JPS Engine Options/Upgrade later

As I do my research with the intent on ordering a JPS Coupe this Fall, I was wondering about the engine choices, specifically between the 1776 and 2110 engines.

My car will be somewhat of a stripper and the bigger engine is a $2,110 hit. If I do the 1776 engine could I upgrade at a later time?

Any comments are appreciated.

Ulrich

Ulrich, my engine swap experience was with a much smaller engine than I have now, followed by a complete re-do of the whole car and an upgrade to a much larger engine.
I went from a 1641 and drum brakes to a 2366 (cum 2424) and discs.
I'd recommend you have the brakes built to support the end-all engine you might want down the road, as well as anti-roll and anti-sway equipment and tires. If you haven't driven a rear-engined car with a stable full of horses, starting small is a good idea. These things are killers if you're not used to the way they handle.
Just my two cents.

get the 2332

My advice is to get the 1776, and figure on doing a 2387 down the road when you have a better handle on what you want. Get 4 wheel discs (So-Cal wide 5s would be lovely), but skip everything else.

John Steele is at his best when the option list is kept short.

Compared to my old 78 911 SC, how would the 1776 compare performance wise?

Ulrich

Are you sure you want to do this?

Not all 1776s, 2110s, etc. are created equal. You can get a 1776 with stock heads, a 110 cam, and ICTs from lots of places for around $2000. They are often "rated" at "about" 100 h/p, or about 65-80 hp in reality. A nice 1776 fully balanced with a forged/counterweighted crank, good rods, forged pistons, good heads, IDFs, and a full merged exhaust will cost at least twice as much (maybe 3x), and make well over 100 hp.

Which one do you think you'll be getting?

The performance difference in 2110s is even more pronounced. They can make 110 h/p, or nearly 200 h/p, depending on the build. It's only money, but the difference is a lot more than $2110 for the big-boy. You want the big-boy.

Porsches diverged from VWs pretty early on in the company's history. By the time your SC rolled off the line, they shared an architecture (horizontally opposed air-cooled cylinders), a common heritage, and not much else.

Stan,
Thanks for the response.

JPS offers a "full balance" on the 1776 for an addtl. $600. Maybe that would do me just fine initially. I am really not looking to build a dragster. My old 911 did 0-60 in maybe 7.5 sec. and that was just fine for the driving I do. This 356 Coupe will not be my daily driver - I have an 03 modified Mini Cooper S for that.

Ulrich

John Steele is at his best when the option list is kept short

stan that is bullshit

I had a JPS built in '02 with a long list of custom features not on the option list. The basic car was great, but the custom stuff was considerably less refined than I was promised.

Three years later, I had an Intermeccanica coach built with some "one-off" features, with completely different results. I'm a very picky guy, and the Intermeccanica is well executed front to back- it's as beautiful under the car as it is on top. It was a bit more expensive, but was totally worth it.

My observation came from firsthand experience.

I think this is a really worthy topic. I am in the works to place a JPS Coupe order early January '08 targeting a June delivery to coincide with a special occasion... I'm not afraid of RPMs and know my way around a tool kit to keep in tune so the larger cc numbers don't put me off, but I live in Dallas and have to battle hot summers in stop and stop :) traffic, so have to consider heat generated by larger displacement. I will be running a/c. My choices runs the spectrum from a fully balanced 1776 to the balls-on 2332. What are some real life experiences with these engines? 99% of my driving is at the early end of the torque curve around town, 75-80mph on the highway, and I'd like to surprise one of those fart-can Hondas off the line every now and then... Suggestions?

Chuck-

My JPS had his standard 1776 (stock heads, 110 cam, ICTs, doghouse cooler) with the Monza exhaust and heater boxes, and it ran REALLY hot in the summer. Smaller is not always better for heat, and 85 hp is not going to surprise any fart-can ricers off the line. Balanced or not, the carbs, heads, and exhaust are the weak links.

I supplied and installed the engine in the IM, and I was a fanatic about cooling. I've got a 2110 in my car now, and I wanted most of the stuff you are after. I chose 90.5 cylinders because of the reputation for running cooler than 94s. I've got a DTM because of the Type 4 oil cooler, and the better cylinder cooling, and I'm running an EMPI 96 plate remote oil cooler with fan (and fan thermostat, and MOCAL bypass thermostat). I've got a 1-5/8 A1 sidewinder.

Up here, it gets to about 95 and humid every year, and gets over 100 and humid about one year in 5. Last year it was over 90 the entire month of July, and set some records. I don't feel like I over-killed the cooling system at all. If you've got A/C and live in Texas, then you'll want everything I've got.

A standard geared, pro-street transaxle with a 3:88 would be adequate for what you are describing. I did a custom-geared pro-street transaxle because I live where it's totally flat, and 99% of my driving is empty-horizon chasing at 60-80 mph. I've got a .82 fourth with a 3.88 R/P, but perfect for the 2110 would be a .85. Stock is a .89, which would be just fine for almost anybody. With a stock-geared transaxle, first is pretty useless unless you are plowing a field or drag racing, and the 3-4 spread is too close. John Steele is pretty good at selecting gear ratios, and has done one that ends up at about .89/3.88 with much better spreads. I'd talk long and hard about this, no matter which engine you go with.

When I had my JPS built, John was using Serrano engines-- I'm not sure what he's using now, but I think this is still the case. If it is, than the DTM is part of the option list (from Serrano-- check his ads on the Samba), and I'd most strongly recommend it. John may tell you it's overkill-- it's not. I have no idea if JPS will do a remote cooler, but if not-- install one ASAP (do the fan thermostat, and the MOCAL bypass thermostat).

I'm going to be installing a Chico Performance 2387 this winter, with short rods for torque, 10:1 (or so) compression, 48 IDFs, and a 1-3/4" sidewinder (200+ hp, but more importantly: 200 lb/ft of torque at 2500 RPM!). My present (135 hp) set-up will be for sale-- it's been great, but torque is like a drug, and I really want to be able to pull hard on that fourth gear.... >;)

Thank you Stan, great information! I'd been to Raby's site and thought the DTM was the way to go... Thanks for validating that. I haven't talked to John yet about transaxle options as I'm still a few months from ordering, but you know how long it takes to dream things out since you've done this at least a couple of times from what I've read in the thread. Thanks again! Anyone else with an opinion??? I'm settled on the balanced/blueprinted 2110 at least, and maybe the 2332 if upkeep isn't TOO demanding. Anyone running that from JPS now?

I'm running a Serrano built 2110 with Weber 40s. When I picked my car up from JPS it had a stock 1-3/8" exhaust; no remote oil cooler, no extra oil sump, dog house cooler and an off the shelf Bugpak oil breather box.
My neighborhood sees about 25 days/year over the century mark. And most days from June to October are 90+.
The car ran hot (230-250+) always!
I've installed an A-1 1-5/8" sidewinder header, a 2 qt CB wide glide sump, an extra large breather box made by Intermeccanica to control the case pressure and a 72 plate remote oil cooler with fan. I also put an opening in the firewall opposite the cooling fan to get a little more air. I wrapped the J tubes (no heater boxes) with aluminum sheeting to reduce the heat exchange under the heads.
The oil temps are better now. It will still get up to 220 on a hot day. I'm in the process of experimenting with a swamp cooler to use intermittently when the temps are high and I'm stuck in traffic. The car runs great now with plenty of power and torque. It still leaks more oil than it should but I plan on running the motor to the ground and then have a new one built. 16,000 miles now, hopefully at least that many left until a rebuild.
I'm pretty sure John Steele is not working with Serrano anymore. You can always have your engine built by someone else and have it sent to JPS for installation.
I'd also have John put a Carrera lid on it with the center opened. That would help with the cooling as well.

As the others have said try to stay with 90.5 mm or 92 mm thickwall cylinders (those 92's are a new development; regular 92's have too thin walls). That will make your engine better able to dissipate heat.

The secondary question the original poster made on 6/22 was how would a 1776 perform compared to his experience with a 3,0 SC? Not well.

You need a lot more displacement to get near most all of the 'big brother' P-car air-cooled engines! Those bigger motors were designed for performance and durability. Our Type 1 engines can be a bit of both, but to get to one extreme you'll likely dilute the other!

I would characterize most of our replica engines as 'peppy' and without a lot of the refinements and add-ons mentioned throughout this thread, 'frail' comes to mind.

Cylinder wall thickness is big component to longevity in the battle against heat related destruction. The cooling efforts mentioned here will be almost more important in sustaining a high speed romp no matter how quickly you are able to come up to speed.

Patrick Friel seems to build mega Type1 engines for racing and if you asked him how well the same engine would perform daily driving chores, I think the answer would disappoint you?

PS: Putting all builder personalities aside, I like the idea of having an engine builder build my engine and having it delivered to the car shop for installation.

I would characterize most of our replica engines as 'peppy' and without a lot of the refinements and add-ons mentioned throughout this thread, 'frail' comes to mind.

Frail? Now you have me worried. I tried in vain, even with an external oil cooler, to tame my 78SC's oil temps in hot Houston, TX. So what does it take to keep one of these air cooled VW engines cool with the a/c option offered by JPS?

Ulrich

TAKE THE REAR COVER OFF

Did you read the posts above?

If you want to maximize the cooling capability of an ACVW: 90.5 cylinders, DTM shroud, Type 4 cooler, free-flowing exhaust, no heater boxes, remote 96 plate cooler with fan and thermostats, good heads, high capacity oil sump.

.... and maybe, no A/C.

Thinking, "hey, I'll get the 1776-- it'll run cooler!", isn't going to get you anywhere. As I said above, the 1776 in my JPS ran REALLY hot, for a variety of reasons. Cooler=better.

Stan; with respect to heater boxes; not all heater boxes are created equal; 1-1/2"s are less restrictive. In fact; some time ago hot VW's had a feature article on how radiant heat from j-tubes affects head temperature. The fact that the heater boxes surround the j-tubes and air is always circulating regardless of your using the heater or not (provided your hoses are all hooked up) helps in protecting the heads from radiant heat which raises oil temperature.

Stan,
I should have read all the posts, you're right. Thanks for the response. All this is great info before I decide to pull the trigger on the JPS Coupe.

Ulrich

No offense intended ands I certainly didn't mean to put you off dude! Truth be told a VW engine was designed to be very efficient when driven in the beetle; a get here from there kinda car.

Extracting reliable sports car-like performance from this same basic engine requires a lot more thought and back up than a stock 1600-1776 provides. So if you only plan to putt,putt,putt even extreme weather locales shouldn't do ya in.

You see yourself hittin' the highway for a few hours at a time on a hot day or challenging (driving fast)yourself on some mountain roads and such, get a 2210-2275, hook up the coolers, fans and a DTM, dump the j-tubes, who needs a heater anyway, and get one of those Tiger A-1 exhausts.

Don't go cheap on the good stuff and don't go small on the engine because if you find you like this type of motoring, you'll be replacing the little motor sooner than you think

I think Paul and Stan both offer excellent advice. I have my 3rd engine in my car in 40,000 km's and am looking at #4 engine options now. The first engine in my car was a basic engine with dual carbs and a few enhancements, 60 or 75 hp. As soon as I could get a repacement I installed a 2110 with IDE 44's, then IDE 48's. Maybe 120hp or a bit more. Engine number 3 is a 2332 with a lot of enhancements, over 200 hp at the flywheel. Engine number 4 is in the planing stages, I am thinking if 200 hp is this much fun, 300hp would be that much more fun....

So, the lesson here is go to engine #3 as a starter and save $$$ in the long run by avoiding engine 1 and 2! Of course I on ocassion like to go fast....

I went from a 1776 to a 2110, and yes it had more hp, but more importantly it had a lot more torque. For 90 percent of my driving torque is more important an horsepower.

Yeah Ron, that seat of the pants feeling goes way beyond CCs and dyno chartzzz! Took me two builds to 'get it'
Now I don't wanna give it up

Another SOC fellow said it somewhere in here: torque is addictive -- just about can't have too much. It is what you feel when the right foot goes down. One of the truly wonderful things that the new engine technology has delivered to us is variable intake valve timing, coupled w/ computer controlled ignition timing, FI, and so forth. The result is all about delivering high torque at just about any engine speed. It is probably why you can buy a replica Speedster w/ an Subaru engine in it, because you can get all that modern "driveability" w/ that option. Not to mention the water for your heater, and blah, blah blah. Not my cup of tea, but I understand where they are coming from -- or should I say going to? Maybe someday that hbigh-tech stuff will be managed in the air-cooled world. Gonna need overhead cams to make that happen, I'd guess, and don't see anybody making these -- but maybe someday. Since Subaru has already done it, sort of, there would not be much incentive, I suppose. Also, I happen to agree w/ sentiments expressed about initial question, which sort of comes down to: buy the biggest, baddest engine you can afford, and don't look back. Drive it like you stole it.