Author Topic: And who said the 8v gti were slow!  (Read 18980 times)

Offline avengedslayer

  • I live here
  • *****
  • Posts: 672
Re: And who said the 8v gti were slow!
« Reply #40 on: 19 June 2009, 09:51 »
 :smiley:

Offline Mew

  • I live here
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,589
Re: And who said the 8v gti were slow!
« Reply #41 on: 19 June 2009, 10:05 »

wtf :laugh: if he has done something to them 8 cams the he would say either hydrolic or solid or what ever, not reprofiled lol...how do you reprofile a tappit?? lol

What are you on about??? :huh:


nige_s

  • Guest
Re: And who said the 8v gti were slow!
« Reply #42 on: 19 June 2009, 10:11 »
Rolling Roads vary greatly and are often out of calibration.  I've had +/- 20 bhp at different locations with the same car and spec.

Offline Grim_Reaper

  • Here all the time
  • ****
  • Posts: 334
  • warningz...i haz powaz
Re: And who said the 8v gti were slow!
« Reply #43 on: 19 June 2009, 10:25 »

wtf :laugh: if he has done something to them 8 cams the he would say either hydrolic or solid or what ever, not reprofiled lol...how do you reprofile a tappit?? lol

What are you on about??? :huh:



look at what work the guy said hes done, he said hes got reprofiled cams on a 8v...8v only has 1 camshaft :/

and then thai said he has 8 cams lmao

Offline azzrobz

  • Here all the time
  • ****
  • Posts: 348
  • Mk3 GTi 16v Anni
Re: And who said the 8v gti were slow!
« Reply #44 on: 19 June 2009, 10:42 »
still smells to me  :grin: wat are the supercharged 2.0 8v's running?? bout 170bhp??

Offline Horney

  • 10k hero
  • *
  • Posts: 10,782
  • Racing, Trackdays, Starwars.
Re: And who said the 8v gti were slow!
« Reply #45 on: 19 June 2009, 10:50 »
Lets look at the mods then.

custom 4-2-1 - Gotta be worth 5bhp
decat - Again at least a few here, lets say 5bhp
stainless throughout - Another 3bhp here?
panel filter - None really butlet's just say 1bhp for sake of arguement.
ported and polished head - THis should easily add a good 10bhp, if it's a good one maybe even more.
reprofiled cams - Depends on spec, lets say a 275 and another 5bhp
and been remaped to suit. - Probably a couple of Bhp due to get the fuelling bang on.

So 112bhp standard plus my rough guesses above = 143bhp

If it's a more metal cam and the map on the ecu is really well set up I can't see why 150 isn't possible. Sure RR's can be a bit over but I really can't see why everyone is bashing this. THere are plenty of 8v's out there producing this kind of power, my MKII should be 140 ish and that's only a 1.9.

Nick

Offline paultownsend

  • I live here
  • *****
  • Posts: 936
Re: And who said the 8v gti were slow!
« Reply #46 on: 19 June 2009, 10:58 »
you must be running a very lairy cam. what are the specs?  must be over 276 duration with very favourable lift.  but without larger valves?

my car (mk2) -

my car at midland vw had 8 runs and started at - 127.8hp@4917/138.5lbf.ft@4595 @ CALCULATED fly

and finished at - 134hp@5712/144.6lbf.ft@4513 @ CALCULATED fly

when we started the timing was retarded slightly, and he adjusted it not to 6'btdc but to where it produced the most power. peak power had shifted nearly 800rpm up the rev range!

here is my spec-

k&n filter in trumpet removed airbox
newman 268'
matched inlet
ported head 35mm/40mm
2.0 agg 70k
lightened balanced flywheel circa 30% reduction
matched and ported ex manifold
milltek full system

now. the torque figure is what i expected. but power, no. no perameters for the dyno were messed around with to invalidate figures. and i was shown figures from other cars (std) to give validity. its a true reading rr. if i were at stealth, i would have gain 10hp easily. the operater had taken a car on said rollers and proved indeed they were optimistic.

by putting in a lairyer cam i would of gained PEAK POWER.  pub figures. i did this (piper276) and guess what? it ruined drivibility

funny one this. the milltek was a 2.5" system and was embarrassingly loud. so i put in a std vw filter, and a jetex 2" system. and tweaked the AFM.  it feels so more responsive, and quicker. hmmm, bigger not always best.

im a real man now. so im building an abf. 150 std. be circa 170 with existing mods to car and a few extras.  piperX filter, ported inlet/ex manis, jetex system, fueling chip :)



 
« Last Edit: 19 June 2009, 11:05 by paultownsend »

Offline Mew

  • I live here
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,589
Re: And who said the 8v gti were slow!
« Reply #47 on: 19 June 2009, 11:01 »
look at what work the guy said hes done, he said hes got reprofiled cams on a 8v...8v only has 1 camshaft :/

and then thai said he has 8 cams lmao

The head has 8 valves, the camshaft has 8 cams. I fail to see the problem?

Offline Wayne

  • Sir Postalot
  • *
  • Posts: 32,051
Re: And who said the 8v gti were slow!
« Reply #48 on: 19 June 2009, 11:08 »
look at what work the guy said hes done, he said hes got reprofiled cams on a 8v...8v only has 1 camshaft :/

and then thai said he has 8 cams lmao

The head has 8 valves, the camshaft has 8 cams. I fail to see the problem?

The correct term is cam lobes.  :smiley:

Offline rubjonny

  • 10k hero
  • *
  • Posts: 16,349
  • Hello, my name is John and I'm a dub addict.
Re: And who said the 8v gti were slow!
« Reply #49 on: 19 June 2009, 11:10 »
To put it into perspective, in my MK2 8v I had a 2.0 bottom end on a MK2 head. completly std head, bottom end and exhaust. It made 141.9bhp on storms rollers, and a completly std 1.8 8v made 127bhp straight after.  So you cant always rely on a rolling road to be accurate!  Its also better to give the power at the wheels as well, as not all rr flywheel calculations are the same either.  Mine was 106.4 at the wheels :)
Hello my name is John and I'm a dub addict.