need more bhp on my 1.6 vtr 8v sitting at 120bhp atm

[Mochachino]

Originally Posted by greyjasper51

Std 8 vs std 16, 16 wins... Highly modified 8 vs. Highly modified 16, 16 wins, however if power is equal i prefer the 8 as i feel its more forgiving and a better drive obviously alot of people feel differently to me...

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk 2

You may prefer the VTR, but the VTS produces more power which you can use to greater effect than an 8valve. that bit isnt a preference but a fact.

[greyjasper51]

Yh agreed if i was gonna build an out and out track car i would go 16v because more power is achieveable overall and would be faster...

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk 2

[greyjasper51]

Originally Posted by Mochachino

if a saxo is slower than another saxo in a straight line with the same chassis then its obviously going to be slower on a track

lol

How it delivers that power through and comming out of a corner...

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk 2

[titchster]

You've never actually driven on a track... have you?

[greyjasper51]

Originally Posted by titchster

You've never actually driven on a track... have you?

Really? Google lewis turner tim parrott motorsport...

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk 2

[Ryanp]

Originally Posted by greyjasper51

120bhp cam, mani back and igniton... Std everything else! Equal car setup... Will beat a 120bhp 16v on track every time

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk 2

Can't be arsed to see if you replied, but no it won't.

For a start the vts has the better final drive.

[Mochachino]

Ok im going to copy and paste something. Pushed me that far my ctrl and V button is going to be pressed now omg.

"The VTS has a longer rev range so it doesnt matter that the peak figures are higher up, infact its a good thing, as this is where you should be anyway if your driving properly in an NA car.

VTRs run out of grunt high up. So if you drop it down a gear, say from 3rd to 2nd for a tightish corner, in a vts youve got a much bigger range to drop into in the first place, and all the powers there. Then you change gear, and your up in the powerband again in the next gear at say 5.5k all the way to 7.2k.

Change down to the top end of the rev range in a VTR and its powerband tails off as you get near the top so you need to change up before the redline to get the best out of it.

The longer revrange also allows you to be much more flexible in the twisties. Because of the nature of the strong higher powerband you can whack it in at high revs and hold it there all the way round a long bend, then change up as you throw yourself off the corner. It also means you can whack it down into lower gears earlier in order to gearbrake before doing that. Where the VTR wouldnt be as happy to do that as theres less power there and theres not as many RPM to play with.

Hence why VTS's are much better all round. And ehy 16vs isnt just about the extra 20 odd brake. I wasnt mentioning handling when I said it was faster round the corners .

If you think this is bull, take a look at any high powered sports NA engined cars. The S2K for example. Theres fuck all power until later on in the rev range. Shit for pick up and go power, perfect for constant power through the corners with well timed gear choices.

Yes you can raise the rev limit, but that doesnt really solve the problem. Even matched with a lairy cam, your powerbands still going to be much smaller than the VTS, and to get the best power will also be a fair bit smaller than the OEM setup.

It will still be great to drive down the B roads and twisty tracks, but youll have to try really hard to stay in the powerband all the time. This might take the fun out a bit. And due to the powerband being smaller as mentioned, it wont be as able as a VTS. Youll constantly have to keep the engine screaming to get the best out of it.

Some people really like that kinda setup. Its more challenging to drive fast in many aspects. But in reality if the 16v is a better performer, is more flexible both to modify for performance purposes and independantly to drive fast, it is the better choice. Even in a reasonably high end VTS, youve still got a reasonable amount of revs to play with, especially when the limits put upto the 7.8k mark.

So basically, if you tune the VTR to a decent NA spec, it will be highly strung and very peaky. If your gonna be happy with that, then go for it. If your having doubts now, dont bother imo as by the time your done and all the moneys been spent, everytime you drive it youll wonder what you could have had. Which is what you see over and over again with people really into their tuning, spending money on the same parts to different specs over and over"

[greyjasper51]

Originally Posted by Ryan

Can't be arsed to see if you replied, but no it won't.

For a start the vts has the better final drive.

Better final drive for what? Top speed?

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk 2

[Mochachino]

Originally Posted by greyjasper51

Really? Google lewis turner tim parrott motorsport...

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk 2

A go-Kart isnt quite the same as a Saxo with a 8v engine vs 16v engine.

Im not being harsh, but experienced people are adding facts to this thread but you are challenging them all with uneducated, unexperienced opinions!

Im not saying that your preference to the VTR is false, thats perfectly fine. A 16v has many advantages over the 8v saxo, apart from its peak power and extra 8valves, its other contributions that are a result of the extra 8valves.

[Ryanp]

Originally Posted by greyjasper51

Better final drive for what? Top speed?

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk 2

For overall performance. The vtr final drive is shite for in gear performance.

[greyjasper51]

Originally Posted by Mochachino

Ok im going to copy and paste something. Pushed me that far my ctrl and V button is going to be pressed now omg.

"The VTS has a longer rev range so it doesnt matter that the peak figures are higher up, infact its a good thing, as this is where you should be anyway if your driving properly in an NA car.

VTRs run out of grunt high up. So if you drop it down a gear, say from 3rd to 2nd for a tightish corner, in a vts youve got a much bigger range to drop into in the first place, and all the powers there. Then you change gear, and your up in the powerband again in the next gear at say 5.5k all the way to 7.2k.

Change down to the top end of the rev range in a VTR and its powerband tails off as you get near the top so you need to change up before the redline to get the best out of it.

The longer revrange also allows you to be much more flexible in the twisties. Because of the nature of the strong higher powerband you can whack it in at high revs and hold it there all the way round a long bend, then change up as you throw yourself off the corner. It also means you can whack it down into lower gears earlier in order to gearbrake before doing that. Where the VTR wouldnt be as happy to do that as theres less power there and theres not as many RPM to play with.

Hence why VTS's are much better all round. And ehy 16vs isnt just about the extra 20 odd brake. I wasnt mentioning handling when I said it was faster round the corners .

If you think this is bull, take a look at any high powered sports NA engined cars. The S2K for example. Theres fuck all power until later on in the rev range. Shit for pick up and go power, perfect for constant power through the corners with well timed gear choices.

Yes you can raise the rev limit, but that doesnt really solve the problem. Even matched with a lairy cam, your powerbands still going to be much smaller than the VTS, and to get the best power will also be a fair bit smaller than the OEM setup.

It will still be great to drive down the B roads and twisty tracks, but youll have to try really hard to stay in the powerband all the time. This might take the fun out a bit. And due to the powerband being smaller as mentioned, it wont be as able as a VTS. Youll constantly have to keep the engine screaming to get the best out of it.

Some people really like that kinda setup. Its more challenging to drive fast in many aspects. But in reality if the 16v is a better performer, is more flexible both to modify for performance purposes and independantly to drive fast, it is the better choice. Even in a reasonably high end VTS, youve still got a reasonable amount of revs to play with, especially when the limits put upto the 7.8k mark.

So basically, if you tune the VTR to a decent NA spec, it will be highly strung and very peaky. If your gonna be happy with that, then go for it. If your having doubts now, dont bother imo as by the time your done and all the moneys been spent, everytime you drive it youll wonder what you could have had. Which is what you see over and over again with people really into their tuning, spending money on the same parts to different specs over and over"

Its never gonna see the road... Track only... And yeah fast road track use the 16v is better but for the same power outputs i prefer the 8v wtf is wrong with that?! 16v is better in the long run over 130bhp vtr is better under that IMO

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk 2

[Ryanp]

So from 'same power 8v will beat 16v every time' it's now about what you prefer..

[Mochachino]

Originally Posted by greyjasper51

Its never gonna see the road... Track only... And yeah fast road track use the 16v is better but for the same power outputs i prefer the 8v wtf is wrong with that?! 16v is better in the long run over 130bhp vtr is better under that IMO

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk 2

Whether its track or fast road, they both have corners, both have straight lines.

Nothing is wtf wrong with that as I have said in a post above yours.

Im reading some contradictions now though,im sure i saw a 200bhp NA vtr being mentioned a minute ago haha

[titchster]

People always complain about how the power's high up in a 16v (an 8v with a cam will be the same, or higher...), but if you've ever driven a car (not a kart, where the engine characteristics and gearing are completely different) on track, in anger, you'll know that it's extremely rare that you're below 5k on track...



Oh, and a VTS's final drive is a higher number than a VTR's, that means it's better for acceleration, not top speed.

[greyjasper51]

Originally Posted by Mochachino

Whether its track or fast road, they both have corners, both have straight lines.

Nothing is wtf wrong with that as I have said in a post above yours.

Im reading some contradictions now though,im sure i saw a 200bhp NA vtr being mentioned a minute ago haha

If i typed r i meant s sorry

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk 2

[greyjasper51]

Originally Posted by Ryan

So from 'same power 8v will beat 16v every time' it's now about what you prefer..

Imo it will proof of pudding is in the eating...

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk 2

[Ryanp]

Originally Posted by greyjasper51

Imo it will proof of pudding is in the eating...

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk 2

Yet as stated the vtr gearbox is not anywhere near as good for performance in gear.

So if you have the same power then the vts wins with the superior final drive

You are banging on about the way it drives and delivers power in previous posts, now having a bad gearbox or final drive isn't going to help. Hence why alot of us with track cars have switched boxes to improve performance.

[greyjasper51]

Originally Posted by titchster

People always complain about how the power's high up in a 16v (an 8v with a cam will be the same, or higher...), but if you've ever driven a car (not a kart, where the engine characteristics and gearing are completely different) on track, in anger, you'll know that it's extremely rare that you're below 5k on track...



Oh, and a VTS's final drive is a higher number than a VTR's, that means it's better for acceleration, not top speed.

Knowing how an engine feels is the same no matter what and yes as is sed before vtr with peaky cam dont like low rpm and if your driving in anger you wont ever go as fast as if your calm... And for someone that says higher number rather than shorter final ratio... Ok

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk 2

[greyjasper51]

Double post sorry

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk 2

[titchster]

By 'in anger' I meant rather than just pootling round behind a pace car, I meant driving a car, on track, fast. If your revs are below 4.5/5k at any point, you're either in the wrong gear, or your ratios need sorting. Or, if you're in 1st and below them revs, it's a bloody slow corner.

Originally Posted by greyjasper51

And for someone that says higher number rather than shorter final ratio... Ok

Please tell me you're trying to tell me that i'm wrong for saying a higher FD number means faster acceleration.


*Must tell all those people who've fitted S1 Rallye boxes that the higher final drive number means their car will be faster top speed, and not accelerate as fast...*