8V inlet manifolds

I wonder if anyone can help with some pictures to enable me to understand what I need.

I am aiming at a 2 litre 8v engine for my Transporter but need a smaller inlet manifold than the MkII PB one. I understand that the AGG manifold is smaller (at least in the plenum chamber area) but maybe also in the distance which it sticks out from the head.

Does anyone have one off the vehicle who could post some pictures taken from various angles to show the offset from the head and the right-hand/no4 side of it, please?

I know that the mounting flange to the head is also different so pictures of that area would be helpful, too. Has anyone modified one of these to fit a PB head or do you know of a different pattern manifold which will fit the PB but is small like the AGG one? If it could also take the PB throttle body that would be marvelloues.

thanks for any help,
Garyd

 

Alternatively, of course, if anyone in the north Bucks area has one laying about that I could inspect and/or borrow for a short while, that would be even better.
Thanks
Garyd

 

AGG manifold as requested, bit fuzzy sorry

compared to a pb exhaust manifold

 

Drunkenalan, Have you not got an agg inlet on your digifant?
I think this relates to the op as he is trying to fit an engine into a van.
What did you need to do about throttle switches on the TB for the Digi ECU?

 

no mate im using a PB manifold at the minute i took the photos for a manifold i sold to MikeH,

they could be easily sorted, they are for closed throttle and wide open so not to dificult to position.

 

Thanks for the photos, Drunkenalan, they help a lot.

Having compared them with the PB inlet I have found:
a) the layout of the pipework of the manifold and the smaller plenum chamber would be very helpful in keeping it away from the T3 bodywork, especially in the right hand corner (no4 cylinder) where I have the greatest conflict.

b) there appears to be a significant flange at either end of the manifold - presumably this is to help it absorb heat from the exhaust manifold?

c) there is a lot of material around the injector housing which would need to be cut away and welded up to provide clearance for the PB injectors. In fact, most of the material above the heat flange would have to go.

d) the top curve of the inlet duct at the cylinder head flange would need significant and careful building up with weld. Well beyond my capabilities but presumably possible?

e) the offset of the manifold (8.5" as measured in your photo) is nearly an inch larger than the PB manifold. This could easily counteract the advantage given by the neater alignment of the pipework.

This has made me less sure that this manifold will do the job.

With regard to the suggestion of a MkI manifold, I have found a diagram of this but it does not give enough detail to understand it's shape. If it was a handed version of the MkII one, so that everything leaned to the left instead of the right it might do the job. Can anyone help with photos of this manifold, please? The 'height' as measured in the photo above, is a critical point.

thanks
Garyd

 

Do you not have the 2E or AGG head for the 2.0 engine?
That will save having to mod the AGG inlet manifold to fit a PB head.
As mentioned in the other thread the 2.0 heads have bigger exhaust ports.
MY T4 van had a NA diesel (1Y) and an inlet manifold similar in shape to the gti ones.

 

Hi Danster,
I have been trying to find out how different the 2.0 and 1.8 heads are. It would certainly be easier to use an AGG block, head and manifold as a single unit. However, what I haven't been able to establish is whether the PB head and/or camshaft give a performance (especially torque) advantage over the standard AGG engine. As it is destined for a Transporter I am after as much torque as I can reasonably get.

Also, can the Digifant system be readily used on the AGG engine? I understand that the AGG electronics are rather more complex?

thanks
Garyd

OK - just found your response in the other thread. You seem to have answered most of this already.

Putting this together with earlier info from Michael Rodent it would seem that a complete AGG engine might be the way to go. I guess the one outstanding issue is with regard to the engine management - can the digifant system be used on the AGG? Will the PB injectors fit into the AGG manifold or can the AGG injectors be connected to the PB/digifant wiring?

Garyd

 

The 2.0 engine will make more torque than the 1.8 due to its larger capacity (bigger bore and longer stroke).
The AGG and 2E heads were designed for the larger capacity and utilise bigger ports as such. You would be looking at a "pack D" ported PB head (alot of money) to get the same size ports as the 2.0 comes with std.
The fitting of a 2E dizzy, knock sensor and sorting the injector and throttle switch wiring is all that is required.
Is the transporter the fwd transverse engined one or the rear engined one?

 

My Transporter is one of the last rear engined (inline) T3's from 1990. The transmission is the original JX 1.6 diesel style to which I have previously bolted an AAZ 1.9 diesel. As far as I know, the PB/AGG/2E engines will also bolt up to this transmission.

I am thinking of going AGG rather than 2E for a couple of reasons. Firstly they are later engines and may be in better condition with parts more readily available in the future. Secondly, they already have the smallest manifold which seems like the only production one that might fit.

I am thinking of using a PB distributor (as I already have one) and may take up your offer of the adaptor ring. I am assuming that your statement 'fitting the knock sensor and sorting the injector and throttle switch wiring is all that is required' means that doing these items will allow the use of the Digifant system. Is that right?

thanks for your help,
Garyd