best engine in a mk2

[Boumsong]

24v 6 cylinder

[Akinesis]

Apparently the VR6's upset handling, though. At the end of this year I'm dropping a new engine in to replace my EX. After reading this thread I'm a little undecided now - 2.0l 8v or 2.0l 16v??? But my car is purely a track car and next year I want to be doing competitions (doing my race licence this year and gaining oodles of track experience!). Without stealing this thread, what would people go for with a track car - 2.0l 8v or 16v??

[andyclimax]

2.0 16 v abf all the way .bolt straght in and are very good on road and track .
vr6's do not fit easely are too heavy and most have done alot of miles .

[Akinesis]

They bolt straight in, do they? That comes with so much relief! Thought I was going to have alot of swearing ahead of me! 16v it is then

[millsy20]

All you need to do is take the mounts of the Scirocco engine and put them on the 16v easy peasy

[Tim_R]

I'd vote for a 2l 16v engine, but i'm biast. ;) Physically they will drop straight in using the old 8v cambelt end mount which bolts straight on with no issues. At least on a 9a.

[hyperdrinky]

I'd be interested to know all of what's involved in a VR6 install and what sacrifices you have to make.

[sciroccorrado]

I'd be interested to know all of what's involved in a VR6 install and what sacrifices you have to make.

Well, off the top of my head...

Advantages: High top speed, quick(ish) accelleration, great in a straight line.

Disadvantages: Mahoosive torque steer, poor handling (MUCH heavier than a valver or 8v), too much weight in the front therefore. Lack of traction

On the whole the 16v/8v is a finely balanced car. To answer the original question, I've got a 1.9l Schrick cammed 8v in my Storm, and it's got approx 145bhp - but can't remember the torque figure. Pulls like a train, and the speedo can't cope ;)

[mr.brown]

I'd be interested to know all of what's involved in a VR6 install and what sacrifices you have to make.

It is a huge job. Custom subframes, suspension, clutch etc etc

20vt is a piece of cake by comparison, lighter and potentially far more power.

[MikeH]

As with most things.... it depends.

What do you want to do with the car, and how much money have you got to spend?

Based on my experiences with Mk2 golfs (which I'll repeat in the track scirocco soon), I think the 2L 16v is a great engine in a lighter car, especially when it's mildly modified. There's plenty of power, good fuel economy (and have the torque to turn a taller 5th gear for cruising), and good reliability. The standard ABF seems to be a very strong engine, and there are lots of them still running strong near 200k miles. Obviously, reliability depends on how well they're serviced, to a large extent.

Up to 180 bhp from a 2.0 16v is fairly easy to get. It gets a lot more expensive if you want around or over 200bhp.

If your car is going to be used as a track toy or competition car, personally I'd go for an NA solution, rather than a turbo, as it's generally more controllable.

The downside of fitting a 2.0 16v in a scirocco, compared to a Mk2 golf, is getting manifolds to fit. There are a few conversion manifolds on the market though.

My track toy 'rocco mk2 currently has a highly modified 2.0 8v in it. Even after I've improved the setup of it, it's not as quick as a 2.0 16v, and it would cost more to build and install than a 2.0 16v.