Question about something that doesnt seem to add up
Thread Starter
|
1st Gear
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 86
From:
The 2.0T is well, a 2L with higher compression, better flowing head, and larger turbo. All this leads to a much LONGER power band. I last dynoed in sig, but that is just spikes and no real power band. If i came across someone that had 180whp and 250wtq but it lasted for 2000-3000rpms instead of 500-750rpms, the other person would most likely win with weights be =.
Numbers are great, but a powerband is better
Numbers are great, but a powerband is better
Thread Starter
|
1st Gear
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 86
From:
i know it unlikely but its what happened maybe the Z was not running well i dont know i am surprised as you i really expected the Z to pull him easily i dont know thats why i created the thread the car is fast i just cant see it being 200bhp as claimed by audi :S or could be chipped and he is lying about it being stock however the same night another Z pulled him however the other z is 6sp and has stillen exhaust, headers , plenum and cai so obviously it would pull
1st Gear
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 220
So is a built AEB 1.8 or 20/20 better/worse than the equivalent built FSI? I'm assuming built 1.8t, because of its older nature and more thorough tuning, but also that the FSI will have more potential in a few years...that sound about right?
I'm make believe
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 17,587
From: In my head
I would have to say he is chipped or atleast did something to the car.
^ the FSI is a better engine. Everything about it is better, its only limitation at this point is the fueling system. The 1.8t is now like 11yrs old and its FINALLY making the power it should be making just withen the past year due to lack of trying from vag people and tuning
^ the FSI is a better engine. Everything about it is better, its only limitation at this point is the fueling system. The 1.8t is now like 11yrs old and its FINALLY making the power it should be making just withen the past year due to lack of trying from vag people and tuning
1st Gear
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 220
Ok, so really you only need to do rods on the FSI for a lot more potential...I know its in its infancy fueling-wise. How about the TB issues?
Also, what would an FSI swap take (would it use mkIV motormounts?) I'd totally do it once I actually have money (ie probably around the time fueling gets properly developed
). My other concern would be finding a manual tranny that would work with AWD (is it simply an 02M?)...I'm going to ask Arnold or Bob...
Also, what would an FSI swap take (would it use mkIV motormounts?) I'd totally do it once I actually have money (ie probably around the time fueling gets properly developed
). My other concern would be finding a manual tranny that would work with AWD (is it simply an 02M?)...I'm going to ask Arnold or Bob...
I'm make believe
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 17,587
From: In my head
They would know. THink the blocks are very close. But with the money spent, you could easily have a nicely ported aeb head and make plenty of power with that. Franky make over 700whp with stock aeb ports
Yea, power is there and in the long run it'll be cheaper...
2nd Gear
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,198
From:
Oh hai, me too 
The 2.0T is a nifty piece of work. I had a 2007 A4 2.0T with the 7-speed auto. The damn thing moved like my 180 did stock pretty much. I can imagine it in a Mk2 being 600lbs lighter than an A4.
However I think your friend is lying lol. A 2.0T GTI which is same motor and roundabout the same weight got its head kicked in by my 180 FWD with just a chip. That was on my old motor and trans as well (regular K03+5 speed).
The 2.0T is a nifty piece of work. I had a 2007 A4 2.0T with the 7-speed auto. The damn thing moved like my 180 did stock pretty much. I can imagine it in a Mk2 being 600lbs lighter than an A4.
However I think your friend is lying lol. A 2.0T GTI which is same motor and roundabout the same weight got its head kicked in by my 180 FWD with just a chip. That was on my old motor and trans as well (regular K03+5 speed).
