Golf GTI VR6 or 2.0L ??

**Meeve** · 4th August 2008, 06:17

Hello guys, I'm looking for a car to start rallying in the 2x4 categorie here in Québec, and from what I see a volkswagen Golf is the cheapest for the quality and the performance it gives, and most rally drivers here have this. The question I have in mind is would a VR6 golf (V6 2.8L engine) would be best or is it better to have a GTI 2.0L (4cyl). I would like to have your opinion. If you have an idea for another car feel free to say. (remember here in Québec there is no peugot, citroen Etc.)

**sal** · 4th August 2008, 14:12

Go for the two litre, the 16 valve if you can get it. Never driven a VR6 on the loose but guess it would be a bit of a nose heavy handful!! Think I can count on the fingers of one finger the number of VR6 rally cars I have come across!

The 2 litre makes a nice rally car in either format. I prefered my old 8 valve MK2 but the works cars and most privateer cars were 16v to take advantage of the "revability"

Have fun!

**Meeve** · 4th August 2008, 22:10

thx for this information. But isin't the performance of the VR6 going to balance for the heavier weight of the engine? Or is it realy more important to be light weight?

**janvanvurpa** · 5th August 2008, 04:16

Originally Posted by Meeve

thx for this information. But isin't the performance of the VR6 going to balance for the heavier weight of the engine? Or is it realy more important to be light weight?

Meeve, a medium warmed up 2,0 16v can give you all the torque you want and at good range.
In a rally motor peak or maximum bhp isn't so important because you also make torque when you change the final drive from the typical 3.6 to something like 4.2 or 4.47.
You can look around worldwide and plenty of people go very fast with "just' 2,0 16v.

If you decide to build or rebuild the motor, you have so much less parts (4 pistons, 16v, 16 seats to grind only one good quality headgasket, 8 rod bolts
etc versus SO MANY) more for a motor which really is designed to rev and BE SMOOTH, not make LOTS of torque.

And they do weigh a lot more, and COST so much that you really would be so much better off with the simpler easier to live with 16v

But to be at all competitive, you must save money for a GOOD multi-plate LSD and shorter final drive, and good, strong suspension.

Why don't you come over to our North American forum which is really aimed at the guys building their own cars. Lots of guys from Ontario, some from Quebec, Maine and of course the rest of USA and Canada.
LOTS of good building advice and photos of the build process, and plenty of VW boys although to be 100% honest it really is only in North America that there are so many VWs----most of the world still finds the best over-all type of car to build and to own is still rear wheel drive, and the Swedes and the Finns and English here can attest to the fact that the vast majority of the cars that normal private driver use and run are rwd Escorts, Opels, Toyotas, and now in Finland the latest mode d'jour is BMWs
We have huge amount of links of really REALLY!! EXCITING rally action in Finland and Sweden at http://www.rallyanarchy.com
And yes they are faster than hell even wintertime with snow.
Many club level guys there are much faster than any North American driver in the supposed hottest turbo 4wd machinery, so clearly there's no handicap using simple rwd. (And i say this having always driven a good National 2wd winning fwd Saab)
Come on over.

**Meeve** · 7th August 2008, 00:54

I found a Golf 1.8L turbo GTI 1992, would it be better than a 2.0L 16V engine? I also found a 1.8L turbo GTI 2000. Both the same price... But the 1992 is more modified : intercooler blow-off valve, 6-speed transmission, etc. Wich one do you think is best?

**Saabaru** · 7th August 2008, 01:33

Originally Posted by Meeve

thx for this information. But isin't the performance of the VR6 going to balance for the heavier weight of the engine? Or is it realy more important to be light weight?

The small amount of extra power will not accout for the loss of handling and stopping ability lost by the excess weight of the VR6. It dosn't take a whole lot of power to propel a little Golf.

**janvanvurpa** · 7th August 2008, 07:49

Originally Posted by Meeve

I found a Golf 1.8L turbo GTI 1992, would it be better than a 2.0L 16V engine? I also found a 1.8L turbo GTI 2000. Both the same price... But the 1992 is more modified : intercooler blow-off valve, 6-speed transmission, etc. Wich one do you think is best?

Considering that most guys with power in the 135-140 bhp range break the CV joints and axles etc regularly, I think you'd be better off in the NORMAL ASPIRATED catagory.

What PRICE are these cars?
You may be doing what too many guys do and spend too much on a nice spec street car and then you throw out everything inside.

The former local fastest Golf guy here got his last car for $400, it was a base model car needing a clutch.
If you're looking at cars in the "more than 400 buck range' I'd say get a cheaper one and spend the money on real parts.

Did you go visit us at http://www.rallyanarchy.com ?

**Saabaru** · 7th August 2008, 16:11

You can also try www.specialstage.com & www.rallyclassified.com

**Daniel** · 7th August 2008, 18:57

listen to janvan. He's completely right with all that he has said on this thread.

**Meeve** · 7th August 2008, 20:56

Thanks for all your advice for golf car! Lately I subsribed to a rally club and the responsable of the club sell her car. Its a Mazda 323 allready modifed, ready to race, with spare pieces. I know nothing about 323, can you help me? Because yes it would be cheaper to buy an allready modified car. Is it performant or is it not? I'd like you to help me gather info for this car. I'll ask her what is modified on her car and i'll tell you when I know.