I don't know why I haven't wheeled this in before! Tuner 16v outputs. Not many made it over the 180 hurdle. Those that did... Conversion name Engine code Capacity Bore Stroke Power Torque C/R Comments 180 bhp No more info AMD 180 2000cc 180 bhp Gas flowed head, fully mapped electronic injection & ignition BRM 180 9A 1984cc 82.5mm 92.8mm 180 bhp K-Jet, Schrick 260 cams, flowed & ported head, inlet & exh manifold, combustion chambers, single collet groove valves BRM 180 9A 1984cc 82.5mm 92.8mm 205 bhp @ 6,500 rpm 163lb/ft @ 5,240rpm Weber Alpha mgt, Schrick 260 cams, modified ports, combustion chambers, single collet groove valves RE2100 Club Sport KR 2058cc 84mm 92.8mm 190bhp @ 6000rpm 168lb ft @ 6000rpm 10.25:1 Schrick cams, gasflowed head, "autothermic slipper design pistons", lead indium HD crank bearings 2000 E 1996cc 182bhp @ 6500 rpm 151lb/ft @5,500rpm 10.5:1 or 10.7:1 Non-cat model, cylinder head machined, camshafts, matched manifolds
Pfft! Dyno lottery springs to mind with all that lot. Marketing swing and never mind 1000, 000 000 other variations.
I have some interesting data gathered through a hard evening of mapping tonight. I'll post up in the morning.
For those who are interested last night Toyotec and myself performed a little cam devolution testing over on this thread. It makes for interesting reading. I part did it for this thread just to see the effects and then for some other reasons highlighted in that thread. ABF cams FTW. What I will say is that the thread highlights the importance of being able to match the fueling to the cam and the cam advance angle. This is very easy and quick with standalone, K-jet would take longer, still not be fully optimissed and also cost more for the dyno development time. Unoptimised Piper cams made 183bhp@6800 163lbft@5200, fully optimised ABF's made 187bhp@7200 and 160lbft@5200. You cannot just chuck them in....
Big bad bals verdict- if you've got an abf on kjet and want more power, you need a turbo, or preferably a 20vt. To spend all that extra on getting the abf management, then adding megasquirt for even 20hp isn't worth it. You'll notice it at 1st, then be used to it in 5mins. I've gone from 66bhp 1.3, to 160 abf on kjet, and yeah its awesome, but a spin in a 20v makes it feel slow straight away. I understand what you guys are saying with technology advances etc, but for a few bhp its just not worth it. You could strip your interior for a similar noticeable difference. I'd sooner start a 20vt conversion spending the money on parts rather than digi gear and an ms ecu. That's my opinion, and I'm no expert, but I've felt a 100bhp increase in my car, and I think I'd be quite dissappointed with 10-20bhp max for that money/aggro. I know old school rr tuners who would argue all day, and are all for kjet for the simplicity of it. Save the money and put it towards a better engine and setup altogether, not a 10% increase in midrange. Put a passenger in your ms abf and ill beat you on my own, whereas you'd still not match a tuned '4 up' 20vt
So why don't we all drive around in 20vt mk2 Golfs! Because thats not what everyone wants including me. I ride a GSXR 750 thats weighs 163kg's and has 146bhp, everything feels slow compared. There is always something faster for the money!!!
if you looked at it that way, no one would drive a mk2 golf if they just wanted to go fast, there are many cheaper options
Exactly. So what's 10bhp for best part of a grand??! Waste of money! Nos would be more bang per buck. Or forged internals including lightening/balancing..
Your opinion against what criteria? Who are you racing? Where do you use your car? It's not just 10 brake, it's volume under curve
I think its all gone a little too scientific for a 20 year old 16 valver! Anyone would think its a formula 1 team paying a million pounds to gain a tenth of a second. Yes definitly you lot have tweaked things to the max, and really explored these engines, and improved them with experience and technology, but I (and a few others) would sooner slap a better engine in. We also all have different opinions on worthiness, and value for money, and different expectations from our cars, that's all I'm saying. I'm not here to argue. I think its interesting and have learnt a lot from what you guys have discovered, explored and explained. Its a shame there's a million and one different factors to include, both physically, and personally.
You're entitled to your opinion! Outright horsepower clearly drives you. However, have some respect for people's interests. The block was effectively 30-years old by the time they canned it, in the last 20v incarnation. It is implicit that anyone posting here accepts the 16v will be used, however old it is. There are folk that enjoy being able to cut through the bullshoitte, and deal purely in facts and carefully analysed data, and that is what this thread epitomises. If the detail that this creates is too complex, to detailled etc, this thread is not for you. Those whose temperament frays at the thought of such detail, the information and pointers it offers, ought not to look to us, but to their schooling, or the reasons why they cannot face down the facts and persuasive evidence. Don't lose sight of the fact that we all have different backgrounds and some folk work in a very detailled fashion, and are paid to do so. This comes out in the information you see.
Mate I haven't dis-respected anyones interests, well I certainly haven't meant to. I think your forgetting I also have an abf mk2, albeit it on crappy kjet. I am also very interested in what you guys have found, I'm always learning on here, its just not everyone wants to go to the trouble of fitting ms. The thread was started asking about cam choice, and its ended with'you must have megasquirt, its the best thing since sliced bread, and I've got all the data/information to prove it'.
~ ish. It flipped the convo round to 'why not do the ECU (not MS necessarily) first? These are the gains avail. Plus, by-the-way, here's compelling evidence which shows that the past Noughties K-Jet outputs quoted, and still being used as references, are in fact overstated and therefore misleading.' By all means give your points of view on that, but I see good, solid, factually-based information - and a clear resistance to that from some corners. If anything sets folk off, it's the redressing of persistently inaccurate info on which they'd relied.
Friday night beery thread? I can see where mk2bal is coming from. The recent cam swap info shows just how much time, effort and cost is involved in this. Just imagine if we had to add in if the inter cam chain wheels had been fitted too! And even the test that was done with the switch back to ABF cams will give results that are not comparable to the Pipers anyway as that setup was not optimised like the latter. and I am not being antagonistic either. I know how much time that test must have taken. I am merely pointing out the shear amount of variables in the mix.
But this only highlights how sensitive tuning (of any type & system) actually is. If it is this hard to get the setup optimum with management then surely you can't possible hope to gain all benefits from just sticking parts without tuning? Gurds
