Author Topic: MK2 Performance?  (Read 15469 times)

Offline Agreeable Slick

  • Global Moderator
  • Serious forum addict
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,079
  • Unit
Re: MK2 Performance?
« Reply #50 on: 03 January 2005, 18:02 »
the reasons 16v pull so hard is cos they get peak power at 6.5k where as 8v are about 5k, plus there are usually and extra 10-15 horses hanging around in the valver.

I have raced the misses old 8v in my 16v and they are about even until 3rd gear when the valver will lift off and go leaving the 8v behind.

StephenEggo

  • Guest
Re: MK2 Performance?
« Reply #51 on: 03 January 2005, 18:43 »
How would the lupo Gti compare to the 16v? Would it be close?

Offline Agreeable Slick

  • Global Moderator
  • Serious forum addict
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,079
  • Unit
Re: MK2 Performance?
« Reply #52 on: 03 January 2005, 18:47 »
personally i would say that the lupo would beat it due to power : weight ratio, as everything it pretty similar performance wise, would be interesting to see.


Offline Dizzie

  • Forum addict
  • *
  • Posts: 4,882
  • Make friends with your fast
Re: MK2 Performance?
« Reply #53 on: 03 January 2005, 23:59 »
iirc lupo's weigh more/about the same as/than the humble mk2.
Mk4 Golf 150PD

Veedubgt18v

  • Guest
Re: MK2 Performance?
« Reply #54 on: 04 January 2005, 07:35 »
8v 112bhp, 114lb(?) 0-60 about 9 secs
16v 139bhp, 124lb(?) 0-60 about 7.5 secs

everyone has their own opinion on the 0-60 but id say a good example of each should get those times

now shhhhh :wink:

if any 8v owner there has goot proof of their 0-60, like a drag run or a reading from a g tech or similar device please put it up, but if its read from the speedo and a stopwatch it means nothing :laugh:

you know mnine is quicker than that! soon as the roads imporvoe you better get your g tec out boy!

Offline tinman

  • I live here
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,229
Re: MK2 Performance?
« Reply #55 on: 04 January 2005, 10:12 »
How would the lupo Gti compare to the 16v? Would it be close?

i think its a little bit lighter, but not by much. the 0-60 is slower, and the top speed is slower. the mk2 wins.

VeeDubGTI16v

  • Guest
Re: MK2 Performance?
« Reply #56 on: 04 January 2005, 12:03 »
8v 112bhp, 114lb(?) 0-60 about 9 secs
16v 139bhp, 124lb(?) 0-60 about 7.5 secs

everyone has their own opinion on the 0-60 but id say a good example of each should get those times

now shhhhh :wink:

if any 8v owner there has goot proof of their 0-60, like a drag run or a reading from a g tech or similar device please put it up, but if its read from the speedo and a stopwatch it means nothing :laugh:

you know mnine is quicker than that! soon as the roads imporvoe you better get your g tec out boy!

you better get somewhere to plug it in then :grin: and we will see :kiss:

Offline davidhawkins_78

  • I live here
  • *****
  • Posts: 905
  • Valver Bad Boy
Re: MK2 Performance?
« Reply #57 on: 04 January 2005, 15:05 »
I'll second that - prepare to be humbled by an 8v  :smiley:

Right, Inters this Year we need a 8 valve  Vs. 16 valve and see who comes out on top  :cool:

But i will concede, if they were that similar why did VW bother to build the 2 side by side ???

BUT a later 8 valve in good condition, that's nice amd loose with a sneaky chip and exhaust / filter will more than give you a run for your money!

The 16v really does lose out in by book by having mechanical fuel injection ...  so bin it and get some DCOE's !! That's half the reason you seem to get such a mixed back - dodgy tuning and making it worse !!


'89 Monza Blue Valver
to quote a VW engineer, "the Mk1 was the prototype, the Mk2, the real thing!"

Offline druid

  • Not said much yet
  • **
  • Posts: 42
Re: MK2 Performance?
« Reply #58 on: 04 January 2005, 16:47 »
Dizzie

You have a 20VT conversion dont you??
does it take 6.8 0-60?

Im currently running 7 secs to 60 with a fairly standard 16 valve lump.

is 6.8 right???
how much boost are you running?
Cheers Drew


VeeDubGTI16v

  • Guest
Re: MK2 Performance?
« Reply #59 on: 04 January 2005, 16:51 »
i was gonna say that, would have thought a 1.8t would be quicker :undecided: have you got traction problems?

I'll second that - prepare to be humbled by an 8v :smiley:

surprised maybe, but not humbled :wink: :grin: