Cheers Gaz, i've just looked into them but they only do the Pro-line kits and not the Sport-lines now. I'm thinking these won't be so soft but I'm sure they'll be better than budget ones.

I should do a proper run,and find out over a day out around the country. This i'll do when i can afford to fill the tank a couple of times and spend a day out on a tour. But i never run with more than half a tank,its lucky to get over a quarter at any time. I can still get 100 miles on a tenner if i stretch it,but that's not fun.

Still,it doesn't drop to 10mpg when being hammered,dont think i could polish off two gallons in under 40miles no matter how i drive,i can zoom about quite swiftly and get enough not to worry about fuel.

Its hard to estimate what you could expect. The bike carbs made the eight-valve engines very economical,as a 1.4 8v on them it drank less than my previous three year old Fiat Seicento 1.1i Sporting,and the 1.6 8v was more economical than the standard 1.3 carb had been.

The Seat Ibiza 1.8 GTi 16v i had between the Seicento and Polo drank far more fuel than the Polo ever has,and I've never rated sporty injection engines for economy - so yours might be more economical on the carbs than a standard 6n2 GTi,but i certainly couldn't guarantee it,and dependant factors are led by how the carbs are set up.

There are many other factors though - It drank more when i lowered it. Crashy and figety compared to the previous setup,i could see where that energy was coming from.

Then weight. It'll happily cruise about town centres and housing estates in fifth gear,it doesn't need to see 2k rpm,traffic permitting. I dont know its torque figure,but whatever its got doesn't need to work hard to pull the circa 720kg car. Add a couple of passengers,or use a 6n shell,and the engine has more work to do.

As I've mentioned,I've always set mine for economy. This has been dented with the valver,not helped by its large ports and high rev nature,and its the first engine I've melted a piston on by running too lean. But now they're set up to match the engine's nature as well as mine,it's all good.

100 miles on a tenner? thats crazy. I'm lucky to see 50 on my 1.3 with the pooberg carb :(

^^Well i can explain that! I've ran a few cars on my daily 52 mile commute to work and back over the following year since that post. It was a tough journey, consisting of many A&B roads, and claimed a victim - the wife's 6n 16v ended up on it's roof so it was replaced with a Golf4 TDI. And the 306 cab almost lost it's roof..

To fuel, the cars and their approximate daily cost were..

Corsa 1.3d ecoflex - £9

207sw 1.6d - £7

6n 16v - £10

306 cabriolet 2.0 16v - £12

KeiHin'd Coupe-S 1.6 16v AFH - £6

Golf4 TDI - £9

The two surprises were not so much that the MK2 was the most economical car despite being the fastest, but that it thrashed a CorsaD 1.3d. But then, so did the 1380kg 1.6d Pug estate. And each for the same reason - the more you have to thrash an engine, the less efficient it is. The MK2 spent virtually all it's time in a long 5th gear. The Pug needed to be stirred like soup, but then it liked low revs and there was always a gear to keep it there. As with the Golf, which was always fine once it was going..

No, the Corsa failed for the same reason the 6n did - revs were needed. Hard work. At least the 6n had the excuse of being a sporty petrol engine, but the Corsa was just shit.

The 306, i felt, didn't do too badly. Yes it was the most juicy, drinking double the fuel the MK2 got through, but that was no surprise. The roof practically acted as a parachute unless i physically held it down in the centre with my left hand, to stop me getting flies in my hair. Then it had a GTi-6 engine in it. Or rather, GTi-5.

So why the strange results?

Simple - The driving styles were affected by a combination of the road limits, and car's ability, to get from A-B under varied conditions within a certain time span. So the MK2 was just teased along, whilst the Corsa was thrashed to within an inch of it's life every inch of the way.

But that's precisely what an economy run is about. Not what works on paper in labatory conditions, but what works in real-world traffic, on the commute it's used for.

And since it's been blue, i've built/tuned the MK2 to commute.

Things have changed slightly. I took the car off the road in the winter because i was running an ally cylinder block and it was burning oil. Tried another and it seemed the block was the problem so, i used the mrs car, and since then we've owned a couple of other cars. Plus a courtesy car.

We only got married early this year and went on to have our first baby, who was born with difficulties so, we've been very busy and the Polo took a back seat. Well, storage.

But when it goes back on the road it will do so with an iron block once again.

Terrible picture but if anyone was wondering what an AVY unit from a 6n2 GTi looks like, when on TCI-H electronic dizzy-hall ignition and bike carbs in a MK2, well here you go - asthetically ruined in comparison to the relatively tidy 1.6 AFH conversion previously, but i didn't do it for show..

Post edited to install the best full economy findings i'm gonna get for the foreseeable, on commute to my old job, at the nearest appropriate place (i'm now locally employed).

Edited 18 October, 201213 yr by MikeyMK

how much power do you reckon she was mikey? 150? 160?

Some times cars just have to take a back seat for more important things mate, hope every one is doing well now

Will be good to see what this new incarnation performs like, will you be looking at getting it to the rr day next year?

Dunno, but i've long given up finding absolute power - i replaced a punched cylinder head on a mate's A3 20v a while back and discovered it comes with a perfect bike carb manifold as standard. On the front of the engine. Where i could fit huge carbs. So if i wanted that instead, i'd have done it.

Bonus points then to those who see the doctored CBR900FF carbs of the ally block have made way for alternatively modified CBR600's. Add the factory ceramic catalyst and you get the idea - this is not just a toy, but primarily a daily commuter.

It should still give enough for the 720kg motor to move adequately with around 140bhp, but then it should still give over 50mpg, too. So it should be about as flexible as anything gets today. Clean, frugal, great fun at any speed, punchy at low revs and racy only when spun-up (the VVT opens up the cam overlap by the driver's foot, not by engine speed)..

(Update edit)

Edited 27 March, 201214 yr by MikeyMK

lovely mk2 mate! loving all the engine conversions! top job!

I've enjoyed doing them, despite some tedious times. This one definately is the last one though, as i don't have time to be fussy anymore.

Well not at the moment, anyway..

So why the change from the AFH head then?

I only upped the compression with AFH pistons due to melting a BCB piston in the first 1.6 AFH, when a water pipe internal flange failed and killed the water pump impeller (That combined to hot-running anyway, and the last cylinder to get delivery of coolant got too hot). Killing that iron cylinder block gave me the excuse to run an ally one.

So further down the road and looking for iron again, i wanted an AVY bottom end ideally, and got hold of a complete unit. The 1.6 AFH was great, but i'd already done it. With the promise of more torque from cams designed for the stroke, plus it being something interesting and possibly ideal, that i hadn't tried a bendy cam engine it seemed rude not to.

It makes sense for future servicing to use common parts, but i haven't scrapped any of my AFH heads yet - they don't make a bad engine with a few choice parts.

How are you controlling the vvt? are you using a separate ecu?

It's not electronically actuated, the information switch isn't needed as there's nothing to read it.

Ahh ok, i assumed the vvt worked in a similar way to the 20vt system, which uses a solenoid to adjust the inter-cam chain tensioner.

When running the high comp in the last engine did you use the m9 head bolts? If so did they hold out ok with such high comp?

Alright mikey, another question on CR ,

How's the starter motor do at cracking it over? I'm starting to think the mk3 item will struggle with my 12:1

any more future plans for this?

Alright mikey, another question on CR ,

How's the starter motor do at cracking it over? I'm starting to think the mk3 item will struggle with my 12:1

If you do a search mikey has done a how to on modifying the mk3 starter to cope with the increase in cr

Update impending.

Expect '01 side pull carbs with vvt actuator on a large throttle pull for high rpm. Also audio improvements which could have been factory, twin rear anti-roll bars, and original wheels.

Lighting plans include US corner lights and twin-dip projectors, but they can wait.

Btw Max, you shouldn't have problems if you're keeping it under 1400cc, i only had problems with the 1.6 engines.

Arr yeah good point.

Ill have a look at this post of yours too

Are we going to get specs on these roll bars with piccies?

Are we going to get specs on these roll bars with piccies?

You find them on some Skoda Felicias, they're solid and about 14mm (I've used two). I will include pics of them both off the car and fitted - the latter relevant because i felt it necessary to take care how they were fitted (stress fatigue has always been a forefront consideration), but don't expect them to be painted and looking pretty..

Update

update Mikey

Update i tells you!!

I'm useless, i know. Had it on the MoT lift recently and forgot to take pics. No phone/camera atm either.

I don't think the wheels are an improvement, but after nine years i needed a change!

You might not be able to see the ARB's here, but they certainly work!

VVT works, too..

Interior still keeping the period vibe.