# 8V 1/4 mile equals 16V, so why bother?



## Maker (Apr 15, 2001)

Hey all, I've been planning to do a 8V to 16V conversion on my G60 Corrado for awhile. Then I found some interesting information on what the 8V's ultimate potential is, and now I'm not sure it's worth the effort. 
VWSport.com maintains a "Top 10" list for each of these powerplants in their forums. Look at their "VW Drag Racing Top List" forum:
http://forum.vwsport.com/viewforum.php?f=26
Compare the lists showing top 10 8V cars with the top 10 16V cars. The results are almost identical.
Top 10 8V 1/4 Mile List: http://forum.vwsport.com/viewtopic.php?t=570
 
1. 9.94 @ 139.21mph, Everson Camargo, 1993 VW Gol, Turbocharged 2.0l 8v - Built Motor/Race Car - Brazil - Info ATS Rocco 
2. 10.69 @ 138.50 MPH, Joel Brown, 1994 Corrado, Turbo 2.0l 8v - Built Motor 
3. 10.76 @ 128.8X MPH, Allen McDonough, 1982 Rabbit, Turbo 1.8l 8v - Built Motor/Street Car - USA 
4. 11.01 @ 125.59mph, Zach Visconti, 1983 Rabbit GTI, Turbo 1.8l 8v - Stock Block 
5. 11.47 @ 117.74 MPH, Gary Miyasato, 1981 Rabbit, Turbo 1.7l w/2.0 Crossflow Head - Built Motor - Sonic Motorsports 
6. 11.54 @ 117.XXmph, James Burlew, 1984 Rabbit GTI, Turbo 2.0l 8v - Built Motor 
7. 11.60 @ 123 MPH, Joe 2.0T, 1996 Golf, 2.0l 8v - (1.87 60ft) - Built Motor 
8. 11.64 @ 119.3Xmph, Eddie Seabold, 1996 Jetta, Turbo 2.0l 8v (17psi) - Built Motor 
9. 11.81 @ 119 MPH, SpeedTek, 1978 Rabbit GTI, Turbo 1.8l 8v - Built Motor 
10. 11.95 @ 122.47 MPH, Dave Krieger, 1986 Golf, Turbo 1.8L Cross Flow (18psi+70shot) - Built Motor 
"Top 10 16v F/I FWD 1/4 Mile list" here: http://forum.vwsport.com/viewtopic.php?t=568
1. 9.95 @ 140.95mph, Kevin Black, 1981 VW Scirocco, Turbocharged 2.0l 16v - Built Motor - USA - Info Orange Crush 
2. 10.16 @ 130mph, Marco Santos, 1983 Rabbit GTI, Turbo 2.0l 16v - Built Motor - P.R. 
3. 10.72 @ 134.08mph, EIP Tuning, VW Scirocco, Turbo 2.1l 16v - Built Motor - USA 
4. 10.95 @ 125.13mph, Paul Wolf, VW Rabbit, Turbo 1.8l 16v - Built Motor - USA 
5. 11.06 @ 125.23mph, Performance Worx, 1979 Scirocco, Turbo 1.8l 16v - Stock Block/Race Car - Canada 
6. 11.21 @ 127mph, Marz Racing, 1984 Rabbit GTI, Turbo 16v - Built Motor - USA 
7. 11.62 @ 121.7mph, Claus Von Essen, 1980 Rabbit GTI, Nos/Carbs 1.9l 16v - Built Motor - Europe 
8. 11.68 @ 125.30mph, Sonic Motorsports, 1980 Rabbit GTI, Turbo 1.8l 16v - Built Motor - USA 
9. 11.74 @ 122.9mph, Carl Kotch, 1988 Rocco, Turbo 2.0l 16v - Built Motor - USA 
10. 11.80 @ 117mph, Euro Speed, ????, Turbo 2.0l 16v - Built Motor - USA 
11. 11.92 @ 114mph, Brady Hort, 1985 Golf GTI, Turbo 2.0l 16v 

Surely lists like these display the ultimate potential of each powerplant. If that potential is virtually identical, then when turbo'ing a G60 Corrado why bother also doing an 16V swap when a good PnP 8V does equally well? There has to be a reason I can't see! 1/4 mile tests aren't valid? I doubt that.
I mean, look at bench flow tests. A regular *stock* 16V head flows SO MUCH better than even a radically ported and modified "big valve" 8V head that the choice would seem obvious. At least, according the results of these pages from LR Engineering:
http://www.porttuning.com/Cyl%...g.htm
-and-
http://www.porttuning.com/Cyl%...g.htm
Summary:
ported "Stage 3" 8V = 160-170 CFM (stock=120-140 CFM)
STOCK 16V = 180-200 CFM


----------



## patatron (Aug 10, 2003)

*Re: 8V 1/4 mile equals 16V, so why bother? (Maker)*

Your numbers are fun and all, but it still comes down to the fact that if you build a 150 HP 8-Valve, and a 150 HP 16-Valve, your 8-Valve is going to be a far more tempermental operation than the 16-Valve. And you will typically spend more money making the 8-Valve have 16-Valve output than it would cost to do a 16-Valve conversion.


----------



## VJVR6 (Nov 8, 2002)

*Re: 8V 1/4 mile equals 16V, so why bother? (Maker)*

Those numbers might be similiar
but an aba 8VT compared to an aba 16VT is a big difference....
This one from eiptuning.com is 2.1L....im personally going for higher hp, that is easier to attain with the 16v vs. 8v.


----------



## Maker (Apr 15, 2001)

*Re: 8V 1/4 mile equals 16V, so why bother? (VJVR6)*

The guys who built the above cars knew what they were doing, obviouisly, by looking at those times. Those 8Vs are freaking fast - just as fast as the 16V. 
Why, and how??!!
How is it that doing a 16V conversion is relatively easier than making an 8V equally fast? That's what you're saying, patatron, right?
The thing is... the above cars had EVERYTHING, balls out, possible done to them. Nothing held back. And those 16V were unable to beat the 8V crowd. They're NOT street cars, though. But is there no lesson to be learned when talking about street cars? Anybody?


----------



## patatron (Aug 10, 2003)

*Re: 8V 1/4 mile equals 16V, so why bother? (Maker)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Maker* »_The guys who built the above cars knew what they were doing, obviouisly, by looking at those times. Those 8Vs are freaking fast - just as fast as the 16V. 
Why, and how??!!
How is it that doing a 16V conversion is relatively easier than making an 8V equally fast? That's what you're saying, patatron, right?
The thing is... the above cars had EVERYTHING, balls out, possible done to them. Nothing held back. And those 16V were unable to beat the 8V crowd. They're NOT street cars, though. But is there no lesson to be learned when talking about street cars? Anybody?

If you are trying to tell me that the 8V motor is just as capable as a 16V motor if they are both done to equally the same extent, you are not making any sense. I am not arguing these numbers you posted, but how much in actual details do you know of each car in that event? It's not my opinion, Its physics. I build VW's for a living, so it is not as if I am just throwing in my opinion here. I have a feeling a may have misunderstood what you were saying, If so, let me know. http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## Maker (Apr 15, 2001)

*Re: 8V 1/4 mile equals 16V, so why bother? (patatron)*

I know. Physics is physics







. Just look at the flow numbers again:
Ported "Stage 3" 8V head = 160-170 CFM
STOCK 16V head = 180-200 CFM
Ported 16V = ... (much more than an 8V head of any kind)
Flow = speed is an oversimplification, but you get the point. 
Don't worry, I understand engine dynamics enough to realize there has to be something to explain the performance similarities of the above lists. I'm asking - what is it?? 
By the way, I'm not trying to tell you or anybody anything. I'm just asking a question








btw, you didn't answer my question







How is it that doing a 16V conversion is relatively easier than making an 8V equally fast?


----------



## patatron (Aug 10, 2003)

*Re: 8V 1/4 mile equals 16V, so why bother? (Maker)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Maker* »_ How is it that doing a 16V conversion is relatively easier than making an 8V equally fast?


The 16V swap is realatvely inexpensive, And I have done countless 16V swaps myself, and could do it blindfolded now. But my first one was an expeirience I will admit. If you go in with good information, you will have a fairly easy swap. I can see spending 3-4 times as much money building an 8V up to 16V stock specs over just doing the 16V swap. My boss would be asking questions if it took me more than an 8 hour day to do an A1 16V swap, But I would get allotted more time Fully build an 8V for a customer. I hope that answers most of your questions. http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## Maker (Apr 15, 2001)

*Re: 8V 1/4 mile equals 16V, so why bother? (patatron)*

Thanks for your response. The reason I originally posted here was to find out if I should to do a 16V swap on my G60-powered Corrado to achieve 200-250 whp, or if there are ways I don't know of to do it with equal *money, effort and time* by doing well thought out mods to the 8V setup I have now. 
I wish I had your level of experience. As of today this thread's been viewed a couple hundered times, but not many have chosen to contribute. 8Vs are as good as 16Vs? Obviously crazy talk!
I'm guessing all those fast 8V cars on the top 10 list would not be made any faster if they went 16V. I mean, with times like these they've all obviously poured lots of $ and effort into their engines already. That's what puzzles me. 16V seems to make common sense, but it's just stuck in the back of my head that if I was smarter I could stick with my 8V and have excellent results if I just knew how.
Do you know what I mean? What do you think?
So what would you see as being required to make an 8V G60 perform equally to a "stock-16V" G60 hybrid? Let's say both are fed by a 15-17psi fully modded 65mm G60 charger.


----------



## soch naungayan (Dec 23, 2001)

*Re: 8V 1/4 mile equals 16V, so why bother? (Maker)*

The list......that list is a bit outdated. A lot of those cars ran those times 2-3-4years ago. But the #1 reason to build up a 16v for a beginner for high HP#s is cost. 3years ago I turbo'd my first 16v with just stacked g60 headgaskets and 15psi and sds....nothing more and that car made 275whp and I ran consistant 12.90s in a illegal(EPA wise)street car. Even then I spent about 3grand on the whole set up. Along the way I talked to alot of the Hardcore crew to suck up their VW knowledge....and pretty much knew what I could get away with. Doing the same with the 8valve would have required bottom end work and headwork....wich meant spending 2 to 3x more money. Something I was in need of then...my 02 cents. I was a beginner then as well.


----------



## 1badimport (Aug 27, 2006)

back from the dead


----------



## B4S (Apr 16, 2003)

Why?


----------



## need_a_VR6 (May 19, 1999)

B4S said:


> Why?


 #3! 

Those lists are quite old, pretty sure the top 16v isn't Kevin. Also, rules/classes have changed a bit since then. A lot of the quick 16v cars are still close(r) to street cars, where a lot of the fast 8v are pro style cars out of Brazil that are running methanol, etc.


----------



## Golf 2.0T (Apr 17, 2007)

i had a 2.0 8V turbo with nothing fancy on it ... 100% stock engine with stacked gasket stock cam ..with a garrett T3-60 and kinetic cast manifold, home made SRI , 440cc tune .. all that in a 2660lbs full interior Golf CL mk3 and the car ran a best of 12.65 @ 108.57 ... and my best trap speed was 112mph so it put down an impressive amount of power for the simplicity of the setup ([email protected]) . 

so it all depend on the power goal .. if the guy wants 300whp or less i personaly would not switch to a 16V if the 8V is already up and running in the car . hell even for 350whp i would not change to a 16V . the only thing to keep in mind is that the 8V will usally require more boost than the 16V to get to the same power goal so if you plan say a 400whp 8V you will need a turbo that is efficient and durable at higher boost . 

even have a video ... not the best run but still a good one 
i loved that setup. 

http://www.bencustomfabric.com/Vid/DoumNapi.wmv


----------



## BoostedOne (Mar 30, 2003)

8V vs 16v;
8V will almost always be less work. 
STRONG 8v turbo pistons are available out of the junkyard via Audi 5000T. Granted they arent as easy to find as they used to be.. Where as 16V has too high a compression to run much boost safely on gas, and even if you do they are still cast pistons. Also available in Rado G60.
Less work to go EFI, since there are factory EFI heads and intakes all over the place. 16V rails are cheaper than they used to be, but who wants to mess with it if you dont have to.

I ditched the 16V for an 8V a long time ago in my old GTI. Wasnt much benefit at all to doing a 16VT over an 8VT for the price.

Plus these days 16VT is almost pointless. A 20V is a muuuch better setup especially for a street car and a 1.8T with bolt ons will paddle a moderately built, streetable 16V up and down the road with ease. 20Vs are available these days for a song, and easily adapted to any EFI you would use on a 16V...


----------



## Mr Roo (Aug 8, 2006)

i know these are fully built cars and have more tricks than a street car would have. I will say from my personal experience on the street. Obviously the level of tuning would affect this, but my 16v's were always faster than the 8v's I encountered. My brother had a 8v jetta at the same time I had my 16v. He could always edge me off off the line or at lights. By second gear I had caught him and passed him by 3rd in most cases. Like I said tuning plays the rolde here, but every 16v I drove seemed faster and more enjoyable to drive than the 8vs i drove.


----------

