GolfGTIforum.co.uk
Model specific boards => Golf mk3 => Topic started by: Khare on 03 October 2009, 22:26
-
As title. Anyone remapped their 2.0l 8v with Rtech or any other company? preferably with Rtech :smiley:
Thanks
-
your determined to blow your engine arnt you!! :evil:
-
Go for it, but with a N/A engine theres obviously less vairables to get more power. I would do all the mods you can before you get it done, rather than paying twice as such.
-
thought about porting the engine khare?
-
TSR do head work pretty cheap on 8v lumps.
I would look to go to C2 Motorsport for any ecu work, they are doing my VR Ecu.
They can up the rev limiter too :P
Stand head rebuild, uprate valve springs, rev harder, faster, hahaha.
Nos?
-
Buy a motherf**king 16V.
Infact no, buy a f**king Skyline engine.
:evil:
:grin:
-
Skyline engines go sideways, lol.
-
think the whole point is he wants a 16v beater so they cry when he tells them its an 8v
-
think the whole point is he wants a 16v beater so they cry when he tells them its an 8v
Would loose all the weight i could to start with, thats free!
Then never put more than 1/4 tank in it. lol
-
think the whole point is he wants a 16v beater so they cry when he tells them its an 8v
Thats not hard to be honest, 16v is not the quickest engine in the world :rolleyes:
-
think the whole point is he wants a 16v beater so they cry when he tells them its an 8v
Thats not hard to be honest, 16v is not the quickest engine in the world :rolleyes:
Wanabee VR
-
think the whole point is he wants a 16v beater so they cry when he tells them its an 8v
Thats not hard to be honest, 16v is not the quickest engine in the world :rolleyes:
Yuo're getting boring now :grin: :grin: :grin: :grin: Same amount of work on the better engine will get you better results :grin: :laugh:
On a serious note - save weight gain performnce. As Chapman at Lotus said add lightness.
As you might know I have a Mk3 16v which is probably as light as it can go without major bodywork modifications. But a well sorted Mk2 in the same sort of modification will be faster than mine because it is lighter. Horney's Mk2 8v is well sorted with a ported head,Cam, lightened flywheel etc is more tuned than mine and can hold its own. DH's Mk2 8v syncro with its ported head, cam, and lightened flywheel etc will hold its own. Danny P's Mk2 Syncro with its ABF engine etc is the same.
So a Mk3 8v with the right work will also be good with the right work and the right weight reduction. Power to weight ratio is one of the biggest factors in going fast, but you need the right chassis to start with. Have you ever gone up against an Elise with 160bhp? God they can go round corners. Seen them show up big hp cars.
Sort your weight out, sort your chassis and handling, then go for the power.
On topic the chip Rtech did for me was better than the standard one, better than the ebay ones, and I'm sure if they set it on their rolling road it would be good.
So I've seen tuned Mk2 8v's go well, so Mk3 8v's should be able to get the same performance but only the weight will go against them.
Best performance modifications I have made on my car have been to the handling and not the engine. Arb's and aggressive alignment made a world of differance.
Drive it, tune it , enjoy it, whatever it is.
Paul
-
You still not got a vernier pulley either have you Khare? You're not even getting the best out of your camshaft with it's physical setting so no point getting it mapped till you have that sorted.
nick
-
You still not got a vernier pulley either have you Khare? You're not even getting the best out of your camshaft with it's physical setting so no point getting it mapped till you have that sorted.
nick
Good point nick, I forgot about that. Vernier is on the to buy list then.
think the whole point is he wants a 16v beater so they cry when he tells them its an 8v
Ditto :cool:
TSR do head work pretty cheap on 8v lumps.
I would look to go to C2 Motorsport for any ecu work, they are doing my VR Ecu.
They can up the rev limiter too :P
Stand head rebuild, uprate valve springs, rev harder, faster, hahaha.
Nos?
If I do head porting and polishing it will be at home, like I did with the mk2 head.
The only guys I'd take my ecu to is Rtech, no one else :smiley:
thought about porting the engine khare?
I have done, and if I fnd a reasonable, cheap ADY head then I'll pinch it and sort it out :smiley:
-
think the whole point is he wants a 16v beater so they cry when he tells them its an 8v
Thats not hard to be honest, 16v is not the quickest engine in the world :rolleyes:
Yuo're getting boring now :grin: :grin: :grin: :grin: Same amount of work on the better engine will get you better results :grin: :laugh:
On a serious note - save weight gain performnce. As Chapman at Lotus said add lightness.
As you might know I have a Mk3 16v which is probably as light as it can go without major bodywork modifications. But a well sorted Mk2 in the same sort of modification will be faster than mine because it is lighter. Horney's Mk2 8v is well sorted with a ported head,Cam, lightened flywheel etc is more tuned than mine and can hold its own. DH's Mk2 8v syncro with its ported head, cam, and lightened flywheel etc will hold its own. Danny P's Mk2 Syncro with its ABF engine etc is the same.
So a Mk3 8v with the right work will also be good with the right work and the right weight reduction. Power to weight ratio is one of the biggest factors in going fast, but you need the right chassis to start with. Have you ever gone up against an Elise with 160bhp? God they can go round corners. Seen them show up big hp cars.
Sort your weight out, sort your chassis and handling, then go for the power.
On topic the chip Rtech did for me was better than the standard one, better than the ebay ones, and I'm sure if they set it on their rolling road it would be good.
So I've seen tuned Mk2 8v's go well, so Mk3 8v's should be able to get the same performance but only the weight will go against them.
Best performance modifications I have made on my car have been to the handling and not the engine. Arb's and aggressive alignment made a world of differance.
Drive it, tune it , enjoy it, whatever it is.
Paul
So what would you suggest is the best way to rid some of that MK3 weight then??? :tongue:
-
think the whole point is he wants a 16v beater so they cry when he tells them its an 8v
Thats not hard to be honest, 16v is not the quickest engine in the world :rolleyes:
Yuo're getting boring now :grin: :grin: :grin: :grin: Same amount of work on the better engine will get you better results :grin: :laugh:
On a serious note - save weight gain performnce. As Chapman at Lotus said add lightness.
As you might know I have a Mk3 16v which is probably as light as it can go without major bodywork modifications. But a well sorted Mk2 in the same sort of modification will be faster than mine because it is lighter. Horney's Mk2 8v is well sorted with a ported head,Cam, lightened flywheel etc is more tuned than mine and can hold its own. DH's Mk2 8v syncro with its ported head, cam, and lightened flywheel etc will hold its own. Danny P's Mk2 Syncro with its ABF engine etc is the same.
So a Mk3 8v with the right work will also be good with the right work and the right weight reduction. Power to weight ratio is one of the biggest factors in going fast, but you need the right chassis to start with. Have you ever gone up against an Elise with 160bhp? God they can go round corners. Seen them show up big hp cars.
Sort your weight out, sort your chassis and handling, then go for the power.
On topic the chip Rtech did for me was better than the standard one, better than the ebay ones, and I'm sure if they set it on their rolling road it would be good.
So I've seen tuned Mk2 8v's go well, so Mk3 8v's should be able to get the same performance but only the weight will go against them.
Best performance modifications I have made on my car have been to the handling and not the engine. Arb's and aggressive alignment made a world of differance.
Drive it, tune it , enjoy it, whatever it is.
Paul
So what would you suggest is the best way to rid some of that MK3 weight then??? :tongue:
Take off the under bumpers! Hefty lumps of metal under both bumpers!
-
So what would you suggest is the best way to rid some of that MK3 weight then??? :tongue:
[/quote]
Take off all the stuff that doesn't make a differance to the driving of the car. 120kgs makes a big differance.
Paul
-
think the whole point is he wants a 16v beater so they cry when he tells them its an 8v
Thats not hard to be honest, 16v is not the quickest engine in the world :rolleyes:
Yuo're getting boring now :grin: :grin: :grin: :grin: Same amount of work on the better engine will get you better results :grin: :laugh:
On a serious note - save weight gain performnce. As Chapman at Lotus said add lightness.
As you might know I have a Mk3 16v which is probably as light as it can go without major bodywork modifications. But a well sorted Mk2 in the same sort of modification will be faster than mine because it is lighter. Horney's Mk2 8v is well sorted with a ported head,Cam, lightened flywheel etc is more tuned than mine and can hold its own. DH's Mk2 8v syncro with its ported head, cam, and lightened flywheel etc will hold its own. Danny P's Mk2 Syncro with its ABF engine etc is the same.
So a Mk3 8v with the right work will also be good with the right work and the right weight reduction. Power to weight ratio is one of the biggest factors in going fast, but you need the right chassis to start with. Have you ever gone up against an Elise with 160bhp? God they can go round corners. Seen them show up big hp cars.
Sort your weight out, sort your chassis and handling, then go for the power.
On topic the chip Rtech did for me was better than the standard one, better than the ebay ones, and I'm sure if they set it on their rolling road it would be good.
So I've seen tuned Mk2 8v's go well, so Mk3 8v's should be able to get the same performance but only the weight will go against them.
Best performance modifications I have made on my car have been to the handling and not the engine. Arb's and aggressive alignment made a world of differance.
Drive it, tune it , enjoy it, whatever it is.
Paul
You have your views and I have mine, yes you can get power out of a 16v but it still lacks torque.
-
len, arent those under bumpers some kind of safety thing?? :laugh:
-
len, arent those under bumpers some kind of safety thing?? :laugh:
Yes they are, but it would not worry me if they were removed.
-
ok are we talking a big job here or just screwing it off?
-
len, arent those under bumpers some kind of safety thing?? :laugh:
Yes they are, but it would not worry me if they were removed.
really? sounds abit dodgy, even for len
-
Oh I wouldnt remove them on my car!
Easy to remove, just 4 bolts on each one.
-
i thought so too!!
plus if my mk3 melted when i did a 10mph shunt, i dread to thing the damage caused at a normal 30mph crash without those attatched!!
-
I would do it on a track car.
As I know how crazy Khare is I thought I would suggest it! :grin:
-
I would have thought the front one is an integral part of the front structure - I don't mean it cant be removed but that it is required to give the front end structural rigidity.
Paul
-
I would have thought the front one is an integral part of the front structure - I don't mean it cant be removed but that it is required to give the front end structural rigidity.
Paul
From memory your right, I believe it ties the inner wings together.
-
think i will be leaving that one then............ :laugh:
-
I would do it on a track car.
As I know how crazy Khare is I thought I would suggest it! :grin:
I'm a crazy bastard! But when it comes to safety I rather have something up front to slow me down. On a track car though, I would :smiley:
-
have you changed you cam yet if memory serves right you had said something about a mk2 cam or something
-
have you changed you cam yet if memory serves right you had said something about a mk2 cam or something
I've got a Kent gs23h cam in there. 285 duration and 11.47" lift. :smiley:
Weight saving is one of the best ways to gain speed, but I've got nothing I can remove that wouldn't sacrifice comfort or something else.
-
I would have thought the front one is an integral part of the front structure - I don't mean it cant be removed but that it is required to give the front end structural rigidity.
Paul
Found a old picture of mine from when I changed the bumpers.
(http://i125.photobucket.com/albums/p51/jmfangio5/golfwork.jpg)
-
Yep, as you can see in the above picture the crossmember bolts to the front of the chassis legs. You certainly wouldn't want those flapping about on any car.
Paul