Author Topic: And who said the 8v gti were slow!  (Read 18890 times)

Offline azzrobz

  • Here all the time
  • ****
  • Posts: 348
  • Mk3 GTi 16v Anni
Re: And who said the 8v gti were slow!
« Reply #90 on: 20 June 2009, 09:57 »
Lmao, ^^^^^^^ hell of an achievement!!!

Offline tomstickland

  • Not said much yet
  • **
  • Posts: 37
Re: And who said the 8v gti were slow!
« Reply #91 on: 20 June 2009, 10:37 »
It probably goes quite well. But always treat rolling road figures with caution.
There's nothing wrong with 8v engines. I had a tuned up 8v in my old Astra GTE. It was a lot of fun.
However, you are better off starting with the highest tune standard unit to start with. ie: 16v.

Offline Khare

  • Serious forum addict
  • *
  • Posts: 7,627
  • The bear that khares
Re: And who said the 8v gti were slow!
« Reply #92 on: 20 June 2009, 10:41 »
It probably goes quite well. But always treat rolling road figures with caution.
There's nothing wrong with 8v engines. I had a tuned up 8v in my old Astra GTE. It was a lot of fun.
However, you are better off starting with the highest tune standard unit to start with. ie: 16v.
That's very true, however, it's also fun making a slow dog run.

And as I said before, the only RR I trust is JKM.

Offline thai-wronghorse

  • Serious forum addict
  • *
  • Posts: 7,325
  • mk1 Seat Leon FR TDI
Re: And who said the 8v gti were slow!
« Reply #93 on: 20 June 2009, 12:39 »
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?

 :wink:  Danke.

Offline DazVR6

  • I live here
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,705
  • mk3 VR6...FEEL THE GRUNT.
Re: And who said the 8v gti were slow!
« Reply #94 on: 20 June 2009, 13:49 »
It probably goes quite well. But always treat rolling road figures with caution.
There's nothing wrong with 8v engines. I had a tuned up 8v in my old Astra GTE. It was a lot of fun.
However, you are better off starting with the highest tune standard unit to start with. ie: 16v.
That's very true, however, it's also fun making a slow dog run.

And as I said before, the only RR I trust is JKM.

Agree there with Khare although i'd rather start with a vr6 than a 16v, my vr made my 16v look weak and supprisingly my ex bro inlaw couldn't lose my vr which was quite impressive especially considering he had a 280bhp r32 skyline gts-t. :shocked:

Offline AudiA8Quattro

  • Forum addict
  • *
  • Posts: 4,776
Re: And who said the 8v gti were slow!
« Reply #95 on: 20 June 2009, 23:24 »
abfs generally make more than 150 nowadays anyway, vw were a bit conservative in their estimates. dont forget that the 4-2-1 also involved removbing the cat which is a restriction in of itself
well yes i know vw limited the abf power cos they didnt want it to conflict wth the vr6, hence why an abf is popular choice amongst the mk2ers. still, it was limited to 150hp, and a manifold and decat giving 23hp is an awesome gain, just goes to show how important exhaust is.

ABF's were not limited also the VR6 was aimed at a different market.
from what I heard the abf was limited to 150 because VW did not want it to compete against the vr6. lets be honest dude, 4 cyl 16v with 150 hp, nice. 6 cyl with 12v and 2.8 litres only 180hp? dreadful...

The 8V and 16V’s were aimed at the hot hatch market, the VR6 was aimed more at the Bmw 3 series owners, hence the VR6 being a lot more money new, people seem to think they limited the ABF but common knowledge seems to be that they did not.
why would VW release a hothatch that competes with saloons? thats silly.
the vr6 was more for the "ultimate" hot hatch title, like the R32 with the mk4 and mk5, or the trophy with the renault, or the ST/RS with the ford. Doubt VW launched a hot hatch to compete with a luxury saloon.

The VR6 was never marketed as a hot hatch but more of a GT car as such, group tests at the time pitched it against the likes of Bmw 328I’s and Merc C280’s, VW after a couple of years even removed the bodykit, I could scan and post the grouptest if you like.
no its fine, I dont wanna have to type too much. All I say is....sh!t unless you spend lots and lots of money on it.

Are you saying the vr6 is sh!t?
FOR DIY GUIDES GO TO <br>www.volkswagenaudi.co.uk<br/>BRAKES, SUSPENSION, CV JOINTS

Offline Wayne

  • Sir Postalot
  • *
  • Posts: 32,051
Re: And who said the 8v gti were slow!
« Reply #96 on: 20 June 2009, 23:45 »
abfs generally make more than 150 nowadays anyway, vw were a bit conservative in their estimates. dont forget that the 4-2-1 also involved removbing the cat which is a restriction in of itself
well yes i know vw limited the abf power cos they didnt want it to conflict wth the vr6, hence why an abf is popular choice amongst the mk2ers. still, it was limited to 150hp, and a manifold and decat giving 23hp is an awesome gain, just goes to show how important exhaust is.

ABF's were not limited also the VR6 was aimed at a different market.
from what I heard the abf was limited to 150 because VW did not want it to compete against the vr6. lets be honest dude, 4 cyl 16v with 150 hp, nice. 6 cyl with 12v and 2.8 litres only 180hp? dreadful...

The 8V and 16V’s were aimed at the hot hatch market, the VR6 was aimed more at the Bmw 3 series owners, hence the VR6 being a lot more money new, people seem to think they limited the ABF but common knowledge seems to be that they did not.
why would VW release a hothatch that competes with saloons? thats silly.
the vr6 was more for the "ultimate" hot hatch title, like the R32 with the mk4 and mk5, or the trophy with the renault, or the ST/RS with the ford. Doubt VW launched a hot hatch to compete with a luxury saloon.

The VR6 was never marketed as a hot hatch but more of a GT car as such, group tests at the time pitched it against the likes of Bmw 328I’s and Merc C280’s, VW after a couple of years even removed the bodykit, I could scan and post the grouptest if you like.
no its fine, I dont wanna have to type too much. All I say is....sh!t unless you spend lots and lots of money on it.

Are you saying the vr6 is sh!t?

No, not at all, I have always liked the VR6.

Offline Shady Pioneer

  • Serious forum addict
  • *
  • Posts: 8,670
  • graphic designer.
Re: And who said the 8v gti were slow!
« Reply #97 on: 20 June 2009, 23:54 »
I do believe he was referring to khare there Wayne, but anyway...

Offline Wayne

  • Sir Postalot
  • *
  • Posts: 32,051
Re: And who said the 8v gti were slow!
« Reply #98 on: 21 June 2009, 00:08 »
I do believe he was referring to khare there Wayne, but anyway...

Sorry, been a long day with lots of hassle.

Offline Jay

  • Forum addict
  • *
  • Posts: 4,416
  • balding fat cvnt
Re: And who said the 8v gti were slow!
« Reply #99 on: 21 June 2009, 01:41 »
Geez, you MK3 lot are always fighting when I come in here.

Calm down.



Everyone knows the VR6 is the best  :tongue:
Passat B5.5 2.3 V5 170, with all the extras.

Want some online storage? Click here to sign up for a Dropbox account.

But for the purest engine experience, displacement has no replacement. All other methods are simply attempts to artificially recreate the benefits of displacement.