1.8t in 4kq

[alan pritchard]

I remember this coming up a while back, i believe someone threw a spanner in
the works and said that you have to fit the instruments as a lot of that
motors elecrtonics are housed ther, as i recall, anyhow i believe the 5cyl
motors are far superior as there are lots of people out there are heading
towards the 1/2 million miles mark on the early motors.  Also i believe the
mc-1 engine is supposed to be good for 500 bhp with very little (or no)
internal work, and the 20v motors close to 400 bhp reliably (this is all
recollection) and as there are 20v motors out there that come with 300+ bhp
in "stock" form, that has to be the way forwards.  But if anyone does do
this conversion id be interested to see the results.  I have seen a 250+bhp
golf runing on tt engine,box and drivetrain and that was neat.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brett Dikeman" <brett at cloud9.net>
To: <David.Ullrich at ferguson.com>; <waves at epix.net>; <quattro at audifans.com>
Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 8:54 PM
Subject: RE: 1.8t in 4kq


> At 2:14 PM -0400 5/15/02, <David.Ullrich at ferguson.com> wrote:
>
>
> >Stock 150-225 HP depending on the engine code, simple chip only mod
> >puts it up to 245 on cars that started with 150 and people are
> >getting up to around 550 HP with stage 3 kits
>
> These figures are grossly overinflated; you also seem to have
> interchanged torque and HP in one case.  Go check out the APR and
> Hoppen websites for proper figures, but they're briefly summarized
> here.
>
> An APR "chip only" puts you at 200hp, 245 ft-lb.  Any more requires a
> turbo change.  Congrats, you've now surpassed an unchipped 3B in
> torque slightly, but you're 17 short in the HP department.
>
> As for "stage 3 kits", Try 280hp with a turbo from APR; further
> mods(III+) get you just over 300hp.  They don't list any other
> options.  The III+ will give you about 30 more hp and about 30 more
> ft lb of torque than a chip-only 3B.
>
>   MTM's "chip only" is 187; chip+turbo stage 1+ is 193, stage 2 is
> 210, stage 3 is 240.  I'm semi-curious why APR seems to be getting
> drastically higher numbers compared to MTM.  I wonder if MTM is
> measuring at-wheel and APR is measuring at-flywheel.  Who knows, they
> don't even put units on their charts :-)
>
> I have no idea where you got "550 hp"; MTM's tuned RS4(which, of
> course, is not 1.8t based) is around 510 hp.
>
> I remember reading about the bimoto TT, which has around 500-600hp
> per engine...but those engines are massively modified down to the
> most basic specifications and probably have tens of thousands of
> dollars of work in them.
>
> >, and that's from a 1.8 liter engine more is being squeezed on
> >stroker motors. How in the world is that average performance? I know
> >the 20VT is a great engine, but it's expensive to install, expensive
> >to fix and the 1.8T is an economical alternative that has the
> >advantage of great potential, lower parts cost, lots of aftermarket
> >support and techs in the dealers that still know how to troubleshoot
> >it.\
>
> The difference is that for $500-600, you've power+torque levels it
> would take an 1.8t owner about $4,000 to match.
>
> The 3B engine owner laughs, spends half as much($2000-2500) and gets
> an RS2 conversion with at least 30+ hp over APR's stage III+.
>
> What was that about "economical"?
>
> As the old saying goes, there's no replacement...for displacement.
>
> Brett
> --
> ----
> "They that give up essential liberty to obtain temporary
> safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Ben Franklin
> http://www.users.cloud9.net/~brett/