Automobiles Forum banner
1 - 14 of 14 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
325 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
i happened to lay a 16v rod down beside an AAN rod and they look identical. i know they are the same length overall but im not sure if one could use a 16V rod in place of an AAN rod. the 16V rod i compared is from a 1.8 16V scirocco engine. anyone have input on this?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
749 Posts
I've heard from numerous people (some very reliable, some questionable) that they are the same exact engine with an extra cylinder "slapped" on. Sorry I don't have a definite answer for you.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
325 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
screw it, i'll be a test dummy for it lol. this engine has been the testing bed for alot of other things so why not add this one to its collection. 16V rod it is!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
164 Posts
I'm a little late to the party on this, but you should check the weight of the rods before you throw it in there. Are you replacing one rod, or are you throwing 5 16v rods in it? Either way, you should make sure that all 5 rods are the same weight group.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,079 Posts
Rallyfreak202 said:
I've heard from numerous people (some very reliable, some questionable) that they are the same exact engine with an extra cylinder "slapped" on. Sorry I don't have a definite answer for you.

Try bolting up an AAN intake manifold to a 16v cylinder head. :wink: I have seen an AAN intake with an end lopped off & a block off plate installed on a 16v engine. The 4 &5 cylinder engines of this era are very similar.
Chris
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
325 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·
my brother has AAN rods, pistons, turbo manifold thats modified, and a K24 all from an S4 engine fit to his 1.8 16V engine so i know it all interchanges. im talking about the actual structure of the rod. like the AAN has an oil passage in the middle and the 16V doesnt. whats with that? i understand that a tube is stronger than a solid structure plus the hollow AAN rod would be a little lighter.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,079 Posts
vwnut8392 said:
my brother has AAN rods, pistons, turbo manifold that's modified, and a K24 all from an S4 engine fit to his 1.8 16V engine so i know it all interchanges. I am talking about the actual structure of the rod. like the AAN has an oil passage in the middle and the 16V doesn't. whats with that? i understand that a tube is stronger than a solid structure plus the hollow AAN rod would be a little lighter.
The rods in the 7a NA 20valve engines, 3b & AAN are the same rod. The drilled hole in the rod is used to allow pressurized oil to lubricate the piston wrist pin. Without this passage the wrist pin relies on splash oiling to keep it lubricated. Pressurized oil helps keep the wrist pin cooler and allows a greater load carrying capability as there is now a film of oil for the wrist pin to "float" on. I suspect this is just an upgrade in the performance capabilities of the rod design. Not much weight difference between the 16v & AAN rods.
Here is an article that explains more about connecting rod design & technology.
http://www.faliconcranks.com/Making%20t ... ection.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
HTH, Chris
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
55 Posts
9a 2 liter 16v rods are rifle drilled as well. Identical specs as displacement is gained from 92.8 stroke crank. Early 1.8t rods interchange as well with a piston swap.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,076 Posts
early 1.8T rods (AEB) are not recommended past 300/300.

and i run a 1.8T and was offered a set of 5cyl Scats from John (quattro87) if i needed them.

i wouldnt hesitate to use them.

and yes, many many 4cyl manifolds have been made from cutting up the 5cyl ones. much to many enthusiasts dismay.
 
1 - 14 of 14 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top