Post Reply 
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.0 A.D.Y Slant Engine vs Normal Fit with Gilo Eng kit
12-10-2017, 09:10 AM
Post: #1
2.0 A.D.Y Slant Engine vs Normal Fit with Gilo Eng kit
What would you guys recommend between fitting the 2.0 A.D.Y with the slant Kit and Normal with Gilo Eng kit. Any pros and Cons.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
12-10-2017, 06:57 PM (This post was last modified: 12-10-2017 06:59 PM by Camperholic.)
Post: #2
RE: 2.0 A.D.Y Slant Engine vs Normal Fit with Gilo Eng kit
If you want reliable power then do not make the engine a sleeper.

I am running a 2L 8V Long stroke VW upright and in line.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
12-11-2017, 07:20 AM
Post: #3
RE: 2.0 A.D.Y Slant Engine vs Normal Fit with Gilo Eng kit
Up right is cheaper and easier, less stuff to modify, motor also seems to last longer

I may be a mechanic, but i can't fix stupid
Bad planning on your part does not make your issue an crisis to me
Bad workmanship by other garages does not entiltle you to better rates at me
Syncro, syncro , syncro and more syncro, this is the syncro way of life
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
12-11-2017, 04:17 PM
Post: #4
RE: 2.0 A.D.Y Slant Engine vs Normal Fit with Gilo Eng kit
(12-11-2017 07:20 AM)syncromad Wrote:  Up right is cheaper and easier, less stuff to modify, motor also seems to last longer

Thanks guys
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
12-13-2017, 12:12 PM
Post: #5
RE: 2.0 A.D.Y Slant Engine vs Normal Fit with Gilo Eng kit
@ Syncromad, what do you think is the reason why the slant engines don't last so long? Don't you think it's maybe because the first ones were the short block engines which we know don't last long? I am just curious...
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
12-13-2017, 06:15 PM
Post: #6
RE: 2.0 A.D.Y Slant Engine vs Normal Fit with Gilo Eng kit
iMHO the pistons wear on the bottom side, thats what i have seen, but also seen some that have done 300k km, so hard to say

I may be a mechanic, but i can't fix stupid
Bad planning on your part does not make your issue an crisis to me
Bad workmanship by other garages does not entiltle you to better rates at me
Syncro, syncro , syncro and more syncro, this is the syncro way of life
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
12-14-2017, 08:50 AM
Post: #7
RE: 2.0 A.D.Y Slant Engine vs Normal Fit with Gilo Eng kit
Just keep in mind that the Gilo crossmember is made for std bus only and must be spaced up for Syncro !
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
12-14-2017, 09:50 AM (This post was last modified: 12-14-2017 09:53 AM by jms_snuggs.)
Post: #8
RE: 2.0 A.D.Y Slant Engine vs Normal Fit with Gilo Eng kit
(12-13-2017 06:15 PM)syncromad Wrote:  iMHO the pistons wear on the bottom side, thats what i have seen, but also seen some that have done 300k km, so hard to say

That was the old argument when the boxer engine was first proposed, VW, Porsche, Subaru, BMW & several aero engine manufacturers used the design & still do without any lower piston wear problems, I was thinking maybe the oil pressure took a bit longer to build up on starting, but the upright & sleeper engines use the same oil pickup tube, so that is also not possible.
I think it was because of the short stroke engines used in the beginning which had an inherent design flaw with relation to the larger off set angle of the con-rod during crank rotation, this was corrected with the longer stroke engine design.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
12-15-2017, 10:06 AM
Post: #9
RE: 2.0 A.D.Y Slant Engine vs Normal Fit with Gilo Eng kit
(12-14-2017 09:50 AM)jms_snuggs Wrote:  
(12-13-2017 06:15 PM)syncromad Wrote:  iMHO the pistons wear on the bottom side, thats what i have seen, but also seen some that have done 300k km, so hard to say

That was the old argument when the boxer engine was first proposed, VW, Porsche, Subaru, BMW & several aero engine manufacturers used the design & still do without any lower piston wear problems, I was thinking maybe the oil pressure took a bit longer to build up on starting, but the upright & sleeper engines use the same oil pickup tube, so that is also not possible.
I think it was because of the short stroke engines used in the beginning which had an inherent design flaw with relation to the larger off set angle of the con-rod during crank rotation, this was corrected with the longer stroke engine design.

I know that some designs rely on the crank splashing oil up on to the cylinder walls.
If the block and crank are at an angle it may not be getting the oil it requires. Just a thought.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 


Forum Jump:


User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)