posted this on edition38 they said some of you guys run them as track cars? how do they hold up?are they as front heavy handling as people say regards sam
You'd be better off with a MK3 16v and some mods, still plenty power to be had and a much lighter front end for better handling.
have a look at 12valvers thread on here, serious car.... only ever driven a standard mk3 vr6, so not much point commenting on that. What is more important to you, the vr6 engine or the mk3? as a mk2 vr6 makes more sense, plenty of people run them as track cars
keep the engine and the bits you need, split the rest of the car and sell the parts - what you make put towards a mk2 shell to fit the vr into, if you can be bothered that is!
yeah use it as a doner car, then you can wide track a mk2 and you will have 288 brakes etc.... if you get a post 90 mk2 then im pretty sure the electrics will just plug and play the same as an abf conversion?
But all fairly involved work. For a casual Mk3 track car, what exactly is stopping someone picking up a Mk3 VR?
Exactly, practically no difference at all in both cars. The mk3 is slightly heavier thats all. The Mk2 would involve plenty of hassle converting to VR with all the wide track where as you can just jump in the Mk3 VR6 once its been lightened a bit and had a cage put in. My advice would be not to bother converting a Mk2 an just crack on with Mk3 as is.
And what actually make a car handle badly? it's name "Mk3" ??? perhaps after changing the shocks and anti rollbars as Chris says might make it handle just as well as the earlier car. Do you know the weight difference between a wide track mk2 and a mk3? bugger all! Just a thought.
My daily, weighing 1.5 tonnes, was transformed on coilovers. If that's doable on an estate wagon, we need to bin the blinkers here. If someone doesn't want to pull a car apart for a several-month build to go track daying, a set of coilovers, half-decent tyres, some EBCs and 1.5 degrees of front camber is all that is ever needed. And then go from there. A full on track day car, verging on club racer, is a totally different proposition.
my mk3 never handled **** leon and that was just a driver, i mean, what a load of *******s! how can the mk3 handle any worse, it's the same dimensions as a mk2, uses the same style suspension setup, same f/r split, so it's a little heavier, and only marginally, and already has the wider track, surely the mk3 has the potential to be better handling every single time, if i was building a track car it would be mk3 every time!!
so the extra weight difference between a mk2/3 is all in the rear beam and drive shafts/steering arms etc... think not
This is can of worms time but the point is that what RIPMk3 said doesnt make any sense. A Mk3 will do just fine for the track and will give you plenty of fun c6mby provided you pop a set of descent shocks on iit and some sticky rubber.
Lets not turn this guys thread into an argument. The fact of the matter is that a reasonably well setup Mk3 doesnt handle anyworse than an equivalent Mk2. The weight is as you should know, but i suspect are being sarcy, not in the rear beam etc but in the body- but as i keep saying its very marginal.
fair points, I never said a mk3 couldn't make a decent track car.... I had one that was litirally a set of bucket seats away from completion...... and even the cheapy coilovers i had made a big difference, sure a set of 'proper' one's would make it handle nicely....... I just suggested putting it in a mk2, as it would be better. I can't be the only person that thinks this... check the track car register on here and see how many mk2 (with abf/vr's) there are compared to mk3 track cars..... I f***** loved my mk3...... just think a mk2 feels a bit more 'lively' thats all
Yes, it's just a compromise between how much someone wants to develop and play with a car, versus how quickly they want to get out and use it. Anything can be tracked. For more serious stuff, definitely look at weight and other factors to optimise what's being built, but the carrot/stick effect of big rebuilds is somewhat drawn out, and depending on circumstances, can easily be enough to break peoples' resolve.
perhaps the "handle's like a barge" comment was too strong (although, on standard suspension with rear beam bushes the wrong side of 100k that would be being kind!!) Back to the original point of the thread - how cheap is cheap? As generally the mk3 prices have plumeted but decent VR's are still at a premium compared the 16v? You may find that looking at 16v's gives you a bigger choice and as such a better chance of picking up a decent one?
