^^ but its pink so you lose anyway tbf

^^ but its pink so you lose anyway tbf

lol... no its not!!! its black now!

1.6 GLX FTW 75 bhp for now until the bike carbs are on , all the valver toys , abs , anti rol bar , interior , bumpers , fogs , color coded grill , its a valver minuis the valves and the empty wallet u get running/ fixing them

a 1.6 8v would not be faster than a corsa sport, no matter what gearbox is on it

well it is!!

Well regardless of whether it is or not,its not fair to pitch a 1.4 against a 1.6.

ain't the mk4 16v only a 1.4?... and quicker, faster and more powerful than the than a 1.6 8v?

1.6 GLX FTW 75 bhp for now until the bike carbs are on , all the valver toys , abs , anti rol bar , interior , bumpers , fogs , color coded grill , its a valver minuis the valves and the empty wallet u get running/ fixing them

you say running and fixing them. but mines never died ... touch wood and the running aint that bad. i would of thought with the carbs it will drink as much as 16v if not more?

1.6 GLX FTW 75 bhp for now until the bike carbs are on , all the valver toys , abs , anti rol bar , interior , bumpers , fogs , color coded grill , its a valver minuis the valves and the empty wallet u get running/ fixing them

you say running and fixing them. but mines never died ... touch wood and the running aint that bad. i would of thought with the carbs it will drink as much as 16v if not more?

with carbs will be more power then a valver though , round town where u will find most valvers they will be left by their 8v little sister

^^ if you cant drive maybe

how much would power would bike carbs give a 1.6? i know on the kr lumps even with a set of 45's its minimal, with most off the shell inlet manifolds there is little to no gain and with a well designed mani its around 10bhp,although with the 1.6 i guess your going from an spi set up so you should get more from it?

The KR's suffer from the badly designed inlets usually and often people that don't know how to jet them properly. The KR's only really need 45's once they're over 160bhp, which isn't just a injection to carb swap. They don't need the twin carbs for power, but I didn't really like the engine with the standard injection system, but i plan to KR on 45's the golf.

Bike carbs can give the 1.6 (with a better exhaust manifold) over 100bhp, with loads of torque. There's more to be had with different a camshaft and headwork etc etc.

Edited 21 July, 200917 yr by twin40racer

1.6 GLX FTW 75 bhp for now until the bike carbs are on , all the valver toys , abs , anti rol bar , interior , bumpers , fogs , color coded grill , its a valver minuis the valves and the empty wallet u get running/ fixing them

except its not expensive to run a 1.4 and road tax is a lot cheaper

also: a friend of mine has a 1.4 16v corsa B sport, with induction kit and exhaust. i had a GT running about 90ish bhp and semi stripped out. from a standstill my GT was well faster off the mark [but i reckon partly down to my driving ] and it got easily by corsa by the time i was in 3rd

and my corsa 1.6 16v sport was easily faster than his 1.4 sport at whatever speed

so add in a heavier 6n, with a 1.4 gearbox which is not particularly short ratios, with less power than my GT [or at best the same] would not be faster than a 1.6 sport corsa

either the corsa wasnt trying, doesnt know how to drive, or you were giving it absolute death and the corsa just wasnt.

Edited 21 July, 200917 yr by doug

both 8 and 16v's are gay.

20v ftw!

Whats the difference in fuel ecconomy? This may be a factor for some people?

Anyone?

H&S

16v for horses

8valve for torques

I prefer 16tbh

16v for horses

8valve for torques

I prefer 16tbh

Horsepower isn't what makes a car 'go'. It's a measurement based on the engines torque figure? Meaning torque is the important thing?

i mesure cars in smiles per mile not mpg , bhp , or tourqe figures

The KR's suffer from the badly designed inlets usually and often people that don't know how to jet them properly. The KR's only really need 45's once they're over 160bhp, which isn't just a injection to carb swap. They don't need the twin carbs for power, but I didn't really like the engine with the standard injection system, but i plan to KR on 45's the golf.

i'm gonna upgrade to a better inlet once i've got the car on the road and have some spare cash, but i've not really gone the KR on 45's route for the performance, its all about the noise for me, i wanna hear them babies on full chant, even just on tick over and a few blips on the throttle with only a down pipe on it the induction noise out does the exhaust noise!

both 8 and 16v's are gay.

20v ftw!

You do know that 16v Golf Mk2s are faster then more modern cars fitted with the 150bhp 1.8T.

both 8 and 16v's are gay.

20v ftw!

You do know that 16v Golf Mk2s are faster then more modern cars fitted with the 150bhp 1.8T.

yeah but the 16v engine isn't scene enough these days, its not like he's not gonna sound cool saying 8 or 16v ftw is he

i mesure cars in smiles per mile not mpg , bhp , or tourqe figures

Ok, but some of us are a little more practical

H&S

I've got a simple sollution to this arguement, everybody goes Rotary :-D :-D :-D

Mazda RX7 = 1.3 no valves - 237bhp and 218 lb-ft torque

enuf said

simplez

I've got a simple sollution to this arguement, everybody goes Rotary :-D :-D :-D

Mazda RX7 = 1.3 no valves - 237bhp and 218 lb-ft torque

enuf said

simplez

How does the fuel get in then?

H&S

I've got a simple sollution to this arguement, everybody goes Rotary :-D :-D :-D

Mazda RX7 = 1.3 no valves - 237bhp and 218 lb-ft torque

enuf said

simplez

How does the fuel get in then?

H&S

Basicly............

""Wankel engines are considerably simpler, lighter, and contain far fewer moving parts than piston engines of equivalent power output. For instance, because valving is accomplished by simple ports cut into the walls of the rotor housing, they have no valves or complex valve trains; in addition, since the rotor is geared directly to the output shaft, there is no need for connecting rods, a conventional crankshaft, crankshaft balance weights, etc. The elimination of these parts often makes a Wankel engine much lighter and it also completely eliminates the reciprocating mass of a piston engine with its internal strain and inherent vibration due to repeated acceleration and deceleration, producing not only a smoother flow of power but also the ability to produce more power by running at higher rpm""

hope that explains it

They also drink considerably more fuel,as they complete their cycle in just one revolution instead of two.

they need a complete overhal every 70 k main thing being the tips of the pistons , plus they drink a shyt load of oil