Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Chris-B
Engine Configuration 1984cc / 4 cylinder in-line / Twin overhead camshaft per head
Power (hp/rpm) 150/6000
Torque (lb ft/rpm) 133/4800
Transmission 5-spd/-
thats stats for a 2.0i 16v golf engine, from a mk3 golf though as mk1/2 golfs never had 2.0 engines.
so if you stick a cam, tb's, and exhaust on an 8v you will only touch 16v territory. if you put the same mods on a 16v you will touch 200bhp without a problem, therefore 16v is better.
|
MkIIs never had 2.0Ls?!! What about the '90-'92 2.0L 16V GTIs?! Does that not count, or something?! Man, do a little research before you start posting for someone that wants opinions from people that actually know a few things about these cars. The 150hp 16V you're refering to is an ABF 16V (2.0L) found in MkIIIs, good luck finding one of those for a motor swap, they're not exactly abundant. Since finding an ABF, then purchasing, potentially shipping and finally stuffing it into a Rabbit-style Golf (MkI style, but it's a 2000 and something, right Luni?!) is no small task, most people opt for the 2.0L 16V out of the MkIIs (134hp). Also 200hp with an exhaust, intake and cams?! Whoa, bro, unless you know of some Uber-tuner, getting 200hp isn't as simple as that (unless you happen to find an ABF 16V, re-chip it and then throw all of these other mods on, which isn't exactly cheap). Luni, like I said, the 16V has more tuning potential, but it all depends on what you want and how much you're willing to spend. As always, you are welcome to PM me for help or info on this subject.