GolfGTIforum.co.uk
Model specific boards => Golf mk3 => Topic started by: DaveHDi on 25 April 2012, 21:55
-
Hi guys. Looking to chop my 1.4 in for a GTi. I'm tempted but the 16v but just wondered what the difference between 8v and 16v was. Is the 16v very noticeably quicker than the 8v etc. what do you guys recommend. What would be your personal choice and why?
Thanks
Dave
-
I'm biased
But IMO 16v I where it's at, I drove an 8v an it was thoroughly disappointing even more so than the valver is compared to other cars...
-
Yes, you would notice a difference.
The 16v is noticably quicker.
-
16v is a very good choice :afro:
-
8v for cheaper running costs is my personal preference tbh! The price of fuel these days would prob make me go for a tdi if I had an option! :sad:
-
Thanks guys. That's what I was thinking and you've just confirmed it for me. 16v it is :smiley:
-
I get 33-35 mpg on a daily commute of A road, an b road blasts, the noise of the valver on cut makes you play more.... I have had 40's if I drive like miss daisy....
-
big difference matey,8v gti has bout 115 bhp and the valver bout 150bhp,youl love it :evil:
-
Hopefully can shift my current 1.4 ASAP then. 16v it is
-
I get 33-35 mpg on a daily commute of A road, an b road blasts, the noise of the valver on cut makes you play more.... I have had 40's if I drive like miss daisy....
+1 to that,have got 42 mpg in mine before. But it's much easier to get 25 mpg :evil: :grin:
-
I find 16v is more economical when granny driving but 8v is more economical when flooring it. 16v is noticeably quicker than an 8v and it will leave an 8v in the dust.
-
The 16v begs to be driven hard so go mad now and again and enjoy! :smug:
-
Any one who says an 8v is better is an idiot and deserves to be shot :) 16v for sure.
-
Any one who says an 8v is better is an idiot and deserves to be shot :) 16v for sure.
The 8v is better... :wink:
-
From what I can gather the 16v is no better on the off than an 8v but obviously when they get going the 16v would then leave the 8v behind. If you want speed then the 16v is the one but if you want something with a bit more poke but decent fuel economy and cheaper insurance then the 8v wins. They are identical for looks and comfort and features so it all depends what you want from the car but my personal choice is the 8v. I have owned 16v and VR's and find the 8v suitable for what I need :wink:
-
Thanks r the advice deano. Thought I'd made my mind up but now I'm not do sure. Lol
-
16v.
-
I think the choice should be made on how u drive,i have owned 16v and 8v (own 8v at the mo) and from my experience you have to rev the 16v more to get the best out of it whereas the 8vs torque band comes into play earlier than the 16v.Obviously the higher you get in the rev range then the 16v comes into its own but it also is going to weigh slightly more not a lot but a little,i think the best thing you can do is try a test drive in both and see how you feel.Also take into account running costs maintanence costs and even engine repair bills and ease of reparing the engine if anything went wrong.
-
Ok that's gd thinking. Thanks for the advice
-
I had an 8v, it sucked.
-
I do like the torque on my 8v, but then i've not driven a 16v GTI for comparison.
-
I had an 8v, it sucked.
Yeah but you've got pink headlights.
-
From what I can gather the 16v is no better on the off than an 8v but obviously when they get going the 16v would then leave the 8v behind. If you want speed then the 16v is the one but if you want something with a bit more poke but decent fuel economy and cheaper insurance then the 8v wins. They are identical for looks and comfort and features so it all depends what you want from the car but my personal choice is the 8v. I have owned 16v and VR's and find the 8v suitable for what I need :wink:
16v is better on or off "cam" than the 8v. There's no debate.
-
8v is disappointing. It's like driving a diesel most the time. You get a swell of torque and think "this'll be good" and then it craps itself.
-
I find my 16v quite slow at accelerating from a standstill, but I am used to the 2.0tfsi on my previous Audi
At motorway cruising it is really good though- feels like plenty of power for overtakes at 70-80mph and I get average 38 mpg.
It's definitely a lot better engine than the 1.4 I had in my first mk3 when I was 18 :)
-
All the answers are in this thread, all that remains to be said is that 8v's suck big time.... With a 16v you can play the game I do.... Look for the tell tale it's an 8v an then remind them why they bought the wrong engined mk3... By leaving them behind....
The 16v should have been the min platform for the GTI mk3 just like it is on the mk4...
-
Unfortunately you will allways get those that say "this car is better than that car" or "my car is better than your car" yadder yadder but at the end of the day its down to personnel preference and cost.
-
I had an 8v, it sucked.
Yeah but you've got pink headlights.
On my VR6
Dont forget the pink dice :kiss:
-
8v got more touque lower down is a myth!
16v will out pull an 8v from the beginning
with an 16v weighing more as someone said dont get how!?
same brakes, same everything else, only thing difference is the head right?
the abf`s are bomb proof, worth getting one just for the knowledge if you f**k it up, it will probably still keep driving!
insurance wise doa qoute, there was a £30 difference between the 8v and 16v for me.
if i had a choise between 8v or death, leathal injection please.
-
If you have ever lifted a 16v and an 8v head you would know the difference,not much on a car admitedly.
-
Thanks for. Overwhelming response guys. Think it's going to have to be a 16v for me as I don't want to get an 8v then be in the same boat I'm in now wishing I'd gone for the 16v
-
Good point,enjoy :wink:
-
8v got more touque lower down is a myth!
16v will out pull an 8v from the beginning
with an 16v weighing more as someone said dont get how!?
same brakes, same everything else, only thing difference is the head right?
the abf`s are bomb proof, worth getting one just for the knowledge if you f**k it up, it will probably still keep driving!
insurance wise doa qoute, there was a £30 difference between the 8v and 16v for me.
if i had a choise between 8v or death, leathal injection please.
i concur, still both slow imo. just the 16v pips it for me.
-
I find my 16v quite slow at accelerating from a standstill, but I am used to the 2.0tfsi on my previous Audi
At motorway cruising it is really good though- feels like plenty of power for overtakes at 70-80mph and I get average 38 mpg.
It's definitely a lot better engine than the 1.4 I had in my first mk3 when I was 18 :)
Glad its not just me that thinks it pulls away from standstill conservatively. Nice and drivable on the A roads though.
-
not read all this thread
but having owned all 3 in the past
VR. 8v. 16v
i can confirm theirs hardly owt in it but if a decent 16v comes up go for that.. but if it comes down to a mint 8v or tatty 16v, then choose the 8v
my old 8v lump was very healthy and would match any standard 16v i came across at the lights
my 16v (had 2) were very slightly better in the top end of the rev range and also on top end MPH but not by much
-
Im glad im not the only one that thinks that :smiley:
-
20vT is what should have been fitted as standard.
-
20vT is what should have been fitted as standard.
deffo
really suits it, all you need in a mk3 tbh is 200bhp and torque to match and you have a real weapon
-
A lot of the responses in here seem to be get the 16v because its faster. It depends how you drive, when the 8v was still in mine I was happy with its performance, more than capable in most day to day driving situations. I guess it depends if you want to drive like a dick or not :P
If you have 2 identical cars one an 8v and one a 16v then go for the 16v obviously but as Brad said if its a good 8v or a sh!tty 16v then go for the 8v, the difference isn't that great
-
with an 16v weighing more as someone said dont get how!?
same brakes, same everything else, only thing difference is the head right?
Head weighs approx twice as much.
Gearbox is heavier too - 02A vs 02O, and the ABF flywheel/clutch is a fair bit heavier.
16v had extra 'toys' too...so probably all in about 50Kgs more weight on a 16v.
-
(http://i254.photobucket.com/albums/hh115/kharekatoh/golf%20mk3/dynochart1-1.jpg)
(http://i254.photobucket.com/albums/hh115/kharekatoh/golf%20mk3/abfdyno.jpg)
-
Odd...no evidence there of this mythical 8v uber torque.
Looks to me like your 16v has at least as much, if not more area under the torque curve. :wink:
-
Haven't we been down this road before and doesn't it always end up in the same place.. :rolleyes:
-
Odd...no evidence there of this mythical 8v uber torque.
Looks to me like your 16v has at least as much, if not more area under the torque curve. :wink:
Ditto. I'm tired of hearing people talk about this 8v low down torque :grin:
I think we should contact Mythbusters and ask them to bust this myth once and for all!
-
Lets face it, the mk3 is fat and slow whatever flavour it comes in, if performance is your motivation then look elsewhere.
-
Lets face it, the mk3 is fat and slow whatever flavour it comes in, if performance is your motivation then look elsewhere.
Not really. I wouldn't class Glenn's Mk3 fat and slow, neither would I class mine to be honest!
-
Right ok...ffs.
-
Sorry guys. I'm new to this and be meant to start an argument
-
mine is very very very far from slow haha...
-
Sorry guys. I'm new to this and be meant to start an argument
No probs, this argument happens every few months and it's always the same, have a go in all the versions and see which one suits you best.. :smiley:
And F17 i'm talking about stock motors.
-
mines not slow either will happily sit along side a corsa vxr, civic type r and clio 172 cup in a straight line :smiley: not bad from an old car it is however gagging for more power from the help of a different engine now :lipsrsealed:
-
Ain't no torque when in 2nd.... It takes to 3-4k revs before it can go.
Worst of all, it feels it swallows fuel big time but can't piss it out fast enough.
However. he 8v will keep up with a 2.0v 16v scobby on the motorway
-
Ain't no torque when in 2nd.... It takes to 3-4k revs before it can go.
Worst of all, it feels it swallows fuel big time but can't piss it out fast enough.
However. he 8v will keep up with a 2.0v 16v scobby on the motorway
Are you on about a 16v or an 8v? If you're on about a 16v then I think yours has problems.
And I'm not surprised an 8v will keep up with a 2l 16v scooby, it's about 100kg heavier (4wd) and only has 8hp more.
-
:grin: :grin: :grin: :grin:
-
This thread is full of fail :grin:
-
I zoned out when i started seeing graphs and charts..