# 2.0T? No Thanks, We'll Take A 2.5T



## [email protected] (Feb 6, 2007)

First off, though my personal opinion reflects the title to this thread, I wrote it pretty tongue-in-cheek and with no intention of starting up any bad blood (BTDT).
All I'm really trying to say is that, once turboed, the 2.5 is a freaking blast.
Shawn, Adrian and I had a great time at the SFL-GTG and it was awesome to see so many familiar faces.
One of the highlights for us was hooking up with Chris and Jeff from C2 Motorsports and getting a chance to see and hear their new Mk5 2.5 turbo kit. They brought their own Rabbit demo to the event and they also brought the VWoA 2006 SEMA Rabbit 2.5T. VWoA has entrusted C2 to tune the car and they completed the job with enough time to to bring the car to the GTG.
Yesterday, on their way back north, Chris and Jeff stopped by our store to talk some business and grab some dinner. We had a chance to crawl around and under the two cars, but even better, we had the opportunity to drive them. I honestly never thought I'd get worked up over the 2.5 - in any kind of variation - but as of yesterday I'm a convert. Personally, I have a hard time recommending anyone buying a GTI or GLI when for less money you can build a Rabbit turbo that'll pull on a chipped 2.0T and cost a great deal less doing it. We already have plans to build a Rabbit 2.5T for Eurowerx at Sebring and this year's Waterfest, and for our Southeast customers, we're offering 50% off the installation fee for the first 5 kits we sell.
C2's demo is a Stage 2 car (Stage 2 includes an I/C and more aggressive mapping) that puts an approximate 250-whp to the ground. Unlike any other Mk5 2.5 I've ever driven, the C2 turbo pulls strong all the way to almost 7k rpm. Second only to the increased power is the sound this engine makes. C2 added a 3" cat-back system, and holy crap does their car sound aggressive. Not loud - just mean, with that distinctive 5-cylinder warble.
C2 intends to develop this kit to a Stage 3 level, with stock bottom end and approximately 300-whp. Once pistons and rods are included, Jeff tells us the 2.5 has just as much, if not more, potential as the 2.8 VR6. He's probably right, but we'll have to actually try and see for ourselves


----------



## [email protected] (Jan 9, 2008)

I couldn't agree more with Brad, the cars are a blast to drive and the power is just starting to be unleashed!
Chris and Jeff have done an awesome job with the kit so far and can't wait to see what we can do with the future "stages"


----------



## vr_vento95 (Nov 26, 2004)

*Re: 2.0T? No Thanks, We'll Take A 2.5T ([email protected])*

I knew the 2.5 had TONS of potential thats why I chose it over the 2.0T FSI. it just needed to be unleashed, thanks to C2 that is now possible. I'll be going stage II http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## esp (Jun 11, 2007)

Now you guys only need to mass produce a sick C2 engine cover


----------



## conejoZING! (Nov 25, 2007)

*Re: 2.0T? No Thanks, We'll Take A 2.5T ([email protected])*


_Quote, originally posted by *[email protected]* »_
All I'm really trying to say is that, once turboed, the 2.5 is a freaking blast.
C2 intends to develop this kit to a Stage 3 level, with stock bottom end and approximately 300-whp. Once pistons and rods are included, Jeff tells us the 2.5 has just as much, if not more, potential as the 2.8 VR6. 


It's a little bit Audi and a little bit Lambo with VW style it sure packs some ammo. This engine is a little powerhouse and I have a feeling you will see this engine in Audi cars turbo'd. Even driving this engine currently N/A with an intake and a GIAC Chip provides fun torquey pulls. It revs hard and plows out the torque. To think that even on the most minimal boost (8 psi) this thing is ALREADY at nearly 300hp. What would be the result of turning up the boost on forged internals??! 500? Eventually you would literally overpower things and burn tires to dust lol!


----------



## .SLEEPYDUB. (Jul 28, 2005)

*Re: 2.0T? No Thanks, We'll Take A 2.5T ([email protected])*


_Quote, originally posted by *[email protected]* »_Once pistons and rods are included, Jeff tells us the 2.5 has just as much, if not more, potential as the 2.8 VR6.


Jeff Atwood said this?


----------



## [email protected] (Feb 6, 2007)

*Re: 2.0T? No Thanks, We'll Take A 2.5T (conejoZING!)*


_Quote, originally posted by *conejoZING!* »_ To think that even on the most minimal boost (8 psi) this thing is ALREADY at nearly 300hp. What would be the result of turning up the boost on forged internals??! 

For now, it's the cams that are the limiting factor. Currently, turning up the boost doesn't yield the results you'd expect.
We plan to work with C2 on developing a set of cams that will add good power whether used in NA or FI applications.


----------



## [email protected] (Feb 6, 2007)

*Re: 2.0T? No Thanks, We'll Take A 2.5T (VR6JettaGLI)*


_Quote, originally posted by *VR6JettaGLI* »_
Jeff Atwood said this?









Yes, he did. 
The 2.5 head flows very well and the farther you take it, the better the gains should be vs. a similarly-built VR6. For example, to my knowledge, no NA 12v VR6 has ever been documented to make 250-whp. I should think the 2.5 is quite capable of 250-whp and more.


----------



## .SLEEPYDUB. (Jul 28, 2005)

*Re: 2.0T? No Thanks, We'll Take A 2.5T ([email protected])*


_Quote, originally posted by *[email protected]* »_
Yes, he did. 
The 2.5 head flows very well and the farther you take it, the better the gains should be vs. a similarly-built VR6. For example, to my knowledge, no NA 12v VR6 has ever been documented to make 250-whp. I should think the 2.5 is quite capable of 250-whp and more.

yes there have been 12v that make over 250whp, and in fact i know of a guy right now thats at over 280whp on a 24v shooting for 300whp. There is more R&D in the 12v than the 24v and more parts available. 250whp has been obtained in a 12v for sure.
and the 2.5 isnt similar to the VR6...its not a VR, its just a straight 5 right? There used to be a VR5 in Europe that was similar, but this is just a regular I5. Im sure the head flows great, id like to see someone get alot of power out of it, but i seriously doubt 250whp N/A is going to happen to this motor


----------



## travis3265 (Nov 15, 2003)

*Re: 2.0T? No Thanks, We'll Take A 2.5T (VR6JettaGLI)*


_Quote, originally posted by *VR6JettaGLI* »_
yes there have been 12v that make over 250whp 

i would really like to see this. my good friend spent over 15,000 on a fully blueprinted vr6 and it made about 220whp. this engine had every possible modification done to including bumping it up from 2.8 to 3.0 liters.


----------



## [email protected] (Feb 6, 2007)

*Re: 2.0T? No Thanks, We'll Take A 2.5T (VR6JettaGLI)*


_Quote, originally posted by *VR6JettaGLI* »_
yes there have been 12v that make over 250whp, and in fact i know of a guy right now thats at over 280whp on a 24v shooting for 300whp. There is more R&D in the 12v than the 24v and more parts available. 250whp has been obtained in a 12v for sure.
and the 2.5 isnt similar to the VR6...its not a VR, its just a straight 5 right? There used to be a VR5 in Europe that was similar, but this is just a regular I5. Im sure the head flows great, id like to see someone get alot of power out of it, but i seriously doubt 250whp N/A is going to happen to this motor

If your guy making is 280-whp it's because he's using a 24v head. Notice I singled out the 12v as not flowing as well as the 2.5 5-cyl. 
There's a thread in the 12v tech forum that's over a year old searching for proof of a 250-whp NA 12v VR6 and no one has yet to offer up any evidence. What's more, the thread starter is Bill from Bildon Motorsport, who knows as much about about that engine as anyone. He started the tread looking for ideas about building their own. They've been working on this off and on for over a year, and to this day they still don't have 250 at the wheels. They're close and I don't doubt they will make it not surpass those numbers.
As for the 2.5 never making 250-whp, why not? High-comp forged internals, radical cams, larger valves, porting and polishing and enough fuel will yield more than 100-hp/liter. It'll cost a bunch to get there, but my point is that even that kind of work on the 12v VR won't yield the same results.


----------



## xDADEx (Mar 25, 2006)

Me and my piddly automatic shoulda just got the wheat colored jetta it was manual


----------



## .SLEEPYDUB. (Jul 28, 2005)

*Re: 2.0T? No Thanks, We'll Take A 2.5T ([email protected])*

u can do the same thing to a 12v and yield more power than the 2.5 when it comes to N\A and FI. inb4tl gtfo ftw- yes thats a screen name, made 280whp on a 24v...a 12v with a fully P&P and built cammed head would make the same power. go to a 3.0L and your adding a minimum of 25whp. 250whp is very feasible on a 12v, now on a 2.5...id really like to see it put out more than 220whp n/a


----------



## [email protected] (Feb 6, 2007)

*Re: 2.0T? No Thanks, We'll Take A 2.5T (VR6JettaGLI)*


_Quote, originally posted by *VR6JettaGLI* »_...a 12v with a fully P&P and built cammed head would make the same power. go to a 3.0L and your adding a minimum of 25whp. 250whp is very feasible on a 12v, now on a 2.5...id really like to see it put out more than 220whp n/a

No offense, but I've been working with 12v VRs for over 10 years now in NA, FI and even 3.0 and 3.1 displacements. There's just no way you're speaking from firsthand experience if you're suggesting 250-whp is very feasible with a 12v VR. From here on out, please post up a dyno plot confirming your suggestions or we should agree to drop it. 
Better yet, I dare you to post the same things in this thread: http://forums.vwvortex.com/zerothread?id=2616140


----------



## travis3265 (Nov 15, 2003)

*Re: 2.0T? No Thanks, We'll Take A 2.5T (VR6JettaGLI)*


_Quote, originally posted by *VR6JettaGLI* »_u can do the same thing to a 12v and yield more power than the 2.5 when it comes to N\A and FI. 

How can you even make that claim when people have just started to tune the 2.5L? It's funny you say that, but a 2.5L on chip intake and exhaust is making way more torque than a 12v vr6 with the same mods.


----------



## RED WHIP (Dec 10, 2005)

*Re: 2.0T? No Thanks, We'll Take A 2.5T ([email protected])*


_Quote, originally posted by *[email protected]* »_
Better yet, I dare you to post the same things in this thread: http://forums.vwvortex.com/zerothread?id=2616140









Yikes. http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## rabbit07 (Feb 22, 2007)

Can't wait till my tax return comes so I can buy the turbo kit.


----------



## [email protected] (Feb 6, 2007)

*Re: (rabbit07)*

I just want to mention that we'll be working with C2 on further development of their Rabbit 2.5T demo. 
We'll have the car in a few weeks and then keep it until Waterfest. While here we'll be working with C2 on developing a more aggressive cam set that will yield some very nice results in either N/A or F/I applications. 
Once we have some workable cams, the stage is set for taking the 2.5 5-cyl even farther than Stage 2's current numbers. 
We'll also be using the Rabbit as a test bed for some upcoming fifteen52 products, such as Alcon-based 4-wheel BBKs, exhausts, clutches/flywheels, sway/stress bars, camber kits, etc. We'll also be changing up the exterior and interior along the way - expect a build-up similar in scope to what you saw from some of the old 1552 Design projects.


----------



## studio19sound (Dec 14, 2006)

*Re: ([email protected])*


_Quote, originally posted by *[email protected]* »_I just want to mention that we'll be working with C2 on further development of their Rabbit 2.5T demo. 
We'll have the car in a few weeks and then keep it until Waterfest. While here we'll be working with C2 on developing a more aggressive cam set that will yield some very nice results in either N/A or F/I applications. 
Once we have some workable cams, the stage is set for taking the 2.5 5-cyl even farther than Stage 2's current numbers. 
We'll also be using the Rabbit as a test bed for some upcoming fifteen52 products, such as Alcon-based 4-wheel BBKs, exhausts, clutches/flywheels, sway/stress bars, camber kits, etc. We'll also be changing up the exterior and interior along the way - expect a build-up similar in scope to what you saw from some of the old 1552 Design projects.

this excites me


----------



## conejoZING! (Nov 25, 2007)

*Re: (studio19sound)*

wow. while all this engineering is going on, I'll pay off my car... forget trade in, this is it.
welcome to the world of 2.5T roadster.


----------



## sl33pyb (Jan 15, 2007)

people should aim for 100hp/per liter NA. honda, bmw ferrari all do it... sure well lose some torque but who cares the lambo v10 5.0 is making 500 hp. i want 250 hp out of a na 2.5. i dout that will ever happen so im just going to turbo it.


----------



## greymk5 (Feb 13, 2008)

OK everyone is talking about how this will be awesome,jeepers I want it...but lets come to reality how much would this really hurt the pocket book?????, $ and cents plss


----------



## travis3265 (Nov 15, 2003)

*Re: (greymk5)*


_Quote, originally posted by *greymk5* »_how much would this really hurt the pocket book?????, $ and cents plss

Open your eyes for a second. Its only like, the fastest moving post on the forum right now.
http://forums.vwvortex.com/zerothread?id=3656458


----------



## [email protected] (Jan 9, 2008)

*Re: (greymk5)*


_Quote, originally posted by *greymk5* »_OK everyone is talking about how this will be awesome,jeepers I want it...but lets come to reality how much would this really hurt the pocket book?????, $ and cents plss

Feel free to give us a call, we would be happy to answer any questions you have regarding the kit http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## VWguy73 (Dec 20, 2000)

very exciting to have such a resource as you guys close by!


----------



## [email protected] (Jan 9, 2008)

*Re: (VWguy73)*

If your interested, you need to call us!!


----------



## VWguy73 (Dec 20, 2000)

if i were to call, we would probably have some good vw conversation, and i'd probably learn a lot, but without dough, there's no turbo in my bunnie's future


----------



## GaTeIg (Jul 6, 2005)

250 whp is more than reasonable. schit.... us 2.0 8 valvers can get 250 whp (with a lil more work but with stock internals)


----------



## [email protected] (Jan 9, 2008)

*Re: (VWguy73)*


_Quote, originally posted by *VWguy73* »_if i were to call, we would probably have some good vw conversation, and i'd probably learn a lot, but without dough, there's no turbo in my bunnie's future

Well we welcome the call http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif Something else to keep in mind, we will have C2's Rabbit here in a few weeks up until Waterfest inorder to add our special touch to finish it up! Feel free to swing by, we would be glad to take you for a ride and have you see the car first hand!


----------



## need_a_VR6 (May 19, 1999)

*Re: 2.0T? No Thanks, We'll Take A 2.5T ([email protected])*


_Quote, originally posted by *[email protected]* »_
As for the 2.5 never making 250-whp, why not? High-comp forged internals, radical cams, larger valves, porting and polishing and enough fuel will yield more than 100-hp/liter. It'll cost a bunch to get there, but my point is that even that kind of work on the 12v VR won't yield the same results.

The highest hp 'streetable' 2L motors (both 16v and 20v) make right around 200whp with 'the works.' Though I can see the 2.5 making close to the same amount of hp/l, it will take the same amount of work and money to get there. No free ride other then displacement. 
As for the 2.5 surpassing the 12v it wouldn't be hard in NA form if the head can flow. We're all working on the 12v problem and Bill has added some focus, and we're gracious. 
With boost concerned until I see a 700+ whp 2.5 on a stock bottom end I'm not convinced it's the better engine choice. It's just too easy to make big, easy power on a VR6. Not that it matters, if you really want a Mk5 it's a moot point as it's not even an engine choice.


----------



## [email protected] (Feb 6, 2007)

*Re: 2.0T? No Thanks, We'll Take A 2.5T (need_a_VR6)*


_Quote, originally posted by *need_a_VR6* »_
The highest hp 'streetable' 2L motors (both 16v and 20v) make right around 200whp with 'the works.' Though I can see the 2.5 making close to the same amount of hp/l, it will take the same amount of work and money to get there. No free ride other then displacement.
As for the 2.5 surpassing the 12v it wouldn't be hard in NA form if the head can flow. We're all working on the 12v problem and Bill has added some focus, and we're gracious.

Agreed and those are pretty much the points I was trying to make. 

_Quote »_With boost concerned until I see a 700+ whp 2.5 on a stock bottom end I'm not convinced it's the better engine choice.


Not going to happen. Though it's no weakling, the 2.5 simply does not have the stout bottom end found in the VR6.

_Quote »_It's just too easy to make big, easy power on a VR6. Not that it matters, if you really want a Mk5 it's a moot point as it's not even an engine choice.

Glad you added that final point







I want to make it clear that my reasoning behind making some of the points I have in this thread is that many people - myself included - up until now had written off the 2.5 as being a good choice for further performance. In N/A form this engine appears to have more potential than a stock VR6 12v, and C2 has already proven it takes quite well to F/I.
Obviously, C2, fifteen52 and NGP are looking to show the world just how much potential the 2.5 has, and I'd be surprised if anyone is rooting against us


----------



## conejoZING! (Nov 25, 2007)

*Re: 2.0T? No Thanks, We'll Take A 2.5T ([email protected])*

700 hp in the Rabbit. Think about it. That sport compact would take off and enter high orbit then blast through spacetime folding space to the other side of the cosmos. Tapping the accel would launch it into a car crash. 
You need some measure of CONTROL over this thing while driving. Sitting at 185ish N/A with air intake and chip the car is already very very quick ... so I must pay strict attention to avoid crashes. 700 would just plain overpower things. I'm no hardcore engineer but it seems like the engine will certainly get at least 400 something. 300+ turbo system will make it very insane and certainly enough for me considering the weight/size of the car. 
I think VWoA knows exactly what they're doing with the Thunderbunny and C2. A built 2.5 would certainly prove useful throughout the entire product line of the Volkswagen Audi Group. The people working on this project may indeed be creating the blueprint for what will become a very widely used engine. Even with all this turbo stuff going on the fuel economy is still good?


----------



## crazyreesie (Aug 1, 2002)

*Re: 2.0T? No Thanks, We'll Take A 2.5T (conejoZING!)*

Don't mind me, I'm just here drooling over Thunder Bunny pics. Those are much better than the framed 4" x 6" on my desk.


----------



## VWguy73 (Dec 20, 2000)

*Re: ([email protected])*

shawn, thanks for the offer that is amazing. I will definitely take you up on that soon. I'm sure I'll want the kit even more afterwards. I'll call to arrange something next week sometime. Thanks again!
- Mark


----------



## [email protected] (Jan 9, 2008)

*Re: (VWguy73)*


_Quote, originally posted by *VWguy73* »_shawn, thanks for the offer that is amazing. I will definitely take you up on that soon. I'm sure I'll want the kit even more afterwards. I'll call to arrange something next week sometime. Thanks again!
- Mark









Looking forward to talking with you http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## slo deno (Jul 10, 2007)

*Re: ([email protected])*

are we talking like this good sounding...
http://youtube.com/watch?v=RIq75ZbYmV8 
stig owns btw.(for you rally folk out there)


----------



## [email protected] (Feb 6, 2007)

*Re: (slo deno)*

In some ways, the new 2.5 does sound a bit like that S1, but of course not so loud and with a deeper tone. Still, most inline 5-cylinders have a similar sound.
We'll get some sound clips up here as soon as we get the C2 car here.


----------



## zonehawk (Sep 24, 2006)

*Re: ([email protected])*

brad expect a call sometime this tuesday from me. and do you have the c2's rabbit yet?


----------



## [email protected] (Jan 9, 2008)

*Re: (zonehawk)*


_Quote, originally posted by *zonehawk* »_brad expect a call sometime this tuesday from me. and do you have the c2's rabbit yet?

Not yet we do not however we look forward to the call http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## veedubb87 (Mar 28, 2006)

*Re: ([email protected])*

can I come down and drive one lol


----------



## [email protected] (Jan 9, 2008)

*Re: (veedubb87)*

Feel free to stop and check it out once we have it here http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## 1.8 gti (Mar 11, 2005)

that settles it Im getting a rabbit, Im from Louisville and I think these guys are too. Now that I saw the C2 guy I think it was chris I just realized he comes in my fruit market all the time. Ill have to say something to him next time.


----------



## [email protected] (Apr 2, 1999)

*Re: ([email protected])*


_Quote, originally posted by *[email protected]* »_We'll get some sound clips up here as soon as we get the C2 car here. 

_Impatiently.... awaiting...soundclips........







_


----------



## 1.8 gti (Mar 11, 2005)

oh yeah I was also going to say we need more pictures of this white rabbit, and that exhaust is awesome is that just r32 exhaust on a rabbit??


----------



## Jefnes3 (Aug 17, 2001)

*Re: (1.8 gti)*

Pic of C2 Rabbit in 'street' mode rollin' to Miami.
Not much bling, but quick. http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif
Props to Paul, aka PLAIN for the photo.
http://forums.vwvortex.com/zerothread?id=3638534


----------



## [email protected] (Dec 5, 2005)

*Re: (Jefnes3)*

http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif to Chris and Jeff @ C2


----------



## [email protected] (Jan 9, 2008)

Took the 2.5T out for a drive again yesterday, very fun car to drive! Those of you that haven't been in or own the C2 kit, your missing out!!


----------



## [email protected] (Feb 6, 2007)

*Re: ([email protected])*

We also got one run at the local strip last week - 14.5 @ 99-mph.
Yeah, not so great, but due to the fact we still have a stock clutch in this car (and our prototype upgraded 02J-B clutch is still a few weeks away), I left the line at close to idle.
Trap speed still indicates a 13-sec car, and over the next few months we'll drop those time quite a bit.


----------



## 1_BADHARE (Mar 8, 2008)

*Re: ([email protected])*


_Quote, originally posted by *[email protected]* »_We also got one run at the local strip last week - 14.5 @ 99-mph.
Yeah, not so great, but due to the fact we still have a stock clutch in this car (and our prototype upgraded 02J-B clutch is still a few weeks away), I left the line at close to idle.
Trap speed still indicates a 13-sec car, and over the next few months we'll drop those time quite a bit.

nice http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------

