Re: [Re: poor man's hot rodding]

[Cathy Boyko <losinit@usa.net>]

Kareem <6keb1@qlink.queensu.ca> wrote:
On Thu, 24 May 2001, Joe Doty wrote:
> the way, the stock 1.8 head on the 2.0 block is good for an extra 7-10hp

Yah, I guess the common lore is that the 1.8 head produces
more power...but this is at high rpm's,  right?? What is
the cost at low rpms? Is the torque noticeably less than with
the 2.0 head or negligible?
Thanks,

Well, on mine the exhaust (TT downpipe with the cat, 2.25" stainless back)
was the biggest bang for the buck, and the 1.8 head did add to the top end
although a clutch concern reared its ugly head at the same time as the head
went on, so that is a factor too. The head rebuild was a fair chunk of change,
but once the bigger manifold went on, the benefits of the head and cam were
more apparent =:0  As for bottom end, it is fine, and I don't regret losing a
bit for the top end gain, after all, much of it ends up as tire spin anyway at
the bottom end. I didn't have my 1.8 bottom long enough to make a fair
comparison to the 2L engine, but the 2 is sure nice. But I'm not going back,
happy with the whole package. The butt dyno gives the exhaust the high marks
for hp/value, and as for real power gains, the head/cam/manifold (all three)
were more money, but worth it. Dyno will be done after we figure out just how
baked the clutch is, I had a baseline done with just the 2L stock setup. HTH,
Cathy, not poor until the hot rodding...

____________________________________________________________________
Get free email and a permanent address at http://www.netaddress.com/?N=1

--
Email LIST problems to: scirocco-l-probs@scirocco.org.
To unsubscibe send "unsubscribe scirocco-l" in the message to majordomo@scirocco.org