Above Forum Ad

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

the Official 16v thread

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • evorobin
    replied
    Originally posted by ausgolfer View Post
    cast manifold on a KR is pretty decent as far as standard manifolds go. Mustn't have been cheap to produce.

    A good set of extractors will gain around 8-10% from just about every golf magazine I've read.

    PS was yours a KR to start with Preeny?
    Strange I've heard headers/extractors do jack. I've got a 2.25 exhaust and would happily fork out $$$ for a performance gain!

    Leave a comment:


  • Preen59
    replied
    Originally posted by velly_16v_cab View Post
    something i will look into.
    got a few plans about importing stuff. (16v stuff)
    Who's the man?

    YOU'RE THE MAN, Velly.

    Leave a comment:


  • velly_16v_cab
    replied
    something i will look into.
    got a few plans about importing stuff. (16v stuff)

    Leave a comment:


  • Preen59
    replied
    Originally posted by velly_16v_cab View Post
    Ashley 16-valve 4 branch manifold and a something like a 2" or 2.5" diameter bore system

    my 16v runs a 4 branch manifold (make unknow) and a little 1.75" dimeter system (for the OME look)
    What sort of dosh to get one to aus? I was thinking 2.25 or 2.5 inch exhaust.

    Leave a comment:


  • Preen59
    replied
    Originally posted by ausgolfer View Post
    I hear that and I want that



    Only experience is that the cast manifold on a KR is pretty decent as far as standard manifolds go. Mustn't have been cheap to produce.

    A good set of extractors will gain around 8-10% from just about every golf magazine I've read.

    PS was yours a KR to start with Preeny?
    10%? That's well worth it!

    Yep KR dude.

    Leave a comment:


  • velly_16v_cab
    replied
    Ashley 16-valve 4 branch manifold and a something like a 2" or 2.5" diameter bore system

    my 16v runs a 4 branch manifold (make unknow) and a little 1.75" dimeter system (for the OME look)

    Leave a comment:


  • ausgolfer
    replied
    Originally posted by Preen59 View Post
    Screw 2.0.

    1.9 all the way!
    I hear that and I want that

    Originally posted by Preen59 View Post
    Now that we're over that crap..

    Exhausts.. Tell me what is the best option.

    I've heard that the cast mani with good secondaries works well and i've heard extractors are far better. So please, i'd like to hear some advice.
    Only experience is that the cast manifold on a KR is pretty decent as far as standard manifolds go. Mustn't have been cheap to produce.

    A good set of extractors will gain around 8-10% from just about every golf magazine I've read.

    PS was yours a KR to start with Preeny?

    Leave a comment:


  • Preen59
    replied
    Now that we're over that crap..

    Exhausts.. Tell me what is the best option.

    I've heard that the cast mani with good secondaries works well and i've heard extractors are far better. So please, i'd like to hear some advice.

    Leave a comment:


  • Preen59
    replied
    Screw 2.0.

    1.9 all the way!

    Leave a comment:


  • velly_16v_cab
    replied
    and you gone 2.0 havent you dom??? if so well done.

    Leave a comment:


  • WABIT
    replied
    Originally posted by velly_16v_cab View Post
    in stock form a 1.8 16v is a touch faster than an 1.8 8v

    mod it to 2.0 and the 16v is a far better engine. esp for track or 1/4miles.

    throw lots of money at a 2.0 8v and you will see mid 150bhp
    throw little money at a 2.0 16v and you will see 170+ bhp

    so why 16v over VR6 or 20v T.

    1, a 16v is a cheap upgrade to a mk1 or mk2
    2, replacment engines are cheap
    3, upgrades are cheap


    of course all this is based from back in the uk, its abit hard sourcing 16v engines here.

    all of this was exactly why i went 16v

    dom

    Leave a comment:


  • velly_16v_cab
    replied
    in stock form a 1.8 16v is a touch faster than an 1.8 8v

    mod it to 2.0 and the 16v is a far better engine. esp for track or 1/4miles.

    throw lots of money at a 2.0 8v and you will see mid 150bhp
    throw little money at a 2.0 16v and you will see 170+ bhp

    so why 16v over VR6 or 20v T.

    1, a 16v is a cheap upgrade to a mk1 or mk2
    2, replacment engines are cheap
    3, upgrades are cheap


    of course all this is based from back in the uk, its abit hard sourcing 16v engines here.

    Leave a comment:


  • Bug_racer
    replied
    Can someone tell me what all the hype is on this forum in regards to the 16V engine ?

    According to these results :

    No 16V car stock managed a sub 16 sec pass

    and looking at this comparison :



    the 8 V is only a tad slower than the 16v .

    Those who have done a 16V conversion , why did you choose this engine over say a VR6 or a 1.8t or even modifying the 8v ?

    Im not interested in what is done O/S to these engines , cause in the UK they are probably a dime a dozen . Im interested in performance figures here in Aus and costs as well . And if they really are that quick , why havent I seen any go to the drags (apart from H8SV8S , but that car was nuts ) .

    Im happy to use the Seat 8v as a comparison car if anyone is interested

    Leave a comment:


  • evorobin
    replied
    I only read some of the 35 pages but yeah it all ended in tears. TBH I thought the video showed it as way too cammy for road use but hey...
    Last edited by evorobin; 29-07-2008, 08:06 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • velly_16v_cab
    replied
    Gary Bocking's 2.1 16v???
    yes that ended pretty sad, I didnt full follow what went wrong...naff oil pump or something wrote off the engine!

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X