fast951

vogel, you are on the correct path. It's great to see someone thinking outside of the box. Keep up the good work and keep us posted.

vogel

Tony,

I'll try to answer some of your questions about my setup.

I'll be locating the vertical dimension of the sleeve on the rim that is what is left of the parent bore. (you can see it in the photo of the block) The sleeves will sit proud of the deck of the block, designed that way by me. I'll then set the block back in the machine and deck it, so the sleeves are flush.

This is where confusion begins. My block will be treated as if it were a closed deck block from this point forward. No longer an open deck 944. I'm using different head studs too. Not because i have to, but because i want to. A Cometic gasket, designed with this application in mind, once again, something the imports guys developed...

Some of the typical dry sleeves actually sit proud of the deck by a few thousandths all the time, this is to keep the open deck from moving and seal gasket surface, my design doesn't rely soley on head pressure, they are supported at the sides, by the block too.

I'm not sure how PD does the deck plate, but some of the deck plate designs locate the wet sleeves vertically (and every way), from the deck plate fixturing. Essentially hanging the sleeve from the plate. Mine could be considered opposite of that.

I would never dare say that the deck plate method is inferior or superior. My company has done alot of deck plate work on huge 2000hp turbo diesel engines for tractor pulling, they use wet sleeves with deck plates and it works great. Point being, this technology is new and to say that something absolutey will or will not work is jumping to conclusions.

If anyone wants to talk development, you can email me privately.

Sam Lin

Vogel, I'd be interested in hearing anything else you've got on it, whether here or e-mail. I come from a Honda background, and this is going to work really well - this engine really is cake compared to some of the nightmare imports.

Sam

Ski

Vogel, great job and continued success in your efforts. But one question that was missed was COST. Turbo 2.5 block to 2.8 or 3.0? What is the ball park or bottom line if you have it, you machine and assemble or just machine, install sleeves and we assemble at home? Would you need the head to make a cleaning pass on it to make sure that block and head are a perfect match?

The reason for my question is that there is a vendor/tuner/shop owner who has a great relationship with PMNA and Porsche. This person has been asking questions about why can't we get pistons cheaper than the first oversize are...$1600 a set if you can get them! Obviously this is just to redo the 2.5 or possibly make it a 2.6L or would 101 bore with 2.5 crank bring 2.7? There might be a source of first oversize and second oversize on the market very soon that should come in around the same price of JE pistons. These will be original design, coated with iron and have a very minute amount of graphite impregnated also. I have a set orderd for my spare engine and I should be able to post pics when I get them.

Russ Murphy

vogel,
Thanks for sharing. This is one of the most interesting threads in some time. I (and likely anyone racing one of these cars in PCA) am intrigued by the potential burlieness of a siamese sleeved 2.6 in a 2.5 donor block.

BoostGuy951

Vogel-

Can you give us an estimate of what this will cost? It seems excellent, but I am guessing that it will be out of the price range of the average 944 enthusiast. Please let us know a ballpark figure.

vogel

I'm estimating that that the whole package will be in the $1500 range. This would include the sleeves, the machining and the installation. You would provide the block core.

Things that would add to the price would be whether or not the head studs and dowels are already removed and what subsequent machining operations i perform. Decking? Boreing? Etc?

I can also provide Arias Pistons, Custom Tool Steel Wrist Pins, Total Seal Ring Packages, & Titanium Conn Rods.

After the basic sleeving operation, it would be conceivable that you take the block and assembly to your guy and have him do the finish bore, deck, balancing, and assembly.

Hope this give you some idea. Thanks.

Kevin Vogel

BoostGuy951

Any Idea what the whole package would run? Including the Pistons, Pins, Rings, and rods?

TonyG

Here's an add for the same setup for Honda's (which the sleeves were made for).

Note how the tops of the liners are supported (and why I don't believe you can properly support the sleeves by the 4 posts of the stud bosses (which flex BTW) and that a deck plate with these is mandatory.




TonyG

vogel

ALOT. If you want to talk numbers and turn around time, please email me privately. It depends to what level of absurdity you want to take it? Piston coatings, ring packages, bore sizes and custom wrist pins, titanium rods, all add up....

thanks,
kevin vogel
vogel@vogelmanufacturing.com

vogel

Tony,

I think it's useful to keep the issue of relativity in mind.

The stock Porsche open deck design fails in high boost applications NOW because the tops of bores move, break gasket seal, flex, and are not sympathetic to detonation or a variety of other symptoms that plague ALL of the open deck aluminum blocks that are used in similar performance applications.

When one chooses to sleeve the 944 with the standard dry sleeve setup that has been around for years, one basically reproduces a similar fitment, both design wise and structurally of what porsche did stock.

So what is gained? Well, you gain the larger bore (or the ability to go larger) and repairable ductile iron or some other material for the bore surface and hopefully a wider combo of pistons and rings that may be cheaper than that Nikasil or Chrome or whatever...

But the dry sleeve can still move at the top. It's bigger and better than stock in many ways, but some problems can still exist. The sleeve is fitted to the existing bore on center.

My wet sleeve is indexed and fitted in a similar manner. All the REAL WORK is done in the bore of the parent material, NOT at the top deck.

So i then have to ask. If a typical dry sleeve setup will work, will this only get better? When the stud bosses try to move toward each other or away, the top flange or "integrated deck" is there to rigid up this movement. You can't quite see it in the photo, but my flange also barely touches a couple of other points around water jacket; 5-6 contact points for each cylinder.

I suppose that one could machine a very fancy top flange on the sleeve to completely fill in the water jacket and then create a complex female version of the tool path to receive this into the block, but four points is enough to maintain fore-and-aft and side-to-side movement. The full circle design in the photo is because it can be done on the honda, take a look at some of the other engines, you won't find full circle contact at the top. In fact much debate exists as to whether that top surface should be inteferece, straight-up, or clearance fit. People are still experiementing.

You have to keep a relative perspective of where you're coming from now in order to solve the problem.

kevin vogel

TonyG

>>>The stock Porsche open deck design fails in high boost applications NOW because the tops of bores move, break gasket seal, flex, and are not sympathetic to detonation or a variety of other symptoms that plague ALL of the open deck aluminum blocks that are used in similar performance applications. <<<

When the cylinder bores move, they will distort the fire ring on a conventional gasket. This alone does not cause it to fail. And this is the very reason why the 951 wide fire, 2.7, S2, and 968 head gaskets have the wider fire ring on one side.... to counter the effects of the cylinders moving and elongating the fire ring.

The the big problem is that the heads simply flex and lift. This is because the head has no rails cast into it to stiffen it up. And it is detonation independant.

The real solution for this is to use a RSR type sealing ring.


>>>When one chooses to sleeve the 944 with the standard dry sleeve setup that has been around for years, one basically reproduces a similar fitment, both design wise and structurally of what porsche did stock. <<<

Yes... but a considerable amount of the cylinder is left to support the sleeve.

>>So what is gained? Well, you gain the larger bore (or the ability to go larger) and repairable ductile iron or some other material for the bore surface and hopefully a wider combo of pistons and rings that may be cheaper than that Nikasil or Chrome or whatever...<<<

Yep

>>>But the dry sleeve can still move at the top. It's bigger and better than stock in many ways, but some problems can still exist. The sleeve is fitted to the existing bore on center.<<<

Of course it can still move. In fact it will move exactly as much as it did without the sleeve since the only thing supporting and countering the lateral movement is the exact same cylinder material that was there before the sleeves were installed (just less of it).

>>My wet sleeve is indexed and fitted in a similar manner. All the REAL WORK is done in the bore of the parent material, NOT at the top deck. <<<

No your wet sleeve is not. It does not use existing cylinder material to support the uppper part of the cylinder/sleeve. Big difference.

The higher the piston in the bore, the higher the angularity of the connecting rod, the higher the lateral load on the cylinder. Thus the forces acting upon the sleeve to move it occure at the top. The material to which the sleeve is made of has nothing to do with this.


>>>So i then have to ask. If a typical dry sleeve setup will work, will this only get better? <<<

It will if you deck plate it to support the sleeves. The bottom of the sleeve support is also questionable since so much of the material has been removed. But there are a few solutions to support the bottom out there...


>>>When the stud bosses try to move toward each other or away, the top flange or "integrated deck" is there to rigid up this movement. <<<

The problem is like I said before..... the block is not engineered to support a wet sleeve and doesn't have the material there like the Honda/Fords do it easily with the sleeves as shown. A deck plate spreads the load where your few small points to not (at least nowhere near as well) thus the loads get placed on a couple of points (depending on there the piston is) at any point in time. And as a result, you could easily flex the block at those two points (especially since the head flexes so much and cannot be used to tie the block in).


>>You can't quite see it in the photo, but my flange also barely touches a couple of other points around water jacket; 5-6 contact points for each cylinder.<<<

It's trivial. Again... the load is not spread.

With your machine abilities, why are you not just making a deck plate and being done with it? It shouldn't be a big problem with the equipment you have.


>>>I suppose that one could machine a very fancy top flange on the sleeve to completely fill in the water jacket and then create a complex female version of the tool path to receive this into the block<<<


Go down that path!

>>>but four points is enough to maintain fore-and-aft and side-to-side movement. <<<

I disagree. But hey... build a 500HP engine and track it and let's find out :-)



>>>The full circle design in the photo is because it can be done on the honda, take a look at some of the other engines, you won't find full circle contact at the top. In fact much debate exists as to whether that top surface should be inteferece, straight-up, or clearance fit. People are still experiementing.<<<

Yes they are...

>>>You have to keep a relative perspective of where you're coming from now in order to solve the problem.<<<


Relative to what?

I hope it works out for you. But like I said before.. with your machine experience and tooling available, why play around with anything but the best possible, most structurally strongest design?


PS> I noticed in your sig that you were building a drag 944. If this is the case, then the requirements are less than if you were building this for a sustained load race car... so you might not have any problems since the loads are only a few seconds at a time, etc...

TonyG

m42racer

There are many ways to acheive the final solution. Something that I know PD has done is to put the Block under torsional twist, similar to what the Crank puts it thro. The Rails of the Block MOVE. Also there is not alot of material in the block to start with. If Dry liners are installed, limitations on bore size exist. This is typically done just to repair the Liners. Now to install oversize bores of the sizes posted, only a wet liner can be installed. The Deck Plate is a more secure way of holding everything at the top, and ties both top block rails together. The bottom of the Liner is still held by whats left in the block. I can only inform on what I have seen. The bottom of the liner is held and the top is held and located by the deck Plate.

There is one huge problem not mentioned so far. DI Liners in a wet application and installed in Aluminum blocks, is almost the same as salt water is to steel. The issues here are not for the faint of heart. For a street car, you should expect to be in the block many times, fixing the corrosion. Even treated water does not help here. Iron and Aluminum mixed with water is corrosive. The Aluminum will oxide very quickly. This sort of application is normally done on engines that come down regularly. It will be the same for all. Its something to consider.

I did some math, but I may be wrong here. If you install Liners, say 110.00 mm bore, and you need something like 1.5mm minimum wall thickness, that adds up to approx 52.00mm or just over 2.00ins extra length inside the Block. Is there that sort of room? If a 968 Head fits on a 944 block, then the 968 Block must have the same overall lenght. The 968 bore are 104.00mm. Thats 30.00mm extra inside. I would think you have broken thro the ends of the block. Maybe I'm wrong here. Any one care to check my math.

In any case, I really feel the important issue here is that pepole are doing these upgrades for us. Thank you to those who are. Thank you Vogel for your option. Its people like you and Performance Developments that have made owning a 944 Turbo fun again. To many of the existing vendors just kept selling us the same old junk. Some even ripped many of us off. Some just don't offer anything new. Those that ripped us and thiose who offer nothing new will go away. You guys will stay and we all have new options to consider now.

I thank you.

fast951

A deck plate is not a new thing for the 951, so the recent claims of innovation are not valid... Norwood installed a deck plate when he built the "Doom" race car. Can you say 900+hp, 36psi boost. out of a 968 Turbo .. Garrity built few 951 engines with deck plates... Someone on the 928 list built a 928 where they used deck plates..I believe Norwood did the work.

Some of the 951 builders in the N.E. are getting lots of HP on 951 race engines without a deck plate..

A deck plate "when built and installed correctly" should help, especially when you turn up the boost way up... For a street driven car, probably not worth the cost.

m42racer

Your correct. Deck plates are not new. Many have used them, as you suggest. Even engine builders who do not build Porsche engines.

But these are engine builders, all of them, not accessory fitters. Its easy to make power bolting on a Turbo and a few "add on tweaker thingy's". And if its power you say, how about 1200HP from 1.5 liters! Now thats power. As for whats worth it. Thats up to the owner I suppose. Again, the 944/951/968 world is changing. There are now serious vendors offering really well engineered products. More are coming. Thats what competition does. The "fitters" will not last, as we have recently seen. To offer some credible products now, you are going to have to invest and develop.

I'm sure these companies now offering these block comversions etc, are intending them for the racer. Not much use fro the street guy. But at least they are offering them. The others you mentioned didn't seem to make them available to all. I would guess that there are not to many that have their own CNC equipment. That is probably the bit that seperates those that are offering and those who do not.