vr6

[shdwdub]

does anybody know how hard it would be if you were to take a 2.8 vr6 and put it in a mk1 gti

[98a4]

Dont, they handle like ass.

[Corporate_Trash]

a 1.8t would be easier to swap.... but of course i'm basing that statement on nothing due the fact i've never done any motor swap in any car

but as it plays out in my head 1.8t seems easier

[duke]

A VR6 really messes with the handling of the car... they become very front heavy.

[trev0rbr]

all the mk1 vr6 guys on the vortex say it doesn't really change that much, stronger springs up front fix it, and as everyone has read in the arguments a vr6 is only 80 pounds heavier, not that much heavier. and don't do a 1.8t swap i know everyone else will disagree but 1.8ts are poop, yeah they can make power, yeah certain ones bolt in, but they have alot of issues, go for a 16vt much better motor.

[eurotrashed]

i hear its not so much the extra weight of the VR, but the VR has to be so far foward in the MKI engine bay, thats what throws it off.

2.0 16v swap on ITBs would be better...

[trev0rbr]

so far forward? where have you guys heard this stuff?

[shdwdub]

i would rather put a vr6 instead of a 1.8 and another question is it possible to put the r32 engine in a mk1. besides the vr6 looks sounds and performs so better the 1.8. and to the 2.0 guy- ive got a 2.0 in my jetta and it feels so slow and whenever i race a 1.8 or vr6 its like im standing still. and i feel like a douchebag when imports beat me.

[eurotrashed]

Originally Posted by trev0rbr

so far forward? where have you guys heard this stuff?

vwvortex

plus just look at the engine bays on them


The Vr6 is situated with its center of mass much farther foward infront of the front axel than the stock 1.6, 1.8 or what have you. The distribution of the weight has a lot more effect than the added weight.

[twenty4valve]

Baller style, 32v Northstar bitches

[trev0rbr]

it's the same thing as the difference between a 2.0 and a vr6, then they're mounted they're situated just lik it would be in any other factory vr6 car. and also the car has the rain tray cut out so it looks like the motors i further forward than what it really is. i've just never heard of the weight being distributed wrong? or that they handle funny at all.

[eurotrashed]

Originally Posted by trev0rbr

it's the same thing as the difference between a 2.0 and a vr6, then they're mounted they're situated just lik it would be in any other factory vr6 car. and also the car has the rain tray cut out so it looks like the motors i further forward than what it really is. i've just never heard of the weight being distributed wrong? or that they handle funny at all.

i've spent plenty of time elbow deep in oil and greese in a MKI bay, the bulk of the VR is way more foward. My brother owns the MKI i work on and hes in the MKI board on vortex and he told me he read the distribution of weight in the engine compartment is what throws it off the most.

regardless. 16v on ITBs> VR6 in a MKI.

[slo goin]

i would prefer the 16v itb setup for great all around but if you are only going straight and have time and money i say vr6t

[Fourt1thirty]

ITBs can eat my ass. Long live the sheetmetal intake. And for the record... the VR6 is heavier and all of that is in front of the front wheels. While it may not totally destroy everything that is the MK1 it certainly doesn't help for the feel and agility of the MK1.

[shdwdub]

i just remembered something wouldent the g60 supercharged engine fom the corrado. destroy all in a mk 1. and it should fit nicely too and its not too heavy.