GolfGTIforum.co.uk
Model specific boards => Golf mk2 => Topic started by: Jay77 on 24 October 2009, 15:43
-
i no this question has more than likely been on here lots of time, but how good is 1.8 16v engine? is it there to get a 2.0 16v?
-
i no this question has more than likely been on here lots of time, but how good is 1.8 16v engine? is it there to get a 2.0 16v?
It's no bad. I used to always have 8v's then got into the 16v's. Have both 1.8 and 2.0 16v's and I prefer the torque on the 2.0ltr combined with the revs of a 16v. Hence why it's going to replace mk 1.8. Not to say that the 1.8 isn't a great engine, just a bit peaky for my taste. But for it's age you can't fault it. Both make a good noise too, it's not a VR howl but sounds good in it's own way... :grin:
-
I've had 8v and now run a 16v. 8v's are 'easier' to drive, but you can't beat the scream and revs on a 16v!!! My valver is off the road from Monday for some much needed attention! When it comes back, it should have no injection and twin 40's for a bit of fun!!!! :cool:
-
the KR has to be one of vw's toughest engines. you can thrash the hell out of them and they just keep asking for more.
very good output for its age, still not bad TBH, by todays stds there not brilliant on fuel but there managble, easy enough to drive but they ydo come on at 4000 rpm
-
Good strong engine but lacks real torque.
-
I've had 8v and now run a 16v. 8v's are 'easier' to drive, but you can't beat the scream and revs on a 16v!!! My valver is off the road from Monday for some much needed attention! When it comes back, it should have no injection and twin 40's for a bit of fun!!!! :cool:
Twin 40's ? Tasty :cool:.
What setup you going to run? Considered something similar when I do my ABF, but somewhat defeats the purpose of an EFi lump....
Had a weber on my old Driver and it sounded great, so twin 40's should sound twice as good.
On topic, the KR engine is like v-tech, happy to tootle along sub 3500k then 4k to 7500k screams it's head off, but you need to usually be a gear lower than you would need to be in an 8v just to get it in the power band. Basically you need to stir the stick to get the best from it but that just makes it more of a drivers car I think.
-
real torque is only managed by old donkey V8's or diesel's nether of them can rev
-
real torque is only managed by old donkey V8's or diesel's nether of them can rev
My Cobra did. Had that balanced to 8k. :smug:
-
yeah but those v8's have there own spectial catogory. them there engines be TOYS
-
I miss my KR everytime i thrash my Tug boat :cry:
-
My Cobra did. Had that balanced to 8k. :smug:
£10 says the balance alone cost nearly the price of a 16V GTI.
is it there to get a 2.0 16v?
In English?
-
I have to say that I prefered driving my 8v, as you could drive it a half throttle and 4000rpm was all you really needed. I drive a V6 TDI Passat as a daily, so it suited me just fine.
I bought a 16v to replace it because, well, I wanted a 16v really. It was the car I wanted new 20 years ago. It is not as tractable below 4000rpm as the 8v, but it does come on song above that. I have to admit to been a bit of a girl though. I tend to drive it with a bit of mechanical sympathy. It's 20 years old, done 159000 miles, so I dont give it too much of a hard time.
-
i no this question has more than likely been on here lots of time, but how good is 1.8 16v engine? is it there to get a 2.0 16v?
Am I missing something here, the fella didn't ask a thing about 8 vs. 16 valve - he said 1.8 vs. 2.0 16 valve
-
allways go 2.0 16v if you can be arsed to swap the bottom end. give's you more torques ( everywhere )
the 5th gear pull from 30- 100 is how you stop 8v lot saying they have more torque. the 16v will start to pull away from the off as the revs rise it'll just pull away faster and faster
-
I've owned both (Mk3 2.0 16V & Mk2 1.8 16V)
I think the 1.8 delivers it's power in a much faster and feisty way however the 2.0 (especially at high speeds) felt much stronger and holds the power much better in comparison.
I've never driven a mk2 2.0 16V but apparently they're supposed to be the mutts nutts!
The 1.8 16V is more expensive to run, maintenance & consumption wise. And finally I'm forever spending money on the 1.8, they're a big financial drain!
Cheers
-
The 1.8 16v Kr is a great engine,mines done 175k now and it still pulls like a train and that noise is awsome,one thing i would say is the 16v kr is hugely restricted by the manifold,the reason i say this is because i replaced mine with a four-branch and now the car seems to pull much harder and from lower down in the rev range and above 4000rpm it really does scream! i found it has lost the flat spot that the 16v kr has from about 2-4k rpm,i cannot comment on the 2.0 16v as i have never driven one but i am tempted by it,the mk3 bottom end with a mk2 16v kr head and cams is meant to be mental and alot of fun so maybe i might go that way in the winter months but all said and done i think the 1.8 16v kr is ONE of the best engines vw ever made in terms of all out fun and noise.
-
Can anyone else comment on ...
ABF head + ABF bottom end
vs.
KR head + ABF bottom end??
:huh:
-
Can anyone else comment on ...
ABF head + ABF bottom end
vs.
KR head + ABF bottom end??
:huh:
I'd be interested in in the +/-'s of this as I have an ABF and a KR so would ideally like to build this best of both over winter.
Think the difference in the heads is a larger inlet valves and smaller exhaust and vice versa, ABF cams give more lower down but are less peaky KR?
-
You only use the KR head on ABF bottom if you insist on keeping it on K-Jet management.
Otherwise, much easier to stick to ABF + ABF.
-
ben the head makes no difference to the management
kr head on abf block raises the compression a bit, i think its raised by 0.5
kr head has better inlet ports as standard as well
-
Very interesting...
And how does a 9a head compare to ABF and KR? (Apart from the difference between cams)
-
Dimensions
Tag Bore Stroke Disp Rod Journal Rod Length Wrist Pin Compression Height Piston Dish Block Height CR
1.7 79.5 86.4 1715 46 136 22 37.5 21 220 8.2:1
G60 81.0 86.4 1781 48 136 22 39.5 25 220 8:1
MC 81.0 86.4 2226 46 136 22 41.5 26 220 7.8:1
1.8 81.0 86.4 1781 48 144 20 32.2 10 220 10:1
16v 81.0 86.4 1781 48 144 20 33.4 -5 220 10:1
20v 81.0 86.4 1781 48 144 20 32.8 0.0 220 9.15:1
Tag Bore Stroke Disp Rod Journal Rod Length Wrist Pin Compression Height Piston Dish Block Height CR
3A 82.5 92.8 1984 48 144 20 ? 15.5 220 10.5:1
9A 82.5 92.8 1984 48 144 20 30.2 -4 220 10.8:1
ABA 82.5 92.8 1984 48 159 21 30.9 14.61 236 10:1
Tag Bore Stroke Disp Rod Journal Rod Length Wrist Pin Compression Height Piston Dish Block Height CR
1.9 79.5 95.5 1896 48 172 26 45.8 ? ? 19.5:1
(Above was taken from US website and they didn't get the ABF), however I beleive the ABF has thicker wrist pins.
Engine Codes
9A - 2.0 16v -137bhp
KR - 1.8 16v. golf GTI - 139bhp
ABF - 2.0 16v. - 150bhp
http://www.gti16v.com/tecspecs.htm
-
there are two types of KR head 027 and 051.
the 027 head is the one with the big inlet ports, most 16v heads are infact a version of the 051.
the 027 has bigger ports but how much of an advantage this is isn't clear, the reason some KR's some on very strong at 4000 and feel really peacky and others are a bit tamer is not just down the manifold biut the ports in the head. from what i can make out they went OTT with the port size and basicly buggerd it up, henace the later 051 heads all had slightly smaller inlet ports but a better exhaust port.
compareing ABF with KR heads is a bit of a tricky one.
the ABF head is an 051 version, but with shortend valve guides so there not sticking down into the port like on the 027 head. so imo VW did some basic flowing. Keeep the smaller porst for better sub 4k performance, but shorten the valve guides so you have head willign fo flow more freely than an 051 from a 9A. to help give top end.
compression wise, it seems general opinion that the ABF is 10.5 : 1 CR some rumors of it been 10.8:1 CR at some point i'll measure it but reagrdless of that ether of those cr's is quite high. say the kr head knocks it up 0.5 your to 11.0:1 cr or 11.3:1 cr thats HIGH
explains why a lot of ABF/KR motors fly aprt when run on kjet. easyest way to deal with the problem would be to chuck some bumpyer cams in with more exhaust overlap hence dynamic compression will be lowerd but if not doing that it's top end fuel and needs to be very very well setup
-
Do you mean flay apart as in break when run on Kjet, or Fly as is in rapid? Just to be 100% crystal. Probs being dense as I'm at work ad suffering brain death....
-
He means fly apart, as in get blown apart due to detonation and running lean at high revs.
Can we refer to K-Jet as a 'fuel misting system' rather than injection from now? It's a far more accurate description.
-
Can we refer to K-Jet as a 'fuel misting system' rather than injection from now? It's a far more accurate description.
:sad: :angry: :cry: :kiss:
-
He means fly apart, as in get blown apart due to detonation and running lean at high revs.
Can we refer to K-Jet as a 'fuel misting system' rather than injection from now? It's a far more accurate description.
:grin: :grin: :grin: :grin:
-
He means fly apart, as in get blown apart due to detonation and running lean at high revs.
Can we refer to K-Jet as a 'fuel misting system' rather than injection from now? It's a far more accurate description.
I see, thought as much and did think that 11.3.1 was pretty high :grin:
So it's ABF everything then. Head, block and loom.
CIS-E Motronic The Abacus of Fuel injection Misting
-
thanks for all ur help