I have read some people recommending slip in pistons and others saying they are rubbish.

Im thinking these ones
http://www2.cip1.com/ProductDetails.asp?ProductCode=ACC%2DC10%2D5211 

For a fairly stock 1800 Type IV.
I have heard that they crack because of the thinner walls but Im not sure if this is just becasue most people are racing etc.

I onl want for a daily cruiser.

What are your opinions?

I don't have any experience on the quality of these pistons but depending on the way you drive and for how long I would assume that you may still have issues...

I have read there were issues with the 92mm pistons in beetles because the wall thickness was lower than standard causing problems with overheating and loss of power when the engine was hot...difference in thermal expansion rate between the cylinder and piston possibly.

Anyone else? I'm interested in this as I'm currently considering either standard 94mm or slip in 96mm for my late type 2/type 4 engine project.

Still a long way to go...

yea you hear people baggin... but everyone i have eva bumped into who owns a motor with slip in pistons has neva criticised.

Dave Olsen from ipswich being one of them. Back before his subi conversion he had an 1835 with a slip in thin walled set... He raced around like crazy, slide ways action, giving ricers a hard time. NEVA had an issue.

I mean... out of all the yrs i been on avd i have not seen one post showing a cracked barrel due to thin walls.

Ask CIP what brand they are. Of course if they are a reputable brand... they would have decent engineering behind them. And ask if they have a guarantee.

I spose the other benefit of going a decent thick wall set is that in yrs to come when you rebuild, you got plenty of flesh to re-hone and use oversized rings rather than throwing away cause the walls are too thin.

But another point is... if you go the little extra effort to fitting a thick walled set, you eliminate any doubt or concern for such 'issues' anyways.

Help me out here

What do you guys mean by slip ins, and thinner.

Are they the stroker kits that just have a larger bore? I just bought a 1640 kit for mine lol.

Anyway on the cyl wall thickness, probably not so on VWs as they are desperate barrels, but cyl wall thickness on every other engine is not what you may think it is. When the cast a block they often suffer from a term core shift, that's where the sand mould moves as they poor and things aren't where they are meant to be. I get brand new blocks arrive at work and first thing is a wall thickness test, one side of the wall may be 120 thou thick and the other side can be 60 thou. Anyway, that was just to show you that even the car you drive now may have extremely thin walls.

yea they are the larger bore barrels and pistons that require no machining (like your 1640) of the case so they slide straight in.

Ones for the 1835cc for example... are still slip in, but for a case whose been bored for 1775cc. So its like... robbing the wall thickness to gain those few extra cc's in the barrels.

Thats pretty crazy movement for the green sand moulding. Do they use shell casting for blocks too? Would be more precise by more exy to produce. I learnt about these techniques in uni last semester and even made a green sand mould and played wiht some moulten aluminium. They didn't give examples of direct practical applications, keen to find out none the less. Where bouts you work?

Since you have a type 4 engine you've got more meat to play with than a type 1.
Stock 2 litre type 4 is 94mm, so 96mm is not much more. It's like the type 4 equivalent of a 1640.
If it's in a hard working Kombi you should be a bit more conservative than the same engine in a beetle though.

Yeah good thought. Well its for an 1800 and it will be my daily driver but saying that, I wont be driving it like a maniac. I just want it to have a bit of extra power if needed.

Just another question concering pistons and barrels, Can I use 2L P&B's in my 1800?