Thanks, some great info. I had a look on that site and its the 1600 mk2 engines which share the same bore as the 1800. doh. I remember reading somewhere that engines with a simular bore and stroke rev and perform better, stoke to bore ratio. Does anybody know anymore info on that? that site is really useful. The 2.0l engine have a massive stroke. I wonder what the 1600 GTI engine would be like with 1800 pistons, Or the 1800 with 2000 pistons
IIRC that was with a wild (304 maybe ) cam. The stock cams in the X-flow heads have quiet a mild cam profile. More for low down torque (athough the the long inlet plays a part there) and emisions, not revvyness. Not sure if the counter flow GTi cam would fit.
Yup... schrick 304 cam, Big Valve Head, Solid lifters, sorted bottom end, jenvey ITB's He spent lots of money on it... Which is the reason for my original point about using a 16v and not wasting the money. As to the bore/stroke question, in general... - bigger bore = more valve area = more power potential - long stroke = slower revving + more bore wear at high revs... maybe some loss of reliability if you rev it hard - more strain on bearings, caps, rods, crank, etc. However, it depends a lot on the spec of the individual bottom end - lightweight crank and rods enable a long stroker (or any engine) to spin faster - for example hotgolf's lightened 2.1 bottom end uses a 95mm stroke, but still revs well..
true, but my point was that for the money spent, cams, itb etc. the gains over a counter flow head werent as large as I personally expected, compared to chrismc's 8v
They weren't as big as Will expected either... hence the VR6 route. Maybe needed a bit more compression to release the extra horses.
