GolfGTIforum.co.uk
Model specific boards => Golf mk2 => Topic started by: jasonpi on 21 April 2006, 17:11
-
right ive been searching through the threads looking at a 9a conversion, was looking at the 1.8t but want to simplifiy the conversion. anyway i was under the impression that putting a 9a bottom end on the car with mods to the head could see upto 160-180 quite easily. now why are people putting in mk3 2.016 lumps in when there quite heavy and not very tuneable? maybe im wrong but i want to keep the head and just replace the bottom end can anyone clarify why people do this?
cheers
-
well a complete MK3 ABF unit can get 170bhp easily just by chipping it ;)
-
are they straight swap jonny? and whats the weight difference in them
-
well it will bolt in no problems, and if you have a late MK2 the loom will plug directly into the back of the fusebox. Main problem is the ABF lump is slightly taller, so the throttle body can hit the bonnet (putting a small dent in it solves this) and the downpipe can hit the tunnel (another dent here, or a taller front mount can be used to tilt the engine back further)
Dunno about weght difference, I don't think it will be a great deal though.
-
i thought the abf engine was 150bhp as standard and i thought chipping a normally aspirated engine will see between 8 and 12 bhp increase, (well thats what most chipping services claim)! and mines an early 16v so dont know if i would need to change the wiring loom? thats why a 9a bottom end for me would be perfect no messing about a straight swap as im led to believe. if only i could find one!!!
-
Is the 9a only found in a mk3 golf gti? Would this engine be workable for example? :
http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/VW-GOLF-GTi-MK3-2-0-8V-ENGINE-Seat-Toledo-SXE_W0QQitemZ4633321559QQcategoryZ9889QQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem
This certainly would be, though you'd have an 8V head to dispense with somewhere:
http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/VW-GOLF-MK3-GTI-2-0-LTR-8V-ENGINE-COMPLETE_W0QQitemZ4631125435QQcategoryZ9889QQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem
-
no offence but the mk3 8v has less power than a mk2 16v 115 versus 136 or 139 i dont want to go back but forward but if ur suggesting using the bottom end a mating it to my 16v head then as jonny suggested still gonna have clearance issues and i dont know if its visable to mate it. 9a's are from corrado's passat's which are 2 litre and these are a straight swap with the original 1.8 bottom end.
-
you need a 2.0 16v bottom end, an 8v 2e is no good. The reason an ABF can make 170 with just a chip , is apparently VW limited the power from the factory so they wouldn't hurt VR6 sales too much!
-
we really do need an ask jonny section :laugh: :grin:
-
We certainly need a FAQ section. I just got through reading another thread which said the 2.0 bottom ends were identical on 8 and 16V mk 3 engines so it didn't matter which lump you found first. The more I know, the less I understand.
-
well whoever said that was wrong ;) Theres no way you can bolt an 8v bottom end onto a 16v without some serious modification, otherwise all us 8v owners would have chucked on 16v heads years ago ;)
-
sorry to butt in lads, but Im getting confused now is nt the simplist thing to put the whole mk3 16v lump in then not only will you have more bhp to begin with , you can also chip it as as said earlier, forgive me if im talking bollocks its all new to me.
rub jonny: when you say late mk2 looms will plug straight in to a 2.0 16v fuse box, how late do you mean.I have a 1990 16v is that to early, cheers
-
Whoa that 'both bottom ends are identical' pony!! I thought they were and bought a 2.0 8v (2e)bottom end and then found it wouldnt fit...its the pistons that are different- the 16v ones are angled to clear the valves. The distributor on the 8v is driven off the oil pump drive shaft whilst the 16v has a blanking plate and the dizzy drives from the cams. The blocks are the same otherwise.
Dont anyone else make this (expensive) mistake- i was gutted as i spent ages looking for a block and then brought the wrong one and then had to find the right one... :grin:
However- the 6a and 9a 2.0 16v (2j) bottom ends are identical except for the sumps and manifolds. The '6a' is fittted to Audis and is in-line, whilst the Passat/Corrado have a transverse '9a', hence the different shaped sumps. I trhink the oil pump is different too- i fitted a brand new 9a one anyway but forgot to compare them!
There are more Audis kicking around and so i bought a 1991 Audi 80 Quattro 2.0 16v and then just swapped the entire engine over. If you go for the later ABF type it is a 'tall block' design and as has been mentioned it will ding your bonnet.
I also heard it was detuned to not embarrass the VR6. The 6a/9a had to run a cat and so had a milder cam than the 1.8 KR 16v, this is why peeps swap the cams over- its only one (exhaust i guess) thats different but i swapped both anyway...
If you want an easy swap go for a 6a/9a as it all swaps over without having to rewire anything. If you want to be able to chip it go for an ABF as its more powerful as standard anyway and has funky elektronik stuff..:nerd:
I only speak from my experience (sorry if i am wrong on any of the above!) but either engine will transform a mk2!! :smiley:
-
if you already have a 16v, the easiest thing is to chuck any 2.0 lump under the existing head, no need to mess about with the abf head & loom no advantage really you can get the same gains.
You want a 90 onwards MK2, check the hazard switch if its on the steering column then its a late spec.  If you have an 8v its easier to fit an ABF, all you need is the matching engine loom, even the fuel pump is the same etc.