Author Topic: MK2 16V 1.8 and 2.0 difference  (Read 4710 times)

Offline Goops

  • Here all the time
  • ****
  • Posts: 450
  • mk2 gti 16v
MK2 16V 1.8 and 2.0 difference
« on: 20 November 2007, 20:30 »
Hiya!

Was just wondering.......   :rolleyes:

My MK2 16V GTI has a 1.8 engine...
whats the difference in performance from a MK2 16v GTI with a 2.0 litre engine??

Thanks in advance,

G

Offline Mew

  • I live here
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,589
Re: MK2 16V 1.8 and 2.0 difference
« Reply #1 on: 20 November 2007, 21:26 »
Well standard the 1.8 is something like 138bhp. The 2.0 16v i have with the WUR mod done is 166bhp. When the modified WUR was on the 1.8 it was putting out 152bhp on the rollers.

The torque on the 2.0 is 146 Ib ft as against 124 on a standard 1.8.

 :smiley:

Offline Goops

  • Here all the time
  • ****
  • Posts: 450
  • mk2 gti 16v
Re: MK2 16V 1.8 and 2.0 difference
« Reply #2 on: 21 November 2007, 01:04 »
Man I guess I should have been more patient and looked for a 2.0!  :grin:
The WUR Mod sounds like an interesting eventuality (if that is a word!)... what are the risks associated with this mod?

Additionally a friend of mine claims that the mk3 lump would go straight into a mk2 16V? Does this apply to the 2.0 only??

Thanks,
G

Offline Agreeable Slick

  • Global Moderator
  • Serious forum addict
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,075
  • Unit
Re: MK2 16V 1.8 and 2.0 difference
« Reply #3 on: 21 November 2007, 01:29 »
er... you seem to assume that there was a 2.0 mk2. I can assure you that there never was. All mk2s that are 2.0 are either engine swaps or have been bored out.

Offline dabill

  • I live here
  • *****
  • Posts: 871
Re: MK2 16V 1.8 and 2.0 difference
« Reply #4 on: 21 November 2007, 09:17 »
you can swap the bottom end for a 2ltr out of the mk3 or an audi, not sure on the engine codes which are usable... very worthwhile mod :) and not maga expensive in regards to performance increase...


noble tuned - and still not fast enough!

Offline peaky83

  • Here all the time
  • ****
  • Posts: 278
Re: MK2 16V 1.8 and 2.0 difference
« Reply #5 on: 21 November 2007, 09:50 »
How much work is involved in that though? I might do it hmmmmmmm :laugh:

Offline hobbiniho

  • I live here
  • *****
  • Posts: 630
Re: MK2 16V 1.8 and 2.0 difference
« Reply #6 on: 21 November 2007, 10:22 »
the block is a 9a i think and if you are going to use it use the 1.8 kr head as it flows a lot better than the mk3 one and as far as im aware it is a straight swap  :cool: :cool:

Offline Goops

  • Here all the time
  • ****
  • Posts: 450
  • mk2 gti 16v
Re: MK2 16V 1.8 and 2.0 difference
« Reply #7 on: 21 November 2007, 22:16 »
Hey Slick yeah I kinda assumed that there was a 2.0  MK2 standard! Sounds like an interesting mod anyway....deffo wouldnt mind some more oomph!

On a side note, looks like summer will be spent on the car, what the hell was steve mclaren thinking........apologies to all the scousers but gerrard is so overated, not the least bit inspiring as a captain, depressed and angry we out of the competition!  :angry:

G

Offline rubjonny

  • 10k hero
  • *
  • Posts: 16,349
  • Hello, my name is John and I'm a dub addict.
Re: MK2 16V 1.8 and 2.0 difference
« Reply #8 on: 28 November 2007, 13:04 »
not quite 100% right slick, the US got the 2.0 16v 9a in a MK2 ;)

std the 2.0 16v 9a got 136BHP, compared to the MK2 1.8 16v KR which got 139bhp.  This is becasue the inlet cam in the 2.0 16v is much milder to stop it killing the cat!  fit a kr cam into a 9a head and you can get 150-160 without trouble :)
Hello my name is John and I'm a dub addict.

Offline Agreeable Slick

  • Global Moderator
  • Serious forum addict
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,075
  • Unit
Re: MK2 16V 1.8 and 2.0 difference
« Reply #9 on: 28 November 2007, 14:27 »
not quite 100% right slick, the US got the 2.0 16v 9a in a MK2 ;)


Indeed, saw he was from west london though, and tbh, who cares about americans  :tongue: :laugh: