Pro's and Con's 20vt or 2.1 ABF

So, I still find myself undecided. I really need to make my mind up on which route to take, engine wise, as time is running out.
Do I go the 1.8 20v turbo route, which currently puts out 260bhp or go the ABF 2.1 on jenveys route. This engine is newly built but never run. It has diesel crank, forged rods and wossner high compression 83.5mm pistons. 2098cc I think. Head has been ported and has kent cams in. Will run on DTA S40 PRO management. So should go well.

I know its horses for course, so to speak, but its frustrating because what I do to my mk2 now depends on what engine I go for. Pretty soon my golf will be resprayed, so any modifications that will need to be done in the engine bay, need to be done very soon.
If I go 20vt, the ABF setup and everything related will be sold to fund the 20vt engine rebuild. So once its gone, its gone for good. If I keep the ABF setup, then I will keep the SEAT and do some track days with the club. Its about time I met some of you!

I ask here because alot of you have had experience with both engines in a mk2 golf. Ive just had the experience of a standard KR and an ABF on R1 bike carbs that ran rich. Still pretty pokey though!

Any thoughts or opinions will be much appreciated.

 

There's more money to be spent in an ABF to get it up to date technically, it's a little 'Bakelite electronics' in places, even though it's graphite and better than the new stuff. I'd go with aftermarket ECU, Digi is like hanging onto a 386 computer because it still works, and it does but each year it gets more difficult and to think there's an analog rev limiter, it's showing it's age! So you have to add a few extra costs with the ABF outside of the internal upgrades, the decision will be easier if you do all the costings. Oil Cooling, Fuel systems and injectors, electrical overhaul... Adds up quickly, then again, the same goes for all cars.

 

Only you can really answer that.

For the noise, Jenvey`s every time.

For throttle response, Jenvey`s every time.

For more power for a lot less money, 1.8T.

 

My 2p: 20vT is the easy way out but there seem to be SO many of them around these days. For me it would be the ABF hands-down: much more in keeping with the [early] Golf GTI spirit of revvy N/A engines. Much more work and money I'd guess too, but it sounds like you already have the ABF kit ready to go so maybe you've already paid for the expensive bits.
Sounds like a no-brainer: a 200hp+ ABF T/B'd MK2 Golf AND keep the Seat 20vT as a track toy, best of both worlds!

 

Forget the numbers.
Think about the different powertrains as experiences.

Does an open induction set up, with pretty instant response, 8000 rpm limit and short gearing appeal to you, in a sub 1000kg shell?

Out the box, does significant engine flexibility from 3000 to 5000 rpm and the ability to cruise at 150mph, having potential to develop much further, in a 1150 kg vehicle that can be a trackday toy as well as a weekend cruiser at appeal to you?

Forget numbers and think about the packages and then move forward.

 

Interesting, I have exactly the same dilemma for my new rally Ibiza.
300hp forged 18T lump or 200+ (ex F2Stu) ABF.
Haven't decided yet, but having to run a 34mm restrictor on the turbo lump is a factor.
February/March is decision time.
Not too worried about which class we run , as no matter which class we enter there is always someone with 5* our budget.
Jon

 

What Nige Said

 

I'm not convinced on putting bucket loads of power through a FWD MK2 chassis.

200 bhp with a NA response could be a better all round package and possibly more fun.

Also what's likely to be more reliable overall?

 

Depends on the use, setup and driver

I agree N/A response will be better, but the slug of torque from a Turbo is also quite nice and a lot easier to live with day to day on a road car, compared to an N/A screamer

 

What Bootsie says ^^^^

I have a 280bhp 20vt in my Mk2 and its great - reliable and mad. But for me the whole experience has to be complete - pokey caged Mk2, reliable, great to drive, great to look at and be in, and sound good too, and this is where mine fails a bit - the sound doesn't really do it for me, I miss my old KJet 9a valver. Jenveys would sound immense in my stripped shell, suit the car better, and I don't need all that power tbh - hard work! Considering making the change, but I'd keep the engine in case!

 

had a few fast road ABF 9A etc 16v mk2's and yes ...cracking cars but a proper set up/ mapped 1.8t with ko4, ko3 to peaky
not as useable and just dial it in to what every you want to use it for ...stonking job ..have mine 7 years and love what the car gives back to me.

 

Power? No one drives power It is torque. A 20vT has no shortage of this starting from as low as 2500 rpm and the good thing is you can shape how you want the torque to be delivered with a bespoke engine map. An engine that can deliver strong torque whilst remaining near std, will be pretty durable in the long run as well.

I hear you say traction! I say suspension geometry.

My own experience from driving a NASP engine that can scream, is more maintenance and up keep for durable track use.
It is more involving to keep it on boil on the track, as the window for that is pretty small. Get that right and you will be pretty much flat out everywhere!

 

9A Valver on ITBs would not stand a chance at pushing Duncan in his angry little MK1 20vT. Your BAM thing was not too shabby at keeping up I should add!

 

Yeah, I'd be lying if I said I wouldn't miss the grunt! And Dunc is on another level really, motivated and talented - I'm more of a nice-day-out trackday driver lol

Still need a nice noise though!

 

All done buddy. Everything from a tsr 4 branch, new wiring loom, new injectors, schrick sump etc etc etc. ECU is DTA S40 pro. Its ready to go in, and used accordingly. Would need to be run in first though. Its one of the reasons I'm finding it hard to choose.

 

I know Nige. I have never driven either though, so just thought i'd get the opinion of you guys.

I have to be honest though, I've never been a fan of cars that are too noisey for road use. I feel a bit embarrassed when people start staring! lol

 

Just my opinion.
If you were starting from scratch I'd say 20vt all day long. It's easy, you don't have to rip the engine apart to get decent bhp, and these days it's won't break the bank.

2.1 takes an engine rebuild, crank, pistons, realistically a reworked head, cams, exhaust etc etc. It's expensive for no more than 240-250bhp if you do it right.

But, youve got the 2.1 ready to go in. Wtf are you waiting for??!! Get it prep'd painted and fitted!

 

I know what your saying mate. Its was one of the reasons I went for the ing in the first place. One of the pro's for going 20vt though, is the availability of parts and the engines themselves. As corny as it sounds, I'd love to see my boy driving it one day. I cant imagine an ABF being easy to find in another 12 or so years. Unless of course you stock up on a couple of blocks now.

 

At the moment, the smooth, powerful and more modern engine appeals to me, aswell as the future development. The SEAT feels really good to drive. Engine wise that is. The rest is a shed! Infact, I like how it responds more than I did the MK4 anni that I had. Feels smoother and quicker. Could be down to the comparable weight of both cars though.

 

I dont envy you Jon. Especially as the choice you make could determine where you finnish in the race. Best of luck though mate.