Beaten down by a Nova.

[Peter Jones]

meh. Everyone hates the stock motor in the Golf they drive.(Well most of the people on here anyway)

Mk 1 Most people upgrade the 1600
MK 2 See saga above
MK 3 - The 2.0 Slow
MK 4 Chips , and bolt ons
MK 5 Chips and bolt ons.
VR6s into Ibizas, 16v s into 1s, 2s and 3s it's all part of the fun.

It doesn't matter how much horsepower you have , you'll always want more.

I'm yet to see a thread titled

"Help! My car has too much power, how do I detune it?"

I like spending money on my car, the more I spend the faster it goes.

The trick is deciding how much to spend and using that money wisely to the best effect.

We each know how much we can afford to spend and can look to this forum for the wisdom to find the right solution to meet our requirements and budget.

Some people have differing opinion on the solution that represents the best value for them it's up to the vehicle owner to chose whatever solution suits his or her personal requirements and budgets.

So it's up to the collective wisdom to help out here to make suggestions, but refrain from judgement, that job's for Spyda.

Peace out.
Pete

[Spyda]

If it gets beaten by a 68kw nova, it needs to be knocked. I dunno about reliable though or economical, 9.8l in a 1.8.......

Anyway, a 2L bottom end, cam and mk3 exhaust are good and would be nice but you would still be left behind by most cars. Id like to hastle some of my mates VS V8s, and VT's so a bit more work would be needed. Ideal 140hp min. Anything less then that for me is not worth the effort.

The argument about 8v and 16v is stupid and i havnt realy looked in to it. As far as i know and 8v needs alot of work and money to make 180hp, a 2l 16v needs KR cams to make 180hp. Mrgolf said "But a tuned 8V such as mine offered better low down torque meaning you didnt have to row through the gears as much to get the performance." That is probly true but wouldnt a 16v have more torque anyway, so regardless of where the torque is thourgh the power band, the tuned 16v has more. If a tuned 8v has 150nm at 3000rpm and a max of 160nm, wouldnt a tuned 16v with 190nm have about the same at 3000rpm?

meh. Everyone hates the stock motor in the Golf they drive.(Well most of the people on here anyway)

Mk 1 Most people upgrade the 1600
MK 2 See saga above
MK 3 - The 2.0 Slow
MK 4 Chips , and bolt ons
MK 5 Chips and bolt ons.
VR6s into Ibizas, 16v s into 1s, 2s and 3s it's all part of the fun.

It doesn't matter how much horsepower you have , you'll always want more.

I'm yet to see a thread titled

"Help! My car has too much power, how do I detune it?"

I like spending money on my car, the more I spend the faster it goes.

The trick is deciding how much to spend and using that money wisely to the best effect.

We each know how much we can afford to spend and can look to this forum for the wisdom to find the right solution to meet our requirements and budget.

Some people have differing opinion on the solution that represents the best value for them it's up to the vehicle owner to chose whatever solution suits his or her personal requirements and budgets.

So it's up to the collective wisdom to help out here to make suggestions, but refrain from judgement, that job's for Spyda.

Peace out.
Pete

You are genius. The is exactly it.

[aliasmk2]

I never said the Aus 8V's were terrible. I just said the euro 8V's were better. I have driven both in MkII's, and I can say categorically that it doesnt matter what kind of driving you do, the euro 8V (EV motor as you correctly pointed out) is faster than the australian 8V motor. Most of the 2 doors you refer to are small bumper euro models with more grunt and less weight than their officially imported counterparts, so more grunt and less weight = faster in any conditions.

You are completely correct in saying it is good, reliable transport. And they handle great too. They are slow, though. No if's or but's. Great car. They just lack the outright grunt of the euro 8V's and 16V's. Beyond this, people are just expressing their opinions...

Now no need to get personal or intolerant of other peoples views

What I am saying is that they are not slow on the open road & would out run a mk1 with a EV on kbasic blah blah blah

What can I say?????? but this is the awful truth

[mrgolf]

The claim about the EV motor in a MkI, I would say there must have been something wrong. Maybe an overdrive gearbox. In gear, an EV would destroy a aus spec GTI. I have driven both. My 8V with K-Jet, another 8V with Digi and a few Aus spec MkII's. Story is the same each time.

[mrgolf]

The argument about 8v and 16v is stupid and i havnt realy looked in to it. As far as i know and 8v needs alot of work and money to make 180hp, a 2l 16v needs KR cams to make 180hp. Mrgolf said "But a tuned 8V such as mine offered better low down torque meaning you didnt have to row through the gears as much to get the performance." That is probly true but wouldnt a 16v have more torque anyway, so regardless of where the torque is thourgh the power band, the tuned 16v has more. If a tuned 8v has 150nm at 3000rpm and a max of 160nm, wouldnt a tuned 16v with 190nm have about the same at 3000rpm?

This is commonly the belief of many people regarding the 8V euro motor. On the UK forums, a lot of people comment that the stock 8V requires less gear changes than the 16V by virtue of the fact that it comes on cam much, much lower. So if you are attacking twisties, you dont have the irritation of having the revs too low for 3rd and too high for 2nd. In the 8V, you leave it in 3rd and you are done. Of course a 16V would be ultimately quicker, but it is a more difficult drive because you are swapping cogs more often. This is what makes the 2.0T in the MkV such a winner. Torque everywhere down low. The 16V motor by design is a peakier engine. It all comes down to personal choice.

Can I just say that I am talking specifically about stock motors. Modifying makes a custom engine that performs how you prefer it to. With my MkII, I made the torque band shift higher a bit, but still lower than the 16V. Best of both worlds... or at least a good compromise while leaving the car fairly stock with its original engine.

[Golf Loon]

WOW. This thread heated up a bit huh?

My coments with regards to spydas car was that with the chip and no other work done, its probably throwing in too much fuel and thus getting poor fuel economy and going slower.

If you put a Mk3 downpipe and manifold and maybe a cam, it would be a different car. I have done it to a few aussie ones and it fixed em!

I`m not gonna go there with your comments Ian, but you are wrong in so many ways. the UK cars were more powerful and faster. end of
Also a Mk1 with the same engine would munch your mk2 all day.

Enjoy the dub you have, no knocking others efforts or desires, lets keep this a nice place to be.

I fully support the sensible comments of Pete Jones.
Peace my VW Brethren

[jayjay]

The argument about 8v and 16v is stupid and i havnt realy looked in to it. As far as i know and 8v needs alot of work and money to make 180hp, a 2l 16v needs KR cams to make 180hp. Mrgolf said "But a tuned 8V such as mine offered better low down torque meaning you didnt have to row through the gears as much to get the performance." That is probly true but wouldnt a 16v have more torque anyway, so regardless of where the torque is thourgh the power band, the tuned 16v has more. If a tuned 8v has 150nm at 3000rpm and a max of 160nm, wouldnt a tuned 16v with 190nm have about the same at 3000rpm?

i'm with golf loon and pete on this one. a 2.0 bottom end, cams and mk3 zorst/extractors would do wonders for your car.

the 16v is a completely different story. it's soo peaky compared to the 8v. but yeah. i have 8v love. i think also cause the valvers run the close ratio gear box, the needing to shift is probably down to ratios, rather than outright torque.

good luck with the motor spyda. should be great fun with those few bits and pieces

[Peter Jones]

I'll be writing up the 2.0 bottom end swap into a MK2 K-Jet system to replace a notoriously (and track proven by myself) underpowered GX 1800 bottom end. (This Mk2 motor is in a MK1). I'll be re-using the MK 2 K-Jet head and injection system.

You might like to keep an eye on what I'm up to, there's a few little tricks along the way to sort out. I've got most of it figured out now, I'll write it all up as I do it , rather than link to third hand experiences, I'll write my first hand findings. Doesn't seem too hard, there's some fiddly bits but they can be overcome with off the shelf solutions if you're not up to the home brew challenge.

I'm not sure how well this will work, although I'm confident it will work better than the low compression GX bottom end.

It's a low risk gamble for me because I got the 2.0 engine very cheap and I can do all the work my self. Mostly this particular conversion will cost me time and gaskets. I plan to properly engineer a higher performance race motor next year after I've paid for a USA Holiday.

Meanwhile if you have any questions - fire away and I'll explain the theory as I understand it before I put it into practice.



Pete

[aliasmk2]

Actually I am not wrong I am just stating facts that people have a lot of problem wrapping their heads around or are just to plane thick to read what I have written
I keep saying that off the mark the digi does not stand a chance, but in the top end in a real life driving situation the digi will take over every time
Remember that a company like VW only would move away from kbasic because they had something better
Its like you people are obsessed with living in some kind of myth

[evorobin]

Speechless although if this thread proves one thing it's that matt needs to bring another bunch of 8v's in his nect container perhaps....

[runamuk]

x2 here... I use the word 'gay' quite a lot, and even did so with gay flatmates. Gay people tend not to have a problem with it.

As for mrgolf,what can I say???????????????????????????????
I am not the first person to use the term gay in a joking style of expression on this forum & I hope I won't be the last
I have gay fiends & have worked with a lot of gay people who are evolved to the stage where they can openly joke about themselves, the same as a lot of Italian people take pride in the term wog
Now do you get that!!!!!!!!! or are you not at that level yet
Homophobic , I don't think so
You really need to have a good look at yourself mate

[mrgolf]

I keep saying that off the mark the digi does not stand a chance, but in the top end in a real life driving situation the digi will take over every time
Remember that a company like VW only would move away from kbasic because they had something better

Ummm... no. They moved away from K-Jet because digi was more efficient. And digi helped with emissions more. And in the euro spec digi motors, you are probably correct in that the in gear acceleration is pretty good and at least on par with K-Jet. Where you are horribly, horribly wrong is where you reckon the Australian digi engined cars are better than the euro engined cars in gear. No. Just no. 112bhp vs 90-95bhp with less weight by around 100kgs will always mean the euro engined cars will be faster. Dont even get me started on torque differences... Having driven both on numerous occasions I can testify that the euro motors are faster everywhere. The reason for the power differences lie in the head and larger valves as well as extra emissions controls, not just the injection.

As stated before, your experience may have been influenced by poor setup or, more likely, an overdrive gearbox whose 5th gear was a lot taller than the genuine GTI boxes. This would result in slower in gear acceleration. If you had driven a euro specced MkII GTI with an EV, you would be more qualified to make such a statement. As you arent, you would have to admit that your experience isnt extensive enough to make a categoric statement as you have.

No offence meant, though, mate. And I have had a good hard look at myself, and I am comfortable with what I see. Especially since I have addressed this arguement far less emotively than yourself. Its only a forum, and its full of opinions. But opinions arent fact until you back them up with hard data/ evicence.

[Spyda]

I was thinking on the train about the mk3 downpipe and mainfold with cams and a 2L bottom end. It realy wouldnt be a bad base. It would open up the mk2 as you all say and would be cheap.

Pete I will be watching

[jayjay]

mm.. i think we need to transfer some of the more relevant/useful ideas to a thread entitled - "how to make 8vs awesome!"

2.0 would be a good base. but i reckon i'd go cams before i went 2.0 bottom end. nothing extreme, just a bit more lift, bit more duration. oh and definately the mk3 manifold/downpipe. have you ever seen the mk2 aussie downpipe? it looks like some kind of deformed urinal.

[Spyda]

mm.. i think we need to transfer some of the more relevant/useful ideas to a thread entitled - "how to make 8vs awesome!"

2.0 would be a good base. but i reckon i'd go cams before i went 2.0 bottom end. nothing extreme, just a bit more lift, bit more duration.

Do you think that would be a good idea without the mk3 manifold and downpipe?

I thought it would have been better to do the mk3 mani and downpipe first as that is the main restrictor (i have been told) then put a cam in to make use of that extra exhaust flow as air flow in to the engine has already been improved a little, then increase displacement to get a bit of extra torque.
I have read you wont get much power gains from a 2L but torque gains will be noticable. Then to unleash the 2l a bit more get the head ported and get a 4branch mani and full exhaust. Pump more fuel in with a higher presure fuel reg and some bigger injectors, maby from a g60. And then when that is done you get bored of it and put in a vr6 with SC, after you win the loto.