I have been offered a mk3 golf with a 20v turbo in. I am in a predicament as I only do about 40 miles a week in the Fabia, so economy is not a factor. Am I ruining my fabia, its an 05 and has done 66k.

Would people have the golf even though its older or stick with the vrs.

I need some divine intervention.

Each will be fun to drive although in different ways, each can be made to go, stop and handle with a little investment so, I suppose it's all down to personal preference. I've always liked the way diesels go, right from the off, the low down grunt but, there is fun to be had with the 20 v Turbo too. As I said, personal preference is what it's all about!

Did the MK3 come with the 1.8T?

I had a MK4 GTi T for ages. Hands down the most reliable car I've ever owned. Performance quite average but decent enough to have some fun whilst returning reasonable fuel economy.

Mark 3's are getting pretty long in the tooth now, you don't mention mileage, condition or history on the Golf.

The mk3 has been converted but he was a vag tech so I know its been done properly. I need to go look at it I suppose

Hi what is the spec of the engine on the 1.8t ? its likely to be cable throttle from an early mk4 gti which will be 150bhp as stock with the ko3 turbo=200 bhp with a remap, if it has the ko3s turbo and sports cat/de cat and a decent front mount intercooler and a jumbo tip (turbo intake pipe) it will hit 250 bhp with a decent stage 2 re map .

 

Insurance will be expensive on a modified car like that if u like the 1.8t I would go for an octy mk1 vrs they are great cars and fairly cheap now and come with the ko3s turbo as standard and 180 bhp and then with just a stage 1 remap 210 bhp 

Better the devil you know.

Stick with the Fabia. The Mk3 Golf is aguably the worst Golf of all time. I have owned two including a GTI and felt no love for either of them. The Fabia is in a different league in my opinion.

The biggest problem with the mk3 was that it was overweight and underpowered even more so with the mk4 and also just like a standard vrs.

Whilst the mk3 was nothing even remotely special, with a 1.8t sitting up front it is a different beast altogether tuneable, an abundance of parts and very good reliability.

Go for it if you don't like it just sell it.

Edited 17 December, 201411 yr by theezenutz

Still handles like a bucket of vomit though, at least the 1.8T is relatively light for its power, I still can't see any advantage, the VRS has so much more torque, the 1.8T just revs quicker and uses tons of fuel.

Still has a better power to weight ratio if you take the 2.0 16v version and whilst the vrs is torquey it's very short and sweet, the abf lump is a fantastic engine and arguably the 1.8t is better.

It may well handle like a boat but I've probably read dozens of posts saying exactly the same about the fabia.

You can make a car handle better than when it left the factory

Edited 17 December, 201411 yr by theezenutz

I totally agree, the 16v ABF is a proper engine, the 20v was a backwards step, if you put the same turbo from a 1.8T onto an ABF it makes more power over a wider range due to the superior head geometry and wider choice of cam profiles.

There is no argument, the ABF is hands down a better engine.

Going to the garage in the next few days to look at it. Its running a few mods like intetcooler, exhaust and ecu. Theoretically its low 200s for bhp. Think insurance will be the biggest factor, even though I am 36.

I totally agree, the 16v ABF is a proper engine, the 20v was a backwards step, if you put the same turbo from a 1.8T onto an ABF it makes more power over a wider range due to the superior head geometry and wider choice of cam profiles.

There is no argument, the ABF is hands down a better engine.

Yes the abf engine is very good but to say the 1.8t is a backward step is a bit harsh, thats like saying the abf was a disappointment compared to the kr that came before it because with 0.2 litre bigger engine and a few years development it only gained 10 more horses. Heck that was about the same time Honda brought out the S2000 with 240bhp from a 2.0 n/a now that's impressive.

 

The engine was not the problem it was cars they built around it that was a disappointing, the engine is very popular and in it's true form mainly the bam 225 version is very good.

 

Here's good read http://www.torquecars.com/audi/18t-tuning.php

Edited 17 December, 201411 yr by theezenutz

Yes the abf engine is very good but to say the 1.8t is a backward step is a bit harsh, thats like saying the abf was a disappointment compared to the kr that came before it because with 0.2 litre bigger engine and a few years development it only gained 10 more horses. Heck that was about the same time Honda brought out the S2000 with 240bhp from a 2.0 n/a now that's impressive.

 

The engine was not the problem it was cars they built around it that was a disappointing, the engine is very popular and in it's true form mainly the bam 225 version is very good.

 

Here's good read http://www.torquecars.com/audi/18t-tuning.php

 

Dude, please.

 

I really know what I'm talking about here, the reason the 20v was a backwards step was because the inlet valve lifters are so small, this means that net valve lift is limited by the size of the radius of the cam lobe while giving no noticeable increase in effective inlet valve area over the 16v, the inlet valves in the ABF are larger and the lifters too.

Inlet valve area is really the only significant factor in determining the power potential of an engine, capacity is irrelevant. There are many 1.6 engines which will comfortably outperform the old 2.8 VR6 engine for this reason.

 

To summarise, there are NO advantages to the 20v configuration over 16v but there ARE disadvantages. That silly sales article appears not to mention these very important facts!

 

Of the list of cars in your sig. the SR20DET is the best designed engine by far, MASSIVELY superior to any VAG rubbish.

 

Ok?

Dude, please.

 

I really know what I'm talking about here, the reason the 20v was a backwards step was because the inlet valve lifters are so small, this means that net valve lift is limited by the size of the radius of the cam lobe while giving no noticeable increase in effective inlet valve area over the 16v, the inlet valves in the ABF are larger and the lifters too.

Inlet valve area is really the only significant factor in determining the power potential of an engine, capacity is irrelevant. There are many 1.6 engines which will comfortably outperform the old 2.8 VR6 engine for this reason.

 

To summarise, there are NO advantages to the 20v configuration over 16v but there ARE disadvantages. That silly sales article appears not to mention these very important facts!

 

Of the list of cars in your sig. the SR20DET is the best designed engine by far, MASSIVELY superior to any VAG rubbish.

 

Ok?

Indeed the SR20DET is a wonderful engine the japs have done wonders to car development.

 

I'm not trying to say i know more than  you but never the less they are still good engines a 16v turbo will make more power hence the reason vag have moved to 2.0t in the latest generation.

The 1.8t is a good engine decent economy, very tunable and very reliable why they used it over the 2.0 i don't know, it seems like it was a finacial decision maybe, never the less they sold plenty of them. So as far as engine choices go it's a tried and trusted engine that has been used in many a car.

 

Have a look on youtube for Reeves mk1. He uses a 1.8t to devastating effect. Oh and in their mk2 as well.

Edited 17 December, 201411 yr by theezenutz

My willies bigger than yours.

To the op, I'd avoid the mk3 golf, I'm another hater for them.

My willies bigger than yours.

 

We KNOW that isn't true 

I have been offered a mk3 golf with a 20v turbo in. I am in a predicament as I only do about 40 miles a week in the Fabia, so economy is not a factor. Am I ruining my fabia, its an 05 and has done 66k.

Would people have the golf even though its older or stick with the vrs.

I need some divine intervention.

 

Don't do it... eventually you'll find yourself with either a broken or a very niche car. Without the kudos of a Corrado 1.8T - for example. You may be better off with a tuned smaller car/engine. Maybe a Swift GTI?