VR6 vs ABF which is better motor....
- bennit
- Cadet
- Posts: 496
- Registered for: 13 years 8 months
- Car Make: Audi, VW
- Car Model: B8 3.2 fsi quattro, 9n3 1.6
- Membership No: missing
- Location: Mafikeng
VR6 vs ABF which is better motor....
I was paging through a mag and noticed that an abf motor is more pricier than a voora, why? Demand perhaps? Now i would like to know which is better motor overall, in terms of modding, and bang for buck. And how much are these motors rated standard, correct me if im wrong, vr6 128kw/240nm & abf 110kw? Maintanance wise? Abf parts, are they accessable?
[img][IMG]http://i1033.photobucket.com/albums/a41 ... d945c6.jpg[/img][/img]
ACCIDENTS HAPPENS AT 100KM/H
ACCIDENTS HAPPENS AT 100KM/H
-
- Cadet
- Posts: 658
- Registered for: 14 years 7 months
- Car Make: VW
- Car Model: 1988 Jetta mk2 cli
- Membership No: missing
Re: VR6 vs ABF which is better motor....
many different factors would depend on making a choice like that.
- dazza
- Field Marshal
- Posts: 12139
- Registered for: 16 years 3 months
- Car Make: VW and VW
- Car Model: Amarok and Citi Sport
- Membership No: 1327
- Location: Roodepoort
Re: VR6 vs ABF which is better motor....
ABF is rated at 110kw at the fly but it was beleived there was word that they were actually detuned to 110kw in Europe and are more like 125kw at the fly.bennit wrote:I was paging through a mag and noticed that an abf motor is more pricier than a voora, why? Demand perhaps? Now i would like to know which is better motor overall, in terms of modding, and bang for buck. And how much are these motors rated standard, correct me if im wrong, vr6 128kw/240nm & abf 110kw? Maintanance wise? Abf parts, are they accessable?
Vr6 is nice but the ABF is a real gem.
Darryn Van Rooyen
Current: 17 Amarok V6 D/C 4Motion H/L Auto
Current: 1987 Citi Sport 1.6
Current: 91 Citi Sport 1.3
Current: 05 Kawasaki 200KDX, 16 KTM 300 EXC
Previous:
14 Amarok BITDI D/C 4Motion H/L Auto
12' MKVI GTI Manual
2009 Audi TT 2.0TFSI S-Tronic
2008 Honda CBX250 Twister - Crashed!
2011 Amarok BiTDI D/C Highline 4Motion
08 RS MKV GTI DSG
09 ZG Ibiza Cupra TDI
06 CW Sportline
01 Citi 1.4i
01 Yamaha YZ125
99 Toyota Tazz
94 Fox 1.8 Sport
Current: 17 Amarok V6 D/C 4Motion H/L Auto
Current: 1987 Citi Sport 1.6
Current: 91 Citi Sport 1.3
Current: 05 Kawasaki 200KDX, 16 KTM 300 EXC
Previous:
14 Amarok BITDI D/C 4Motion H/L Auto
12' MKVI GTI Manual
2009 Audi TT 2.0TFSI S-Tronic
2008 Honda CBX250 Twister - Crashed!
2011 Amarok BiTDI D/C Highline 4Motion
08 RS MKV GTI DSG
09 ZG Ibiza Cupra TDI
06 CW Sportline
01 Citi 1.4i
01 Yamaha YZ125
99 Toyota Tazz
94 Fox 1.8 Sport
- Fiefster
- Cadet
- Posts: 116
- Registered for: 12 years 9 months
- Car Make: Volkswagen
- Car Model: 2005 1.4 CitiGolf
- Membership No: missing
- Location: Far far away...
Re: VR6 vs ABF which is better motor....
Id also say depends on what you want. Lets say you want to fit it into a citi golf then there is no point in fitting the VR as it will cost you a lot more and will require much more work. Where as in a golf 3 body its a different story. There the VR conversion might still be more expensive (stand corrected) but Id say way more worth fitting than the abf.
Nuclear powered spaceship
Disguised as a 1400 citiGolf
Disguised as a 1400 citiGolf
-
- Lieutenant-Colonel
- Posts: 4314
- Registered for: 17 years 3 months
- Car Make: vw
- Car Model: caddy
- Membership No: 1507
- Location: woodmead area
Re: VR6 vs ABF which is better motor....
+11ty billion.. I had an Original Golf 3 2door ABF and I wanted a VR but my reason was for the tone of the motor.Gizmo20VT wrote:i say visa versa.. vr = king
Performance didn't bother me much.
Current :
2005 bagged caddy pickup
Ex :
The list exceeds the character limit
- Velofox
- Lieutenant-Colonel
- Posts: 4427
- Registered for: 16 years
- Car Make: VW
- Car Model: '94 FoxT 2.0 16v'
- Membership No: 1314
- Location: The Land of Milk and Honey...
Re: VR6 vs ABF which is better motor....
oh yeah...dogg wrote:+11ty billion.. I had an Original Golf 3 2door ABF and I wanted a VR but my reason was for the tone of the motor.Gizmo20VT wrote:i say visa versa.. vr = king
Performance didn't bother me much.
Current Rides
1994 2.0 16v FoxT - Lexy
1998 2.0 8v Mk3 GTI - Liesy
My Inspiration
16vT Engine Pics
1994 2.0 16v FoxT - Lexy
1998 2.0 8v Mk3 GTI - Liesy
My Inspiration
16vT Engine Pics
- Killerwatt
- VWCSA Member
- Posts: 4819
- Registered for: 15 years 11 months
- Car Make: AUDI
- Car Model: S3
- Membership No: missing
- Location: Brakenhurst
Re: VR6 vs ABF which is better motor....
Both motors have their own pros and cons, i think slightly more cons for the vr. But you will never ever in a million years get an abf to sound like a vr6. So i vote VR.
- CRASH_IT
- Cadet
- Posts: 996
- Registered for: 17 years 7 months
- Car Make: Audi
- Car Model: 8P S3
- Membership No: 1540
- Location: Alberton, JHB
Re: VR6 vs ABF which is better motor....
dazza wrote:ABF is rated at 110kw at the fly but it was beleived there was word that they were actually detuned to 110kw in Europe and are more like 125kw at the fly.bennit wrote:I was paging through a mag and noticed that an abf motor is more pricier than a voora, why? Demand perhaps? Now i would like to know which is better motor overall, in terms of modding, and bang for buck. And how much are these motors rated standard, correct me if im wrong, vr6 128kw/240nm & abf 110kw? Maintanance wise? Abf parts, are they accessable?
Vr6 is nice but the ABF is a real gem.
correct
CURRENT RIDE
2013 VW transporter 2.0TDI
2007 Audi S3
EX
- 2014 Ford Fiesta ST
- 1993 1.8i CITI MP9 98HP 147NM @ KAR
NOW:2.0 ABF 117HP 158NM @Panics on XMS (SOLD)SNIFF
http://www.vwclub.co.za/phpbb3/viewtopi ... 3&t=108203
2013 VW transporter 2.0TDI
2007 Audi S3
EX
- 2014 Ford Fiesta ST
- 1993 1.8i CITI MP9 98HP 147NM @ KAR
NOW:2.0 ABF 117HP 158NM @Panics on XMS (SOLD)SNIFF
http://www.vwclub.co.za/phpbb3/viewtopi ... 3&t=108203
- SHAUN
- Post Whore
- Posts: 29491
- Registered for: 19 years 9 months
- Car Make: BMW
- Car Model: 2006 335i
- Membership No: 1148
- Location: WildWest
Re: VR6 vs ABF which is better motor....
Id love a VR motor in a mk1, even if so many go against it, i just dont want the fuel consumption lol
2006 E92 335i * Monica
2001 Audi S3 Quattro * Suzie-Q
1999 Jetta 3 20vt 181kw 390nm * Jet-Li
2006 Caddy 1.6 low and slow * Tossa-Caddy
2001 Polo classic 16v ABF Featured * BLUEmotion
1988 Bmw E30 2.9L - Written off
1991 MKII GTI - Sold
1989 MKII CSL - Sold
2001 Audi S3 Quattro * Suzie-Q
1999 Jetta 3 20vt 181kw 390nm * Jet-Li
2006 Caddy 1.6 low and slow * Tossa-Caddy
2001 Polo classic 16v ABF Featured * BLUEmotion
1988 Bmw E30 2.9L - Written off
1991 MKII GTI - Sold
1989 MKII CSL - Sold
Saiendra wrote: I cannot argue with you, you bought a BMW out of motorplan...
You clearly have more balls than me.
- panic-mechanic
- Panic's Place
- Posts: 26715
- Registered for: 21 years 8 months
- Membership No: 79
- Location: Benoni, putfontein.
Re: VR6 vs ABF which is better motor....
ABF all in all is much better bang for buck.
Stephan van Tonder - Jhb - Putfontein Benoni
'05 Audi A6 3.0L TDI Avant
'09 Touareg 3l TDI
'13 VW CC 2l tdi (repair project)
'05 Touareg v10
Perfect Power dealer. I do dyno tuning.
'05 Audi A6 3.0L TDI Avant
'09 Touareg 3l TDI
'13 VW CC 2l tdi (repair project)
'05 Touareg v10
Perfect Power dealer. I do dyno tuning.
-
- Cadet
- Posts: 658
- Registered for: 14 years 7 months
- Car Make: VW
- Car Model: 1988 Jetta mk2 cli
- Membership No: missing
Re: VR6 vs ABF which is better motor....
if you think with your head you are going to find yourself going the ABF route, but like everone is saying the smart money would go ABF as it does in all honesty out perform the VR, but if you do drop a VR in it its because its something you really want not because its the smarter choice. Im going VR in my jetta 2 for that exact reason, other option would be 2.0 20VT which would put both motors to shame!
-
- Lieutenant-General
- Posts: 8881
- Registered for: 20 years 4 months
- Car Make: Audi
- Car Model: Amarok V6
- Membership No: 664
- Location: Pretoria
- Contact:
Re: VR6 vs ABF which is better motor....
I stand to be corrected but getting ahold of VR6 gearboxes are aparently getting a bit difficult.. so there might be problem 1.
To make a VR6 go into a MK1 or 2 is going to be a lot more work the ABF is a lott less.
Then the weight of the VR6 wil effect handling more so than the ABF.
I agree with the VR6 for looks and the sound.
To make a VR6 go into a MK1 or 2 is going to be a lot more work the ABF is a lott less.
Then the weight of the VR6 wil effect handling more so than the ABF.
I agree with the VR6 for looks and the sound.
Joggie Pretorius
---------------------------------------
EX - CARS
Jetta CSX 1.8 8v
Golf CTi 1.8 8v
Polo 1.6 lux
SEAT Ibiza Sport
VW Polo 2.0 Highline
BMW E90 320D
VW Caddy 2.0 8V
Nissan X-trail 2.0 dCi
VW Jetta 2.0 16V Turbo
VW Polo 1.6 Comfortline
BMW 335
Suzuki SV1000S (125hp - 109NM)
Audi RSQ3
CURRENT CARS
VW Amarok V6 Exstream
---------------------------------------
EX - CARS
Jetta CSX 1.8 8v
Golf CTi 1.8 8v
Polo 1.6 lux
SEAT Ibiza Sport
VW Polo 2.0 Highline
BMW E90 320D
VW Caddy 2.0 8V
Nissan X-trail 2.0 dCi
VW Jetta 2.0 16V Turbo
VW Polo 1.6 Comfortline
BMW 335
Suzuki SV1000S (125hp - 109NM)
Audi RSQ3
CURRENT CARS
VW Amarok V6 Exstream
- zain_c
- Brigadier
- Posts: 6009
- Registered for: 14 years 3 months
- Car Model: Accord + MK2 Jetta CSi
- Membership No: missing
- Location: Skaapstad
Re: VR6 vs ABF which is better motor....
I'd go ABF for sure. Love that motor to bits...pity they so pricey.
2010 Honda Accord K24
1992 MK2 Jetta CSi
ex:
86 MK2 Jetta CLX
88 MK2 Golf CSL
14 6R Polo
97 Caddy
83 MK1 GTi
04 Citi 14.7 s2s Killarney
06 MK5 Golf
92 MK2 2.0 16v GTi Exec
88 MK2 CLi 1.9 16v 15.0 Killarney
96 MK3 GTS
1992 MK2 Jetta CSi
ex:
86 MK2 Jetta CLX
88 MK2 Golf CSL
14 6R Polo
97 Caddy
83 MK1 GTi
04 Citi 14.7 s2s Killarney
06 MK5 Golf
92 MK2 2.0 16v GTi Exec
88 MK2 CLi 1.9 16v 15.0 Killarney
96 MK3 GTS
-
- Cadet
- Posts: 658
- Registered for: 14 years 7 months
- Car Make: VW
- Car Model: 1988 Jetta mk2 cli
- Membership No: missing
Re: VR6 vs ABF which is better motor....
+10000000000000000!!! fooking hard to get hold of, i have been looking for awhile now with no luck, but if you are prepared to pay, when one surfaces its not cheap at all.I stand to be corrected but getting ahold of VR6 gearboxes are aparently getting a bit difficult..
VR swap into an mk2 in all honesty is not that difficult if you have all the parts.
- Forest
- Lieutenant
- Posts: 1720
- Registered for: 15 years 1 month
- Car Make: BMW
- Car Model: 135i Coupe & S1000RR
- Membership No: 1648
- Location: Boksburg
- Contact:
Re: VR6 vs ABF which is better motor....
ABF with your current gearbox = R10 000
VR6 + VR6 gearbox (only 1 that works) = R10 000
Dont see a price differance....
Its all about supply and demand.
VR swop, usually only done in Mk3 VR6's = not high demand.
ABF works in almost any VW + its awesome = high demand.
VR6 FTMFW Haters!
VR6 + VR6 gearbox (only 1 that works) = R10 000
Dont see a price differance....
Its all about supply and demand.
VR swop, usually only done in Mk3 VR6's = not high demand.
ABF works in almost any VW + its awesome = high demand.
VR6 FTMFW Haters!
Stock Standard '89 Golf Mk2 VR6 (Sold)
Project "Merge" Mk2VR6 - The Build
'86 Golf Mk2 AGU 2 Door (Sold)
Project "Tudor" Mk2AGU -The Build
Project "Merge" Mk2VR6 - The Build
'86 Golf Mk2 AGU 2 Door (Sold)
Project "Tudor" Mk2AGU -The Build
- zain_c
- Brigadier
- Posts: 6009
- Registered for: 14 years 3 months
- Car Model: Accord + MK2 Jetta CSi
- Membership No: missing
- Location: Skaapstad
Re: VR6 vs ABF which is better motor....
Forest wrote:VR6 FTMFW Haters
2010 Honda Accord K24
1992 MK2 Jetta CSi
ex:
86 MK2 Jetta CLX
88 MK2 Golf CSL
14 6R Polo
97 Caddy
83 MK1 GTi
04 Citi 14.7 s2s Killarney
06 MK5 Golf
92 MK2 2.0 16v GTi Exec
88 MK2 CLi 1.9 16v 15.0 Killarney
96 MK3 GTS
1992 MK2 Jetta CSi
ex:
86 MK2 Jetta CLX
88 MK2 Golf CSL
14 6R Polo
97 Caddy
83 MK1 GTi
04 Citi 14.7 s2s Killarney
06 MK5 Golf
92 MK2 2.0 16v GTi Exec
88 MK2 CLi 1.9 16v 15.0 Killarney
96 MK3 GTS
-
- Major-General
- Posts: 7404
- Registered for: 21 years 2 months
- Car Make: VW
- Car Model: MK1
- Membership No: missing
- Location: Johannesburg
Re: VR6 vs ABF which is better motor....
I would say ABF any day of the week, but lately I've been getting to drive a different Mk1 every week, and each has the same recipe, ABF, Dicktator,exhaust and what do you know, 130BHP atw. Its just too common(and for good reason). So I can't believe I'm going to say this, I'd like to drive a Mk1 with a VR6 6 pot in the front, and the 6 Pot sound out the rear, why? Because not everyone in my neighbourhood has one.
Ex '02 Citi.Com 20VT K04
Ex '12 GTI 6 Candy White,Manual,Revo STG 2, 250whp 460nm KAR pump fuel only.
'80 MK1 L 2Dr 8V Throttles
'92 CTI 16VT 240whp @ Panic 0.3 bars boost.
'12 GTI 6 Candy White DSG 14.4 @ 160km/h Tarlton Stock Std.
Zubair Aka Boost Junkie
ZUB-AIR-RESEARCH
Boost Developments
Ex '12 GTI 6 Candy White,Manual,Revo STG 2, 250whp 460nm KAR pump fuel only.
'80 MK1 L 2Dr 8V Throttles
'92 CTI 16VT 240whp @ Panic 0.3 bars boost.
'12 GTI 6 Candy White DSG 14.4 @ 160km/h Tarlton Stock Std.
Zubair Aka Boost Junkie
ZUB-AIR-RESEARCH
Boost Developments
- zain_c
- Brigadier
- Posts: 6009
- Registered for: 14 years 3 months
- Car Model: Accord + MK2 Jetta CSi
- Membership No: missing
- Location: Skaapstad
Re: VR6 vs ABF which is better motor....
aaaaah...i'd like to cruise Big Ron style too.
so more or less how much would a VR6 transplant cost to put into a citi?
so more or less how much would a VR6 transplant cost to put into a citi?
2010 Honda Accord K24
1992 MK2 Jetta CSi
ex:
86 MK2 Jetta CLX
88 MK2 Golf CSL
14 6R Polo
97 Caddy
83 MK1 GTi
04 Citi 14.7 s2s Killarney
06 MK5 Golf
92 MK2 2.0 16v GTi Exec
88 MK2 CLi 1.9 16v 15.0 Killarney
96 MK3 GTS
1992 MK2 Jetta CSi
ex:
86 MK2 Jetta CLX
88 MK2 Golf CSL
14 6R Polo
97 Caddy
83 MK1 GTi
04 Citi 14.7 s2s Killarney
06 MK5 Golf
92 MK2 2.0 16v GTi Exec
88 MK2 CLi 1.9 16v 15.0 Killarney
96 MK3 GTS
- Smok3X
- Captain
- Posts: 2032
- Registered for: 15 years 1 month
- Car Make: SEAT
- Car Model: LEON CUPRA 2.0 TFSi K04
- Membership No: 3083
- Location: JHB
Re: VR6 vs ABF which is better motor....
VR6 Sounds awesome! But not for a Citi if you ask me... you wont last too long once the cops stop you and open the bonnet!
ABF FTW! 125KW ATF Easy! with standard motor!
ABF FTW! 125KW ATF Easy! with standard motor!
Current:
Leon CUPRA - 2.0TFSi K04--> Rides Thread
169WKW@Dark Artz - Stock
229WKW@Dark Artz - RevO 2+
Ex:
Ibiza CUPRA - 1.8 20V - Hybrid Turbo-->Rides Thread
Revo:182KW and 399NM@Experience
ABF Citi Golf - 2.0L 16V--->Rides Thread
FRC - 124KW and 198NM@Auto Trix
1/4 Mile:14.61s
1ST Place - 4AF2 Margate 31st Oct 2010
Leon CUPRA - 2.0TFSi K04--> Rides Thread
169WKW@Dark Artz - Stock
229WKW@Dark Artz - RevO 2+
Ex:
Ibiza CUPRA - 1.8 20V - Hybrid Turbo-->Rides Thread
Revo:182KW and 399NM@Experience
ABF Citi Golf - 2.0L 16V--->Rides Thread
FRC - 124KW and 198NM@Auto Trix
1/4 Mile:14.61s
1ST Place - 4AF2 Margate 31st Oct 2010
- panic-mechanic
- Panic's Place
- Posts: 26715
- Registered for: 21 years 8 months
- Membership No: 79
- Location: Benoni, putfontein.
Re: VR6 vs ABF which is better motor....
I have driven a couple of mk1's with vr6 lump. All I can say is understeer......
In a mk2 and mk3 - yeah it's better but you also HAVE to upgrade springs and shocks and brakes for sure. As much as I love VR's I hate them. It's a fantastic sounding engine but in stock form it's pretty useless for it's capacity. Once you make it a 3.1 it's a heck of a lot better but it can use fuel that will make a sheik's eyes water.
I have genuinely played a lot with both and as I said ABF better bang for buck. When you leave reason at the door then yes the VR into other stuff becomes interesting and yes it stirs the soul for the sound and yes - it's not as common as the ABF. Then again I have a REAL soft spot for those 1.8 20v turbos......
In a mk2 and mk3 - yeah it's better but you also HAVE to upgrade springs and shocks and brakes for sure. As much as I love VR's I hate them. It's a fantastic sounding engine but in stock form it's pretty useless for it's capacity. Once you make it a 3.1 it's a heck of a lot better but it can use fuel that will make a sheik's eyes water.
I have genuinely played a lot with both and as I said ABF better bang for buck. When you leave reason at the door then yes the VR into other stuff becomes interesting and yes it stirs the soul for the sound and yes - it's not as common as the ABF. Then again I have a REAL soft spot for those 1.8 20v turbos......
Stephan van Tonder - Jhb - Putfontein Benoni
'05 Audi A6 3.0L TDI Avant
'09 Touareg 3l TDI
'13 VW CC 2l tdi (repair project)
'05 Touareg v10
Perfect Power dealer. I do dyno tuning.
'05 Audi A6 3.0L TDI Avant
'09 Touareg 3l TDI
'13 VW CC 2l tdi (repair project)
'05 Touareg v10
Perfect Power dealer. I do dyno tuning.
- dazza
- Field Marshal
- Posts: 12139
- Registered for: 16 years 3 months
- Car Make: VW and VW
- Car Model: Amarok and Citi Sport
- Membership No: 1327
- Location: Roodepoort
Re: VR6 vs ABF which is better motor....
Does anyone know exactly the weight difference between the ABF and VR6 motor...how much extra weight we talking?
Darryn Van Rooyen
Current: 17 Amarok V6 D/C 4Motion H/L Auto
Current: 1987 Citi Sport 1.6
Current: 91 Citi Sport 1.3
Current: 05 Kawasaki 200KDX, 16 KTM 300 EXC
Previous:
14 Amarok BITDI D/C 4Motion H/L Auto
12' MKVI GTI Manual
2009 Audi TT 2.0TFSI S-Tronic
2008 Honda CBX250 Twister - Crashed!
2011 Amarok BiTDI D/C Highline 4Motion
08 RS MKV GTI DSG
09 ZG Ibiza Cupra TDI
06 CW Sportline
01 Citi 1.4i
01 Yamaha YZ125
99 Toyota Tazz
94 Fox 1.8 Sport
Current: 17 Amarok V6 D/C 4Motion H/L Auto
Current: 1987 Citi Sport 1.6
Current: 91 Citi Sport 1.3
Current: 05 Kawasaki 200KDX, 16 KTM 300 EXC
Previous:
14 Amarok BITDI D/C 4Motion H/L Auto
12' MKVI GTI Manual
2009 Audi TT 2.0TFSI S-Tronic
2008 Honda CBX250 Twister - Crashed!
2011 Amarok BiTDI D/C Highline 4Motion
08 RS MKV GTI DSG
09 ZG Ibiza Cupra TDI
06 CW Sportline
01 Citi 1.4i
01 Yamaha YZ125
99 Toyota Tazz
94 Fox 1.8 Sport
-
- Lieutenant-Colonel
- Posts: 4314
- Registered for: 17 years 3 months
- Car Make: vw
- Car Model: caddy
- Membership No: 1507
- Location: woodmead area
Re: VR6 vs ABF which is better motor....
Its not only the weight in the Mk1/Citi.. its the way the motor sits in the engine bay. It sits basically on top of the front suspension more towards the slam try. One can almost stand in the space in the back of the motor with a hair dryer for some Forced Induction.dazza wrote:Does anyone know exactly the weight difference between the ABF and VR6 motor...how much extra weight we talking?
Current :
2005 bagged caddy pickup
Ex :
The list exceeds the character limit
-
- Lieutenant
- Posts: 1119
- Registered for: 15 years 3 months
- Membership No: missing
- Location: Pretoria
Re: VR6 vs ABF which is better motor....
Why i put a t on mine, not too many of those around. (methinks)Zubair wrote:...... ABF ...... Its just too common(and for good reason)...
BMW k1200RS
-
- Cadet
- Posts: 658
- Registered for: 14 years 7 months
- Car Make: VW
- Car Model: 1988 Jetta mk2 cli
- Membership No: missing
Re: VR6 vs ABF which is better motor....
Yebo. the VR motor mounts in such a way that it sits pretty much straight up whereas your normal 4 pot sit slanted backwards.Its not only the weight in the Mk1/Citi.. its the way the motor sits in the engine bay. It sits basically on top of the front suspension more towards the slam try. One can almost stand in the space in the back of the motor with a hair dryer for some Forced Induction.
And i stand to be corrected but the difference in weight between a 4 pot setup and the VR is only like 80 pounds. same thing was asked on vwvortex
- Ansell
- Cadet
- Posts: 181
- Registered for: 9 years 6 months
- Car Make: VW
- Car Model: 1997 Golf 3
- Location: Somerset West, Cape Town
Re: VR6 vs ABF which is better motor....
Yeah. The ABF in a MK3 is 1115kgs and the VR6 in a MK3 is 1180kgs. All 5 doors. That's about 65kgs difference. The ABF has about 10.13kgs per kw and the VR6 is about 9.21kgs per kw. This is just in the case of a MK3 that the VR6 has better power to weight. For comparison my MK3 is a 1.8 MP9 which is 1035kgs and 82kw which gives it a power to weight of about 12.6kgs per kw. All in all, booooyaaa!
Current:
1997 Golf MK3 GSX (1.8 MP9)
Specs:
79.7kw at 5209rpm and 160nm at 4240rpm (Saichs Dyno)
Modifications:
Stock exhaust with one 50mm-57mm freeflow box.
Standard airbox
Standard cam
Ex: 1970 Beetle 1300 twin-port
If you don't look back at your car after you park it, then you own the wrong car.
1997 Golf MK3 GSX (1.8 MP9)
Specs:
79.7kw at 5209rpm and 160nm at 4240rpm (Saichs Dyno)
Modifications:
Stock exhaust with one 50mm-57mm freeflow box.
Standard airbox
Standard cam
Ex: 1970 Beetle 1300 twin-port
If you don't look back at your car after you park it, then you own the wrong car.