RE: {non-religion} sources for a 2.0 sb

["Crane, Damien" <d3c@TENNANTCO.com>]

As I recall, it is the block that is taller (16mm, I think).  Remember the
big deal they made about the rods being longer, giving a better rod ratio
and smaller angles which helps reduce wear on the piston skirts and makes
the engine smoother and last longer, etc.

> ----------
> From: 	brett@kodak.com[SMTP:brett@kodak.com]
> Sent: 	Tuesday, October 13, 1998 8:46 AM
> To: 	scirocco-l@scirocco.org; veritech@fix.net
> Subject: 	Re: {non-religion} sources for a 2.0 sb
> 
> 
> > Subject: Re: {non-religion} sources for a 2.0 sb
> > 
> > I have a question to add. Is it best to use a 2.0L 16V bottom end or 
> > will any 2.0L bottom end work just as well.  I know there is a 
> > difference in the oiling system between the 16V 1.8 and 8V 1.8  Are 
> > there any differences between the 2.0L?
> > 
> > -----------------------------------------------------
> >                    Kris Rayner
> 
> 
> I have heard that the A3 2.0 blocks share the same oil and coolent
> passages
> that the 1.8 & 2.0 16v engines...so deductive reasoning says that an A3
> 2.0 block should mate up to a 1.8 or 2.0 16v head...however...aren't the
> A3 blocks 10mm taller for some reason?  Or is the added height all in the
> tall block (cross-flow head)?  Something to think about anyway. Ask around
> the engine shops with real experience like Techtonics, BSI, or Shine.
> 
> ==Brett
> --
> To subscribe or unsubscribe, send email to
> scirocco-L-request@scirocco.org,
> with your request (subscribe, unsubscribe) in the BODY of the message.
> 
- --
To subscribe or unsubscribe, send email to scirocco-L-request@scirocco.org,
with your request (subscribe, unsubscribe) in the BODY of the message.

------------------------------