[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
What STEAMS me about Vortex... Sorry... Rant
It possibly might be something to do with your speedometer cable drive
gear not matching final drive of your tranny (can't remember which way
it works though...)
JT
Chris Bennett wrote:
>Ahh the bullshit flag has been waved... Good man.
> Well... is it in any way possible that the size of the tires and wheels had
>anything to do with the accuracy of the one speedo reading I saw (105ish in
>3rd gear)??? I am trying to offer reasons for one of two conclusions...
>mechanical malfunction or operator error. I am sure that just about everyone
>here is smarter in math than I am. I never really got past (or through)
>geometry... ya know? As you said the math backs up the facts and I do not
>dispute that. It's been well established. I got the engine/tranny from a
>wrecked 88 scirocco. Stock PL/2Y setup as far as I can tell. I have no
>reason to believe that there is cam/head work. I removed the AC and
>installed power steering on the 85. Also took the front brakes and
>associated hardware. Kept my speedo cable and gear. Sometime in this time
>frame I replaced the idiot light box and the cable/gear... I had both an
>orange gear and a white one... I think I chewed the orange. Also had a
>syncro problem in the tranny had a guy in Seattle rebuild it for me.
>Destroyed the 3rd and 4th gear...as far as I know replaced it with stock
>parts... nothing special. The tranny guy was this older german dude that was
>absolutely a wizard. Same day rebuild, cheap...
> Also since then I have gone through a couple of clusters...
> Again I am absolutely sure that you are right I don't doubt the masters. So
>I am sure something in the history of this car wasn't calibrated or I am
>full of shit. I am doubting my memory now. I believe that I saw 105 but
>maybe I didn't. Unfortunately the car doesn't have the same configuration or
>is it in the condition now to be redlining 3rd. I did rev up the 87 this
>evening on an onramp... not to redline but I was nowhere near 100. So I will
>concede that one on lack of proof.
> As for the exhaust I am doubting that too... geez. I will go out and
>measure it tommorow and tell you. I do know that the cat is hollow and that
>alot of the rest was replaced by a local muffler shop. Thats when the
>resonator was removed. The actual muffler rattles like a can with a rock in
>it at the moment so it doesn't sound very good.
> Top speed. I had at the time a 120 speedo in it and I think at this point
>the gear was chewed anyway... I figured that I should pass a mile marker
>every 60 seconds if I was doing 60 mph. So if I passed one every 30 seconds
>that would be 120 right? Again I never claimed to be a math wizz. I timed it
>the best I could and then did the math in my head. I pushed it really hard
>and kept it there for probably half a tank of gas which wasn't a very long
>time but too harsh for the bearings obviously. So for this one I am going to
>say operator error again.
> Maybe someday I will have an opportunity to take it to the track and see
>what it will do officially. I know what I believe and believe what I know...
>I would swear on a bible that I saw 105 in 3rd and I really want to argue
>the fact but I don't have a leg to stand on logically and no way or desire
>to reproduce the run.
>
>Oh yea... scirocco content...
>How do I wire up the reverse lights?! I still have an 8v harness for that
>plug I think. And a 16v 2y tranny.
> Duly humbled.
>Chris
>On 5/17/05, Dan Bubb <jdbubb@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>
>
>>Well, it's time to be the tech dick ;^)
>>Maybe you had a non-stock 16V gearbox with taller ratios, but in the past
>>we've been all over this. Taller ratios won't give you a higher top speed
>>cause it takes the engine off the power peak. So, I strongly doubt the 143
>>top end with a stock 1.8 16V with modified exhaust.
>>As far as third gear pulling 105, even with the tallest third (1.29 vs.
>>the
>>stock 16V 1.44) you'd be over 7000 RPM which is about 1000 RPM past the
>>power peak, so I kind of doubt that number too.
>>Stock exhaust size for a 16V is about 2". TT sells an upgrade to 2.25".
>>They
>>also sell an upgrade to 2.5", but strongly (strongly!) recommend that it
>>only be used with forced induction engines. So, basically if your exhaust
>>was that big it was hurting the performance of a stock 1.8 16V.
>>Not trying to be a dick. Just stating the basic facts.
>>We went over this about a year ago in some detail. Maybe it's time to dig
>>up
>>all the HP, drag, C of F blah, blah, blah.....again.
>>Dan
>>The insufferable tech dick.
>>
>>
>>----- Original Message -----
>>From: "Chris Bennett" <scirocco16vr32@gmail.com>
>>To: "Allyn" <amalventano1@tds.net>
>>Cc: "Scirocco List" <scirocco-l@scirocco.org>
>>Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2005 9:12 PM
>>Subject: Re: What STEAMS me about Vortex... Sorry... Rant
>>
>>That is a stock 1.8 16v with no cat and no resonator other than the stock
>>muffler. I was absolutely at max full throttle doing actually 143mph. I
>>didn't find out till much later that they make tires that are designed to
>>go
>>that fast. :) I do have a larger diameter exhaust. 2.5 or 2.75 I think. I
>>have the 16v dealer video where they state that the top speed is 122mph on
>>the track. I thought that was pretty funny.
>>It did take a while to get to that speed. I used to be able to pull close
>>to 105 in 3rd gear (maybe that's why I need a head gasket now LOL) I
>>remember the engine going up a little in pitch everytime there was a
>>bump--as the front wheels were leaving the ground. Like I said that was
>>once... I won't ever do that again--at least not in a Scirocco.
>>I have pushed the R32 a little bit and it feels better and worse at the
>>same time. Approaching 100mph you know it with a Scirocco... you know you
>>are going fast. The R32 at 90 feels smoother than the Scirocco does at 60.
>>If I ever get my chip I will see what the R will do out somewhere where
>>there are no cars and it isn't deer season.
>>Reminds me of Rodney Carrington... Talking about hunting deer with a
>>buick... Camoflaged... "start her up real slow..."
>>
>>On 5/17/05, Allyn <amalventano1@tds.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>>That is scary! 110 is scary enough, I don't want to think about
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>150...
>>
>>
>>>>I believe a scirocco with a decent body "kit" to keep its nose down at
>>>>speed while the flow around tit smooth enough would be the way to go.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>But
>>>
>>>
>>>>then again if I were to try somethign like that, Bonneville is the
>>>>
>>>>
>>place
>>
>>
>>>agreed. front and rear spoilers seem to help a bunch. the rieger
>>>
>>>
>>actually
>>
>>
>>>smoothes out when going >100. its funny that the original post mentioned
>>>143, as thats what my speedo read at top end after the 2.0 swap. true
>>>speed
>>>was lower, as i dont have the right speedo gear for my wheel/tire size
>>>(reads ~8% high).
>>>Al
>>>
>>>
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>Scirocco-l mailing list
>>>Scirocco-l@scirocco.org
>>>http://neubayern.net/mailman/listinfo/scirocco-l
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>--
>>Build a man a fire and keep him warm for an evening...
>>Set him on fire, and keep him warm for the rest of his life.
>>_______________________________________________
>>Scirocco-l mailing list
>>Scirocco-l@scirocco.org
>>http://neubayern.net/mailman/listinfo/scirocco-l
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>