whitter45
Member
Registered: 15th Nov 02
Location: Norton
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by adiohead
I've been considering swapping my LCR for a 225 TT.
Would have to be a 2002 onwards for me to try out the custom code VVT attack remap (if their claims are correct).
most are about £8-£9k for the ones I like.
oh, and I get about 25mpg
[Edited on 02-07-2010 by adiohead]
There is not much difference between the VVT and the older units
They pull slightly harder at the top end but very little difference
|
adiohead
Member
Registered: 28th Sep 01
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by whitter45
There is not much difference between the VVT and the older units
They pull slightly harder at the top end but very little difference
BUT there is new software "claiming" nearly 300bhp using the dormant VVT on the BAM engines.
|
Jambo
Member
Registered: 8th Sep 01
Location: Maidenhead, Drives: VXR Arctic
User status: Offline
|
i fancy buying a 100k cat c, painting it wacky colour sticking lambo wheels on it and enjoying 
|
whitter45
Member
Registered: 15th Nov 02
Location: Norton
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by adiohead
quote:
Originally posted by whitter45
There is not much difference between the VVT and the older units
They pull slightly harder at the top end but very little difference
BUT there is new software "claiming" nearly 300bhp using the dormant VVT on the BAM engines.
I will believe that when I see it
Most engines push 280 max and i wouldnt go above 300lbs/ft on standard internals as the conrods are the weakest aprt
My mate run a hybrid turbo that had a really flat and consistent boost curve and he only ever saw 292 max
|
CORSA NUT
Member
Registered: 3rd Aug 01
Location: Wirral
User status: Offline
|
Paul mate they are NOT good one fuel as said by Steve 
Good cars though just watch for the common faults like the binnacle going
|
Bart
Member
Registered: 19th Aug 02
Location: Midsomer Norton, Bristol Avon
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by whitter45
they are not cheap to run and you will not see above 30mpg
On that car, you will barely see above 20 my friend, believe me 
|
whitter45
Member
Registered: 15th Nov 02
Location: Norton
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Bart
quote:
Originally posted by whitter45
they are not cheap to run and you will not see above 30mpg
On that car, you will barely see above 20 my friend, believe me
I should know i owned one for 2 and a half years
Most i got was around 32 avaerage
Generally it was 27 average
|
adiohead
Member
Registered: 28th Sep 01
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by whitter45
I will believe that when I see it
Most engines push 280 max and i wouldnt go above 300lbs/ft on standard internals as the conrods are the weakest aprt
My mate run a hybrid turbo that had a really flat and consistent boost curve and he only ever saw 292 max
I agree, I want to see independent verification before I go for it. Could just be total BS.
here's a stage 2 RR (on their RR of course):
http://i522.photobucket.com/albums/w350/christoone/1_8T20VVT20ATTACK20LCR1.jpg
|
whitter45
Member
Registered: 15th Nov 02
Location: Norton
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by CORSA NUT
Paul mate they are NOT good one fuel as said by Steve
Good cars though just watch for the common faults like the binnacle going
and rear springs
indicator relays
coils packs
window drop
etc etc
|
whitter45
Member
Registered: 15th Nov 02
Location: Norton
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by adiohead
quote:
Originally posted by whitter45
I will believe that when I see it
Most engines push 280 max and i wouldnt go above 300lbs/ft on standard internals as the conrods are the weakest aprt
My mate run a hybrid turbo that had a really flat and consistent boost curve and he only ever saw 292 max
I agree, I want to see independent verification before I go for it. Could just be total BS.
here's a stage 2 RR (on their RR of course):
http://i522.photobucket.com/albums/w350/christoone/1_8T20VVT20ATTACK20LCR1.jpg
thats stage 2 so would require intercooler cat back exhaust and breathing kit and I still dont think they would see above 290
APR had there car with all bells and whistles and still only got 290
[Edited on 02-07-2010 by whitter45]
|
Bart
Member
Registered: 19th Aug 02
Location: Midsomer Norton, Bristol Avon
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by whitter45
quote:
Originally posted by Bart
quote:
Originally posted by whitter45
they are not cheap to run and you will not see above 30mpg
On that car, you will barely see above 20 my friend, believe me
I should know i owned one for 2 and a half years
Most i got was around 32 avaerage
Generally it was 27 average
which model was that?
Our TT which we owned for almost 5 years (02 plate), was doing around 22 when I was driving. I dont know what the wife was getting out of it, probably alot more as she drives more sensibly.
I pretty much always did put my foot down though.
Her new 07 is alot better on fuel, closer to 30.
[Edited on 02-07-2010 by Bart]
|
whitter45
Member
Registered: 15th Nov 02
Location: Norton
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Bart
quote:
Originally posted by whitter45
quote:
Originally posted by Bart
quote:
Originally posted by whitter45
they are not cheap to run and you will not see above 30mpg
On that car, you will barely see above 20 my friend, believe me
I should know i owned one for 2 and a half years
Most i got was around 32 avaerage
Generally it was 27 average
which model was that?
Our TT which we owned for almost 5 years (02 plate), was doing around 22 when I was driving. I dont know what the wife was getting out of it, probably alot more as she drives more sensibly.
I pretty much always did put my foot down though.
Her new 07 is alot better on fuel, closer to 30.
[Edited on 02-07-2010 by Bart]
the one in the pic i posted
2002 52 plate TT 1.8T 225 BHP with Viper induction Firge DV relocated to front intake and blueflame cat back exhaust
the 2.0t is a much more fuel efficient engine - prefer the looks of the old model though
[Edited on 02-07-2010 by whitter45]
|
CORSA NUT
Member
Registered: 3rd Aug 01
Location: Wirral
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by whitter45
quote:
Originally posted by CORSA NUT
Paul mate they are NOT good one fuel as said by Steve
Good cars though just watch for the common faults like the binnacle going
and rear springs
indicator relays
coils packs
window drop
etc etc
Arrrrrrr you know the TT only too well mate i see
|
whitter45
Member
Registered: 15th Nov 02
Location: Norton
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by CORSA NUT
quote:
Originally posted by whitter45
quote:
Originally posted by CORSA NUT
Paul mate they are NOT good one fuel as said by Steve
Good cars though just watch for the common faults like the binnacle going
and rear springs
indicator relays
coils packs
window drop
etc etc
Arrrrrrr you know the TT only too well mate i see
the list goes on mate
Truely let down by the electrics in the TT
|
3CorsaMeal
Member
Registered: 11th Apr 02
User status: Offline
|
it would be a crap choice for a 2nd car to save money as an S2000 is too expensive to run
|
jr
Member
Registered: 20th May 02
Location: Kent
User status: Offline
|
its a mk4 golf coupe, therfore shocking at anything other than looking nice and having a well put together interior
|
whitter45
Member
Registered: 15th Nov 02
Location: Norton
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by jr
its a mk4 golf coupe, therfore shocking at anything other than looking nice and having a well put together interior
|
Bart
Member
Registered: 19th Aug 02
Location: Midsomer Norton, Bristol Avon
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by whitter45
2002 52 plate TT 1.8T 225 BHP with Viper induction Firge DV relocated to front intake and blueflame cat back exhaust
I assume that was the Quattro as well?
quote:
Originally posted by whitter45
the 2.0t is a much more fuel efficient engine - prefer the looks of the old model though
really?! looks dated imo, interior and exterior.
The newer models are alot more responsive and alot better to drive imo.
|
3CorsaMeal
Member
Registered: 11th Apr 02
User status: Offline
|
does it really drive and perform the same as a mk4 golf then?
|
jr
Member
Registered: 20th May 02
Location: Kent
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by 3CorsaMeal
does it really drive and perform the same as a mk4 golf then?
IMO exactley the same, the suspension set up is identical
|
whitter45
Member
Registered: 15th Nov 02
Location: Norton
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Bart
quote:
Originally posted by whitter45
2002 52 plate TT 1.8T 225 BHP with Viper induction Firge DV relocated to front intake and blueflame cat back exhaust
I assume that was the Quattro as well?
quote:
Originally posted by whitter45
the 2.0t is a much more fuel efficient engine - prefer the looks of the old model though
really?! looks dated imo, interior and exterior.
The newer models are alot more responsive and alot better to drive imo.
the 225 was only available in quattro or the shite hadlex as i prefer to call it
Worst ever 4wd IMO
yeah the 2.0T is a cracking engine - I drove one and really liked it
The exterior is just very bland IMO - no doubt its a better car
|
adiohead
Member
Registered: 28th Sep 01
User status: Offline
|
my mk4 isn't too bad at handling.
|
jr
Member
Registered: 20th May 02
Location: Kent
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by adiohead
my mk4 isn't too bad at handling.
really ? seriously, its one of the most lumbering hatches ive ever driven
|
Adam_B
Member
Registered: 13th Dec 00
Location: Lancashire
User status: Offline
|
Is it the same as an S3?
|
Bart
Member
Registered: 19th Aug 02
Location: Midsomer Norton, Bristol Avon
User status: Offline
|
I guess its a matter of taste, side by side I do prefer the newer look;
In the 5 years of having the old one, we didnt have a single thing wrong with the car, but then it only had only done about 15k miles over the space of 4-5 years.
|
