1.8 16v to a 2.0 16v Swap

jmracer17

jmracer17

New member
I am looking into doing a swap to a 2.0 16v. I am currently running a 1.8 16v. As far as the computer and fuel, what has to be changed/converted? I am running STL with the car. Thanks for the help/input in advance.

James
 
Sorry Lael, but I'm pretty sure Bill is right about the Digifant. I found this information on VWVORTEX:

The 1.8L 16v (code name PL) made 123hp stock, ran off CIS-e injection, and was introduced in late 86 Scirrocos and eventually found its way into the GLI and GTIs in 1987 to 1989. The 2.0 16v (code name 9A) made 134hp stock, ran off Motronic injection, and was introduced in early 90 in GLIs and in late 90/91 in GTIs up to 1992. They were also available in B3 Passats.
 
Actually Ralf, I think Lael is right, the 16v motors (PL and 9A) are CIS injection. Looking at ETKA for a '91 Golf, they show Digifant for the 8-valve motors and CIS for the 16v lumps. Never played w/ any of the late A2 cars, so I wasn't sure.

OP, should be nothing more than swapping the motors. Although, ETKA does list a different injector p/n for the 9A motor than they do for the PL motor.
 
I think the source of the confusion is because I believe the 2.0L 16V used KE-Motronic. Jetronic was the Bosch nomenclature for a fuel only computer so the 1.8L 16V was KE-Jetronic. Motronic was used when spark control was integrated with fueling. But the 2.0L 16V was still continuous injection, hence KE-Motronic.
 
Why not consider leaving it 1.8L for STL? You'll weigh 260 pounds less, and with the shorter stroke and some bigger cams you'll get more RPMs and possibly more horsepower from the mill...how do the heads and intake compare...? You'll have to make a lot more ponies out of that 2.0 to justify 10+% more weight... - GA
 
OK ok I remember now, I had a 91 GLI 16V, The computer was one unit, Not a knock box and ECU. and If I remember correctly, the harness went from the engine, inside the car to the fuse/relay box to the trunk, then back up under the dash.....
Has wicked electric recaros, power windows, and was the first to have a real diagnostic port by the shifter....

But I took that engine out and stuck it in a 87 16V scirocco w/50mm intake & header.. I did port a 1.8 16V head for it, cause the head gasket was leaking...

The source of info unless its from ETKA, my memory or a Bentley, I wouldn't trust it.....

OK now its a legal issue, If you up date, you have to do it all correct? Keep in mind the used that system for 3 or 4 years... then obdI save our lives diagnostically...
I am trying to forget about digifant, that was the biggest pile of crap ever made! I have 1 ECU left & I want $300... They always go bad..
 
Last edited:
Lael Cleland said:
If you up date, you have to do it all correct?
Click to expand...
Engine changes in STL are allowed, as long as "...the manufacturer of the vehicle and engine are the same (e.g., an Acura engine installed into a Honda car) and was available in a car delivered in North America. The chosen engine must retain its original cylinder head and intake manifold."

Also note:

"Fuel injectors and fuel rails must maintain the original number and mounting locations, but are otherwise free."

So, technically, I suppose you could change the fuel injection, but the CIS-E and Digifant intake manifolds are different, so it would be a real PITA to swap the fuel injection between the two...

GA
 
FWIW the 1.8 16v head has larger, better flowing intake ports than the 2.0 16v head.

I would definitely go 1.8 for this.

ALL North American 16v engines were CIS type injection. As noted the CIS-E aka KE-Jetronic were delivered on the 1.8 cars, with a separate "knock-box" to control ignition. The CIS-E Motronic or KE-Motronic were delivered on the 2.0 cars with ignition and fuel in one ecu. In Europe there was an ABF code motor that used electronic injection, but STx does not allow non USDM motors. And if they did, you should look at the naturally aspirated 20v motor IMO...
 
Last edited:
Ok looking at a 1.8 & 2.0L 16v, you can not tell a difference from under the hood. All the same parts, even the throttle body and fuel distributor is the same.... If you look under the rain tray is the only difference, no knock box, may have an ign module on top of the ECU.... Its not Digifant! That was 8v only, that had an air flow meter, and junk ass plastic coolant flanges...

I would love to stick a 1.8-2.0 16V in my 84 rabbit and go STL/U, but cant unless i cut the roof off and call it a cabriolet, witch had Digi also from late89-93....

It has been a while, now all I see is friggin 2000 up Passats and Audis.....
 
shwah said:
but STx does not allow non USDM motors. And if they did, you should look at the naturally aspirated 20v motor IMO...
Click to expand...

HA! I was thinking about going the opposite direction with my A4, 16V head on a 20v engine w/turbo... Then I found an AEB head, Huge ports!
 
The intake mani on a 9A(2.0) is 42mm as opposed to 40mm on the PL(1.8). I would personally go with the 1.8; revs a little higher and as stated above the head flows better. A majority of the 2.0's also have extra emission junk added.
 
Yep - intake mani is different on 2.0. Of course the Euro KR was 50mm runners.

The AEB is the head to have in a 20v.
 
Wow thanks for all the input! We are currently already over the weight of the 2.0 running the 1.8. I got the car for free and it has a huge beefy cage in it. I figured it wouldnt be worth it to change the cage around running 3 or 4 times a season. I am 19 and trying to do the motor little by little. We thought that since we already have a 2.0 block that we could start to build it slowly since we wont be contending for much! I look at it as if I can drive it on the trailer, finishing last or first, it was a good weekend. I just have a tired 1.8 that has been in the car since 1987 when the car was built! I have raced it for 3 years and the previous owner ran track days with it. Thanks for all the input. I will talk it over with the pops and see what we figure! Thanks guys!

James
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top