Fuel Injected ITB's

[SirSpectre]

DAMN. Thats impressive

[Prof315]

These blocks have oiling issues at really high rpm, we've blown up a few of them so I know what of I speak. If you plan to turn them much over 8000 rpm get oversized bearings that increase the main and rod clearance by 0.001". This is one of our 8v grenades, it happened when coming off throttle at about 8700 rpm.

It's the oil pump that causes the starvation issue. Around 8500 rpm or so they start to cavitate.

[ABA Scirocco]

There may be problem with the stock oil pump, but there's more going on than just that, we've had similar things happen on engines with an external dry sump style oil pump. The problem is at least somewhat related to how much power the engine produces, a 175bhp motor that's turned 8500rpm seems to be much more reliable than a 195 bhp motor that's turned 8500bhp, I have no way of confirming this but I think something is flexing under extreme load, either the crank or the block, a little extra bearing clearance seems to help the engine withstand this. BTW, the blown up engine in my picture was one of our first 200 bhp 8v's, it had standard bearing clearances.

[vwjunkie42]

Found some Helpful seeming threads:

Dyno Results
Build thread

Still reading through everything in the build.

It looks like he used higher compression pistons and bigger valves than I'm planning, but he was able to hit 195whp after his rebuild, and apparently that is without it being tuned for optimum performance...

What compression ratio would you guys suggest I aim for? I heard 11:1 and up is risky on pump gas.

hey thats my motor want to buy my itbs im currently looking into the twm's or badger5 itb's. and may be getting rid of the gsxr itb's. i have been running these flawlessly since the build.

[Sycoticmynd29]

These blocks have oiling issues at really high rpm, we've blown up a few of them so I know what of I speak. If you plan to turn them much over 8000 rpm get oversized bearings that increase the main and rod clearance by 0.001". This is one of our 8v grenades, it happened when coming off throttle at about 8700 rpm.

Looks like I'll be setting a rev limit of 8000 haha

Are there any better oil pumps I could get? Not even to step the RPM's up more, just so that the oiling system works a little better.

hey thats my motor want to buy my itbs im currently looking into the twm's or badger5 itb's. and may be getting rid of the gsxr itb's. i have been running these flawlessly since the build.

What are you making the switch?


As for buying the GSXR's from you, PM me about it.

[-RalleyTuned-]

I did the gsxr throttles on my 16v about 5 years ago. The car ran ms1 v2.2 and it ran decently. The biggest issue with them is that it was never consistent. I was constantly under the hood tweaking the throttles to try and retain a good idle. The biggest issue I found was the intake boot would swell and compress and would get leaks no matter what I tried.

The car ran well and sounded cool, but in the end I switched to a custom built intake with a single 70mm throttle body. The throttle response was very close and the car made a lot better power and torque.

Like valvecovergasket said, its not so much the basic tune, its getting the off idle and mid range tuned. Consistency with that setup was difficult and I would never run those or suggest running those on a high power engine. On our race car we are making 185whp and 149ft/lbs running a stock 50mm intake, 276 cams, basic port work, 12:1 compression and ms1. That is a car that runs 30min track sessions at nothing under 4000rpm If you want to do ITB's, spend the money on a nice set from TWM or Jenvey (jenvey being my preference) and you won't have to screw with trying to make the bike throttles work.

[bonesaw]

I used ae111 throttles from Toyota and have been very happy with them.

[vwjunkie42]

I did the gsxr throttles on my 16v about 5 years ago. The car ran ms1 v2.2 and it ran decently. The biggest issue with them is that it was never consistent. I was constantly under the hood tweaking the throttles to try and retain a good idle. The biggest issue I found was the intake boot would swell and compress and would get leaks no matter what I tried.

The car ran well and sounded cool, but in the end I switched to a custom built intake with a single 70mm throttle body. The throttle response was very close and the car made a lot better power and torque.

Like valvecovergasket said, its not so much the basic tune, its getting the off idle and mid range tuned. Consistency with that setup was difficult and I would never run those or suggest running those on a high power engine. On our race car we are making 185whp and 149ft/lbs running a stock 50mm intake, 276 cams, basic port work, 12:1 compression and ms1. That is a car that runs 30min track sessions at nothing under 4000rpm If you want to do ITB's, spend the money on a nice set from TWM or Jenvey (jenvey being my preference) and you won't have to screw with trying to make the bike throttles work.

what this guy said. although i disagree with some of what it. i have had no problem with leaks. i have found that after a few years of using as a daily i need to re synch them, but all in all i have been quite happy with them. there are a few reasons i want to go with the jenveys. they are a bit bigger, they look alot cleaner, i will be able to swap trumpets easier. and they will be much easier to keep synched. also i think once i go with the bigger itb and up my fuel pressure i should be able to make over 200 bhp op referred to my build thread in a previous post but for reference specs are

2L 9A Block
.040 Wiseco 11:1 pistons
IE rods
Balanced crank
Windage tray
SCCH intermediate shaft
Autotech lightweight intermediate gear
MLS 9A headgasket (stock)

Ported 1.8L PL Head
Supertech +.5mm Intake valves backcut to 6.5mm
Supertech +.5mm Exhaust valves
Tapered TT guides
Basic 3-angle valve job
Supertech valve springs
Supertech Ti retainers
German OE lightweight mk4 TDI lifters
TT 288 cams
Autotech adj. cam gear @ 3* retarded
GSXR1000 TB's w/ 3" Velocity of Sound trumpets

[Sycoticmynd29]

what this guy said. although i disagree with some of what it. i have had no problem with leaks. i have found that after a few years of using as a daily i need to re synch them, but all in all i have been quite happy with them. there are a few reasons i want to go with the jenveys. they are a bit bigger, they look alot cleaner, i will be able to swap trumpets easier. and they will be much easier to keep synched. also i think once i go with the bigger itb and up my fuel pressure i should be able to make over 200 bhp op referred to my build thread in a previous post but for reference specs are

2L 9A Block
.040 Wiseco 11:1 pistons
IE rods
Balanced crank
Windage tray
SCCH intermediate shaft
Autotech lightweight intermediate gear
MLS 9A headgasket (stock)

Ported 1.8L PL Head
Supertech +.5mm Intake valves backcut to 6.5mm
Supertech +.5mm Exhaust valves
Tapered TT guides
Basic 3-angle valve job
Supertech valve springs
Supertech Ti retainers
German OE lightweight mk4 TDI lifters
TT 288 cams
Autotech adj. cam gear @ 3* retarded
GSXR1000 TB's w/ 3" Velocity of Sound trumpets

Is that your red engine, or the black one?

Just asking because the beginning of the build for the black motor says you got 11.3:1 pistons

[vwjunkie42]

yes this is the black one and sorry they are 11.3:1

[frechem]

I would highly recommend going with TWMs over Jenveys and this is coming from someone that has ran both.

[vwjunkie42]

really, i was looking at the twms as well. a buddy of mine has them on a counterflow 8v and hates them. have you run the dth ones? from the pics i have found it looks like the linkage may not clear the water neck on the front of the head.

[frechem]

really, i was looking at the twms as well. a buddy of mine has them on a counterflow 8v and hates them. have you run the dth ones? from the pics i have found it looks like the linkage may not clear the water neck on the front of the head.

Yes I currently run the dth ones. They come with their own water neck. You can look through my build thread to see this along with pictures of both setups.

[weeblebiker]

I built this
http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthrea...ntake-manifold page 5 and 6 have the final assembly pics, the first 4 pages are parts gathering and figuring out how to do it.

what I learned is use the oe injector position, moving the injectors away from the intake valves increases the fuel wall wetting which makes tuning the off idle lean and large throttle close movment over rich impossible to tune out.

also if you are running a stand alone absolutley make sure you have your wiring dowm pat, no short cuts or you will have electrical noise issues. all sensors should have the the ground wires twisted around the signal wires to prevent inductance issues and the grounds must return to the ecu. you must have a noise free tps signal as there is a drastic change in the fueling for 0-7% throttle position.

[JakRabit]

I run jenvey itb setup on my 16v and it came as a kit with fuel rail, injectors, linkage. It costs about 1500 bucks well worth it and it looks badass.

[Sycoticmynd29]

I think I am going to try to have flanges welded onto the ends of the throttles so I can bolt it to the "manifold" instead of having them connected with silicon couplers.

That way I won't have to deal with them swelling or shifting, which will hopefully make everything work a little smoother.



Now I have heard time and time again that Stand alone is required to run ITB's just because of the difference in sensors used.

Would it be possible to run OEM management with ITB's if I used a plenum?

I would replace the TPS with the TPS for the ITB's, then everything else would be the same.

Think it would work?

[ps2375]

Now I have heard time and time again that Stand alone is required to run ITB's just because of the difference in sensors used.

Would it be possible to run OEM management with ITB's if I used a plenum?

I would replace the TPS with the TPS for the ITB's, then everything else would be the same.

Think it would work?

Swap the TPS's would only work if they had the same values, it depends upon what OEM management you are considering (it has been done, but I doubt it was very good to drive), and a standalone is generally used due to the fact it is easier to tune for the new setup.

[bonesaw]

Do you really want to run cis-e with Itbs? Kinda defeats the purpose.

[ValveCoverGasket]

Do you really want to run cis-e with Itbs? Kinda defeats the purpose.

[Sycoticmynd29]

Do you really want to run cis-e with Itbs? Kinda defeats the purpose.

I might be making an ass out of myself here but,

I don't think I am running CIS-e, the car is already ABA swapped with a matching ECU.

I have never been sure which cars have which fueling though, so that might still be CIS-E.


It wouldn't be the end of the line, just a middle step to get the ITB's on the car and driving sooner rather than later. Pretty much just a random idea I had, and it would be kind of cool if it worked well.

[Prof315]

I might be making an ass out of myself here but,

I don't think I am running CIS-e, the car is already ABA swapped with a matching ECU.

I have never been sure which cars have which fueling though, so that might still be CIS-E.


It wouldn't be the end of the line, just a middle step to get the ITB's on the car and driving sooner rather than later. Pretty much just a random idea I had, and it would be kind of cool if it worked well.

ABAs are electronic fuel injection.

[bonesaw]

Is the car a 16v or 8v? Either way a plenum is required for maf or fuel management unit

[Sycoticmynd29]

Currently the car is an 8v ABA

The motor the ITB's will go on will be a 16v swapped ABA.


If I have to wait until I have everything (mainly the stand alone) I will wait, just trying to think of set ups I can do as steps towards the whole.


Do you think I could get the car running normally (AKA no power loss) with that set up?

Part of the reason I'm even thinking about it is because a friend works for someone who is apparently trying to work out a way to run ITB's on OEM ECU's, although they are going more for OBD2 than OBD1, but I still see it as a step in the right direction if it will work for OBD1...

[bonesaw]

on the newer cars that have MAP sensors sure, but ABA is MAF only and a plenum would be required. You should probability wait until you get the standalone and do it right the first time.

[Sycoticmynd29]

on the newer cars that have MAP sensors sure, but ABA is MAF only and a plenum would be required. You should probability wait until you get the standalone and do it right the first time.

Getting it to run on the OEM ECU would use a plenum.

That's actually what I was trying to figure out, if it would be possible if I used a plenum to keep the MAF sensor.


None of that is a matter of how I want mine set up, just as a proof of concept really.

Thanks for the help!

[bonesaw]

It MAY work, But without proper tuning it it only going to run as good as a stock ABA.

[Sycoticmynd29]

It MAY work, But without proper tuning it it only going to run as good as a stock ABA.

That's as far as I would take it. Prove that you can do it on the Stock management, gains or not.

Getting it to actually matter would be up to anybody who actually wanted to run that set up.



I like playing with crazy ideas and thinking up ways to get them to work, just because of what it is more than what it does.

The actual build plan will stick to what is known to work.

[need_a_VR6]

I think the MAF/plenum is probably easier then getting a modded 1 window 16v dizzy working. It seems people even have trouble with that! Make sure you just buy and ABF one to save the headache.

[Sycoticmynd29]

I think the MAF/plenum is probably easier then getting a modded 1 window 16v dizzy working. It seems people even have trouble with that! Make sure you just buy and ABF one to save the headache.

I thought the modified Dizzy was more for the 16v head swap than the ITB's?

[weeblebiker]

you really need to check the thread I linked earlier

[need_a_VR6]

You will need the dizzy mod on stock Motronic management, period.

[ps2375]

You will need the dizzy mod on stock Motronic management, period.

I don't think the Op knows that there is no room for the ABA dizzy in the ABA location with a 16V head on the block and the dizzy will have to be in the 16V location, meaning that the 16V dizzy is a 4 window dizzy that will have to be modded to a 1 window dizzy.

[JakRabit]

I would not advise welding to the t-bodies they will warp. The other problem is you have to run a standalone if you want to make any power on itb's.

[Sycoticmynd29]

you really need to check the thread I linked earlier

I looked through it, just haven't had a chance to read it yet.

I would not advise welding to the t-bodies they will warp. The other problem is you have to run a standalone if you want to make any power on itb's.

Didn't think about the throttles warping.. hm

You will need the dizzy mod on stock Motronic management, period.

I don't think the Op knows that there is no room for the ABA dizzy in the ABA location with a 16V head on the block and the dizzy will have to be in the 16V location, meaning that the 16V dizzy is a 4 window dizzy that will have to be modded to a 1 window dizzy.

I didn't even think about spacing issues.

I was planning on using the 16v dizzy, and I know the windows have to be swapped in from the ABA dizzy, I just wasn't sure why you brought it up.

[need_a_VR6]

Because lots of people struggle to make it work.