I always thought VW/Audi went to a 5 valve head for emision reasons and not
for performance, might be wrong tho.

Réjean Langis
93 Corrado VR6
[email protected]
http://user.fundy.net/langisr
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mark Radelow" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Cc: <[email protected]>; <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2001 3:37 PM
Subject: Re: OT: 1.8T stuff(my project-for those interested)


> Well Five-Valve technology doesn't mean it's the best.  After all look at
F1
> that TRIED 5-valve heads but after they found out they couldn't get as
good
> of cam profiles and the cylinder filling wasn't that good they went back
to
> four-valve heads.  Regardless if whether the 20v was built for turbo or
not
> I believe the head isn't THAT great for anything other than
turboing...like
> you said :)
>
> Mark
>
>
> From: John Caldwell <[email protected]>
> To: Mark Radelow <[email protected]>
> CC: <[email protected]>,  <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: OT: 1.8T stuff(my project-for those interested)
> Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 12:08:24 -0600 (MDT)
>
> On Wed, 27 Jun 2001, Mark Radelow wrote:
>
>  > I think the jury is still out as to whether the Five-Valve head is
really
>  > that superior to the 4-valve design.  In Europe the normally aspirated
>  > 5-valve 1.8 liter makes approx. 130hp (72hp/liter) compared to the 150
> made
>  > by the 2.0 (75hp/liter).  The 5-valve head has a lot more reciprocating
> mass
>  > in the head along with the rocker design which limits cam profile
design.
>   I
>  > doubt the costs justify the end result.  For me, if I were to turbo a
VW
> I
>  > would use a G60 head.  Same thing, designed for boost and you can
easily
> get
>  > 250 HP out of that motor with a turbo.
>  >
>
> That motor wasn't built to be naturally aspirated.. in the great tradition
> of giving people 9,000 engine choices to put in their golf, some dudes at
> vw and audi said "wouldnt it be cool if we made a NA 20v?"  With the same
> displacement, as you approach max efficiency for a head on the motor, the
> gains arent going to appear that big.  If you could rev a 20v to 10krpms
> or above, I guarantee that it would make more power than a 16v.  That
> whole game changes though when you start cramming air into the motor...
> you don't need to rev it to 10k to get the power out of it.
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
>
> _____________
> List Sponsor: http://www.netsville.com
> To remove yourself from this list, send mail to [email protected]
with 'unsubscribe a2_16v' in the body of your message
> See us on the web at http://www.a2-16v.com
> Visit the 16V Homepage at http://www.gti16v.org
>

_____________
List Sponsor: http://www.netsville.com
To remove yourself from this list, send mail to [email protected] with 
'unsubscribe a2_16v' in the body of your message
See us on the web at http://www.a2-16v.com
Visit the 16V Homepage at http://www.gti16v.org

Reply via email to