Very good! Thank you all. It looks like even the turbo is slow, which is fine by me. How significant is the difference between the NA and turbo in terms of power/economy? I'd like the mechanical valvetrain over the hydraulic, but I'm wondering how much power would be sacrificed for that (all turbos came with hydraulic valves, right?). The NA would certainly be more basic. Also, what is the difference between the ECOdiesel and the rest of the 1.6es? I at first though that it was somehow more ECOnomical, but I can't tell whether it's a reference to a more efficient engine or more emissions controls.

$800? I don't think I even mentioned a car :). $800 does sound like a good deal, though!
Ha! I think I'm set for now, thanks :). I'm really only interested in the engine -- the rest of the car can be a rustbucket with no heat, 5th gear, or even working headlights. I'd just need to be able to drive it home in fair weather during the daytime.
Would these earlier brackets not eat belts?

The cars that had belt problems were the late models with power steering and AC. That said I had a 91 1.6 ECOdiesel Jetta and never ever had trouble with the belts... because I replaced the worn rollers and alternator pulley. When it got wrecked it had almost 430,000 miles on it.

They are great little engines. Parts are readily available. Leaky injection pumps are becoming a big problem, you'll need to replace the seals.

The ECOdiesel is a turbo 1.6 with a smaller turbo and no fuel enrichment. They run very clean, and you can turn the pump up a bit for more power. They were the first passenger diesel to have a cat, though few at this point still have it installed.

IMHO the Jetta ECOdiesel is the one to get... more power, late model w/ big bumpers, and very comfy / adjustable seats. Most have a sunroof, and many have cruise control.

Don't let the timing belt scare you. It's easy to replace and if you follow the procedure you'll easily get 60,000 miles of service.

-J

Oh I forgot to add: The 1.6 got self adjusting lifters in 1986. The head bolts were enlarged too... I think in 1984. Unless it is in very good shape I would avoid the small bolt engines. Plus I'm partial to the 1985+ Mk2 cars.... bigger, more comfortable, and I think better looking.

-J

Not that you didn't already know this, but it appears you are right lol. I went and looked at my car, it looks like the upper bolt is under the timing cover. I did not look too close when I had the motor out of the car. The pump was shiny and tight so I didn't replace it with the motor out. The car had a new head on it when I got it and appeared to have gotten a waterpump and other cooling system items. I did a timing belt because an OEM belt was dirt cheap and it was trivially easy with the motor on the bench, it will be nice to not have to think about it at all. In hindsight I probably should have done the water pump just because but, alas hindsight is 20/20.

My car and the donor car were both 90 GLs, 5speeds with sunroofs. I put in a transmission with a slightly taller final drive out of a gas car. I don't remember the exact numbers but when I did the math it was like 200-300 rpms lower on the highway, and I was not disappointed by the acceleration with the stock shorter gearing so hopefully it will be okay. I saved the original trans in case I made the car undrivable.

I would have preferred the turbo, but I'm sure compu85 can clarify, the non turbo was 59HP, the turbo was 68, and the ecodiesel turbo was like 62HP.

Someone mentionned the VW motor that came in Volvos, the D24. A friend of mine, upshift on here, has a D24T 740, or 760. That motor gets a bad rap, two timing belts is annoying, but far from the undoable task some people online claim it to be. He spent a small fortune on timing tools and his car runs an absolute treat. I beleive most of the tools will work on a 1.6 so when my water pump dies, I know where to go to pull my pump and retime it.

So, jooseppi, why do you need just the motor? Hopefully not for a Benz swap lol.

So you don't think the motor would work in my 'SD :confused:?

:D

I was mainly interested in swapping it into a Japanese compact from the '80-'90s for a super-economical winter beater. Specifically, the car I am interested in the 4WD Tercel SW made between 1982 and 1988.

http://www.forum-auto.com/uploads/20...09153632_7.jpg

They are bulletproof, dirt-simple wagons that can go places that nobody would expect to see a subcompact wagon in.

http://www.forum-auto.com/uploads/20...65983_47_b.jpg

http://www.forum-auto.com/uploads/20...6666069_10.jpg

They can also carry heavy loads. This is SirNik84's T4 (Tercel 4WD in shorthand) hauling an engine for a '97 Civic and a T5 tranny. Granted, he has installed air shocks.

http://i131.photobucket.com/albums/p.../toyloaded.jpg

The cars came with a 6-speed manual transmission with five normal gears and one extra-low gear only available when 4WD mode. The 4WD is shift-on-the-fly. The cars are quite '80s, with plaid interiors (only some years), stodgy designs, and lots of black plastic exterior trim (including the rear license plate surround, which is known as the ATM). The stock engine is a 1.5-liter single-barrel carb 4-cylinder that makes 63 HP at 4800 RPM. Vroomvroomoom!!

I've liked the cars for a long time and have more recently had the idea that a VW diesel in a T4 would be a blast. I Googled it and found that someone had already explored the idea but gave up when he bumped into having to figure out a clutch/flywheel solution. I then thought of how JB3 welded together two input shafts for his W201 5-speed-onto-OM616 project and thought that the same should work here, allowing me to easily overcome that hump. The other two major things I can think of off the top of my head that I would have to deal with would be the engine mount arms (I don't even know how the VW engine is mounted, but the VW is transverse and the T4 is longitudinal) and fitting the tranny to the engine (adapter plate).

The OM601 is a more powerful but less economical and heavier option. I don't even have a T4 yet and my fabrication skills (nonexistent, will be developed this spring on various projects) are nowhere near able to tackle this project, but it's something I might do over the next couple of years. MA allows a summer-winter swap that I could put the T4 and Mercedes on -- $25 to swap registration between vehicles, designed for people with, say, a convertible and a 4WD.

I wonder if a PO overheated it as a result of some sort of cooling system failure?

My first car was an 83 VW jetta Diesel. No turbo. I can say this. Those cars ATE headgaskets. The 5 speeds seemed to have some issues after about 130k. Rear main seals had a bad habit of going too requiring new clutch and pressure plate. I put 3 head gaskets on mine. An Injection pump (shaft seals notorious for leaking). 2 5 speeds. I bought it at 120k and drove it to 160. Oddly though I really miss that car!

Usual reason is the timing belt was left too long and parted company. Anything more than an idle there will be damage. The cars with hydraulic lifters seem to fair even better if the belt goes out at idle.

It probably is still a twenty dollar part and fairly easy to change if one is uncertain of when it was last done. There is one model where they tried to boost performance with the non turbo engine around 90-91. They fooled around with the gear ratios and as a result I never liked that model.

The turbos never used that odd gearing setup. My feeling is that the better quality units where 85-87. Eventually they clad them with too much problematic plastic. It was so bad I felt the reliable toy company probably supplied it. Their cooling system from the factory is about the best I have ever seen. Those cars should be okay operating in the Sahara desert. Also they had the best heater set up I ever had. Very fast to get heat and all too soon it was so hot it could almost burn you. The tdi diesels where a total joke in comparison. That's what I like about volkswagon products. One extreme to another.

One thing to add is that there are some excellent non factory FSM publications out there to support vws that are great.

I knew nothing coming in, bought a bentley manual for my mk2 diesel, reduced it to 15k parts, reassembled. Great resource. Also if you can find a copy, the poor rchards diesel manual can't be beat.

Sitting on an 86 IDI.....

Yes the bentley manual is not cheap but is superior to most types of manuals. You might find one used cheap now though. It really covers the car well in an understandable way.

I do not think it covers the transmission though. That is okay as without a pile of special tools you are not going in there anyways. I still have my manual somewhere around here.

The previous poster has the 86. To me this was the absolute best year in many ways. On the east coast of Canada they have almost disappeared unfortunately. Miles and rust have taken them to a better place. A cheap car that was pretty efficient and generally easy and cheap to fix. Pretty reliable as well in my opinion. I still may see one on the road every six months or so.

I will never forget them as they were that good for the time. Still have a lower block with about 100k miles on it. Plus a complete engine/transmission with about 160k miles on it that is still very good in storage.