So, why's the differences? They're both 1.4 right?

no similarities at all, completely different, the abd is stronger

The aex is the later engine obviously, fitted to the 6n . Iirc it has a smaller stroke than the earlier abd but has bigger bores to gets its 1400cc's of displacement, it should make a good rev happy engine compared to the torquey nature of the abd.

The aex is the later engine obviously, fitted to the 6n . Iirc it has a smaller stroke than the earlier abd but has bigger bores to gets its 1400cc's of displacement, it should make a good rev happy engine compared to the torquey nature of the abd.

yeah your right max, would make a very revvy engine, aswell as the bore and stroke the bottom end, the internal components (pistons, rods etc) seem to have much less material compared to the abd iirc making them lighter

would be good mated to a early solid lifter combustion chamber head with a load of material skimmed off to bring up the compresion, coupled with some carbs and a gk cam would make a cool engine dont you think?

wasnt the abd spi and the aex mpi??? appologiesif that be wrong :)

wasnt the abd spi and the aex mpi??? appologiesif that be wrong :)

ye, i think you right

Cheers boys. That's exactly what I needed to know about the stroke and bore.

The aex is the later engine obviously, fitted to the 6n . Iirc it has a smaller stroke than the earlier abd but has bigger bores to gets its 1400cc's of displacement, it should make a good rev happy engine compared to the torquey nature of the abd.

yeah your right max, would make a very revvy engine, aswell as the bore and stroke the bottom end, the internal components (pistons, rods etc) seem to have much less material compared to the abd iirc making them lighter

would be good mated to a early solid lifter combustion chamber head with a load of material skimmed off to bring up the compresion, coupled with some carbs and a gk cam would make a cool engine dont you think?

The AEX uses a seperate tensioner for the cam belt rather than the water pump which means a custom cambelt to get it to work with earlier heads. Aren't solid lifter heads flat anyway? I thought the combustion chamber was purely in the pistons in all small blocks up to the AEX. If this is the case then the compression ratio will be stupidly high, not to mention valve/piston contact.

The AEX uses slightly different engine mounts and starter motors too.

In short, too much of a ballache to really be worthwhile in anything it's not come in standard.

The aex is the later engine obviously, fitted to the 6n . Iirc it has a smaller stroke than the earlier abd but has bigger bores to gets its 1400cc's of displacement, it should make a good rev happy engine compared to the torquey nature of the abd.

yeah your right max, would make a very revvy engine, aswell as the bore and stroke the bottom end, the internal components (pistons, rods etc) seem to have much less material compared to the abd iirc making them lighter

would be good mated to a early solid lifter combustion chamber head with a load of material skimmed off to bring up the compresion, coupled with some carbs and a gk cam would make a cool engine dont you think?

The AEX uses a seperate tensioner for the cam belt rather than the water pump which means a custom cambelt to get it to work with earlier heads. Aren't solid lifter heads flat anyway? I thought the combustion chamber was purely in the pistons in all small blocks up to the AEX. If this is the case then the compression ratio will be stupidly high, not to mention valve/piston contact.

The AEX uses slightly different engine mounts and starter motors too.

In short, too much of a ballache to really be worthwhile in anything it's not come in standard.

cam belt wouldnt be much of a problem, make a custom vernier pulley with a solid head inner and a round tooth outer, then you just looking for a cambelt with the right length if the aex one doesnt fit, youd easily find one with a gates cam belt book

you can get solid lifter heads with combustion chambers in the head aswell as been flat, I've got a couple of both sat about

the capacity in the chamber in the early heads is greater than the aex head so there shouldnt be any valve contact to worry about, you should be able to get away with a good skim aswell

at the end of the day you could just still use the aex head (or maybe a aee, bigger valves?) with a big cam, solid lifter coversion etc but i personally prefer the early heads for some reason

It's literally the block casting and crank I'm interested in. Now I know that an AEX is useless, I'll get onto an ABD. These came in golfs, anything else?

Skodas, seats and vw's.

If you want a strong version of the 6n's shorter stroke 1.4 (said AEX) then just use AFH con-rods. And if you want it high compression then use pistons out of a 6n 1.6 8v lump (AEE and i think the other code was AEA).

I know by experience these are all uniform in dimensions.

Then you'd have a 1.4 with a compression ratio and strength akin to a GT engine.

Dont try to mix them. As said, they're two completely different engines with different uniform. Different bore and stroke. Compression chamber. Engineering sizes. They just dont mix.

I'm a fan of the 8v tbh, its the way forward for a gutsy engine if not the most racy. And the ABD, which is based on the older pre-6n engine, is a sweet unit that works well in the old skool Polos,and works so well on the bike carbs in my experience. So there's little point looking past it, imo.

The standard spi fuel system lets it down,the engine can give better performance for less fuel,so they'd hardly perfected the system they nailed to it.

Thanks for the input, all really good. I'm looking at sticking a diesel head, rods and pistons into a 1.4 unit, so the strength of the ABD may lend itself to it. Plus the bores etc of the AEX are all wrong. From the ABD, I'd only be using the block, crank and oil pump. The rest would be 1w items. I know tommo slapped a turbo on an ABD, and as far as I'm aware, the bottom end was fine, so it should be up to a diesel system right? Addition of a supercharger is likely (eaton probably) but it won't be a turbo. Again, the components should be up to this?