What do you think of those two engines compared by performance, hp and torque?

I had an AEE in the car before and now a rebuilt 1.6 AFH (same gearbox)

In terms of acceleration the AFH should be way better but mine is pulling less than the AEE was, at least to the 4k rpm mark.

I would like somebody's comment that has driven both.

I'm thinking sometning is not set up right on mine.

thanks for your comments

I've a 1.6 glx and a 1.6 gti, there totally different engines, the glx was a nice daily with lots of torque, the gti was rubbish low down until you get the revs up. To be fair the gti seemed slower and was a massive disappointment.

The AEE does have a lot of torque at low revs, too much really. But the mid-range, and especially top end, of the 1.6 16v is so much better that it makes up for it by a long way.

No two engines are the same though, i've ran 16v engines based on both AFH and 6n2, but they've been relatively similar - the AEE's were always very different to the 16v's.

What fuel systems did your engines run?

The AEE was stock.

the AFH is stock, just brought to 1.6L. Runs on stock blue injectors and stock fuel pressure regulator&fuel rail. The fuel pump is AEE tho.

Afh runs ok, idles ok, pulls ok but still not as good as the AEE was. Can't push it yet cos it was rebuilt, but for a (supposed) 130bhp engine I'm a bit dissapointed.

The AEE was a monster low down I agree with that. After 4k it's dead. Drives like a diesel basically.

I found these on an old thread: (hope I don't break any rules posting this here)

I've always used carbs, i've been told the AFH fuel system should be okay with a 1.6 but i have no experience of it myself. I'd be inclined to try 1.6 injectors and pumps but it's all theory to me.

The aee engine on the saloon had a different carb and pushed out 100bhp, just shows you the difference that this can make.

I think somebody used a valver TB on the AEE and achieved good results too. (think a little les than 100 bhp)

Didn't try it on mine because it became an oil eater in the end. 1L every 1000km.

Anyway still runing in the AFH and can't say the verdict yet. I put the foot down sometimes but only on low to medium revs. Not really dissapointing but was expecting more I must say.

Had some problems with pinking. Sorted that out with retarding the ign. It may well be petrol causing it. (didn't have RON 100 in the tank, mixed with 1/4 of RON 95 and 3/4 RON 100)

Think others are running 1.6 AFH's too with standard injection with no problems.

Thanks for your comments.

Having experienced both. The AEE's are dead punchy low down but the 16v's have the legs top end (as expected) the AFH 1.6 seems to have quite a linear power delivery so doesn't feel as exciting but is still pretty good

You're limited with cams on the AFH, but you can swap the head for the roller-rocker type 16v heads and still use your AFH fuel system/management/inlet manifold/etc (mine is from a Leon BCB engine, common as muck). These have a range of cams, some designed for 1600cc, and so you might get some torque back that way.

The only issue to contend with, when fitting this head, is that you need the later exhaust manifold because the exhaust ports are different. The AFH's cambelt relay roller is wider, but this doesn't matter.

Edited 24 December, 201510 yr by MikeyMK

I have a roller-rocker head from an AUS engine if i remember right. I didn't use it cause i read somewhere that the AFH head is a better flowing one.

Tested it yesterday to 6k (just once) and it's better after 4k mark but I'm not sure if that's all it can do.

If I'm correct it should have at least 25% more torque from 3k all the way up to 6k compared to an AEE.

i was on the motorway too and tested it on an uphil drive. flored it at 3,5k in 5 gear and we were more or les where the stock AEE was.

I Will try to push it in 4th on the same strech of road once I've done at least 1000km with it....

Is there a chance the fuel pressure regulator is faulty?

how can i check if the fueling is right? just from the lambda signal or is there a different method too?

thanks alot

The 75bhp head has smaller exhaust ports, so maybe that's where that idea comes from. The ones on my 1.6 head are about the same size as the AFH's, just a more rounded shape. But they all seem to use the same manifold tubing (even GTi) and that seems to be a good match for the smaller ports. I could probably benefit from a bigger manifold then, but i'm not fussed atm.

the AUS head has similar or even same size exhaust ports as the AFH head has. Had both on the table at the same time and couldn't find any big difference between them. didn't measure the ports tho. As you said Mikey, they use the steel exhaust manifold on the AUS too, the AFH is cast iron.

I had to custom built the exhaust from mani to silencers. It's like the polo one just a little bigger tubing. I don't think that could be the cause for any big torque loses.

The only way to know if it's ok will probably be taking it to the rollers.

I can do a test run with a clio 1.4 16v. Basicaly same engine as the AFH is. 100hp too. Will do a test run on same strech of road and see. The 1.6 AFH should pull way better.

The 100bhp version of the roller-rocker 1.4 will have the larger exhaust ports (same as 1.6 engines), still more rounded. The cam profile for that is most like an AFH which, as Harris said, is quite linear and doesn't feel as exiting (i'd say nothing dramatic, like it doesn't have a party trick or ace card). I ran this engine, using a 9n Sport head, on bike carbs for only three miles and have to say that's precisely what it was like. It went well though, considering the head wasn't getting any oil..

Anyway, there are so many factors and variations between alien cars, such a comparison is barely worth it. The VW engine is a medium stroke as a 1.4 and long stroke as a 1.6, this makes a difference in how the engines feel. Then you've got gearing and weight of the car being major factors, and then, different cars 'feel' faster than others anyway. Clios are quite soft, you sit 'in' them as opposed to 'on' them like the firmer-seated VW, they sound different..

With being able to pull away in 2nd gear, and being able to hit 60mph in it, thus being able to do 0-60 in one gear, i was able to count the sprint in less than six full seconds in my head, on various attempts. Do i think it did it in less than six seconds? Hell no.

I set my dizzy timing by feel, because that's the only way to get a custom build to where it really needs to be. It's a tedious process though, because it's so difficult to tell over a few miles at a time if the last adjustment has made it better or not..

Only measuring equipment works, even between changes on the same car, so trying to judge specific culture differences between two completely different cars is probably not gonna be a helpful exercise.

I agree that comparing two cars only by feel is impossible an pointless too.

If i have two cars more or les same weight and run them on a hill long enough for them to reach max speed and one is 75hp and the other is let's say 130 and the last one ends being slower...

that's a sign for problems for me.

I may be wrong but the 1.6 AFH should be way faster than an AEE.

anyway tested the fuel pressure regulator...Works...changed the dizzy (don't ask me why) and it made a hell of a differece.

advanced the ign a bit and pulls way batter. With the old one it started pinking and couldn't do that. I dont now why was that.

I have a tendency to set the dizzy by feel too but it may be wiser to do a timming light check just to know where we are atm. sadly i don't have one.

sorry for your head Mikey it probably seized and became scrap metal

another question: does a FSI head fit to an old block like AFH? ayone tried that? (just some crazy ideas going throug my head) I now that there were some belt driven models but don't know engine codes...

still trying to find all ponies in my AFH.

Yeah, the up-squirters were stuck open, the block I bought was dirty, had grit in the oilway. With revs the head got oil, but once I was idling in traffic it was starved and the cams seized.

Bit of a killer as I was on the way to poloshow at the time.

Dunno about FSI as I don't do high fuel pressure..

As for what engine should be faster, well that depends how you drive it. Hold on to the gears of an AEE and you'll slow it down, you need to be changing gear by 5k or you're just losing time. But in an AFH you've gotta hold it above 3k over gear changes. They require a different driving approach to get the fastest lap time and they require different gearboxes. Because their power delivery is in a different rev range.

Edited 28 December, 201510 yr by MikeyMK

In terms of acceleration the AFH should be way better but mine is pulling less than the AEE was, at least to the 4k rpm mark.

I would like somebody's comment that has driven both.

I'm thinking sometning is not set up right on mine.

thanks for your comments

What management are you running? Have you checked your AFR?

Running lean and wrong timing can ruin a good engine pretty damn quick

Stock management. Stock injectors.

It should be fine with that. Others are running them on same setup. I can check the AFR only by the lambda sensor. but as I said there are others running them on same setup. It would probably be better with a custom map but...

Had problems with timing. Could' advance it...don't now why...changed dizzy way better...

It started pinking with the old one immdiatelly and had to run it almost on full retard...have no timming light to tell where I am now. I know 6 deg BTDC is standard for this engine. Had no time to play with that any further atm.

That was a nasty surprise waiting to ruin your work Mikey! I hate the car for a couple of days when that happens and wish it being crashed in the scrapyard press...fortunately it goes away in a day or two or more likely 3 to 4 at least for me is like that.

After playing a bit with the 'new' dizzy and ign timming it goes better than the AEE even from low down is ok and I'm beginning to like it.

The torque is the reason I went for 1.6 and I would be really dissapointed if it ended up being boring/slower.

I Will try to borrow a timming ligh an control it. We Will see than if that's all it cand do. I don't know how pwerfull is a well tuned one so I'm just compareing it to the prevuous engine I had in the car.

I would say wideband is a must, and just because other people can get it running doesn't mean that it is very safe to do it.

Here are two examples of Golf 8v and 16v ignition maps, the fuel maps follow the same pattern. It would surprise me "a whole lot" if the Polo is not the same way

My AEE tends to make around 115hp on average, and I have compared many times against another mk2f with 158hp or something (1.6 16v on standard AFH cams and bike carbs) and 'head to head' its not hugely different until you get up to higher speeds when the 8v is running out of puff the 16v will romp away. However I do have a shorter gearbox than him... I do have a video from santa pod where it was just a win by the AEE but he didnt get a great start.. will try dig it out

Thanks for the ecu maps. They kinda relate what people are saying and the nature of the engines.

I understand the purpose of having a wideband - you know exactly where you are with the AFR as oposed to a standard one but would that work with the standard ecu?

Harris.racing I had a go in a clio as I said and my AFH is only a bit faster but you would't even notice it. The clio has a bit shorter gearing as so it's a bit in advantage nevertheless a very very small difference between the two with a 30hp difference in favour of the AFH. would be interesting to see the your video too.

I would say it's a no go if you have a healthy AEE in the car not much difference compared to an 1.6 AFH for daily driving.

happy new year folks

Most wideband lambdas have output that simulate the oem narrowband lambda

Can you read a wideband lambda signal through VCDS or you have to do it with a reader for that? what about a voltmeter? what voltages I would see?

now with a narrow band VCDS in giving me 0.83 at full throttle.

I have pushed the 1.6 AFH to the limit. It's doing a 100 (miles/h) in 4th at 6k rpm. It can't rev the 5th. It's an AEE box and the road was more or les level.

I'm interested what top speed is normal for a 1.6 AFH on level road. It should be able to hit 120 with ease or not? (don't worry I don't drive that fast if it's not safe)

I just want it to run like it should.

thanks for all the replies.

You have to use a AF-meter

Most common are AEM, Zeitronix and Innovate