I still can't believe that matt83 used a computer game to back up an argument related to tuning engines. Just as he (almost) started talking sense!
well given the level of inteligence in this thread where people couldnt distinguish power from torque from power delivery, i thought my example of an old old computer game would be the simplest was to explain this
all this diesel vs petrol chat seems to be missing BTCC Seat Leon's, the quickest car in the field in a straight line by miles and usually if its not at the front of the race its not far behind.
Try a VR6 with a Blower I don't think anyone is "slagging off (a 16V) for no good reason". You seem to be slagging off VR6's due to your own predudices. The question was a very simple one: How would you go about make 180-200bhp in a mk2 Golf....? One of the answers available, and the one I gave, would be still a boggo standard VR6. He will then have the figure he was after and they are (relatively) easy to do. With minimum tuning you will even be well over that target figure (No cat, air filter, 268 cams and chip on a 2.8 = circa 210bhp). I'll conceed that you do NEED to do something with the standard VR6 Gearbox in terms of gear ratio's but buying another box to build together would be cheaper than getting a Shed Head (other modified heads are available ) while still on your quest to crack the 180 mark. It was you that randomly and complete off topic threw in an opinion of it being an bad idea by casting aspersions that it will understeer badly. But that wasn't the question. In fact it wasn't even close to being the question. Interestingly enough, I have not met anyone that has built or driven (open mindedly) a MK2 VR6 track car and said it handles terribly and wish they had never done it. The worst I have hear dis "it handles differently to a 16v" but then you have to expect that, and adjust. What they may loose out of on on entry to a coner, they more than make up on their way out and on their way to the top end imho.
The problem is, many people have a dawning realisation that they have the wrong car, or the wrong engine in their car. Natural human behaviour is to defend your previous decisions. So unless you have lots of different cars, or have had in the past, then you can't really judge fairly. Myth creates myth, and goes round and round in circles. The few people who have experience with different variations of VW engines have made sense on this thread - I thank them for their opinion. Unfortunately, they're in a minority! What's a newbie to think to make sense of it all???
Not nice when it comes back the other way is it. I am simply placing the counter argument. He will have 180-200hp from a tuned valver for less than 2K also if this is the chosen path. Just as easy to do as an engine transplant. Putting a heavy, forward leaning, engine in the front of an already understeering car dont seem a smart move to me, so I offfered my opinion on this as it needs adding into the mix of the discussion. Its a pertinent comment.
well my 20vt albeit with the k03 turbo runs a 1bar of boost anymore than that and it starts panting like a dog lol toyotecs car compared to mine is pretty insane leaves me for dead although his traction is an issue lol
1. There shouldn't be a counter Arguement. Suggest counter suggestion yes, but not arguement. Like counter susggestions of: A 2l 16v with x y z. Or How about a NA 20v. Not easy granted, no off the shelf parts by Mad20v's went very well. Or You could even get a 1.8 20vt with ko3 turbo with minimal boost increase to see 180 - 200 Good old fashions G60 power. Chipped 1.9 PD diesel engine even - Although thats proabbly heavier than a VR........ etc etc etc He asked how you would go about getting 180 - 200 bhp into a mk2 Golf. One option, and the one I would go for as a Mk2 VR is an excellent alround car (having no idea what he actual use for it would be. Track? Cruser? what?) Do you know what he wanted to use this car for? Handling on the edge out of the equation, a MK2 VR6 is an excellent (if not slightly thirsty) fast daily driver. That might be all he is after. 2. He would have to heavily tune AND do 90% of an engine transplant to go from 8v to 180 - 200bhp 16v. Although to counter my arguement, being and '86 car it would need a full wiring change. But it would if he went ABF route also. But I guess thats a whole nother discussion. 3. HAve you driven............. Oh whats the piont. I fear I know the answer. Even if you had your probably so stuck in your ways you would say it doesn't feel right mid corner before you even started the car. No one has, in any of this thread slagged off the 16v. Its a great engine. Just that if everyone did the same engine wise, the same as with styling for the E38ers amongst us, it would get f@cking boring quite quickly. It seems only you that is slagging off the VR6 by only looking at what you think are its negatives. 4. You offered an opinion on handling, but the question was all about getting a power figure into a mk2 golf. You and I had or have no, or little idea of what the car would be used for. Its final use has as much to do with the final choice as anything imho. With the little info given, imo a VR covers more bases and has your power figure ball park before you think about anything else
did i just read something about a VR6 mk2 being too smooth and predictable... ive had mk2s in all verietys from diesel, turbo diesel(2), GTD, GTI 8V(3), GTI 16v(2) and VR6(2 one heome brew one bought) and the VR is the most fun asa std package, wouldn`t say its predicatble but a std VR engine, box etc is clinical but the sheer tourque is what makes me smile. as far as the handling and power to weight etc we will see when i start using it on a track in the not too distant future. im currently "sorting" the front end out a bit as it reminds me of zebedy, imsure a bit of tinkering with the coilies and possibly a harder spring - if anyone has anyideas tips pls pm me overall if you want an anti depressant on 4 wheels that doesn`t cost the earth to build (or nowadays buy!) id say a VR mk2 is the way. OH that isn`t because i have just picked up a proper bargain of a VR mk2 and the blinkers are on
Did not "put a turbo on it". The whole thing was engineered for maximum torque for very little outlay. Der Renner is a very very fast car.
We are talking about a trackday car. Tell you what, put a VR6 in it. End of. Or maybe we should go down the road of HOW to extract 180-200hp from a valver if anyone might be interested.......for under 2K
It's a shame all the threads I found and posted the links to in 'the 2 litre 16v thread' are dead now, as the info was all on here. pm'ing me is a waste of time regarding them,as I have no idea how to retreive them.
thats the second time you have said that in this thread, and a point I find hard to see why you are making - the MK2 chassis isn't that bad as standard, it can be made to oversteer if that is the willl....... although I will say that my first MK2 was terrible in mid speed corners on track, understeer was the issue, but it was only noticeable because I was trying to keep up with Barny, Speedo et al from back in days past - the only major difference was that I wasnt running uprated ARB's and they were. The point I'm making here is that this chassis mod is recognised as one of the if not THE first mod to be made to a standard MK2, no matter the engine fitted as standard or the one being transplanted, be it 16v, 20vt or VR
Is it 2002 or something? I think i've just inadvertently travelled back in time. Does anyone know how to fit 280's to a mk2?
the first two posts by the OP, and to me its a simple choice, made entirely logical by the year of the car, and that is fit a 2L 16v, and run it on K-Jet The 86 8v being pre digifant means that it runs on K-jet, so although it isnt the easiest conversion to do, it isn't that difficult either Parts needed to convert to 16v, - 9a, or any of the other 2L 16v engines - pre 90 spec 16v engine loom, along with all the other 16v related parts needed, ideally you would get a 16v donor car for this to ensure that you have everything you need, the earlier 16v's arent that expensive to buy as an mot failure in this respect - you may want to source a 16v 2Y code gearbox depending on the condition of the existing box and the ratios in it the above is the basic non definitive list, there will be other parts you need Once you have the above, or indeed have it running, to acheive something along the lines of 180-200 bhp, and not a) spending a fortune, b) setting your bhp aim too high A man in the shed head, and a session at a reputable RR with experience in the K-Jet system as a minimum, further to that, some mildish cams depending on how you prefer to drive, and what you would like in terms of idle and performance off cam, something up to the schrick 268 duration seems to fulfill that criteria I've quickly written the above whilst watching telly, so apologies if I have missed something (I will add as a footnote that I wouldn't set out and follow this path, having been there and seemingly done it all before with almost every possible variation of mk2, it isnt my preferred choice, but I try not to be too biased, and the 2L 16v does have its upsides, that cannot be denied)
^^ sitting on the fence there Chris. In an ideal world your above post could have started and finished this thread.
