1.6 Doesn’T Feel That Quick

[McSwerve 0]

Afternoon all.

 

I bought my standard 1.6 gti for a bit of Autosoloing, and after the 1st event its evident that the standard suspension needs some stiffening to make it competitive (but thats another story).

 

However, although you dont actually need that much power for these events, I dont feel the car is as quick as it should be.

 

It starts on the button, and is very smooth, just not much umpff.

 

Other than a Dyno run, are there any other ways to establish the engine health?

I though about a bit of side by side testing with one of my other cars. My 320d should do 0-60 in 8.0, but my seat of the pants dyno already tells me that my 205 will be miles behind. Rather than the 0.7 seconds behind as it should have been in 1990.

 

Sorry to be a bit vague, but any thoughts gratefully received.

 

Cheers

Edited December 14, 2011 by McSwerve

[Anthony 1,000]

There can be significant differences between two apparently identical standard engines, and that's before the possibility that there's something amiss with fuelling or ignition.

 

1.6's never feel especially quick - particularly by todays standards - and do need to be revved to deliver their best, which is obviously the complete opposite of something like a 320d that has masses of mid-range grunt. Certainly I can easily see that getting out of a 320d straight into a 1.6 GTi would feel a bit underwhelming if you try driving it the same way, even if it was a healthy quick example to begin with.

 

Also, do you know what gearbox is fitted? 1.6's feel dreadful on longer gearboxes like the 1.9 IMO.

[Tom Fenton 1,526]

As above, and I think a lot of it is that standard road cars have moved on so much.

 

Put it into context - your average 2.0 turbo diesel is something like 150-160bhp if not more, with buckets of torque.

 

A 205 that was 115bhp to begin with and almost certainly isn't any more isn't going to feel fast.

 

But certainly they do seem to vary. My red 205 when it was standard with 140k on it went pretty well, you had to work it, but it was OK. My green 205 1.6 with 63k certainly does seem slow at the moment, having been owned by a librarian and then an old guy all its life.

[Miles 331 1 Cars]

Some are like that I'm afraid, I remember one my Dad back years ago, that was a D plate and it was slow (Slowest one I have and had driven) but everything checked out fine, even a 405 TD was on par with it

[Leon 24]

I've never driven any 1.6's that feel the same as each other, same goes for 1.9s.

 

In fact I almost rear ended a mate of mine once, me in a 309 GTI, him in a 205 1.9 - we both agreed to properly gun it from rolling @20mph and his car was so lethargic that as he changed into third I damn near shunted him. Huge difference in power between the various XU's over the years it seems.

[harryskid 193]

My old 1600 gt1 road rally car was quite quick but it never seemed to like low revs or hills !

[eddie bullit 37]

I've had the same experiences. I drove two 205 back to back and they were totally different. This was defo a healthy car as it showed 124bhp at the peugeot club RR shoot out at the GTI centre in Sheffield. May not be accurate I know but beat every other 1.6 and a good few 1.9s

I had this with a 106 gti as well when they came out. Test driven at a dealers. The wife and I took it out and it was underwhelming. Drove a pre registered 12 months later and it was s*it off a shovel! we bought that one

Edited December 14, 2011 by eddie bullit

[Baz 421]

Echo'ing all the above, having had many of both, they differ hugely!! It's quite comical and just seems to be luck of the draw!

 

I've had 2 1.6's that were inexplicably quick,(i still have one) making average 1.9's look awfully slow, to the point where you'd think they weren't standard at all! I won a regional sprint championship in a standard up to 2litre class a few years ago using it against CTR's, Clio's, etc etc and as a result was accused of cheating, 'works spec engine is it', 'done the old cosworth pistons job on that have we' etc, when i'd bought it off eBay a few weeks before for a few hundred quid!

 

The same engine easily led & baited an Mi16 engined 205 around the Nurburgring too, but then that probably comes down to track knowledge & ability to a point too.

 

1.9's seem to be more-so commonly poor or 'average', yet the Wheeler Dealer's 1.9 went like the proverbial off a shovel! Wish i'd kept that engine now tbh!

 

Head castings also differ quite a bit.

[eddie bullit 37]

I'm in the same boat now Baz. My miami never felt up to speed and this has since been proven when the new owner had a poor result whilst at a RR session. The steely revs very quickly compared and is more akin to the 1.6 with the way it pulls through the rev range.

The steely has 3/4 oil pressure when fully warm whereas the miami was 1/4-1/2 at best. Is this a good indication of engine health?

Edd

[harryskid 193]

 

 

 

 

1.9's seem to be more-so commonly poor or 'average', yet the Wheeler Dealer's 1.9 went like the proverbial off a shovel! Wish i'd kept that engine now tbh!

 

Head castings also differ quite a bit.

 

When you say Wheeler Dealers 1.9 do you mean the one that was done on tv?

[Baz 421]

Not really Paul, the oil pressure doesn't do a thing for performance and to be honest that's even if you could trust the standard senders/gauges! It just sounds like a better one this time!!

 

When you say Wheeler Dealers 1.9 do you mean the one that was done on tv?

 

Yup, only with a different engine, beam, exhaust, fuel & brake lines, suspension, steering wheel, gearknob & parcel shelf from then...

 

[eddie bullit 37]

Not really Paul, the oil pressure doesn't do a thing for performance and to be honest that's even if you could trust the standard senders/gauges! It just sounds like a better one this time!!

 

OMG! you've used my REAL name! the secrets out

[309jazzpanda 39]

I'm glad this thread is up I was going to post a similar thing. Don't mean to thread jack but i finally got my 309 running the other day, toed it down the side road at work and it seemed slower than my 1400 155k 205, ignition timing does need setting but i need to know did the 1600 cti have he same engine as a normal 1600 gti? (hardtop)