16v engine into A4 B5 chassi?

[Drunken_M]

Hi, i have an 9A engine laying around, and i want to do something different then others, and use this engine in my A4 for a big turbo engine. I know 20v head is better and i have one laying around too, but i want to go all 16v turbo in my a4 and do something totally different then most people, and i know these engines can do 500hp when built and modefied head.

Ive read that the bolt directly to the gearbox and motor mounts, but do i use AEB motor mounts on the 16v engine or some other mounts?
Hope someone can help me a bit.
I hope a 2.0 16v has better torque down low then the AEB?

[NeedingAnAudi]

Doesn't seem like a situation many would be in. You should go for it though!

[somebody5788]

Wait, like the one from the Jetta's? Worst engine VW has ever made >.> Maybe somewhat reliable but that head doesn't flow enough to make a good engine out of it.

[M-Hood]

Why would you think a 16V would have better low end tq then the same bottom end with a 20V head?

[Drunken_M]

The 16v engine is a 2 liter 9A engine from an 91 passat, aeb is 1.8 liter. Of course i could fit the aeb head on the 16v bottom end to easier get more gains and flow. But i would like to go all 16v becouse i want to do something different. I will port the 16v head myself and build it. And another reason why i would like to use the whole 16v engine is becouse i will use it in my girfriends Golf MK2 later on when her car is ready for it and i have the time to build my AEB to 2.1liter and portet aeb head for the final engine for my car.

I just think it would be real nice to have an old engine in my car to make it unique :)

[M-Hood]

Yes a 2.0 will have better power down below, on your post you really didn't make it clear you were comparing 2.0 vs 1.8t since you said 2.0 16V vs AEB. Many times on your post you switch between AEB being the head and AEB being the block so I wasn't really sure if you were comparing just the blocks or the 2 different heads on the same 2 liter block.

When you say 2.1 liter AEB are you talking about the block or head? Because the AEB 058 block cant be made into a 2.1 liter. To do 2.1 liter you would also have to swap to a older ABA block or switch to a newer 06A block. The AEB block wont take a crank larger then the ABA crank which is 92.8mm. Largest bore the 058 will take is 83.5mm and along with the ABA crank that only gives you 2032cc, exact setup I have been running for the last 8 years.

Yes doing a 16v motor/head into a 1.8t would be different since most of the people with the older cars that have the 16V usually swap a 1.8t. You dont see many people thinking about doing a 16V motor swap here in the states because most states have laws in place that dont allow putting older motors into newer cars that are driven on the street. Thats why you dont see many I5 20v motor swaps in a B5/B6 car.

[Drunken_M]

Sorry, my english gramatics i really bad.
When i say AEB 2.1l i mean AEB block and head, with a AAZ TD crankshaft and 83mm bore it can become 2067cc that people call 2.1l build. Its verry few 058 block that has been stroked to 2.1l

But i have talked to Issam about that and his told me what i need to do it, i have AAZ crankshaft laying around, thats why im not going 2.0l stroke on the AEB.

Its no problem for me here i Norway to use an older engine in a b5, thats why i want to do a 16v conversion, becouse the 2.0l 16v engine doesent need a new bore like the AEB does, and its kind of a special build.

But all i am asking is if someone know if any motor mounts would fit the 16v block in the b5 chassi.

And is there hard to get 500hp from a built 2.0 16v engine?

[M-Hood]

I dont see how a TDI crank is going to fit in the AEB block, my ATW block is the same as the AEB block and the ABA 92.8mm crank bearly fits with plenty of shaving.

As for the mounts, just go look at any 2.0 ABA swap into a B5 since it has been done plenty of times, they just put the AEB head onto it.

[Drunken_M]

I cant tell you more then issam told me, he said hes done it before and it fits with some more shaving then 2.0l crankshaft.
ABA is the same design block as the 9A block? Then it should be alot of info on the mounts.

I might just go for the 9A block with the AEB head on it if 16v head is not satisfying for my needs.

Was there alot of difference on low rpm torque with the 2.0l stroke on your engine? What turbo are you running now?

[M-Hood]

When my 2 liter went in so did my GT35r, still running a GT35r at this time but going to be switching to a EFR 8374 once it shows up.


I haven't seen any 2.1 setups making big power and I know 034 did a 2.1 setup on their A4 time attack car but then ended up going back down to a 2 liter.

[Drunken_M]

034 used 06a block? I dont think its a big difference if i build 2.0 or a 2.1l. Issam said it wouldent be much of a difference. How is the spool on your 2.0l with gt35? Its just what i am considering building, what exhaust housing are you using on your GT35?

Do you think it would be better of me to use the 9A 2.0l block with the AEB head on to get most out of the engine? Mabye the TDI crank fits better in the 9A block then the AEB block?

I just want a stroker engine in my A4 with an gt35 turbo, and an 16v engine in my girfriends car that can handle about 350-400whp, can i use the 16v head on the AEB block?

[M-Hood]

Pretty sure 034 used a 06A block for their builds. Wont be all that much difference in spool doing a 2008/2032cc 92.8mm setup vs a 2067cc 95.5mm setup, what you lose is being able to rev as high with the 95.5mm setup.


I run a .82 a/r and hit 25psi right around 4600-4700 rpms. Here is one of my old dyno plots back when I was running 1 single 044 fuel pump.

[Drunken_M]

629whp on 110 oct with only 1 044 fuel pump? Holy shit! Did you use the Stock in tank fuel pump or only the 044 fuel pump?
Do you have a spec list on the engine and head? What goals do you have with the new turbo?

[M-Hood]

629whp on 110 oct with only 1 044 fuel pump? Holy shit! Did you use the Stock in tank fuel pump or only the 044 fuel pump?
Do you have a spec list on the engine and head? What goals do you have with the new turbo?

That was done with a drop in 044 kit that 034 then started offering. Still have that one in my tank along with the dual 044 setup 034 put together for me.

Here you go but I haven't updated that site in a long time.

Engine and head
ATW block bored to 83.5 mm
ABA 2 liter crank
JE 8.5:1 Pistons
Pauter Rods
Ported AEB head
RaceWare head stud kit
Schrick 252/260 cam set
Supertech 1mm over intake valves
Supertech inconel stock size exhaust valves
Supertech High lift, high rate valve-spring set with Titanium retainers
VR6 throttle body
Custom Intake Manifold


Goal with the new turbo setup is 700-750whp on Q16 or C16.

[Haenszel20v]

Wait, like the one from the Jetta's? Worst engine VW has ever made >.> Maybe somewhat reliable but that head doesn't flow enough to make a good engine out of it.

You have no idea what you're talking about.

[Drunken_M]

That setup sounds nice, is there any downside for me to use the 9a engine block with aeb head and not the crank in an aeb block? Im thinking of using stock sized pistons 82,5mm with a compression ratio of 9:1, or is it much to gain with a 83 mm bore?

[M-Hood]

IIRC you have to weld close some of the coolant passages if you put the AEB head on it. There should be plenty of threads here on AZ about that when doing the older block.

[Drunken_M]

Ive redd that aboute the coolant passage, but is the 9a block it self any worse then the aeb block? Do you Think the 16v head will flow 500whp with the gt35 with some small porting and valve, springs, and retainer upgrade?

[spindoctor]

You have no idea what you're talking about.

Thread revival.

Found this on youtube.






How possible is it to shove this 16V head on to an AEB block?

If the 300hp(rpm limited @8500rpm) N/A Audi A4 used a 16V..there must be something good about it.

[M-Hood]

Shouldn't be much different then putting a AEB head onto a 16V ABA block which plenty people have done.

[chris164935]

Can you provide any more information on this Audi A4 with a 16v head and is naturally aspirated? Thanks.

[spindoctor]

Can you provide any more information on this Audi A4 with a 16v head and is naturally aspirated? Thanks.

http://www.clubgti.com/forum/showthread.php?t=187653

[chris164935]

Very nice! I was more hoping for a 300hp production car though. Lol.
ITBs were my first dream.

[spindoctor]

Very nice! I was more hoping for a 300hp production car though. Lol.
ITBs were my first dream.

Inside sources say the valve spring only last like 4hours or so. Camshaft lift was said to be around 14mm(!!).

Id like to know why the 4 valves heads perform better than the 5 valves. Ferrari(I think it was) F1 ran experimental 5 valve heads, and reverted back to 4 valves shortly..never look at the 5 valve again.

[chris164935]

Inside sources say the valve spring only last like 4hours or so. Camshaft lift was said to be around 14mm(!!).

Id like to know why the 4 valves heads perform better than the 5 valves. Ferrari(I think it was) F1 ran experimental 5 valve heads, and reverted back to 4 valves shortly..never look at the 5 valve again.

My first guess would be too much weight in the valvetrain running the 5 valves versus 4 valves.

[spindoctor]

I get your point. It is heavier as a cylinder head.

However, having read this:-

http://www.billzilla.org/2v4vpage2.htm

One problem that multi-valve heads have is that the area between the valve tends to get a 'dead' area for the airflow, thus limiting airflow between the valves. With a five valve head the inlet valves are usually about the size of the exhaust valves, and so the middle inlet valve has two dead spots, one on either side, thus limiting flow. The flow bench only tells part of the story though, as it can really only show relatively slow airspeeds. At high airspeeds (eg, mach 0.4 or so) the effect is worsened. They also have relatively poor squish areas compared to four valve heads.

[chris164935]

I get your point. It is heavier as a cylinder head.

However, having read this:-

http://www.billzilla.org/2v4vpage2.htm

That article makes some pretty valid points, but the 5 valve motor he talks about was produced in the 90's ('91 to '98 specifically) by Toyota. He mentions all the valves being the same size with less squish area. However, our 5 valve motor has smaller intake valves versus the exhaust valves, which, I would think, provides more squish area. It's possible that other designs have changed in the 5 valve motor heads as well. So, who knows? I am no engineer by any means, so this is all speculation, of course.

[demonmk2]

Very nice! I was more hoping for a 300hp production car though. Lol.
ITBs were my first dream.

the only way your gonna get 300 hp on a 16v with ITB's is with some crazy cams and off the wall compression and even then the A4 is too damn heavy to even appriciate the power(and money invested) the motor could produce.

I had a 2.0 16v in my 87 gti with ITB's and customs cams with stock compresion *10.1* I was at about 200hp with that! and only 134 on tq. it was awesome and fast but the car only weighed 2k.
I ditched the whole setup for an ABA turbo setup and all I can say is 320 whp-346wtq in a 2k car...holla wuut!

[spindoctor]

That article makes some pretty valid points, but the 5 valve motor he talks about was produced in the 90's ('91 to '98 specifically) by Toyota. He mentions all the valves being the same size with less squish area. However, our 5 valve motor has smaller intake valves versus the exhaust valves, which, I would think, provides more squish area. It's possible that other designs have changed in the 5 valve motor heads as well. So, who knows? I am no engineer by any means, so this is all speculation, of course.

AEB engines were produced in the mid 90s.

Another thing to add is our engine being turbo'ed, it may be a different game altogether.

I'll do more research and add to this thread. If im running standalone ECU, I'd like to run a 16V head and see how it goes. The video of that golf I posted earlier really amazed me.

[demonmk2]

didn't the NA 20v heads flow a helluva lot more than the heads that came on the turbo?
I also wonder if VW/Audi went back to the 16v head design because of the type of fuel injection it is now running (fsi-tfsi) which looks like an easier design to work with for that type of fuel injection and know everybody thinks the 16v head flows better.... I don't know just a guess but I would imagine a 20v head compared to a 16v would "have" to flow more.

[spindoctor]

didn't the NA 20v heads flow a helluva lot more than the heads that came on the turbo?
I also wonder if VW/Audi went back to the 16v head design because of the type of fuel injection it is now running (fsi-tfsi) which looks like an easier design to work with for that type of fuel injection and know everybody thinks the 16v head flows better.... I don't know just a guess but I would imagine a 20v head compared to a 16v would "have" to flow more.

They went back to 4 valve simply because there's not enough space :-




* with the NA 20V heads, Im not sure myself but I got a good feeling it has a slightly more aggressive cam profile than the turbos(both stock)

[demonmk2]

ah, kinda what I thought.
you know whether it was a 16v head or a 20v, with good/professional porting I'm sure either would be up to the task. then it would be a matter of cam profile (NA) and/or (a big enough turbo) to push the air.
My main opinion on it is, whether 20v or 16v on ITB's... the weight of the car would kill the performance and cost to much money.