mk3s suck so much in factory form because of the floaty dampers, which its 10 times worse after 10 years of wear. mark, fancy a chase with mine when yours is finished? mine was weigh bridged at 1220kg with me in it
def would like to see what the difference is..... but then you have special trainers just for driving, i have flip flops - i wouldn't stand a chance
there have been 3 2.0 16v mk2s in the essex cgti gang. only one was quicker than a mk3 16v, the same one went round corners pretty well too. the other two couldnt do corners
To answer the original question about the VR6 being suitable for track work, as previously mentioned... Fitting a decent suspension kit, ARBs (if budget allows), bit of negative camber and some poly bushes transforms the car, although they are still nose heavy compared to a lighter engined Mk3. Depends how far you want to go with it?? If its cheap, they can be a lot of fun and would advise you to keep it in the Mk3 wrapper and save the hassle of a transplant to Mk2. The VR6 suffers from long gearing as standard, which can be overcome by fitting a different final drive, but it really depends on what type of track you are driving on, if gearing will be an issue. Going off topic: I love the Mk3 blinkers some people have Maybe some day... There will even be a Mk3 VR6 which out paces and handles a Mk2 or Mk1!! In fact, would that not be Pascal's??
mk3 vr6 has the extra grunt compared to the smaller engined, which would sort out weight issues anyway. not really driven a mk3 vr in serious anger so dunno how the engine weight effects stuff, but by all account, a vr in a mk2 is fine
^^^ love pascals mk3.. is pretty extreme though as matt says. 12valver - when you say front heavy, how is this noticeable? understeer? I have only driven a mk3 vr6 that was standard and was on the road so probably wasn't pushing hard enough to feel bad understeer. But getting back into my abf mk3 also totally standard it just generally felt a little lighter.... keener to turn in etc
It may be, but like for like, there's what is now my Mk1 behind it, so there's a genuine comparison there.
true..... although - just a thought, not really much more lightening you can do to a mk1 is there? stripping a mk3 must make a bigger difference if you get me? also, some circuits that are faster with longer quicker corners would favour the mk3's bigger track and high speed stablility? where as a tight twisty circuit the mk1 change of direction would be no match for the mk3.... as demonstrated when i followed a 205 off a motorway junction, long sweeping slip road and he was twitching all over the place and i was sat behind him wanting to go quicker.... then we got to the roundabout at the bottom...... ha ha, he had turned off and i couldn't even see him anymore
It's all anecdotal imperfect info - at the end of the day, any hatch from the VW stable can be tracked well. In the going faster department, there are no limits in unlimited trackday environments, but it all depends on whether it's a case of getting on track, or doing more. Weight and power are the golden rules.
Where's the usual comments? VR6 has a low power output for the engine of its size Its a heavy engine - like driving with an anchor attached to your bonnet Doesn't have that much torque Drinks lots of fuel Nothing special about the engine... Mehhh to such comments I love my VR6 in my mk2
^^ good point G-Man, we had only discussed handling, totaly missed all those points.... anyway, on the power thing, 170 is low for a 2.8 isn't it? ah ha ha ha.......... hopefully the OP will come back and answer the question as to why it is cheap? as if its just tattyness then it could be perfect for cheap entry to track fun. If its a high miler knackered car then a better condition abf could be a better/cheaper option
I would suggest you are being a bit modest, and that your own car would out handle alot of well preped Mk2's. Boat Anchor power FTW. You'll never see me choose a mk3 over Mk2 VR if I could buy either "ready to go" but I would suggest the extra Weight the Mk3 does have particularly at the rear end, could go some way in helping to neutralise extra weight of the engine a bit. If you can get hold of a Mk3 Vr cheap, and you want to track it - Go for it I say. Strip the bugger out, upgrade the suspension and ARB's and off you go. A long weekends work Max, where as a Mk2 conversion isn't.
A friend has a mk3 VR6 which was put together on a budget he uses at the 'ring and UK track days, it's stripped and caged, stock engine, gaz fixed height suspension, has stock ARBs so has 'a bit of roll' but it hangs on well on R888s, had a ride round Silverstone with him the other Monday and all things considered is a perfectly useable car for the purpose.
I had the Koni coilover kit on my Mk3 when it was an ABF. The spring rates always felt a bit hard (the kit covered 16V & VR6) so when I put the VR6 in the ride became alot nicer (with poly bushes) and I believe this was due to the extra weight of the VR6 engine being better suited to the spring rates. You do notice the extra weight when pushing on as the front end will run wide, but I found the same with the 16V (it is a FWD VW after all) but obviously not to the same extent. RallyeVR6 - Cheers mate, it does ok. Will hopefully see some improvement after this years work / rebuild. Had an interesting conversation with 16valver last week. He was watching the vids back of a track night at Knockhill he had done in the wet (E46 M3 SMG) a few weeks ago and when pushing on got a 1min 10 lap as his best. I seem to recall a certain black MK3 VR6 (which was stripped at the time) putting in a 1min 13 on a standard engine (no head / cams) on the same track, in the same conditions with Ess_three as the passenger. Nae bad as they say
