It was all a sham - only one "wide arch" car was made by Danny Whitrow at RSD and although it looked the dogs, it was not that great - I think Seat had ideas of cashing in on the F2 success but nothing ever came of it There were no other factory ibiza's other than std 16V cupras. There was a red turbo cordoba made, actually by Brian Ricketts I think, but it was a bit of a death trap and was broken for parts a few years ago Cheers Rob
The digi ABF goes very well in the Mk1, I'm guessing a remap would make it loads better then. On the to-do list.
I bet it does!!! Even my mechanic's 1.8 16v PL Mk1 goes REALLY well. Definately get it re-mapped, especially if you have a few breathing mods and can always run 98RON fuel.
not quite the answer you were looking for matey but when my abf cams died an awful scraping death when a tappet shattered, i could only source a kr head, when it was fitted and run around in for a while i noticed that the car pulled equally as well as before hand (rr'd at 157 bhp and 133) afterwards it was rr'd again with the kr head and cams, 155 bhp and 138 lb/f, lost 2 bhp but gained 4 lb/f, now, the dyno chart was interesting as the power and torque were both being produced almost exactly 1000 rpm lower in the rev range so the narrower ports on the kr head seem to give more down low pull but on the road seemed to die after 6k maybe 6.1k. the abf head definately pulled harder to 6500-6600 just before the limiter kicked in but the kr head was a tiny bit easier to accelerate in 5th at lower speeds, ie 30&40 mph zones.
abf cams have a different profile on the actual lobes over the kr in that the kr lobes surface that comes in contact with the tappet/follower is only half the width of the abf which is full width contact. im not sure how this woud affect the surface of the tappet as there is bound to be a little wear caused y the edge of the kr item.
Can't find the thread that Tub posted about lightweight tappets in 16v.. Found this on vortex 16v forum, lightweight 16v tappet info. Made me laugh, they're all blithering on about part numbers and ringing Germany to find out how/what/why, then Ess Three comes along and states the car they were fitted to , part numbers and pics http://forums.vwvortex.com/zerothread?id=1094732&page=3 Edited by: G_V_K
I try my best.... The common problem with Vortex is that there's far too many Internet experts and far too much talking...and not enough doing. As we all know, when theory and reality collide...reality wins. Every time. ...which is why it's a breath of fresh air on here with people that actually 'do' things!
Excuse my ignorance but is the ABF the 2.0 16v to have then? Is it better than the 9A/KR combo? I haven't had any experience with 16vs before - only the 8v. I always though the KR head was better - hope I haven't opened a can of worms Edited by: randomguy82
No worms released as yet From what I've found, the ABF seems to make more power when tuned, but it also makes it higher up. I recently achieved my goal of over 200whp, but the mapping is WAY out as I've killed another TPS. At the moment, I needed just under 9000rpm ( ) to reach peak power - properly mapped this motor should peak at about 8000 by my guess. The chap who tuned my car figured that the tall block (ABF) would make peak power at least 300rpm higher than a 9A - I don't know why in technical terms, though. To put it simply, if you want a silly race engine (which I somehow have stumbled upon in my daily driver ), go with the ABF, otherwise, the short-motors are fine and the majority of talk is utter BS.
My motor is a 2L short block and makes plenty power (193 atw) so I dont think this has much to do with the power potential if H8SV8S has achieved similar outputs as me but with an ABF. Rob
