ABF or VR6 in mk2 track car?

Can you tell me the good and bad points of both options

Are VR's harder to put in (i'll be doing it myself)
Harder to get a VR? More expensive?

Also any ideas how much i'd be looking to pay for both?
I'm pretty sure i'll go with the ABF i just wanted to make sure a VR might not be a better option

cheers

 

depends which sort of tracks your going to attend, short straights etc the vr would be good, long straights where higher rpm will be in play the 16v, tuned however as the vr would be quick enough for both.

 

The phalacy over Mk2 VR6s not handling continues. Its utter tripe. Just needs setting up.

16v will use less fuel, thats about the only real advantage! My Jetta VR6 caned about 80 when i took it to Donington. Mind you, i did 7x 30 min sessions.

 

VR's are too heavy! (Sorry deako)

 

yeah i've heard that before...hmm
Is the ABF fairly easy to put in? I will have help but this is my first engine swap

 

I can help if you want? Hand you tools?

 

whats the costs work out as out of curiousity...

just wondering if a standard vr6 will be cheaper to do than having to mod the 16v up.

 

Try telling that to Paul Horrocks who came 2nd or 3rd at Kames last year and came close to getting a trophy at Curborough yesterday. He was using his heavy momma corrado too, and was lapping 0.2 slower than his stripped Mk2 shell last year.

 

He cheats though

 

i've never bought the 'VR6 is too heavy' argument....

for starters, if you care about weight wtf are you driving a mkII for...they ain't the lightest cars every made...get yourself an AX or a westfield.

and secondly, a good driver will be quick in anything. if you have extra weight at the front drive around it (keep more weight on the front during turn in, trail braking for example)

 

is the VR more tricky to transplant than an ABF?

 

9a!! lol

 

Not a thought that entered my head as I passed 99.9% of the much modified MK2 16vs in my STD VR engined banana with an absolute minimum of alterations.

Dont perpetuate the rubbish thats posted on here, I thought youd have more of an idea

What may be true is that some people with VR engined cars are too thick or too tight to spend the cash need on tyres and suspension

 

My 9a valver will hold off the missus' 4-motion in a straight line,
Get a valver, a VR6 will cost a lot more when it goes wrong.

 

I'm not saying it as fact mate... not even saying it as an opinion... just saying it to liven up the debate!

 

Hes talking about a Mk2 VR6 conversion though, and matt, im sure youve spent far more than was needed on 16v engines! 3 of them in total is it??

 

The debate doesnt need livening up, the guy asked for opinions on what he should base his car on.


If you go the 16v route you will need to spend a fair bit of cash on the lump to bring the power up to a reasonable level and the engine will still be a little short on power so you will need to make the best of the suspension, tyres and weight advantage to make up for the engines short comings. Dont get me wrong I love the 16v engine but I think I realise its short comings, why else do you think Bill and Maurice moved on to the 20v???????? I also love the VR6 but once again I understand the short comings of the engine, they cost a fortune to tune and I dont think Ive seen a charged VR perform any better than a std VR, and thats why I sold mine. The 20v is the way to go at the moment, its not an engine I particularly like but it is the way to go.

Also think how often you see a 16v owner tinkering with it to get the best out of it and see how many clutches and gearboxs they go through. The VR had a gearbox, clutch and chains at 100k but nothing in betweenspeaks volumes I think

 

cheers for that mate

As its the first time i've attempted somthing like this though, is the VR a harder job? i want somthing that'll be good fun but also somthing i can actually see myself finnishing!

Like i said i've got a few mates who can help out i just don't want to bite off more than i can chew
Edited by: thebluebus

 

personally i would tune the 16v

cheap parts, much easier conversion

leaves you more money to spend on brakes/suspension etc

 

How does it leave more money for brakes and suspension when you have to spend loads of cash on the engine to get some power out of it??????


The VR conversion is just as easy as the 16v as long as you get all the bits you need, in fact its easier because you can run it as soon as its fitted because you dont need to mod the engine.

Edited by: motorhead