cold. Built tdis go really low on compression. I think something like 14.5-15:1 is the ideal compression ratio for gas and diesel regarding compression loss but I'm not sure there. That doesn't mean its the best starting compression ratio
direct injection and indirect injection are not even comparable..
direct injection will run efficiently with low compression..
indirect injection DOES NOT LIKE LOW COMPRESSION!!
IDI engines ALWAYS have more compression than direct injected engines..
ideal compression for a TDI IS NOT THE SAME AS AN IDI!!!
for real!
-
I checked into the diesel truck records class and they are capable of being beat. But____if you want to break a record, the vehicle has to meet all the safety regulations for doing so. Meaning full cage, fire suppression, seat and seat belts. I'm sure the list goes on. But if you want to run what you brung, then thats completely different. They have speed clubs. Just do that.
I would most defiantly want to break a record before it gets to high and before all you guys go and set new ones.
Go for it, and good luck.
-
I'm not the best for what engine parts fit what, but I'm good at playing with numbers :P
Just out of curiosity, I threw some numbers together to see what kind of power you'll need. Rolling resistance I googled and found on landracing.com forums. I guessed that was just tire to salt resistance, so I added the same for bearing/drivetrain friction.. not sure if that's accurate but it's a small amount of power anyway. CdA is sorta estimated off of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automobile_drag_coefficient , right around volvo 740 wagon. Thinking about it now, weight might be on the low side? But, an extra 500lbs is less than 3hp once it's rolling.
(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7169/6657819897_0819eb13ce_b.jpg)
Basically, 130mph should be 140-150hp at the wheels. Certainly attainable from a sky-high boosted franken engine! I can send you that spreadsheet if you want as well and modify anything you think is off
-
you also have the 1.4d vw polo engine,dont know if anyone have messed with it and his hp capability ???
-
I don't know what is ideal as I stated earlier, only speculating. I did read that VW made our engines 23:1 or 23.5:1 not for performance but cold starts only. I would think no matter what engine, gas, TDI, IDI, there would be losses for compression. I just need to see a spec of what it is to believe it. I would think that 23:1 would not be the best for an IDI engine, but there should be a formula to find out what is the optimum. I would think it would have to be somewhere in the range of 17:1 and 23:1.
-
Exciting stuff for sure. I have to hurry off to my daughter's basketball game right now, but will check back later. I would love to have a copy of that spreadsheet. The current G class (2.0L) record is about 130 mph. That might be "stage 2" for me, most likely with VW 1.9L Diesel power. Right now, my focus is on the 105 mph record in the H class (1.5L) diesel category.
The VW Polo engine has been suggested (1.4L), but unfortunately we never got that engine in the USA, and importing from Europe looks prohibitively expensive.
Steve.
-
I realize the difference I don't think a lowered cr of 17:1 would be so bad tho performance pistons for gm idis are 18:1 and on a car that's used only for land speed records I don't see how it hurts going a bit lower
-
I saw a gas engine with no spark start on ether once! ;)
I would remove the glow plugs for sure as that lowers compression where you want to, but if you have too much space between the head and piston, you won't burn the fuel as well with the air, particularly as you get further away from the precup opening. 17 or 18:1 shouldn't be too stupid low though!
I revised a copy of that spreadsheet and sent it out to Jetmugg, included fixing an error in my calculations. Mostly adding temperature and altitude compensation and road grade to that. If anyone else wants a copy, PM me your email and I'll send it out! Lower the rolling resistance and change to your local altitude and it'll give a good guesstimate of power to hold a certain speed.
(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7145/6663318155_9352be5a0f_b.jpg)
-
That spreadsheet is a great resource!!! Plugging in the estimates for rolling resistance, aero drag, static weight, etc. gets pretty close to the power that I had "noodled" that I would need. The existing record is 105 mph. I would like to raise it to 110 (at least on paper). The spreadsheet says that 115 hp will be required to get there. I was thinking that I would need somewhere in the range of 125-150 hp to make it happen.
I want to give the "Franken" setup a try, if I can collect all the right pieces. 1.6 Hydraulic blocks don't exactly grow on trees around here. As long as I can find the right combination of block, head, crank, rods, and pistons, my intent is to build a 1.5 crank, rods, and pistons in a 1.6 TD hydraulic block with a 1.9 AAZ head, water-to-air intercooler, unknown (Mercedes?) turbo, gasser intake, and a water-to-oil cooler. A modified injection pump will be needed (Giles?). With that setup, I hope that I could build a minimum of 115 HP. I would plan to keep the glow plugs in place. I'm hoping that with a strong battery, fresh starter, and the correct IP timing, I will be able to build an engine that will start in reasonable temperatures (above 40F or so).
I know some local VW racers who have a chassis dyno connection. I think that's the place to do the testing.
Exciting stuff, even if I don't have any of the parts yet.
Steve.
-
Maybe someone out there could "sponsor" you and send you a block. Around this forum there seem to be guys selling some blocks from time to time. I just found out that if you build a crate, not pallet, you can send it regular fedex. Maybe even someone wanting to help overseas could donate you that TDI 1.4 block. You maybe able to put out some feelers.
If you do go to a 1.5/aaz combo and I am not using my aaz head I would let you use it to see if it works or not. Then you could either keep it and buy me another or send it back. All I would want is to not have any cost in shipping and make sure I get a head back.
-
TheMan:
That is a very generous offer, and one which I appreciate very much. That is a very attractive option. I would certainly be interested in partnering up with anyone who might be interested in such an effort, and particularly someone who might want to run their engine setup.
The idea has crossed my mind several times to seek out a partner/sponsor, particularly with respect to an engine program for this assault on the the existing diesel truck records.
Just FYI, the existing records are as follows:
H / Diesel Truck (1.016 - 1.523 Liters) = 105 mph
G / Diesel Truck (1.524 - 2.015 Liters) = 129 mph
F / Diesel Truck (2.016 - 3.014 Liters) = 131 mph
E / Diesel Truck (3.015 - 4.267 Liters) = 141 mph
Above that, the engine size starts to get pretty big for a vehicle the size of a Rampage.
I intend to build my roll cage, fire system, etc. to be legal up to 175 mph, although I doubt that I will ever see that kind of speed.
Steve.
-
I would think that the 1.5 to 2.0 liter record would be very easily broken by borrowing a TDI and having Malone tune the snot out of it.
-
Yes, the G class record would be next on my list, most likely with TDI power. In fact, that record may be "softer" than the H class record at 105 mph for 1.5 Liters, but I figure it's better to start at the bottom and work my way up.
In fact, the current H class record holder attempted to set both the H and G class records in 1 meet, but he couldn't get the engines swapped in time to go after the G record.
Steve.
-
Here's the link to vw's official 1.5l white paper.
http://home.comcast.net/~jakeru/15dsae.pdf
It mentions that a compression ratio of 16-1 to 18-1 is ideal for best power and fuel consumption even for an idi engine but starting and idling becomes a problem. Lots of good info.
-
Here's the link to vw's official 1.5l white paper.
http://home.comcast.net/~jakeru/15dsae.pdf
It mentions that a compression ratio of 16-1 to 18-1 is ideal for best power and fuel consumption even for an idi engine but starting and idling becomes a problem. Lots of good info.
sounds like some glow plug blanks, and a shot of ether is just what the 1.5/6/9 engine needs for a cold start.. ;D
maybe it will lope at idle with such low compression..
-
I'm curious about the glow plug deletion. This is something new to me. I realize that removing the GP's would reduce compression a bit, but would it really be worthwhile to remove the GP's and just fill the holes with some plugs?
It seems to me that leaving the GP's in, for easier starting, would outweigh any potential performance benefit to be had by lowering the compression ratio even further.
Like I said, this is all new to me, so please feel free to set me straight.
Steve.
-
I'm curious about the glow plug deletion. This is something new to me. I realize that removing the GP's would reduce compression a bit, but would it really be worthwhile to remove the GP's and just fill the holes with some plugs?
It seems to me that leaving the GP's in, for easier starting, would outweigh any potential performance benefit to be had by lowering the compression ratio even further.
Like I said, this is all new to me, so please feel free to set me straight.
Steve.
if you delete the plugs, you wont blow a plug apart from having to use ether to start it..
the big tractor puller diesels use LOTS to start their engines, and keep them running long enough to sustain life..
i imagine it will be such low compression that ether will be required..
-
Umm, I don't see the reason of lowering compression? And removing glow plugs? That sounds just stupid with idis. Stock compression ratio is more than ok with your power goals. You can have engine that behaves and starts like stock engine and will make 150hp.
-
Umm, I don't see the reason of lowering compression? And removing glow plugs? That sounds just stupid with idis. Stock compression ratio is more than ok with your power goals. You can have engine that behaves and starts like stock engine and will make 150hp.
thats what i tried telling him! stock compression is fine up to like 200hp, or more..
all lower compression is going to do, is make it harder for you to reach your goal.. you will need more boost to make the same power.
only reason i suggested removing the glowplugs is because its going to be such low compression that it will basically require ether to start, and ether blows the tips off glow plugs.. so if i cant talk him out of lowering the compression, then im going to suggest what he can do to do it safely..
my engine is a STOCK 1.6D long block, and i bet im pretty close to the 150hp mark. i know i will be 150hp once i install my 10mm pump ;D
-
I think once again you are traveling into a trail and error. If you could have a shop machine you something that looked like a glowplug only was one solid chunk of steel, then you wouldn't loose any compression ratio. I agree that lowering it further would be a bad deal probably. It would be easier to leave the glowplugs in there and run them from a seliniod a la vince waldon style. You can run them on a push button toggle while cranking or not for as long as you need.
After having a precup fall into my IDI I really wouldn't do ether, even without a functioning glow plug and lower compression.
-
Here's the link to vw's official 1.5l white paper.
http://home.comcast.net/~jakeru/15dsae.pdf
It mentions that a compression ratio of 16-1 to 18-1 is ideal for best power and fuel consumption even for an idi engine but starting and idling becomes a problem. Lots of good info.
I don't think he is lowering the CR for performance. I think he is only lowering it as that is what the aaz head will do to it. Also, if he will be at 19:1 as someone stated then he is above the numbers listed so he maybe ok. It might start a touch hard and smoke some at idle, but it will start and run well hopefully.
-
Exactly as TheMan stated. The reduction in CR would be only as a result of using the better-flowing AAZ head on the 1.6 block, along with the 1.5 rotating assembly. The lower CR is not intentional, it's a side effect of the necessary combination of parts. There is no readily available combination of rods and pistons that would maintain the 23.5:1 compression ratio for a 1.5L rotating assembly when combined with the 1.9L AAZ head.
Around-town driveability is not a concern.
If I build it and it will start with the use of GP's, then there would be no need to delete them. (this is the trial and error area - as far as I can tell, there are no 1.5L "Franken" diesels with the 1.9L heads running around currently.
A nice big juicy turbo will have to be part of the recipe, along with a properly sized intercooler.
In order to race in the class that I want to race in, the engine must be a nominal 1.5L or less.
Part of the allure of LSR racing is also the kooky engine combinations that are used....
Steve.
-
Exactly as TheMan stated. The reduction in CR would be only as a result of using the better-flowing AAZ head on the 1.6 block, along with the 1.5 rotating assembly. The lower CR is not intentional, it's a side effect of the necessary combination of parts. There is no readily available combination of rods and pistons that would maintain the 23.5:1 compression ratio for a 1.5L rotating assembly when combined with the 1.9L AAZ head.
Around-town driveability is not a concern.
If I build it and it will start with the use of GP's, then there would be no need to delete them. (this is the trial and error area - as far as I can tell, there are no 1.5L "Franken" diesels with the 1.9L heads running around currently.
A nice big juicy turbo will have to be part of the recipe, along with a properly sized intercooler.
In order to race in the class that I want to race in, the engine must be a nominal 1.5L or less.
Part of the allure of LSR racing is also the kooky engine combinations that are used....
Steve.
i would use the 1.6 head still.. its going to be an all around better engine.
quite a few of us have debated the 1.5/6/9 hybrid, and we scrapped the idea because sauerkraut built one, and it sucked..
-
I've been searching the archives for any info on Saurkraut's 1.5/1.6/1.9 engine. I have found several threads where he was trying to figure out the right combination of parts (1.9 rods, etc), but I haven't been able to find a thread or post where the 1.5/1.6/1.9 engine has actually been assembled.
If you can point me to a thread where someone has this engine setup built and running, that would be great.
What kind of problems was Saurkraut (I assume he doesn't post here anymore) having? Hard starts? Smoky low-rpm operation?
I just can't find any documentation to show that Saurkraut successfully had a 1.5/1.6/1.9 engine built and running. I'd like to read more about it, but can't find it using the search function. Maybe I just haven't found it yet.
Steve.
-
The lower CR is not intentional, it's a side effect of the necessary combination of parts. There is no readily available combination of rods and pistons that would maintain the 23.5:1 compression ratio for a 1.5L rotating assembly when combined with the 1.9L AAZ head.
Actually, there's no combination of custom parts that would give you a 23.5:1 compression ratio with an AAZ head and a 1.5L bottom end. The swirl chamber volume in the AAZ head was matched to the 1.9 liters of displacement of the engine AAZ to give it the 23:1 ratio it has. Since your displacement will be a lot less, so will your compression ratio.
I, for one, am an advocate of running the lowest realistic compression ratio possible that will still get the engine to fire and idle. That 23.5:1 compression ratio is your friend when you're trying to crank an engine in the cold. But once the engine is warmed up, and after you add 20-30 lbs of boost, that compression ratio isn't going to do anything good to your engine.
If you can do it without glow plugs, I'd scrap them. In a high horsepower/high endurance engine, they're just a liability. I've been to the races at Bonneville, and it's plenty warm - like 90's. With a good starter, a good battery, possibly a block heater beforehand, and the ingenstion of some hot air, I'll bet it would start just fine. In fact, I'll supply you a portable generator to use to run a block heater and hot air gun if that's the way you decide to go. I'm in Utah and can help if you need some help.
-
How is the 1.016 - 1.523 Liters measured? Is it only the swept volume? It would be a shame if the larger head bumper you into the G class and you only got a speed of 120 MPH
-
How is the 1.016 - 1.523 Liters measured? Is it only the swept volume? It would be a shame if the larger head bumper you into the G class and you only got a speed of 120 MPH
larger head adds displacement doesnt it? i never really thought about it before..
-
How is the 1.016 - 1.523 Liters measured? Is it only the swept volume? It would be a shame if the larger head bumper you into the G class and you only got a speed of 120 MPH
larger head adds displacement doesnt it? i never really thought about it before..
NO! Displacement is the swept volume of the pistons.
-
The word is "displacement". as in something (a volume of air inside the cylinder) is being displaced with a slug of aluminum. Head volume won't be entering into the displacement equation as long as you're still running 1.5L crank & pistons, since the minor increase in "combustion chamber" volume won't be displaced by any piston parts (hopefully). Still 1471cc + still class legal.
J.R.
SoCal
-
I don't know what you guys (MJF/ROR) have against lowering compression? It's simple math that you can make more power on lower compression before having any mechanical failure (head gasket/breaking rods/breaking head studs etc). He doesn't need to cold start it every morning, I don't see how 18:1 would be such a problem?
Everything I've read says that diesels are more mechanically efficient as you get towards 16:1, but lets ignore that for a second... if you can make 150whp at 30psi and 23:1, drop to 18:1 and you can do 40psi and make gobs more power. 1.6 head and no glow plugs will probably bring you to around 18:1
I'm not saying it's required for 150whp, by why not drop it and make 180whp?
-
I don't know what you guys (MJF/ROR) have against lowering compression? It's simple math that you can make more power on lower compression before having any mechanical failure (head gasket/breaking rods/breaking head studs etc).
I like engines that work right, smoky hard starting one is not like that. 150whp (or 180whp) doesn't need lowering compression ratio.
-
Call me stupid, but what is the difference in peak cylinder pressure, from an engine that has a standard compression ratio of say 22:1, and developing say 150BHP, and a sister engine that has it's compression ratio lowered to say 19:1, and also developing 150BHP ???
I cannot picture why the same power output doesn't require the same force pushing the piston down, or at least average force...
The same force being the result of the same overall psi in the cylinder, isn't it ;D
-
Great discussion guys... As far as the absolute HP numbers needed to set a new record in this class - I think that 150 HP (from a 1.5L engine) would be on the high side of what's needed. In fact, I would feel very good if I could see numbers between 125-150 HP at the wheels, spinning the engine somewhere in the 5,000 rpm neighborhood. This will be tested by running on a chassis dyno.
Some people seem to think that it should be very easy to make this kind of power from a 1.5L VW diesel. I'm not so confident, that's why I am interested in taking every advantage in building an engine, while trying to keep the cost down. Keeping the cost down, to me, means using as many factory VW parts as possible. Custom pistons, custom rods, custom cranks, etc. are all cost prohibitive. A creative combination of factory parts is within the budget, as long as I can source the parts.
There is no doubt that the 1.9 head will flow better than the 1.5 or 1.6 heads. I can run any turbo that I want, which should help with the EGT's and the ability to push a lot of air through the head at elevated rpms. Low RPM drive-ability is not a concern. The ability to get the engine started is important, however.
The way this effort will work is that the engine will be started, warmed up (even if it's very smoky), brought to the start line, then when the official starter waves me onto the course, the engine will basically be run at WOT for 2-3 minutes straight. If all goes well, and the vehicle runs more than 105 mph through a measured mile, the vehicle will be impounded overnight, and another attempt will be made to "back up" the record on the next day.
There will be an insulated tank (basically a cooler) in the bed of the truck, full of icewater, which will circulate through the intercooler, and possibly through a water-to-oil cooler as well. The icewater tank can be re-filled for the "back up" attempt on the second day.
I'd like to raise the record to something over 110 mph, just to have a little cushion. Depending on the final selection of tire size and transmission ratios, the rpm's that the engine will have to turn through the measured mile will be somewhere between 4600 and 5600 rpm. 5600 scares me, and I don't think 4600 will be enough to make peak HP. I'll be aiming for a combination that will peak more in the 5,000 rpm range.
-
Use the ARP hardware for the connecting rods and all other fasteners you can and with the lowered compression ratio I do not think it would be an issue to turn it at 5500rpm for only one mile. If you are going over 100mph then it is less than 40 seconds. That isn't that long. Please again, do not use the same water/ice for the oil cooler as the intake cooler. The rpm limit is more about the pump and you can talk to Giles about that one. These are basically the same bottom ends that VW has put in the high reving gassers that see well over 6,000 all the time.
Like I said if I don't have my engine built you could borrow the aaz head I have. If it doesn't work go buy a 1.6 head and send it to air cooled engines plus in tiffin ohio. My 1.6 head flowed way more and had less tumble than a 1.9 head that he didn't do the port job on. I didn't even have the race port done, it was daily driver port job. He said there was more to be had. He also gives you a flow bench report on your head. I had 600.00 in the entire job rebuilding, porting and shipping.
-
TheMan - I'm not trying to be difficult, just want to understand the reasoning behind not using the same cooling water for the intake air as for the oil cooler. I don't have a good feel for what the water temp would be after the intercooler, but I "feel" like it should still have plenty of cooling capacity to cool the oil as well.
I have a friend who is into VW drag racing. He uses a cooler full of icewater and a livewell/bilge pump to circulate the cold water through his intercooler and back to the cooler. This is on a gasoline powered 2.0L VW that makes BIG power (running in the 10's across the 1/4 mile) He says that a cooler full of icewater will last him an entire afternoon or evening of drag racing. Of course, he runs his engine for much shorter periods of time.
Obviously, I have a lot of homework to do on this setup, I'm just trying to learn as much as possible at this stage.
Again, I really appreciate the offer to possibly use your 1.9 head when the time comes. I would certainly be willing to take you up on that offer. Your cylinder head guy sounds like he knows what he's doing, as well.
Right now, my first priority is to get the chassis, roll cage, and suspension worked out on the car before I will need an engine, but I will keep thinking about the engine package and looking for a good deal on the parts that I'll eventually need.
-
I don't know #s but if you just put intake air into the ice water that is all it will heat that ice water. Oil temps will be between 210 and 260 F depending on how hard you are running, that will heat that mixture more than the intake air alone. You will want the coolest intake air and oil to be as cool as possible but over 180F. If it was a street strip car then yes I wouldn't hesitate sharing the icewater, but this is all out speed and you are looking for the most cushion so I wouldn't cut corners on that. The more cool air you have the more fuel you can put to it and therefore the more power. It maybe only 3-4 HP, maybe only 1 HP, but in your goal I would take every possible HP I could, especially if it is easy like this one.
John at Air Cooled Engines Plus is a genious. He started in the porche/vw air cooled stuff and is a nut, but does everything now. He has a great formual to make the heads flow. He maybe one to hit up for help and you could say he helped in the LSR if you get it.
-
I don't know what you guys (MJF/ROR) have against lowering compression? It's simple math that you can make more power on lower compression before having any mechanical failure (head gasket/breaking rods/breaking head studs etc).
I like engines that work right, smoky hard starting one is not like that. 150whp (or 180whp) doesn't need lowering compression ratio.
x2..
he hit the nail on the head!
im going to be up around 200hp here soon, with a STOCK N/A long block! (and compounds of course)
-
I wish I would have known about when I did my head I spent hours porting it and almost 400 for a rebuild
-
Great Thread.
Steve, could you fill in your location so we all know where this cool project is happening.
-
I updated my location to Festus, Missouri, USA. There are a couple of sub-discussions starting here, so some of the responses will get a little confusing. I will try to keep my responses limited to the discussion of a 1.5L "Franken" IDI engine.
The 1.5L crankshaft has smaller rod journals than the 1.6 or 1.9L IDI engines. At one time, Saurkraut had proposed using 1.9L rods with cut-down 1.6L pistons in combination with a 1.5L crank. The larger rod journal size of the 1.9 prohibits this from working without custom bearings, or some other custom parts.
The piston-pin to piston top surface dimension is greater on a 1.5L piston when compared to a 1.6 L piston. That's where the difference in stroke is made up.
I'm definitely still learning while keeping my eyes open for good deals on parts of the puzzle.
Steve.
-
Jesse Winders has the 1.5 diesel record for the truck class and diesel streamliner class, as well as a couple others. The 1.5 truck record is 3 years old, it's not as easy as it appears on paper.
-
Yep, Jesse Winders is the current recordholder in H/DT and some other categories. The Winders team is certainly sucessful and knowledgeable about what it takes to run at Bonneville. If I'm not mistaken, Mike Manghelli held the H/DT record before Jesse, right at 100 mph, also in a Rabbit pickup. I believe that Jesse intended to set a new record in the G/DT class, but didn't quite get the engine swap completed in time, based on photos and descriptions I have seen. If he goes out with the intention of setting a new G/DT record, I would not bet against the Winders team.
UnderPSI - I see your location in Utah, are you associated with the Winders team at all?
I fully appreciate that breaking the record will not be easy. That's why I want to explore every option for building 1.5L diesel power that will work at Bonneville.
SteveM.
-
Old man Winders is a good friend of mine, a very nice guy.
-
Do not lower compression,trust me..
If i built some think like this,maybe i use 1.4 na or 1.3 na base engine.Both engine has several benefit against 1.6 or 1.9
-
Do not lower compression,trust me..
If i built some think like this,maybe i use 1.4 na or 1.3 na base engine.Both engine has several benefit against 1.6 or 1.9
Unfortunately the only IDI engines we got in the USA were the 1.5 and 1.6, they have a lot of 1.9 in Canada and a lot more turbo diesels. I think with the limits the OP has on funds for this project importing an engine is not going to be an option, otherwise he'd probably be looking at the 1.2TDI or cobbling something together with the different European TDI engines.
-
Do not lower compression,trust me..
If i built some think like this,maybe i use 1.4 na or 1.3 na base engine.Both engine has several benefit against 1.6 or 1.9
i wouldnt lower the compression, if the diesel god is advising against it..
we've all been saying not to the whole time, and now that Aki suggests the same, i would NOT even touch compression.
-
FYI, some where north of 28psi on a 1.5, head studs pull out of the block.
-
FYI, some where north of 28psi on a 1.5, head studs pull out of the block.
i ran ~35 psi on stock head bolts, and a stock gasket.. 1.5D.. the trans end of the block finally failed, and cracked all to hell.
thats why he is going to put a 1.5 rotating assembly in a 1.6TD block.. (a 1.5TD with strong head bolts/studs)
-
Do not lower compression,trust me..
If i built some think like this,maybe i use 1.4 na or 1.3 na base engine.Both engine has several benefit against 1.6 or 1.9
You can run less compression without a problem, it will even start decent.
-
UnderPSI - as I was searching the forum on this topic, I saw your thread about the big valve heads, including a 1.9 head with very big valves. Your Samurai looks bad-to-the-bone. Extremely nice job on that truck. Have you ever run a 1.9 head on a 1.5 displacement engine?
Steve.
-
I haven't, don't see the need.
-
Are you running the big valve 1.6 head in your Samurai?
-
Are you running the big valve 1.6 head in your Samurai?
what "BIG VALVE" 1.6 head are you talking about? ALL 1.6 heads have the same valves..
-
Are you running the big valve 1.6 head in your Samurai?
what "BIG VALVE" 1.6 head are you talking about? ALL 1.6 heads have the same valves..
This one...
http://www.vwdiesel.net/forum/index.php?topic=26316.0
-
Are you running the big valve 1.6 head in your Samurai?
I haven't yet, was busy with other projects, ordered my head studs and a low pressure turbo today though.
-
What you really need :
http://aki76.kuvat.fi/kuvat/polo+1.3+d/remppakuvia+helmikuu+004.JPG
1.3 d = > 1.3 td
http://aki76.kuvat.fi/kuvat/polo+1.3+d/remppakuvia+helmikuu+012.JPG
twin turbo
http://aki76.kuvat.fi/kuvat/polo+1.3+d/remppakuvia+helmikuu+051.JPG
and serious power ;D
-
What you really need :
http://aki76.kuvat.fi/kuvat/polo+1.3+d/remppakuvia+helmikuu+004.JPG
1.3 d = > 1.3 td
http://aki76.kuvat.fi/kuvat/polo+1.3+d/remppakuvia+helmikuu+012.JPG
twin turbo
http://aki76.kuvat.fi/kuvat/polo+1.3+d/remppakuvia+helmikuu+051.JPG
and serious power ;D
SOO FREAKIN COOOOOLLLL!!!
(i want one)
-
wait for dyno sheet.. ;D
-
wait for dyno sheet.. ;D
the dyno is prolly gonna make me s#!t a buick...
nothing surprises me with you tho, Aki..
-
Aki - that 1.3 Polo engine looks deadly. It is a shame that we don't have those engines in the USA. I have heard rumors of some people who have imported "Gray Market" VW diesel engines to the US from Europe, but there doesn't seem to be a good source for such services.
I would be happy to give that engine a good home, and send it back when I am done, if you are interested in having your engine compete for a Land Speed Record.
Steve.
-
http://aki76.kuvat.fi/kuvat/polo+1.3+d/DSC_0003.jpg
;)
-
im definantly not an engine guru but what about water methonol injection? boosts compression and cools egt's, also how about propane injection? i dont know what is "alloud" with the LSR but just a couple power adders to maby think about. also what about making a 1.5 TDI? use a 99 1.9tdi head get a m-tdi pump built, but i dont know about pistons but its just a couple of things that i thought about while reading your thread
-
http://aki76.kuvat.fi/kuvat/polo+1.3+d/17032012142.jpg
-
Beautiful work, Aki. I assume the main cap girdle is strictly custom work. If the engine block was once the weak link, it is not anymore.
I don't recognize the block, but then again I am not an experienced expert at VW diesel block spotting.
Steve.
-
Question on you for your build. Are you looking to build custom motor mounts or know if the mounts off a 1.7 omni will work for that application. I might be looking to build another diesel and put it in an omni.
-
Why? Just get a Rabbit. They are 99% Omni only infinitely better and readily available as diesels already.
-
well the bolt holes in omni block same as vw.. so they direct fit... with proper vw engine block style mounts... later omni had dodge engines... so when i refer right mounts...
the tricky piece... the pressure plate/release plate on a omni is different then vw... screws up the cable length... but i cannot rember why this is.. maybe different push rod or something.. but ive run into this in the past long long long ago...
-
Why? Just get a Rabbit. They are 99% Omni only infinitely better and readily available as diesels already.
Infinitely better is your opinion I had a rabbit I hated everything but the Diesel engine in it.
-
You're right. Enjoy your Omni.
-
well the bolt holes in omni block same as vw.. so they direct fit... with proper vw engine block style mounts... later omni had dodge engines... so when i refer right mounts...
the tricky piece... the pressure plate/release plate on a omni is different then vw... screws up the cable length... but i cannot rember why this is.. maybe different push rod or something.. but ive run into this in the past long long long ago...
Thank you for the info
-
"Most" of the VW diesel and 020 trans was a direct bolt-in. I am using an 020 4-speed in my diesel Rampage, which would have been the stock trans on a pre-2.2L manual trans Omni/Horizon/O24/TC3/Charger/Tursimo.
The mount on the front of the engine has to be custom fabbed (front as in pulley end). The 1.7L gasser mount will not work in this location due to the needs of the injection pump mounts. The other mounts will work, but they must come from a 1.7L Omni. 2.2's are different.
The shifter linkage from a 4-speed 1.7L Omni will work, but you must have an "Omni" 020 4-speed tranny linkage. They are different than those found on true VW applications.
The clutch cable needs to be from a manual trans 1.7L Omni. You will need the pedal cluster from the same donor car.
It can be done, but only worth it if you have a pretty good reason.
A hopped up 1.9L AAZ Dodge 024 might be pretty cool, though.
Steve.
-
"Most" of the VW diesel and 020 trans was a direct bolt-in. I am using an 020 4-speed in my diesel Rampage, which would have been the stock trans on a pre-2.2L manual trans Omni/Horizon/O24/TC3/Charger/Tursimo.
The mount on the front of the engine has to be custom fabbed (front as in pulley end). The 1.7L gasser mount will not work in this location due to the needs of the injection pump mounts. The other mounts will work, but they must come from a 1.7L Omni. 2.2's are different.
The shifter linkage from a 4-speed 1.7L Omni will work, but you must have an "Omni" 020 4-speed tranny linkage. They are different than those found on true VW applications.
The clutch cable needs to be from a manual trans 1.7L Omni. You will need the pedal cluster from the same donor car.
It can be done, but only worth it if you have a pretty good reason.
A hopped up 1.9L AAZ Dodge 024 might be pretty cool, though.
Steve.
The rampage Shelby charger and rampage engine bays are all l body based so I figured you could answer most of my fitment questions. Alot of mounts and brackets would likely have to be fabricated. And as long as its a carb or tbi omni it wouldn't be to bad wiring wise. The chassis of the lbody while heavier than the rabbit has more creature comforts and more structure to it also. I haven't owned one later than 86 to compare how close it is to a rabbit.
-
If you were swapping into an early L-body that still had the original 1.7L / 4-speed drivetrain, it would be pretty straightforward to covert to VW diesel power. The front motor mount would have to be custom fabbed, but the rest should bolt in. That would get you the functioning engine and trans, but doesn't consider things like air conditioning, power steering, power brakes, etc.
I'm running a manual rack and pinion, manual brakes, and no A/C, but mine's a race vehicle.
-
If you were swapping into an early L-body that still had the original 1.7L / 4-speed drivetrain, it would be pretty straightforward to covert to VW diesel power. The front motor mount would have to be custom fabbed, but the rest should bolt in. That would get you the functioning engine and trans, but doesn't consider things like air conditioning, power steering, power brakes, etc.
I'm running a manual rack and pinion, manual brakes, and no A/C, but mine's a race vehicle.
Basically how my rabbit was other than the manual brakes