I'd be tempted to start with standard cams initially and go from there. Gives you a chance to keep your eye out for a cheap set of aftermarket stuff (e.g. on eBay.de) in the meantime. Have you overlaid Guy's power/torque curves from his EFI 1.6 AFH with yours from the AEE?

There's thread after thread on CGTI on the 8v vs 16v 'low-down torque' debate with people wanking over both engines. I think to overly simplify the conclusions, they found that a 16v lump had the same or better torque everywhere over the 8v and the 16v only felt peaky because it was even stronger at higher revs than mid-range - whereas the 8v tailed off, leaving the mid-range grunt as the highlight.

In the intake manifold of prefabricated Fireblade throttle parts suitable for AFH or roller cam head 16 V. T he ​​bridge was made ​​by us, then noble blue powder coated is Sold. only the bridge with the custom rubber cylinders that have been glued and screwed. Of course the blue is also mounted to get with the syringe. In the photo are the Flanchbilder see so shaded from the bridge, which means you can control so that your head looks exactly like that.

Much so made sense is.

You both make very very good points, to be honest I was considering standard cams - I don't think the head work would particularly hinder it, so may build it up with that.

Noticed people play with Verniers on standard cams and get good results, so maybe worth playing like that too.

You very are both thinking wisely, and I had considered the same, I think where I went wrong with the AEE was doing it all at once, you couldn't feel what had done what and if it was truly beneficial or not.

Is it worth getting an AFH head worked? Seeing they flow well anyway?

Adam, that either makes no sense what so ever, or I have forgotten how to read

Edited 18 January, 201313 yr by Mclovin

Adam, that either makes no sense what so ever, or I have forgotten how to read

Too much Iron Brew

That Forbes character posted something and I replied. Now it's gone and I look like a monkey! :(

It's Irn Bru, just sayin'

Edit:

http://www.ebay.de/itm/Ansaugbrucke-VW-Pol...=item2579b16884

HE POSTED THIS, HONEST.

Edited 18 January, 201313 yr by Adam-

I definitely had more torque from the 8v engines than 16v ones, I only had to look at the mound of scrap tyres and gearboxes to know that.

The 16v has more cushion to it, I can't explain, I think the 8v was better at dealing with moving smaller amounts of fuel/air.

Speaking of explanations, I don't understand this 'responsive' thing..? My carb'd engines were in another league on response than the 6n was, both in terms of feel through the pedal, and in terms of the immediate kick from the brake horse burgers. The carbs spurred me on, tantalizing me to be naughty with instant promise, whereas the valver just did as it was told.

I definitely had more torque from the 8v engines than 16v ones, I only had to look at the mound of scrap tyres and gearboxes to know that.

That could say a lot more about torque delivery than peak torque though. My turbo makes more torque (dyno proven multiple times) than a G40-lader did on the same car, but it was the G40-lader that killed gearboxes and trashed tyres thanks to its aggressive delivery.

On CGTI there were loads of similar arguments in the 8v vs 16v debate, but they did things scientifically and organised a massive dyno shoot-out to separate the 'forum fact' from the truth.

My 8v is pretty responsive, every single person who's driven it says that.

Anyway mandem needs helpdemz to make a plandem for some camdemz

1.4 16v AFH vs 1.6 8v AEA torque plots - from VW figures. Whilst the AFH's peak torque is at a higher rpm, it holds >120Nm for longer than the 8v. Would be nice to get the VW figure for the ARC/AVY and do a 1.6 vs 1.6 comparison.

Obviously the butt dyno measures torque at road wheels vs road speed though, so how the car (and engine!) feels with either of these engines can be massively dependent on gear ratio choice.

Would an aldon RR print out be any good Andy?

I guess that's as standard as a 1.6 AFH gets

That's decent guy, isn't that dip where the AFH injection runs a bit lean?

You got a straighter photo please Guy, or even better a scan?

Even the 1.4's have the same dip, poloace on here did a chip for the afh that smoothed that out so it must just be something in the standard map

No scanner but i'll try and take a better photo now

Edited 18 January, 201313 yr by Mclovin

Ah I see I see :)

Wonder how a mapped one on ITBs would compare to one on the standar inlet/single throttle body.

Assuming Guy's Aldon plot is reasonable in terms of accuracy (and certainly power/torque matches what I recall Jez's making) then 1.6 AFH beats 1.6 8v AEA hands down.

That torque is a bit high Andy, think the peak is only around 137

Tried to get a better one but for some reason its upsidedown and I can't edit it on mobile PB

Check the units I used.

137ftlb yea? If so Andy is right

Edited 18 January, 201313 yr by harris.racing

Ja, Guy's plot is in English - mine is in European.

Was about to post figures from mine to add into it but realised info was on laptop which someone stole.

However,

1.6 AFH with cams & bike carbs

Yes I am retard

8V for the win ja?

Nick have you got the plot for yours? Would be interesting to see how that compares

Whyyounoread!

All I know is it made around 168nm from around 2250 up to about 5000 then started to drop off

It even peaked max torque at 4500 one run

Inotread because the last post I read before starting to reply was Andy's, I then had to feed the child and when I finally finished the post and posted it you had posted again

Ill let you off then frienddd