You can do it, but the probs afaik are there arent off the shelf drive shafts for straigh into mk2`s, plus the o2m doesn`t have a manual speedo drive, only an electrical signal, not the same as the 02a where you can remove the electric sender and drop in a cable drive. PLus you`ll need a custon raer mount, or a mk4 type mount welded into the n/s chassis leg. Honestly I`d just drop in an 02a, whith the power of a mapped bam in a light mk2 pick up a ctn code the car will fly and it`ll cruise too.
I've just bought an Ibiza Cupra 1.8T geabox. It'll have VR6 ratios in a 4-pot housing so should work out well
Nop. not all sellers know what they are selling Tip: look for sellers advertising AYP Ibiza engines........
Nice choice is it an EWP? not that it matters mind as i think the 2 are the same, CDA ratio's with a 3.3 FD. Rough (tested on GPS) figures on mine with 195 50 15 tyres are; 2nd = 10 mph per 1000 rpm 3rd = 15 mph 4th = 20 mph 5th = 25 mph rough top speeds changing @ 6800 rpm are; 2nd = 68 mph 3rd = 102 mph 4th = 136mph 5th = 170 mph (not tested) Its a good compromise box for a powerful 1.8t imho,2nd still spins off the throttle in the dry but 3rd and 4th are both long and hard pulling in a mk2,5th is still very good but gives medium revs for mpg. It does lack the punch of a CDA with a 3.6 FD but enables gears to be held longer and could/would result in less changes per lap on track. Again,my opinion is that more power will make it perfect enough as mine is down on power for the k04 spec.
Yes EWP is the code (same as EDT I believe). Ive been studying options for months and waiting for one of these to come up. I think the most used spreadsheet on my PC is the gearbox/ratios one I took from the FAQ section on this site lol. I want long enough legs on the 'box to give it sufficient cruising ability, but enough pickup in 3rd and 4th to make it rapid on A/B roads. It won't be a serious track car as that's not the plan - but I want it usable. I dont mind some compromise. I've a Polo 1.8T gearbox and a G60 gearbox now to dispose of
Nobody has mentioned a Corrado G60 box yet. Code: CBA. IIRC I'm running one using a G60 flywheel and stock VR6 clutch mounted to an AMK lump. 1st is a little short, but the rest of the ratios are good. running 215/40/16 tyres gives about 3100k rpm at 85mph. Perfect for everyday driving. Personally, I wouldn't go for a shorter ratio box. I'm only running 210 and there is plenty of power to move such a light car even with the slightly longer ratios. More power and shorter ratio box doesn't make much sence to me. The only upgrades I'd consider would be a VR6 1st and 2nd replacement (Slightly longer) and a diff if I was using it in anger regularly.
Thats because of the short 1st. It would be easier to just use a 16v box they have the lowest ratio 1st and second already. I have the box you require at the moment(not that I've tried it out). CDA with a G60 5th. 5th gear change is alot easier than than 1st and 2nd
Hey Kev, how are you mate? Same set-up here, G60 CBA with diff, lightened flywheel, Sachs clutch. 1st is short but it's a track car, happy with a low 5th and other ratios. Haven't looked at the ratios for a while but IIRC the conclusion I came to in order to optimise things (cheaply/easily) was to fit a CDA which I have spare.
But you don't want the low ratio (short) 1st and 2nd. You want higher (longer) ratios if you've got big power in a light car. Hence using the VR 1st and second 2nd. Fitting a Mk3 Valver box with a long fifth is OK of you only have circa 130-170BHP and want something that gets you there quick then will cruise. Agreed changing fifth is easier, but that doesn't matter when you have a mate that builds gearboxes for a living. Also, when has the easiest option ever been the best one?
A lower ratio (number)! Not lower gearing. If you looked at the FAQ you will see what I mean. A VR6 has the same ratios apart from maybe 3rd and a lower (ratio) final drive. Do a search and you will see I'm not mistaken. I know what's needed Btw my post referred to the g60 box that was mentioned.
Yes, Higher ratios = taller gears = less rpm/mph Lower ratios = shorter gears = more rpm/mph EDIT: corrected........yes, very easy to get mixed up!
No, you've got it back to front. Lower ratios = shorter gears = more rpm per mph Higher ratios = taller gears = less rpm per mph You're looking at the numbers not what they represent. A low ratio gear will be a higher number (think cogs on a push bike - More teeth on the rear wheel makes it easier to pedal i.e lower geared AKA Low ratio)
Gears: 3.30 will be a shorter gear than 3.10 (With a 3.30, with the same RPM = less speed) Final Drive: 3.3 will make all the gears Shorter than 3.10 (With a 3.30, with the same RPM = less speed) BTW, I use a VR6 gear ratios in my mk2 20VT. I like it. 1- 3,3 2- 1,94 3- 1,31 4- 1,03 5- 0,84 Final Drive - 3,388 274km/h@7200 in 5th.
Numbers make it easier to get your head around. You can make that look any way you want to confuse things further. As long as everyone gets it. Higher numbers = shorter gears = less mph per rpm Lower numbers = Longer gears = more mph per rpm
Nicely backed out of. The general standard is: Lower ratios = shorter gears = more rpm per mph Higher ratios = taller gears = less rpm per mph You switching them around them asking questions just confuses matters. Join in with the correct school of thought and you'll get answers much more quickly and easily.
Each to their own Who's looking for answers? Not me! Maybe your'e confused! I answered in reference to your "ideal" G60 box with VR 1st and 2nd. My answer that involved an easier solution was to forget the g60 box and go with a CDA/DPA (more readily available) with a G60 5th (for cruising). Why split a box for 1st and 2nd change when you can get the same result by changing 5th with the end cover removal? Especially if the box is still to be purchased.
