2.0 8V or 2.0 16V

[St_Lunatic]

Hey Hey.

Here is a little question.

golf 2.0 8V or golf 2.0 16V

Which motor is better for the 1/4 mile

[Chris-B]

16v (150ish bhp)
8v (125ish bhp)

[St_Lunatic]

Yeah.

But what is the better motor?

For a MK1

[Chris-B]

16v obviously!

[24VR666]

Originally Posted by Chris-B

16v obviously

It's definitely not that simple........a 16V is good, but they're not 150hp. The 16V motor (2.0L) cranks out about 134hp and about 133 lb./ft. of torque. The 8V (2.0L) motor generates 115hp with about 122lb./ft. of torque. Now, I have experience with both of these motors and it just depends how you want your car to act during the 1/4 mile. In my opinion, the 8V motors are way punchier and have far better throttle response than the 16V. Slightly modified, I noticed that the 8V motor was quicker off the line and through the gears than the 16V. However, the 16V had better top end, could rev higher, and had a higher top speed. My Rabbit that I had, set up more for the track, was also geared pretty good for the drags. If 1/4 mile is your thing, whatever motor you get will have to be coupled to a built drag tranny and a strong racing clutch. That's what I had in my Rabbit (built 2.0L 8V, close-ratio drag tranny w/racing clutch), and none of my 16V (not stock ones, either!) buddies could touch me until I ran out of gearing at about 110-115mph (my motor was screaming as if it was getting its nuts smashed, so I tried not to take it over 100mph too much). PM me if you want to find out more info on the advantages and disadvantages of both of these motors, and possible modifications that you could do to both.

[24VR666]

Also, the 16V has a higher potential when it comes to modifying, although it'll cost a little more to modify than an 8V.

[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.

[turbo15]

I say go with 16v

[24VR666]

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.

[goonburg]

the easiest answer is to save your money and spring for a 1.8t perferably from an audi

[24VR666]

Very good advice, indeed (minus the part about Audi). In fact, I mentioned this to Luni a while back in an old post. I would grab the motor from a VW, though, because the Audi engines are longitudinal and VWs have transverse engine layouts, making it difficult (but not impossible) to swap. A 1.8T is the most tuner-friendly motor VW's ever made. There are countless companies, offering countless mods for the motor. Since Luni lives in South Africa, it might not be as easy to pick one up as it is in the states. A 1.8T swap in that little Golf would be pretty burly, although the biggest problem would be traction.

[24VR666]

Personally, I'd love to see a rear mounted 24V VR6 motor in a MkI. My guess is that in Germany, this has already been done.

[Chris-B]

Originally Posted by 24VR666

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.

dont forget you are in a different country you abnoxious peice of turd.
i have never seen a 2.0 mk2, then again ive never seen a 240sx with a 2.4

Originally Posted by 24VR666

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,

plenty of them over here

Originally Posted by 24VR666

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

i didnt say intake, i said throttle bodies. Jenvy/SBD can easily get 220bhp from a 2.0i 16v with their tb's so maybe you should do some reasearch

Originally Posted by 24VR666

(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)

tb's require new management and loom, not just a chip.


One thing i would like to know though, why in threads like this there is ALWAYS some sad frustrated angry person on the other end trying to 'prove' their intelligence to the rest of the board by making an argument?

Anyway im more of a Vauxhall/Nissan man myself....

[24VR666]

I'm so sorry you abnoxious piece of turd, didn't know that you lived in a shithole. Anyway, I'm stoked for you that you have plenty of ABFs over there, but here in the states, they're scarce and I bet they're not plentiful in South Africa where Luni's from. Since we are talking about SA and not UK, all your magical tuner friends don't matter. Are you mad that I told you to do a little research? Is that why you decided to take offense? I'm sorry, I'll send you a box of Kleenex to wipe your teary little eyes. Since Luni doesn't have thousands of dollars to blow on a motor that could be eclipsed easily by a 1.8T, then get it shipped, then put all the wonderful upgrades that the super-savant brits would throw on there, I'm trying to suggest a motor that is more realistically acquirable. I don't have to "prove" my intelligence to anyone, I've owned and worked on more Dubs in my lifetime than the amount of cars you'll ever own put together. I know my VWs, and I hope you just stay with Vauxhall/Nissan, cause we don't need parasites like you in the VW scene.

[Chris-B]

Originally Posted by Chris-B

One thing i would like to know though, why in threads like this there is ALWAYS some sad frustrated angry person on the other end trying to 'prove' their intelligence to the rest of the board by making an argument?

i rest my case.

now calm down before you give yourself a heart attack

its not my fault i live here, it may be a shithole but at least everybodys head actually fits through the doorway.
im not mad, im not stupid enough to get mad on an internet forum unlike some.

you can keep the kleenex if you want, im sure you need it more than i do