FormaCars

Visit our community sponsor

Thanks Thanks:  0
Likes Likes:  1
Results 1 to 35 of 35

Thread: Audi engine & transmission?

  1. #1
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    17
    Post Thanks / Like

    Audi engine & transmission?

    Has anyone considered using Audi engines and drivetrain?
    They seem to be a similar configuration so perhaps could be shoe-horned in there. Some of the engines are actually pretty short.

    Would be interested to know if anyone has evaluated this for the 818 yet.

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    QC, Canada
    Posts
    5,161
    Post Thanks / Like
    A long time ago some team fitted a VW TDI with Audi gearbox. Car was actually blessed by Obama for fuel efficiency.
    Very few details on the thread they created.

    Since the VW and Audi engines are pretty similar, a gas 4-cyl Audi engine would most probably fit as well.
    Not sure about the modifications for engine mounts (probably something similar to mine) and gearbox in order to fit them in. I believe it was minimal on the chassis.

    Most probably the top diagonal bars from each side or shock tower brace and merging in the middle top of the 1.5" FW tube would have to be relocated or totally cut. I re-angled mines, I was able to keep them. I fitted the VR6.


    What would be the advantage of a gas 4-cyl Audi engine vs the Subaru?
    Frank
    818 chassis #181 powered by a '93 VW VR6 GT3582R ~400whp/wtq+
    Go-karted Aug 5, 2016 - Then May 19+21, 2017
    Tracked May 27/July 26, 2017

    Bulid time, including registration 3283.5h in 148 work week time and 3.5 years elapsed

  3. #3
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    24
    Post Thanks / Like
    One major advantage of Subaru engine is low CG which is important for track cars.

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    QC, Canada
    Posts
    5,161
    Post Thanks / Like
    Magpie, the reason I am asking about advantage of an Audi engine over the Subaru is that you gotta make sure that advantage is worth the trouble of fitting a different engine and gearbox.
    Frank
    818 chassis #181 powered by a '93 VW VR6 GT3582R ~400whp/wtq+
    Go-karted Aug 5, 2016 - Then May 19+21, 2017
    Tracked May 27/July 26, 2017

    Bulid time, including registration 3283.5h in 148 work week time and 3.5 years elapsed

  5. #5
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    17
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Sector View Post
    One major advantage of Subaru engine is low CG which is important for track cars.
    Do you think (in the real world), it's actually that different? They seem to have a pretty huge sump to me, so perhaps a dry-sump and lower the engine. I'd be interested to know the COG height numbers.

    Quote Originally Posted by Frank818 View Post
    What would be the advantage of a gas 4-cyl Audi engine vs the Subaru?
    Interesting about the VW engine, Frank. I wonder if these days the TDI is still considered 'clean' over there.
    I think you may have assumed I was speaking of the inline 4's. Have you seen how short the V8's are? Now think about how tasty that would be!
    I'm not worried about a bit of chassis butchering, as long as it fits within the suspension and bodywork.

    By the way, your build looks AMAZING!

    audibbk[1].jpg

  6. #6
    Steve >> aka: GoDadGo GoDadGo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Slidell, Louisiana
    Posts
    2,391
    Post Thanks / Like
    Blog Entries
    1
    It would be interesting to see if someone ever decides to stuff the following into an 818:

    Chevrolet LTG Turbo 4
    272 HP @5500 RPM
    295 LB-FT TORQUE

    LTG FWD
    6-SPEED MANUAL
    295 LB-FT TORQUE LMT

    Of course a lot of modifications would be needed since it would have to sit in the car side saddle, but a new power plant mated to it's matching 6-speed gear box that all comes with a warranty would be nice.

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    304
    Post Thanks / Like
    batcountry.jpg

    Personally I'd go with the LNF from the Cobalt/Solstice/Sky that had 290hp/340ft-lbs with no-lift shift. The LNF is probably the most underrated engine ever, simply because GM was such a mess at the time it came out. It'd almost certainly be less work to mate it to the sti transaxle a la the D.O.A. ecoboost.

    And wasn't Wayne supposed to be cramming a Camaro V6 in an 818? Or was that just a tease?

  8. #8
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    24
    Post Thanks / Like
    Subarugears.com makes adapter plates for various engines to be used with subaru transmissions.

  9. #9
    Senior Member flynntuna's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    San Diego Ca 92106
    Posts
    1,809
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by phil1734 View Post
    batcountry.jpg

    Personally I'd go with the LNF from the Cobalt/Solstice/Sky that had 290hp/340ft-lbs with no-lift shift. The LNF is probably the most underrated engine ever, simply because GM was such a mess at the time it came out. It'd almost certainly be less work to mate it to the sti transaxle a la the D.O.A. ecoboost.

    And wasn't Wayne supposed to be cramming a Camaro V6 in an 818? Or was that just a tease?
    Wayne put an EZ30 (6cyl) in his 818. A few others including myself are using the EZ36. The EZ30 bolts in without modification, the ez36 needs some modification.

  10. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    304
    Post Thanks / Like
    Yes, but he also mentioned having a newer V6 Camaro donor at his shop for some nefarious purpose. Maybe I was reading into it too much that it had anything to do with an 818 or that it was even really a donor.

  11. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    QC, Canada
    Posts
    5,161
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Magpie View Post
    I think you may have assumed I was speaking of the inline 4's. Have you seen how short the V8's are? Now think about how tasty that would be!
    audibbk[1].jpg
    Now we're talking!
    18.2" long will fit without mods.
    Just need to ensure width is acceptable and mostly height. Unless you change the fiberglass engine cover. I think 33.5" is how high the engine can be without modifications.

    Which V8 code? ABH? What year-model would you get it from? If power is not important and 275hp for 4.2L is ok to you, that'd be great.
    In my case even though the sound would be amazing, it would lack serious power and making it turbo may be more complicated, depending on its width.

    How the hell Audi managed to make a 4.2L V8 the same length as the VR6... long stroke?

    Tnx for the comments on my personal build.
    Frank
    818 chassis #181 powered by a '93 VW VR6 GT3582R ~400whp/wtq+
    Go-karted Aug 5, 2016 - Then May 19+21, 2017
    Tracked May 27/July 26, 2017

    Bulid time, including registration 3283.5h in 148 work week time and 3.5 years elapsed

  12. #12
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    17
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Frank818 View Post
    Now we're talking!
    18.2" long will fit without mods.
    Just need to ensure width is acceptable and mostly height. Unless you change the fiberglass engine cover. I think 33.5" is how high the engine can be without modifications.
    The way I scale that image, the height would be about 28" (720mm) with the stock intake, and the width bwtween heads shouldn't be an issue if the engine bay is designed for boxers.

    Quote Originally Posted by Frank818 View Post
    Which V8 code? ABH? What year-model would you get it from? If power is not important and 275hp for 4.2L is ok to you, that'd be great.
    In my case even though the sound would be amazing, it would lack serious power and making it turbo may be more complicated, depending on its width.
    How the hell Audi managed to make a 4.2L V8 the same length as the VR6... long stroke?
    I actually recently owned a BBK (Non-FSI) in my S4 manual sedan. Aside from the timing chain tensioners breaking and the subsequent collateral damage (yes, it was expensive to fix!), it was an amazing engine. Oh so happy to rev! I'd probably aim for the newer FSI BVJ/BAR/CAU engine from a S5/A6/A8/Q7/Touareg for it's $/kW factor. The 'high revving' (yes, that's what they call it) BNS from an RS4 would be nice, but waaaay pricier if you can even get one. The BVJ/BAR/CAU is still 257kW (350hp) and 440Nm, so will get along just fine. The weight is 198kg, so probably about the same as the EJ with turbos etc.

    Transmissions could be 01E (6 speed manual), or any variant that can handle the torque (or just use STI). Could even bring in the option of a DSG if you want launch control, lightning fast shifts (but also more weight, about +60kg).

  13. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    304
    Post Thanks / Like
    An EJ longblock is only 120kg. Remove the AC compressor and Power steering, add turbo and intercooler and you'd probably still be under 140.

    There's a reason they're so popular for ultralights.

  14. #14
    Senior Member STiPWRD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Leesburg, VA
    Posts
    1,313
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by GoDadGo View Post
    Of course a lot of modifications would be needed since it would have to sit in the car side saddle, but a new power plant mated to it's matching 6-speed gear box that all comes with a warranty would be nice.
    Are you saying the engine would be sitting in the cabin? I'm not getting what you mean by "side saddle."

    Quote Originally Posted by phil1734 View Post
    An EJ longblock is only 120kg. Remove the AC compressor and Power steering, add turbo and intercooler and you'd probably still be under 140.

    There's a reason they're so popular for ultralights.
    Does the 120 kg include the intake manifold and other parts of the engine (oil pan, coolant cross over tubes, headers, etc...)? Or just the short block and heads? That seems a bit high. When I built my engine, I could pick up the sti short block by hand - the shipping box said it was 98 lbs (44.4 kg). I couldn't imagine the heads being 75 kg. I have a spare set of heads in the basement I could probably weigh.

  15. #15
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    QC, Canada
    Posts
    5,161
    Post Thanks / Like
    Magpie, I like the idea!

    The weight seems to be similar to the VR6 with a turbo, I don't think it's as light as the EJ.

    Seems like a very very compact V8 that should most probably fit. There's the question of your axle centers on the gearbox to make sure they aren't too high or too far back of the spindles. If you can make that measurement we would know with enough % of success how well it would fit without frame modifications. You would also know the most probably frame modifications to perform if it doesn't fit well after the measurements.

    Of course the RS4 B8 engine would be a killer, especially for the sound!!!! One of the best sounding engine if you do the exhaust right.

    You are located in Europe?
    Frank
    818 chassis #181 powered by a '93 VW VR6 GT3582R ~400whp/wtq+
    Go-karted Aug 5, 2016 - Then May 19+21, 2017
    Tracked May 27/July 26, 2017

    Bulid time, including registration 3283.5h in 148 work week time and 3.5 years elapsed

  16. #16
    Steve >> aka: GoDadGo GoDadGo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Slidell, Louisiana
    Posts
    2,391
    Post Thanks / Like
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by STiPWRD View Post
    Are you saying the engine would be sitting in the cabin? I'm not getting what you mean by "side saddle."
    "Sitting Side Saddle" is a reference to a lady riding a horse with both legs on one side, which was a common practice in the 1800's.

    My reference to "Sitting Side Saddle" meant that the engine and transmission would be transversely mounted like most front wheel drive cars.

    I saw Cadillac North Star V-8 stuffed in an old Fiero GT at a local Hot Rod Run and the fellow took me for a ride in what he called His Fierce Fiero and it really got me thinking about the 818. Heck, it might be possible to pretty much pull any FWD GM or other similar combo to the 818 as well.

    Also, for the record my MK-4 is far from the norm so other options may work well for the "Too Cool For School 818!"
    Last edited by GoDadGo; 04-05-2017 at 09:07 AM.

  17. #17
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    304
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by STiPWRD View Post
    Does the 120 kg include the intake manifold and other parts of the engine (oil pan, coolant cross over tubes, headers, etc...)? Or just the short block and heads? That seems a bit high. When I built my engine, I could pick up the sti short block by hand - the shipping box said it was 98 lbs (44.4 kg). I couldn't imagine the heads being 75 kg. I have a spare set of heads in the basement I could probably weigh.
    Yeah, 120 is everything ready to run, accessories included.

  18. #18
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    17
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by phil1734 View Post
    Yeah, 120 is everything ready to run, accessories included.
    That's much lighter than I thought.

    Quote Originally Posted by Frank818 View Post
    There's the question of your axle centers on the gearbox to make sure they aren't too high or too far back of the spindles.
    Does this go part of the way to answering the question? The 0B4 Quattro manual and the 0B3 FWD gearboxes actually bring the power across from the front of the gearbox to a mini prop shaft, to a front differential and axles that are now 152mm further forward than the older 01E. Mad. 0B1 can also work for lower torque applications.
    B8_Trans_Front.pngB8_Trans_Side.pngB8_Trans_Side2.pngB8_Trans_Top.pngB8_Trans_Side3.pngteaser_32-6-Gang-HSG_4_3.jpgteaser_31-7-Gang-S-tronic-quattro_4_3.jpg

    0B1: 6 speed manual, FWD, manufactured by Kassel, 68 kg (149 lbs), max torque 350 Nm (258 lb*ft).
    0B2: 6 speed manual, AWD, manufactured by Kassel, 78.6 kg (173 lbs), max torque 350 Nm (258 lb*ft).
    0B3: 6 speed manual, FWD, manufactured by Getrag, 77.1 kg (170 lbs), max torque 400 Nm (295 lb*ft).
    0B4: 6 speed manual, AWD, manufactured by Getrag, 86.1 kg (189 lbs), max torque 500 Nm (368 lb*ft).

    Quote Originally Posted by Frank818 View Post
    You are located in Europe?
    Kind of. New Zealand actually, but I'd considered us pretty 'European' even being on the other side of the world to them Fully metric for 41 years, and most of our vehicles end up here as either UK spec (with metric gauge cluster), or Japanese/Korean.
    I'd add my location , but apparently being a newbie means that's above my pay grade
    Last edited by Magpie; 04-05-2017 at 06:42 PM.

  19. #19
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    1
    Post Thanks / Like
    Magpie pretty much has all the information down!
    Just a couple things I'd like to add. Engine width is ~29" (735mm) over the outside edges of the cam covers. The exhaust doesn't stick out beyond that but the stock manifolds are very compact and not very free flowing.
    I don't have a specific number on height but looking at a rear view of the engine, height is quite a bit less than the width. The intake manifold barely sticks above the cam covers.

    Frank818, you mentioned the ABH engine code.
    This picture posted by Magpie showing the 464mm length shows the BBK/BHF (for US) and later engine codes.
    audibbk[1].jpg
    Any Audi V8 with belt drive camshafts will be substantially longer. Basically Audi ditched the belt drive and went to a chain camshaft drive similar in concept similar to the VR6 cam drive. A primary chain from the crank to intermediate sprockets, then secondary chains, set behind the primary chain and overhanging the flywheel, to the camshafts. Due to this length overhanging the flywheel there may be interference with the frame upper rear crossmember in the 818.

    Just for giggles, cylinder centers are 90mm on all the Audi V8s and the 4.2L is 84.5 X 92.8mm bore and stroke.

    Obviously I'm pretty enamored with this engine (own a 2005 S4) but it is huge for it's displacement, heavy, has camshaft drive issues that are expensive to repair and can be catastrophic and any good four cylinder with a turbo can match its output. So, there's the sound and the wow factor, but.......

  20. #20
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    304
    Post Thanks / Like
    The O1E would probably fit better. The newer style might be too wide and moving the output flanges forward could bring them into contact with the 818 "strut towers," put a pretty extreme angle on your CVs, and require custom length half-shafts. Really depends on how much play you have to move the engine/trans fore and aft.
    Last edited by phil1734; 04-07-2017 at 07:29 AM.

  21. #21
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    17
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by J. Daniel View Post
    Obviously I'm pretty enamored with this engine (own a 2005 S4) but it is huge for it's displacement, heavy, has camshaft drive issues that are expensive to repair and can be catastrophic and any good four cylinder with a turbo can match its output. So, there's the sound and the wow factor, but.......
    I used to own one the same as you... and oh, the sound, especially when manual!
    I agree that the only engines likely to fit at the rear drive cam chain ones, pretty much from the 2000's onwards. But not sure about the 'huge' comment. It's no wider or longer than a EJ/EZ. I know it's hard to believe, but you should go and measure it. Yes, it's heavier, but with twice the cylinders, you have to expect something. I think it's probably in the order of 60-80kg all-in.
    As for the cam drive issues, this only affected the B6 model S4 (and earlier) BBK/BHF V8's, as the plastic Audi used for the tensioners became brittle over time. Some would say that you have a time bomb above 100k miles. which was exactly what happened to mine, but was resolved for the B7 models.

  22. #22
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    17
    Post Thanks / Like
    Okay, so I have been thinking long and hard about this, and thought I'd share what I also have sitting in my garage... a B8 S4 with the 3.0TFSI engine.
    Now, if you think the V8's were short, you should check this out. Apparently the main engine is only 360mm long! Sounds crazy (again), but the rear mounting face is almost in line with the 3rd cylinder, for the reasons outlined about the V8 cam chain positioning.
    So what this means practically, is that the distance between the output shaft of the gearbox and the front of the supercharger pulley is only 470mm. This compares to the EJ20 + 5sp in my GC8 STI RA at about 520mm. The width head to head is about 740mm, which again is about the same as the V8 and most Subaru engines.

    The 3.0TFSI weighs 189kg incl ancillaries and supercharger. The power is officially 245kW (333hp), but this has been proven low many times. Most people would estimate the output to be closer to 270kW (370hp), which lines up with the 0-60 times of about 4.7s (launch control off). Tuning from any one of the big boys (APR etc) will get you up to about ~465hp (with dual pulleys), or into the mid 500's on 108 RON. Perhaps a little excessive

    The one thing left for me to do, is bring the S4 into the garage and jack it up for a transmission measure. Mine has the Quattro 0B5 (dual clutch), so will be interested to know the approximate length I'd be looking at. This will determine how far aft of the rear axle the transmission will extend. Using the STI 6-speed is also an option... depending on whether it would actually mate closely to the engine or not.

    web-audi-10-be-specs.jpgs-l500 (3).jpgIMG_20170407_071708c.png

  23. #23
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Colombia
    Posts
    221
    Post Thanks / Like
    Kudos on your project ideas! If you read Frank's thread and are still thinking of fitting a large VW engine in the 818... congratulations, you've got some brass ones! One thing to think about is traction. High power doesn't have much to do with traction if I don't tell you what the rpm and torque curve looks like. My skoda AGU engine held 300ftlbs upwards of 8500rpm and held it's traction relatively well for a 400+hp engine in a FWD car. If I were you, all I'm saying is high rpm N/A engines have better traction that turbo engines with the same hp because the have lower torque, so if you have a choice... On the 818, traction is very important over 300hp because it's so light.

    Now regarding complexity... I think the most complex part of Frank's build was the non-subaru tranny. If I were you, I'd stick to it unless you have very high horsepower goals. You can mod it to take 500hp relatively easily and a short gear set is available from less than 2 grand. Subaru trannies are also very light and can take high rpm shifts while Audi/vw manuals kinda suck at it unless you use the huge and heavy dual clutch tranny. Honestly, there are very few valid arguments to use a non-subaru tranny.

    Another point on complexity... Fsi... 150psi fuel system. Don't get me wrong, my favorite engines are vr6 for sound and 3.0Tsi for everything else. But if you're going to put one in an 818 what are you going to do about the ecu? This is a non trivial matter. Just look at the zillion hours Frank put into his wiring and that was with the infinity system with a diy can bus. Is there a standalone system that can handle the fsi system? From what I remember is that VW ecus don't cooperate well with hardware mods and they're very difficult to convince that they're in their original frame when they're not (power windows, a/c, 4wd, radio, alarm, ABS,etc.) It's all wired together in the new audis/vws.

    That's why I went electric. ;-) Honestly, it's a lot less wiring to do.

    Speedy G
    Last edited by Speedy G; 04-08-2017 at 08:14 AM.

  24. #24
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    QC, Canada
    Posts
    5,161
    Post Thanks / Like
    Well, here are the things to know:

    - Engine length
    - Engine height
    - Engine width
    - Gearbox width (very important as there are diagonal bars making the bottom not very large exactly where you need it to be large!)
    - Gearbox length
    - Gearbox Bellhousing to axle centers

    In cases where the last one above is very short, if you need to back off the engine in the engine bay, don't mind about the upper shock tower brace, you can cut it and flip the bars over like I did (rewelded of course), should give enough clearance you have 8in of play over the bottom of that bar. Mind about the bottom frame, the 1.5in tube onto which the FFR engine mounts are welded. The more you back off the engine, the more that tube will be in the way.

    The above 6 bullet points are all dependent to each other. Change one and others will be affected, unless you have a tiny gearbox like the Subaru which gives plenty of space around, but as a general rule, you have to fit everything within those 6 points in order to minimize frame modifications. In that area, one frame mod might cause a bunch of mods. If you change the suspension design, you might have to change everything around including body panels.

    You will certainly need custom driveshafts but that's not a problem with The Drive Shaft Shop in USA.

    I found out that the upper horizontal V bars and the shock tower brace are not a problem to deal with. Other bars are more in the way.
    Frank
    818 chassis #181 powered by a '93 VW VR6 GT3582R ~400whp/wtq+
    Go-karted Aug 5, 2016 - Then May 19+21, 2017
    Tracked May 27/July 26, 2017

    Bulid time, including registration 3283.5h in 148 work week time and 3.5 years elapsed

  25. #25
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    17
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Speedy G View Post
    High power doesn't have much to do with traction if I don't tell you what the rpm and torque curve looks like... On the 818, traction is very important over 300hp because it's so light.
    This is a good comment, and totally agree. After having a string of Japanese turbo 4WD's, I told people my V8 Audi wasn't very torquey, and they looked at me sideways. What I think we're both saying is that traction is a bit harder to manage if you're dealing with a humped torque curve, particularly in a track situation. This is precisely the reason I want NA or supercharged.

    Quote Originally Posted by Speedy G View Post
    Now regarding complexity... Audi/vw manuals kinda suck at it unless you use the huge and heavy dual clutch tranny. Honestly, there are very few valid arguments to use a non-subaru tranny.
    I totally agree with this (and realistically see myself going the STI route), but would still be very interested in driving the newer series of 0B1/0B3 FWD manuals to see. I imagine they would be fairly good. Question is for me around the extension aft of the drive axles.

    Quote Originally Posted by Speedy G View Post
    Another point on complexity... Fsi... 150psi fuel system...But if you're going to put one in an 818 what are you going to do about the ecu? This is a non trivial matter....Is there a standalone system that can handle the fsi system? From what I remember is that VW ecus don't cooperate well with hardware mods and they're very difficult to convince that they're in their original frame when they're not (power windows, a/c, 4wd, radio, alarm, ABS,etc.) It's all wired together in the new audis/vws.
    Isn't the fuel rail pressurised by a cam-driven pump on the FSI engines? If so, it doesn't worry me any more than my daily driver does, which it not at all.

    As for ECU's, this is where I have done a bit of research over the last few days and the options are rather limited. These I think are some of the options:
    1) New ECU - The only manufacturer (that I can find) that makes a >6 cylinder direct injection ECU is Motec, and costs >$4k. Ouch. Adaptronic stopped their development, Life haven't released theirs yet, and the others only do 4 cylinders.
    2) Factory ECU - You hit the nail on the head with your comments about not being in their original home. Plenty of warning codes to have to disable, ignore or try and battle through. This could be hassle central.
    3) Convert to Port injection - Has been done many times before, where people plug the injector hole and have some ITB's made up. Bit of a hassle, but could end up being the a cost effective option and you wouldn't miss out on all the other modern goodies
    4) Not use a FSI engine - Perhaps stop at BBK/BHF. Still 250kW, which (let's be honest) is plenty.

  26. #26
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    17
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Frank818 View Post
    ...In cases where the last one above is very short, if you need to back off the engine in the engine bay, don't mind about the upper shock tower brace, you can cut it and flip the bars over like I did (rewelded of course), should give enough clearance you have 8in of play over the bottom of that bar. Mind about the bottom frame, the 1.5in tube onto which the FFR engine mounts are welded. The more you back off the engine, the more that tube will be in the way.
    I reckon you're points are totally valid, and you are clearly experienced to be bringing them up. I have been having a good look at images of this area, and I'm thinking (correct me if I'm wrong), that 1) The Ecoboost engine fitted in there so the length must surely be okay, 2) the Subaru engines have to slide in and fit between the two vertical shock mounting bars so the width is surely okay, which means 3) the engines final resting place should work. I feel like I am guessing a bit here though, so perhaps someone can clear it all up with some actual facts and figures. I'm not averse to re-positioning members (like those diagonal ones), but modifying suspension geometry and/or body panels is out of the question for me.

    Does anyone have a 3D CAD model or frame dimensions of the chassis? Then we can start doing some 3D packaging and know for sure.

    Such good discussion, thanks everyone!

  27. #27
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    17
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Magpie View Post
    The one thing left for me to do, is bring the S4 into the garage and jack it up for a transmission measure. Mine has the Quattro 0B5 (dual clutch), so will be interested to know the approximate length I'd be looking at. This will determine how far aft of the rear axle the transmission will extend.
    Jacked the car up tonight and had a measure. It's almost impossible to get a tape anywhere near the mechanical parts of the car because of all the under-body panels etc in the way, but I think I achieved what I needed to.
    Total width between output flanges is 550mm (21.7in). Pretty wide, but this in itself won't necessarily pose a problem. It's the width of the gearbox that might. Not that I could even see it...
    Total length of gearbox (from output centreline) is 680mm (26.8in) back to the joint of the centre differential cover. This is what gets replaced with a cover/cap on the 0B1/0B3 units. It's quite long, but I suspect this is mostly because I have a 0B5 (7 speed S-Tronic). The 0B3 looks considerably shorter.

    Does anyone know the distance between the centreline of the rear wheels and the inside of the rear bumper?

    IMG_20170409_213640 - Copy.jpg IMG_20170409_214554c.jpg

  28. #28
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Colombia
    Posts
    221
    Post Thanks / Like
    There's another option for your ecu. You use a regular aftermarket ECU and you spray when the intake valve is open. I read somewhere that someone had done that and it worked. No clue how to do it or what ecu they used, but that would be the best case scenario.

  29. #29
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    17
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Speedy G View Post
    There's another option for your ecu. You use a regular aftermarket ECU and you spray when the intake valve is open.
    I'm not sure I quite understand, but perhaps that makes 2 of us I think the issue is mainly around the drivers for the piezoelectric solenoids rather than the timing. Adaptronic were doing this externally, with a bit of a hack for a prototype. I imagine it requires some very short, very precise control.

  30. #30
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    QC, Canada
    Posts
    5,161
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Magpie View Post
    Does anyone know the distance between the centreline of the rear wheels and the inside of the rear bumper?
    Yeah I do, will come back on this soon.
    Frank
    818 chassis #181 powered by a '93 VW VR6 GT3582R ~400whp/wtq+
    Go-karted Aug 5, 2016 - Then May 19+21, 2017
    Tracked May 27/July 26, 2017

    Bulid time, including registration 3283.5h in 148 work week time and 3.5 years elapsed

  31. #31
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Posts
    5
    Post Thanks / Like
    Great thread, any more updates on the 3.0t in the 818?

  32. #32
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    QC, Canada
    Posts
    5,161
    Post Thanks / Like
    Magpie, for the measurement I need my bumper in place. Since it's tilted a little you cannot measure as if it's perpendicular to the floor. However after the horrible issues I am facing rebuilding the engine, the bumper won't be back on until probably June or July.

    What's not very interesting, is that I wrote that to you ONE YEAR ago. Jesus... I could have taken the measurement way before.
    Frank
    818 chassis #181 powered by a '93 VW VR6 GT3582R ~400whp/wtq+
    Go-karted Aug 5, 2016 - Then May 19+21, 2017
    Tracked May 27/July 26, 2017

    Bulid time, including registration 3283.5h in 148 work week time and 3.5 years elapsed

  33. #33
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    17
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by TJRNT View Post
    Great thread, any more updates on the 3.0t in the 818?
    Yes and no. I see you are after the same type of thing as I am and I have been (still) doing a bit of work in the background.

    I started with a packaging study of the frame, all in CAD of course, using known dimensions and few photos.

    Here's what you'll get with the V8 BNS from an RS4 (or the lower revving BVJ/BAR/CAU) combined with an 01E
    2071-BNS-01E.jpg

    This BNS is now mated to a 0A2 (newer than 01E)
    2071-BNS-0A2.jpg

    This is a V8 BNS combined with an 0B3 (which was never actually manufactured, it just exists in literature, but you could possibly adapt an 0B4 shorter by removing centre diff somehow). As you can see it's super long.
    2071-BNS-0B3.jpg


    When I started looking into the 3.0TSFI (CAKA) engine more dimensionally, I think (>90% sure) that it fits to the older 0A3 or even the 01E trans. It will also fit easily (relatively) into the back of the 818, but my reasons for not going down this path have been more to do with the lack of FSI ECU's available, and the cost of the engines. I had one lined up ready to buy (with a hole in the side of the block, but that's another story), but on inspection, it had been sitting outside for a long time, and I just wasn't convinced it was even worth the cheap price they were asking.

    As far as transmissions, the 0A2 (FWD)/0A3 (4WD) is the successor the 01E/01X, but I believe they have the same bell-housing bolt pattern. The newer ones are all aluminium.

    So my research suggests:
    B6 S4 used the V8 BBK with 0A3
    B7 S4/RS4 used FSI version of the V8 (BNS/BAR), with 0A3
    B8 S4 used 3.0TFSI (CAKA) with 0B4 (Manual), or 0B5 (Dual Clutch). These are the gearboxes with the front axle way up against the engine, actually in front of the clutch.
    B8 RS4 used the same FSI V8 (BNS) with 0B5 (Dual Clutch)

    Other info I have found is that the Cayman/Boxster used a 01X, and the Cayman/Boxster 'S' uses a 0A2.

    The reason I don't think the newer transmissions (0B4 etc) will work is that the newer geometry (axle forward) means the gearbox is far too long out the back, or pushes the engine forward, resulting in crazy driveshaft angles. Not to mention that the axle output flanges are super wide making this even worse.

    My personal conclusion from all of this:
    Engine from a B6 S4 (BBK non-FSI) for ease of parts/supply, short length and price. Only negative is the chain tensioners will need updating to B7 spec
    Transmission 6MT 0A2 from either diesel A6 or Cayman/Boxster

    Hope this helps!

  34. Likes flynntuna liked this post
  35. #34
    Senior Member flynntuna's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    San Diego Ca 92106
    Posts
    1,809
    Post Thanks / Like
    Have you considered the width of the engine? It's a pretty wide engine, especially in the top end.

  36. #35
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    17
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by flynntuna View Post
    Have you considered the width of the engine? It's a pretty wide engine, especially in the top end.
    Yes, I have, although there's still a lot that might get in the way. In theory the V6/V8 engines are less wide compared to the EJ's, but I guess diagonal members, suspension and all of that could be more of an issue than just width.

    Quote Originally Posted by Magpie View Post
    The width head to head is about 740mm, which again is about the same as the V8 and most Subaru engines.
    Image below shows the BNS as top view.

    2071-BNS-01E top.jpg

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Vintage Wheels

Visit our community sponsor