cant decide.....

[VeeDubGTI16v]

for a track day car mk1 stripped with a 16v on carbs or throttle bodies

[Agreeable Slick]

mk1s and 2s are done for a reason blue, they are light, agile and have the right posture and handeling for a track car. Mk3s are too lardy and you need to invest far more into them to get the same gains as you would get out of a mk1/2 for half the price.

I would say mk1, with a mk2 16v engine, on throttle bodies, or ported and polished, balanced and lightened fly should see you with nearly 200bhp at the fly, and 165-170 atw no problems.

[Bronze MK1 Cab]

MK1  You f*cking knows it clart 

[Optimus Wol]

^^ no need to get aggresive chris..... 

[Flying Custard]

MK1  You f*cking knows it clart 

 


And what slick said, but mybe with a 2.0 16v lump instead of the 1.8 

[tinman]

track day - mk1. weight is the killer.

i wouldn't touch a cab for any sort of track day work, and anybody who is suggesting it needs their brains tested. the only cabs that are worthwhile on tracks are the ones that were originally cabs from the start, and not the ones with the roof hacked off.

a cab will suffer from scuttle on a track, plus they weigh alot more than the standard mk1. as for a mk3 cab on a track - that has to be some sort of joke.

cant really see the point of a 2litre 16v though. the difference between 1.8 and 2.0 is top end, and you wont be going top end on a track. for decent acceleration you want to keep the stroke shorter so the 1.8 would easily suffice.

[golfpro]

Youv got to do a mk1! If i had the time/money/knowledge/effort thats what id do.

Either that or id do a camper...

Id love one of those things!

Look at me goin off in my own world again, do a mk1!

[sportline_velly]

mk1
fully stripped
caged
2.0 16v flowed head
kr cams
42mm inlet manifold
16v box with LSD

now that would be fun!!!! 

[Judderi]

track day - mk1. weight is the killer.
cant really see the point of a 2litre 16v though. the difference between 1.8 and 2.0 is top end, and you wont be going top end on a track. for decent acceleration you want to keep the stroke shorter so the 1.8 would easily suffice.

Kinda disagree there mate, the 2.0 bottom end provides a hell of a lot more torque and bottom end power to the 16v - well worth the mod!

mk1 cos there the coolest closely followed by a mk2

[mix]

track day - mk1. weight is the killer.
cant really see the point of a 2litre 16v though. the difference between 1.8 and 2.0 is top end, and you wont be going top end on a track. for decent acceleration you want to keep the stroke shorter so the 1.8 would easily suffice.

Kinda disagree there mate, the 2.0 bottom end provides a hell of a lot more torque and bottom end power to the 16v - well worth the mod!

mk1 cos there the coolest closely followed by a mk2

i agree there, the 16V has the torque higher up the revs and the 8V at the bottom end.......aslong as it is a 8V 2-litre.... if its a 16V 2 litre i agree with tin.....