Beaten down by a Nova.

[Spyda]

He meant the chip which you can buy off ebay cheaply I'm sure

Ive got that. Seems to only get rid of digi lag.

[evorobin]

Is there any differences in the ecu except fuelling from the chip?

[jayjay]

i reckon if you wanna spend 4 grand it'd be much easier to deliver reliable comfy horsepower from a 16v. matt has plenty and there are a few 2.0 abfs kicking around for around the 2grand mark. you could easiliy spend less than 5 grand on any valver with techtonics/g-grind cams and you'd be pushing 160 hp no doubt.

i reckon an aba would poop all over a counterflow 8v. cept here, the only abas came in the new beetle

[qsilverza]

Hehe.... a Nooovaaa

I think I would sit and cry

I went in an 8V GTI MK2 in South Africa that had a huge Exhaust and it was ok. But my mates Golf CTI which is like a Mk2 but more modern, I think had a 16v engine used to go like a MOFO ! Hehe we were doing 180 kays easy with three of us.

Oh, and the R32 GTR while tempting, would really not be fun car to drive everyday and would end up costing you the earth for petrol/maintenance and insurance, trust me I have looked ! One good thing is they have held there value really well even with the petrol prices.

[Spyda]

i reckon if you wanna spend 4 grand it'd be much easier to deliver reliable comfy horsepower from a 16v. matt has plenty and there are a few 2.0 abfs kicking around for around the 2grand mark. you could easiliy spend less than 5 grand on any valver with techtonics/g-grind cams and you'd be pushing 160 hp no doubt.

i reckon an aba would poop all over a counterflow 8v. cept here, the only abas came in the new beetle

I think 150 is the limit. I know that 150 is the limit for the clutch, and i do like burnouts. Im worried about how much the car and brakes can take before they need to be strengthend and upgraded.

A GTR is ideal, who cares about how much it costs to run and maintain when it does 4.7 to 100 standard. You always have to pay extra for a car with GT, and the R doesnt help either.

What i dont understand is insurance charges extra for a mk2 gti when its so slow.

[Tim]

What i dont understand is insurance charges extra for a mk2 gti when its so slow.

insurance values arent always based around how fast a car is.
Its most likely about parts pricing and availability. And also if owners are prone to crashing them or not.


Back on the holden nova topic. Are any of you guys old enough to remember the old holden nova ad campaign?
The jingle went something like "Gotta get a holden novaaaaa. Cos it goes real quick!"
I guess thats proven to be true isnt it!

[Peter Jones]

I think 150 is the limit. I know that 150 is the limit for the clutch, and i do like burnouts.

You can run the 16v clutch pressure plate for a heavier clutch in the MK2s so long as it has the 210mm flywheel. (Which you could change too if you had too.) There's heaps of clutch options out there.

I just bought a 210mm 16v pressure plate and disc for my MK 1, only .US$120 plus shipping (Which will be a bit because of the weight, but still cheaper than sourcing locally.)

There's clutches out there that will hold back 300 + HP if you're prepared to pay for them.

Pete

[gldgti]

i cant believe that this has ended up with people talking about 16V's being better than 8V's AGAIN!

WE KNOW.

ITS ALL BEEN SAID

IT WAS DISCLAIMED AT THE START OF THE THREAD!

wasnt this thread about sorting Spyda's mk2's issues out and suggesting a couple of things to wake up his current engine?

sorry guys, i tire of reading the sme old crap posted over and over again.

[Bora Sport]

I have been reading this thread with some interest and a fair bit of dismay. I feel that I can speak from some experience here. I have owned and modified an Australan delivered MK2 GTI and also a South African import 1.8 16V GTI which I upgraded to a 9A (2.0) bottom end.

From my own experience I can tell you the way to go to get a bit (emphasis on bit) more perforance for not a lot of money is to throw away the standard exhaust manifold and down pipe and put a Mk3 2.0 exhaust manifold and down pipe. You can also do as I did and go for a mild cam such as a Hydrosport (roughly 268 degree) which retains driveability because it wasmy wife's car (you can go wilder for more top end and less driveability) and with mine I sent the ECU to the US and had it upgraded. I would think that it is probably not possible to do this any more due to the age of the cars.

For not a lot more money and a fair bit more performance do exactly what Loon suggested. Use a Mk.3 2.0 bottom end with the 1.8 head to retain the Digifant to keep costs down. With the mild cam and 2.0 manifold and 'zorst' you will gain a lot more performance. I am using the word performance advisedly because there is a lot more to making a car quicker and more enjoyable to drive than outright HP numbers. Torque is what makes a car feel good and accelerate especially from low engine revs.

The 2.0 modification may not have much more than 120hp but the driveability and 'in gear' performance will be in another suburb.

I hope this advice from somebody who has actually done it helps.

[Peter Jones]

From my own experience I can tell you the way to go to get a bit (emphasis on bit) more perforance for not a lot of money is to throw away the standard exhaust manifold and down pipe and put a Mk3 2.0 exhaust manifold and down pipe.

I've got those parts left over from the MK3 I just wrecked, if you're after a bargain uprade.

Pete

[ausgolfer]

Gotta agree with that. An 8v mk2 should never have been a gti, ......And this is not a debate about 16v VS 8v (the fact of the matter is it's been proven several times the 16v is higher power and torque EVERYWHERE in the rev range).

i cant believe that this has ended up with people talking about 16V's being better than 8V's AGAIN!....
sorry guys, i tire of reading the sme old crap posted over and over again.

What have I done....

For not a lot more money and a fair bit more performance do exactly what Loon suggested. Use a Mk.3 2.0 bottom end with the 1.8 head to retain the Digifant to keep costs down. With the mild cam and 2.0 manifold and 'zorst' you will gain a lot more performance. I am using the word performance advisedly because there is a lot more to making a car quicker and more enjoyable to drive than outright HP numbers. Torque is what makes a car feel good and accelerate especially from low engine revs.

The 2.0 modification may not have much more than 120hp but the driveability and 'in gear' performance will be in another suburb.

I hope this advice from somebody who has actually done it helps.

AMEN! or May the force be with you

[gldgti]

I've got those parts left over from the MK3 I just wrecked, if you're after a bargain uprade.

Pete

thats what i like to see

[mrgolf]

Blardy hell... People go on and on about how crap the 8V engine is, and I point out that the 8V from the euro spec engine, particularly the early K-Jet ones, are a completely different engine. Mine was good for mid 8 sec 100's when it was stock, and in gear was as quick as other hot hatches like the Pug 206 GTI180, MCS and MkIV Golf GTI. In TLGP's (in my younger days) it was easily a match for any 6cyl NA commodore or falcon.

The Australian 8V was certainly a LOT slower than the euro spec one. So dont sully the 8V name by lumping it in with the Australian engine. 8V isnt slow. With mild blueprinting, mine is as fast as a Pogo GTI.

As for the 16V vs 8V arguement, the 16V's were ultimately better in terms of outright power, and a 16V will always be faster around a track. 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. For the record, mine puts out 100wbhp, a 16V has 105wbhp.

If I owned an Aus spec, I would just transplant. A 2.0 8V would be a great start. Then look at silly power. I wonder if a 2.0FSI would fit???

[aliasmk2]

I am completely amazed at how people on this forum jump at the chance to knock an Australian delivered mk2
They might not have the initial take off grunt that an EV engine running on kbasic, but they do perform quite well once rolling on the open road, being a good car for overtaking & general touring, out driving a lot of cars that it should'nt
I get the feeling that most of the people on here don't get out of their own suburb to often or are just to busy dreaming of good old england
I live in Lismore which has no traffic lights,a population of 40,000 & 4 Australian delivered mk2 gti's & 1 CL (sorry no gay 2 door imports). None of the other owners in Lismore use this forum, they all praise their standard mk2 gti's(Australian) for its overall qualities of reliability, economy, build quality & most of all its performance on the open road with no traffic lights & lots of corners
I use to have a mk1 with an EV motor runinng on kbasic extractors 2inch zorst & all that stuff. Off the mark it was very quick, much more than my mk2, but when it comes to hills or overtaking the Australian mk2 gti would leave it for dead, no Q's asked
This car was never really built for TLGP, but it does do the job that it was designed for very well

[mrgolf]

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...