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

[m4tt274]

vtr is more torquey but the vts engine produces more power high up.
becuase of this the vtr feels quicker round town.

my vtr with a toyosport manifold, supersprint, K&N panel filter and a good service made 109bhp at 60,000miles.
doubt you have 120 but good luck if thats what your going for

[NismoSteve]

But when it comes to cost why bother NA tuning an 8 valve as for a quarter of the money it would cost to get 120brake, you just just drop a 16 valve engine for the same power?

I'd only use an 8 valve to go boost. Anything other tuning is a waste of money.

[greyjasper51]

For cost just go 8v turbo most value for money but n/a cast efficient 16v lump agreed 100% money no object... I dunno tbf n/a tho... Prob 16v because can get a higher hp overall...

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk 2

[blackie_2k5]

Steve has got the nail on the head tbh

The 8v responds very well to a littl boost and is very driven able, other then that I'd just save or 16v

You can make enough power to justify tuning the 8v without boost

[jasonmayall]

Originally Posted by greyjasper51

In all honestly id rather drive a 120hp vtr than a 120hp vts because there more forgiving with a mistake and you dont have to have them screaming their tits off to make power, the 8v is more progressive... What ive found anyway

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk 2

Couldnt agree more. The toruqe on the VTS doesnt really kick in until you're revving the titties off it, I preffer to have a bit of power low down for daily driving, i very rarely take my car above 3-4k which wouldnt be easy if it was a VTS

[Gandi699]

you adapt your driving style with a 16v engine though, besides its not like the VTS doesnt have enough torque lower down the range for town driving

[NismoSteve]

Probably more a case of 16 valve envy lol!

Its the best of both worlds with the S engine. No problem at low revs and when they come on cam they just pull and pull. They love to rev. Its not like thrashing a wheazy 8 valve. Its no effort for the engine.

[Gandi699]

Depends on the 8v and its mapping though, the higher spec 8vs will rev out like a VTS does if not more. However it wont be "peaky" as a VTS or any other 16v hatch really

[hobers4]

i have a vtr with a straight through exhaust and a carbon fiber induction and believe me id be lucky to be getting 85-90bhp? what you need to remember is its 98bhp when it comes out factory u have engine deteration to take into consideration

im gunna get it rolling roaded before i overhaul the engine and gearbox but that aint gunna be for a while yet

[wadoryu]

Originally Posted by hobers4

i have a vtr with a straight through exhaust and a carbon fiber induction and believe me id be lucky to be getting 85-90bhp? what you need to remember is its 98bhp when it comes out factory u have engine deteration to take into consideration

im gunna get it rolling roaded before i overhaul the engine and gearbox but that aint gunna be for a while yet

Any rolling road tech will say unless your car has a serious problem then it will be give or take standard.

[hobers4]

Originally Posted by wadoryu

Any rolling road tech will say unless your car has a serious problem then it will be give or take standard.

im just guessing lol it is on 96k but but i tell everyone its 90bhp coz i dont wanna big it up or try get people racing me i enjoy my car low revs not making scream for me to change gear it probabally is running about standard bhp tbh

[titchster]

Originally Posted by greyjasper51

In all honestly id rather drive a 120hp vtr than a 120hp vts because there more forgiving with a mistake and you dont have to have them screaming their tits off to make power, the 8v is more progressive... What ive found anyway

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk 2

To get an 8v to 120bhp, it needs to be pretty tuned. A 16v...? Standard. So the 16v is going to be less stressed, and less prone to problems.

And, an 8v at that power needs a pretty lairy cam, which means the power's going to be as high, if not higher than on a standard 16v.


That's not to mention that if you start adding any of the normal mods to a 16v that you'd have done to the 8v (even before the cam), the 16v is going to have more power.

Having owned a black top 8v, and a (98bhp) silver top 8v, and having raced a 130bhp 8v in my relatively standard 16v on the 1/4 mile, and properly pwning it, I know which I prefer.

[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

[Mochachino]

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

Sorry, a 120bhp VTR will beat a 120bhp VTS?

Put the same driver in both car and the VTS will be ahead very easily, power is there in the corners, you drop the gear and the power is there and still makes power further up the rev range for longer. Unlike a VTR, power drops off easily, drop a gear before the corner and you haven't got power and the power tails off too easily.

16v doesnt just mean more power, its about where the power is and the ability to use the power to better effect than where the 8valve makes its power and range.

VTR for boost, if not then go 16v.

[blackie_2k5]

Originally Posted by Mochachino

Sorry, a 120bhp VTR will beat a 120bhp VTS?

Put the same driver in both car and the VTS will be ahead very easily, power is there in the corners, you drop the gear and the power is there and still makes power further up the rev range for longer. Unlike a VTR, power drops off easily, drop a gear before the corner and you haven't got power and the power tails off too easily.

16v doesnt just mean more power, its about where the power is and the ability to use the power to better effect than where the 8valve makes its power and range.

VTR for boost, if not then go 16v.

having spent alot on 8v's..this comment is the best way to look at it^^

[titchster]

iLol.

greyjasper,how many times have you compared against a standard VTS on track? I think in the last 4 years of doing track days, i've seen 2 standard Saxos on track. And they were both VTRs.

The only time i've compared against a highly modded 8v on track was on a 1/4 mile. It was a good half a second slower than my 16v.

[greyjasper51]

Straight line... Woopdy woop... Ans thats what i was saying if you could get 200bhp outta a n/a vtr it would be the way dorward but you cant and thats why vts is usually the way forward... Easy cheap power...

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk 2

[Mochachino]

Originally Posted by greyjasper51

Straight line... Woopdy woop...

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

[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

[titchster]

VTS is the way forward because it's got more power full stop. Costs more to get an 8v up to 16v power than it does to put a 16v in. Other than that, on a track, the two cars would be the same.


Why is the 8v more forgiving? In what way? And better to drive? It doesn't idle as smoothly, because of the big cam, it's lacking low down, because of the big cam, and the power's as high as the 16v, or higher, because of the big cam. At what point is the 8v better to drive?