I'm basically wondering how easy it is to fit a VR6 lump into a mk3 polo coupe GT. Very difficult? Extremeley difficult? Pretty much impossible? You see when i was in the hunt for a car a month or so back my aim was to buy a mk2 golf driver and have a vr conversion next year. But Kerrly's polo came along and i couldn't resist!!! So now i am wondering if i can still do a VR conversion?

If not what other conversions can you do? G40 obviously but i would rather steer clear of superchargers!! I'v also heard you can fit te 6n2 Gti lump??

I need to know what i am saving for to start budgeting

Cheers, Ashley

I suggest you use the search function to answer your question as this gets asked on a daily basis!!!! It might fit at a squeeze but will completely fuck up the handling/braking etc. Not worth it imo unless you mid mount the engine and have rear wheel drive!

yep use the search function :)

lol how many people are going to ask this sort of question!

some guy is doing it to his polo

have alook around

TBH, I can never see the attraction of fitting the VR6 engine? They are very heavy, not very powerful for their size, thirsty and prone to bottom end wear.

Is it JUST the sound that makes people want them? Hardly a justifiable reason for fitting is it?

Edited 4 October, 200817 yr by breadman

from what i've heard about mk3's the handiling is pretty comical unless you've got a decent suspension setup polybushes and maybe an anti roll bar, the vr6 engine is really heavy, so i dont know how much that will mess up the handling in such a small and light car as a mk3 polo? ontop of that. they push out about 180bhp, which is not alot for a 2.9 NA engine, they cost alot to supercharge or turbo anyway so if you want to push more power out your looking at alot of money, the reason why they cost so much to gain more power is because their an old engine, not as new therefore harder to tune compared to a modern 1.8T.

realistically i'd look at a g40 conversion, theirs potential there and its been done alot, and its a safe option because its pretty much designed for the mk3 shell?

if you're after the sound then look at weber carbs or a decent exhaust setup with a straight through?

I feel a bit of de-javu coming on

from what i've heard about mk3's the handiling is pretty comical unless you've got a decent suspension setup polybushes and maybe an anti roll bar, the vr6 engine is really heavy, so i dont know how much that will mess up the handling in such a small and light car as a mk3 polo?

yep. mk3 handling is pretty poo, and vr's are same weight as an iron-block derv...what with being aly-block an all...wount really work in a mk3 polo, due to size, would fill up all the bay, and the gearboxes are mahoosive! plus the shell wouldn't take the abuse of a big vr...

ontop of that. they push out about 180bhp, which is not alot for a 2.9 NA engine

2.8 = 170bhp - mk3 golf vr, b4 passat vr

2.9 = 190bhp - vr rado

they cost alot to supercharge or turbo anyway so if you want to push more power out your looking at alot of money, the reason why they cost so much to gain more power is because their an old engine, not as new therefore harder to tune compared to a modern 1.8T

not really alot to turbo or supercharge, can be done quite cheaply if you include engine purchase price in the cost.

if you buy a running donor car with each lump in, and aim for 350bhp, the vr will be cheaper to acheive that figure with, 1.8t's with a high factory figure are expensive, and the 150bhp ones are shit to get good power from...a standard vr is minimum 20hp more an loads more torque and makes a better noise!

realistically i'd look at a g40 conversion, theirs potential there and its been done alot, and its a safe option because its pretty much designed for the mk3 shell?

if you're after the sound then look at weber carbs or a decent exhaust setup with a straight through?

^ both of these are good options, you can alwas get rid of the glader for an eaton or rotrex.

lupo/polo 1.6 16v lump might be worth lookin at too, iirc a few have been supercharged succesfully.

Sorry for postin a thread that has been posted mucho times before. Yeah I'm thinkin that the 1.6 16v engine will be the best bet. Or i might just go G40.

Cheers

G40!

yep g40 all the way after getting rid of mine i cant see much out thee with similar performance as economical and modable as the g40 and i only touched the service of modding with an eaton conversion

Ok next question. How much should i be ablo to pick up a G40 lump and box for?

Ashley

1000-1500 for conversion (box lump loom shafts etc) i recon

Put a fat woman in a wheel barrow and try and run round a corner. Same sort of deal doing a VR6 in a 86c i am guessing :-)

G40 is defo the best option. The cost of servicing a charger will be cheaper than fabricating/buying all the specialist parts to do a VR6 conversion.

Refreshed charger on a strong engine with regular servicing and maintainance will be much better than pissing about with a VR6 bottom end in a mk3 bay especially as you would have no room to work in there at all, VR6 engines look huge in a mk2 golf let alone a polo :-)

Hmmm will have to start budgeting for this me thinks, unless a certain test the missus is doin turns out positive

Edited 9 October, 200817 yr by -Ashley-

therea an G40 engine for sale on ebay at the mo. £400 starting bid, buy it now £1100.

Well,he was easily deterred..

VR6 engines only look massive because of their ridiculous inlet manifolds - they just look like a Ford 1.6 CVH Fiesta/Escort engine without it.

Three and a half cylinders long,no wider than a 16v,yet a row of six bike carbs would fit along the front side.. It'd be worth it just for the sound.

Has anyone actually weighed one,with gearbox,but without manifold?

not really alot to turbo or supercharge, can be done quite cheaply if you include engine purchase price in the cost.

if you buy a running donor car with each lump in, and aim for 350bhp, the vr will be cheaper to acheive that figure with, 1.8t's with a high factory figure are expensive, and the 150bhp ones are shit to get good power from...a standard vr is minimum 20hp more an loads more torque and makes a better noise!

i disagree with this, vr's are expensive to tune, you will pay at least 2 thousand pounds on a vf charger conversion, rotrex is more

turbo conversion is even more expensive

over 320 horse power on a vr, you really should be looking at uprated internals

if you buy a running donor car with each lump in, and aim for 350bhp, the vr will be cheaper to acheive that figure with, 1.8t's with a high factory figure are expensive, and the 150bhp ones are shit to get good power from...a standard vr is minimum 20hp more an loads more torque and makes a better noise!

Just a bit of random info but the 150bhp early 1.8ts re better to get big power from... The AGU has the larger port head and has forged internals as standard...not the pistons but conrods are. My old mans was an AGU and quite happily ran an IHI conversion at circa 350bhp and the internals were solid.

I'm sure i read somewhere on Vwvortex that actually the dry weight of the vr compared to the 1.8t lump is only somewhere in the region of about 30kg heavier also...

Could be a nice conversion with the right engineering and shit loads of money, but realistically.....not worth it.

.Joe