80 estate 2.0 petrol - Page 2

vorsprung durch technik · 08-06-18, 11:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peacedub

I see some debating going on so i'll join in on the action. The 16v is a fantastic engine, the only thing that lets it down is the injection system. Skip a couple of years to the revamped ABF 16v with digifant and hands down this is one of the best engines of that era. I drive a 16v ACE in my coupe that has been tuned and running straight through exhaust. It is by far quicker than my 2.6 V6 avant, but this is a cruising vehicle and I don't wish to kick the ass out of it. The 2.0 8v is ok but not in the heavy Audi's. In the mk2 golfs I preferred the 1.8 8v to the 16v kr. Much more responsive low down and with a 272 cam it redlined all day long.

I see these Audi's as cruising mobiles, I don't think they are built for thrashing. Even in the S2's you have to think about the corners etc and are not as poised as the light hatchbacks.

Your comparing apples with oranges ie ACE and BMF.

A standard 16v ACE needs to be revved hard to get it's 0-60 time of 9.6 where as the V6 is quicker to 60 (check the figures) and soooooooooo much smooooooother.

What's your modified ACE 16V Coupe pumping out?

Peacedub · 08-06-18, 12:09 PM

It's all about preference, I was choosing the 16v over the 8v, and also the v6. I have (your old V6) and I chose that as it will be a cruiser, I don't hate them it's just not my preference, if there was a 16v avant I'd have that instead. I find it's a happy medium between the 2. 16v has ok economy and more power than the 8v. The v6 in my opinion is underpowered and thirsty. I've had both 2.6 and 2.8, both have never felt as quick as my 16v but the sound of the 90 degree v6 can't be beat.

I'm not sure what it's running but it's had a metering head overhaul, inlet and tb ported and an ecu tweak to suit

vorsprung durch technik · 08-06-18, 01:13 PM

Exactly V6's don't feel that quick until you look at the speedo.

My old Crystal silver 2.6 avant now yours managed 500 miles on one single tank

back in 2001
using the M25 M11,A11 A140 up to Croma running around on that weekend and back. Unbelievable for a V6 and
at least 200 miles more than the 2.0i seirra it replaced. Soooo much quicker, silent and a joy to drive.

08-06-18, 12:09 PM	#12
Peacedub Grown up member Classic Audi Club Member Join Date: Oct 2015 Location: Ilkeston, Derbyshire Posts: 142	It's all about preference, I was choosing the 16v over the 8v, and also the v6. I have (your old V6) and I chose that as it will be a cruiser, I don't hate them it's just not my preference, if there was a 16v avant I'd have that instead. I find it's a happy medium between the 2. 16v has ok economy and more power than the 8v. The v6 in my opinion is underpowered and thirsty. I've had both 2.6 and 2.8, both have never felt as quick as my 16v but the sound of the 90 degree v6 can't be beat. I'm not sure what it's running but it's had a metering head overhaul, inlet and tb ported and an ecu tweak to suit

08-06-18, 01:13 PM	#13
vorsprung durch technik 4 ring whore! Classic Audi Club Member Join Date: Feb 2014 Location: Near Watford. Posts: 7,753	Exactly V6's don't feel that quick until you look at the speedo. My old Crystal silver 2.6 avant *now yours* managed 500 miles on one single tank back in 2001 using the M25 M11,A11 A140 up to Croma running around on that weekend and back. Unbelievable for a V6 and at least 200 miles more than the 2.0i seirra it replaced. Soooo much quicker, silent and a joy to drive.