Classic Audi » Technical » Mech/Tech » Engine » Anyone swapped an 8v with a 9a 16v

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 18-12-14, 10:17 PM   #11
Val
Grown up member
 
Val's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: 5vtq gte
Posts: 177
Default

You expect too much from dinosaur fuel injection. At least try 16v abf from mk3.

Last edited by Val; 18-12-14 at 11:02 PM.
Val is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19-12-14, 06:24 AM   #12
msh
4 ring whore!
 
msh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Rucava, Latvija
Posts: 3,816
Default

You mean injection from the same engine, which was compared against KR by GintsK with words "that drowsy engine..." ? People here are complaining about engine characterics, not lack of specialists for engine management - try to explain why there aren't such words for 2v engines

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flying Frank View Post
Yup, I also agree that the 16v engine is overrated....had a 16v B3 saloon and comparing it to my B3 2.3 coupe is like comparing white with black. The 2.3 has more torque, possibly uses about the same amount of fuel, but has that extra pot to give it far more aural appeal !!! No contest in my book.
Actually slightly less. 2.3 also has just 6 newtons of torque more, but way more usable torque curve - because 2v engines are tuned for low rev torque, and because of power stroke overlap.
msh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19-12-14, 08:53 AM   #13
Flying Frank
4 ring whore!
Classic Audi Club Member
 
Flying Frank's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Kernow, Gods own county !!
Posts: 2,388
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by msh View Post
You mean injection from the same engine, which was compared against KR by GintsK with words "that drowsy engine..." ? People here are complaining about engine characterics, not lack of specialists for engine management - try to explain why there aren't such words for 2v engines



Actually slightly less. 2.3 also has just 6 newtons of torque more, but way more usable torque curve - because 2v engines are tuned for low rev torque, and because of power stroke overlap.
If you ever think of moving to England, perhaps you'd consider being my next door neighbour

Flying Frank is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19-12-14, 10:09 AM   #14
Addicted
Grown up member
Classic Audi Club Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 591
Default

http://www.clubgti.com/showthread.php?103013-8v-v-16v

Makes interesting reading... there's loads of this comparison on club GTI (for obvious reasons). Somewhere in there there's a graph that overlays the 8v torque curve over the 16v to show that it reality the 8v at no point has more torque.

Remember that here on this forum anyone without 5 cylinders is considered 'wierd' and not to be trusted

Personally, if you currently have a 1.8v I'd replace it with a 2 litre.. but if you do want 16v then I'd highly recommend the ABF 16v from the mk3 GTI. They can be picked up cheap with thier management(the one in my unit cost me £100 with management and loom, but budget £300), they do away with the mech injection so are easier to fit that say a 9A or ACE. The throttle body ends up at the front of the bay, so inlet plumbing is neat too.

I'll try and find some photos of the one I did 10 years ago. Seem to remember we used an ACE exhaust manifold, coolant flange, top hose and oil pickup.. most other stuff swapped across from the 8v..

I'll now don my armour in readyness of the attacks from the 5 cylinder, pitchfork wielding mob
__________________
1985 Type 81 2 door 2.8 V6
1983 Golf GTI track weapon
1977 Scirocco G60
1968 Sand Rail
2006 A4 2.0 TDI Avant = DEAD due to oil pump failure.. then alive.. then DEAD due to cam belt tensioner failure! and ALIVE again!!!
Addicted is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19-12-14, 10:37 AM   #15
Val
Grown up member
 
Val's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: 5vtq gte
Posts: 177
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Addicted View Post
Remember that here on this forum anyone without 5 valves per cylinder or jetronic is considered 'wierd' and not to be trusted
Fixed your post.
Val is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19-12-14, 10:44 AM   #16
Addicted
Grown up member
Classic Audi Club Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 591
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Val View Post
Fixed your post.
__________________
1985 Type 81 2 door 2.8 V6
1983 Golf GTI track weapon
1977 Scirocco G60
1968 Sand Rail
2006 A4 2.0 TDI Avant = DEAD due to oil pump failure.. then alive.. then DEAD due to cam belt tensioner failure! and ALIVE again!!!
Addicted is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19-12-14, 06:33 PM   #17
msh
4 ring whore!
 
msh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Rucava, Latvija
Posts: 3,816
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Addicted View Post
http://www.clubgti.com/showthread.php?103013-8v-v-16v

Makes interesting reading... there's loads of this comparison on club GTI (for obvious reasons). Somewhere in there there's a graph that overlays the 8v torque curve over the 16v to show that it reality the 8v at no point has more torque.
No graphs at all, only "The db" states that he has one.
msh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19-12-14, 06:54 PM   #18
jamiecoysh
Grown up member
 
jamiecoysh's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Torquay, Devon
Posts: 119
Default

I was going to drop in the G60 if an engine change is on the cards

I think the 3A engine is a much better engine than the 6A engine and they both use the same metering head I think.
jamiecoysh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19-12-14, 07:20 PM   #19
Addicted
Grown up member
Classic Audi Club Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 591
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by msh View Post
No graphs at all, only "The db" states that he has one.
So in the last 6 hours you've managed to go through the entire Club GTI forum and come to that conclusion?
__________________
1985 Type 81 2 door 2.8 V6
1983 Golf GTI track weapon
1977 Scirocco G60
1968 Sand Rail
2006 A4 2.0 TDI Avant = DEAD due to oil pump failure.. then alive.. then DEAD due to cam belt tensioner failure! and ALIVE again!!!
Addicted is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-12-14, 12:44 AM   #20
msh
4 ring whore!
 
msh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Rucava, Latvija
Posts: 3,816
Default

Yeah, right.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jamiecoysh View Post
I think the 3A engine is a much better engine than the 6A engine and they both use the same metering head I think.
Not really - about the metering head. I don't know the internal differences, but I do know that as usual, the letters after part code are different - and that's logical, after all, we're talking about engines, one of which is able to burn approx 20% more fuel - and it does routinely, even cruising on road. Of course, 16v runs with various 8v stuff - metering head of my 3A ended up on 9A engine in corrado, where I had to manage to get that engine running, but how correctly, I can't tell.
msh is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 08:43 AM.

Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2007-2008 Classic Audi | Site by Roadrunna