Mk1 Race Engine Discussion

[Water Boy]

The berg cup motors are all 1600s as they run in that class, the 16V ones you see manage up to 240HP / 10 000rpm and cars come in at below 700kg , these things are really fast! as far as horsepower goes, Bertils in the states have been making superVee engines for open wheelers over there in the US for ages and there 8V 1600 vw engines produce 210 - 215 hp. These are full dry sumped race engines for open wheelers and wouldnt have enough torque to work well in a tin top car

At the wheels or at the fly wheel? 200hp at the wheels out of a N/A Mk1 is isane...

[Water Boy]

Avitar pic shows my itb 8V 1.9 I built recently hoping for a strong 165hp at the flywheel and plenty of grunt

Is this for a open wheeler or a Mk1? I like what im hearing...

[HillFlog]

The 8V open wheeler motors top out around the 200hp at the flywheel these are all 1600's , they all need close ratio boxes low diff gearing and only push 450kg of car. This will be bad in your mk1. The berg cup cars are making more power but are not restricted to 8V heads.

For a mk1 you need more torque to help with the weight, so the motor I built for my mk1 is pumped out to 1.9L and only going for 165 hp with a rev ceiling of 8000rpm with heaps more torque so standard gti box and crown and pinion should be ok.

The 16V motors would be better again but I kind of wanted to build an 8V to keep it in the spirit of the early cars and to keep costs down.

Seriously though a light golf mk1 with 140hp (flywheel) will feel like a rocket around town.....great fun

[GoLfMan]

have you got a big photo of this engine? sounds awesome

[alex g]

have you got a big photo of this engine? sounds awesome

yer would be interested in a better look, what managment are you running??

[gldgti]

Hats off to anyone that bothers to throw big $$$ at an 8v

Remember hp is nothing without torque!

a well respected vw race engine builder once said "the vw 16V is junk for tuning... the most economical way to get power from a watercooled vw s to start with a 1.8l 8V".

it was common in the states to build up 1600 8v's to around the 150-170hp mark. when the 1.8 l became more common, 200hp was easily broken.

the normal 16V that most people have on here (from the mk2's and 3's) is largely a ****e head... due to the valve positioning, its a very inefficient configuration for getting much more power out of it than is standard (without turboing). thats said, you can still do it, but its costs BIG $$$$.

for anyone wanting to get to 200 hp, use an 8V 1.8. this is the most reliable and cheapest option.

if you want more, get a turbo. the 20V head is far better than the 16V in terms of efficiency of design in the flow characteristics....

[Oneofthegreats]

a well respected vw race engine builder once said "the vw 16V is junk for tuning... the most economical way to get power from a watercooled vw s to start with a 1.8l 8V".

it was common in the states to build up 1600 8v's to around the 150-170hp mark. when the 1.8 l became more common, 200hp was easily broken.

the normal 16V that most people have on here (from the mk2's and 3's) is largely a ****e head... due to the valve positioning, its a very inefficient configuration for getting much more power out of it than is standard (without turboing). thats said, you can still do it, but its costs BIG $$$$.

for anyone wanting to get to 200 hp, use an 8V 1.8. this is the most reliable and cheapest option.

if you want more, get a turbo. the 20V head is far better than the 16V in terms of efficiency of design in the flow characteristics....

Those comment's come from a former employee of Drake engineering.
There stuff was the bomb & it also cost a bomb.
There 16V's cost $10KUS in 1984! Came with dry sump, Hilborn injection, methanol, crank triggered ignition etc. which made a crazy 280hp NA!
I have the links somewhere.
If your interested I can post the up.

But he is right about what he's saying, but also don't forget that not all of us have his capability's to go out & build a cyl head from scratch either.

I wouldn't got so far as saying it's cheaper & more reliable to build a 8V over a 16V. No way.
Go out & build a 200hp NA 8V & I bet you wont get much change out of 15G. It will also be a time bomb too IMHO.
The big banger 2.1L TSR engine will set you back roughly $6KAUD without a clutch, then add shipping, tax, duty etc. & you'll still only make 160hp. Then add on the ignition & fuel system's, intake, exhaust etc.

It's going to take a hell of alot of work to get a 8V there reliably. First you'll have to find the rare eurospec rally big valve cyl. head's. Which still cost $3500US. You'll need a cam that has a duration of more the 310+degree's & about 280+ @.050! That will have some trouble if not, it won't idle under 2000rpm in a 4 cyl & chew go juice like's it going out of fashion. That's not a reliable street engine.

I'd rather buy a 2L 16V, mild head mod's, set of split profile cams, slap some ITB's with some good engine management & your there with 30MPG!



Check here. Created by Bill Brockbank. Well respected VW tuner who people thought was mad to stay NA with a 16V. Showed them how it's done.

http://www.badger-5.com/

[gldgti]

thanks golfworx...

still i would say that 310 deg cams arent necessary.... for 200 hp. with drakes BVH for 1600 278deg cam and i think twin 45 dcoe's they had figures of 174hp.

i cant remember the 1.8 figures...

oh well.

haha

(crawl back in my hole)

[Oneofthegreats]

Please don't take my reply as being nasty. That maybe the way it came across but that's far from how I mean't it to be.

To increase roughly another 15% in power will require more comp. cam & flow along with some rev's.

Or you could try & find a super rare drake head which will give you a head start.
The drake head show's how much more efficient they are over a standard head. A standard 1800 GTI engine has a solid cam of 286degree's & roughly 230@.050 with about .423" lift.
The drake depending on which one your talking about has around the same lift with more duration @ .050 & less total duration which makes it a fatter cam down low to make the torque & with the BVH can still make the numbers up high.

I've got a link from my saved as favorite's but don't know how to post it up. It's a link to a Scirocco that had a stageIII drake engine upgrade soon after the car was brand new & made 143bhp @ 6000rpm & susprisingly made 138ft.lb @ 2000rpm. I'll say not bad for a 1.6L!

[alex g]

now we are getting somewhere

a 200bhp 8v without boost is a very very high target

and the drake is as rare as the rocking horses(even in the states)

and boost on the ole 16v can be extremely rewarding