NormanCoal

I have done a similar thing, I measured the bearings, 16v and VR6, and found no difference

As has been stated above, the only difference between the 2.8 and the 2.9 is the bore/piston size - all the 12v VR6 rods are the same

all the 12v VR6 cylinder heads are the same, no differences at all, not even the cams

If you are after a wider track than the current 3 stud setup that is on your rado, get some wishbones and driveshafts from a 4 stud MK3 Golf, or a passat (F-N reg). This allow all your current stuff to fit as per normal, but will give you a wider track, circa 16mm per side. If you arent wanting to change the stud pattern of the wheels, this is a much easier solution!

That very much depends on what you are trying to acheive - give us some more detail, and I or others should be able to help

the hub is commonly used as a term for the whole lot. If you are thinking of putting a 5 stud flange into a 4 stud hub, then yes, this does work

...has already been given. Mat noticed a big difference in the car despite it being unmapped and pinking, a difference that I also noticed when I went out for a passenger ride with him. Without trying to flame here - since my question was posted, Mat hasnt answered it..........my point was that if there was a difference between fitting and before remapping then IMO Will is quite justified in having his opinion that he doesnt rate the Schrick if no discernable difference can be detected on his particular engine. If no difference was noticed from fitting before the remap then the situation would be exactly as Will has described

And the answer to my question Mat?

I think that most people who have been into modifying engines for a period of time realise that you dont get 100% of the benefit by just bolting a performance part onto an engine - by the same idea, in this instance, you would expect to gain something by bolting on a schrick. In this case, Will has seen no gain at all, and I think that is the point of the thread - I dont think that is the norm going on previous results and opinions on this very forum

answer a simple question mat - did you see any difference in the characteristics of your engine directly after you fitted the schrick?

The American MK4 12V got a variable intake like the 24V's ;-) I reckon Schimmel has probably got quite a few lying about his workshop with the amount of turbos he installs :-) Let hear your thoughts on controlling it then Kev - the US 12v doesnt run the same ECU setup as our late 12v's, and the TB is fly by wire isnt it?

Thats a touch harsh isnt it? Someone writing about their personal experience of something shouldnt mean that others should be worried for that reason alone. With anything S/H that hasnt been seen or used before, it can happen that the experience isnt all positive

Thats interesting to know - time to open it up and see whats happening then Will

From a passengers point of view at lunchtime, (and regularly being in the car) I couldnt say that I noticed any difference to be honest. Maybe there is an issue somewhere - perhaps the flap isnt being moved inside, although it appears to be from the actuating rod

What made you choose equal sizes front and rear? The way I understand the effects of these bars is to run bigger on the rear than the front - considering Neuspeed only make a 25mm front bar for VR fitment, I would only have fitted a 28mm rear - and that is what I have had fitted. Yes its stiff on the road, but I dont drive much on really bad roads. Smooth surfaces on track will lessen any problems of big ARB's, but the only benefit of bigger ARB's on track is that they dont require the same level of poundage in the springs to get the same effects on the handling Gary, if you want some technical help and experience, Monseuir Eyre is the guy to talk to Chris

He'd be hard pushed to use a VR ARB on a 4 stud car :-P - on a serious note, you be wanting to take a look at suspension in terms of spring rates and dampers that will cope with that. If you want to play with ARB's then try the H&R rear and a G60 23mm at the front - your Golf has always had a tendancy to steer from the rear, so any less than what you have at the moment (a 25mm right?) and you are going to have more oversteer problems - but you knew that already right........

Nope!

Make me an offer on my one, about to break a passat vr

As Kev says the golf and rado VR boxes are exactly the same, they run the same CCM code gearbox.

the key is coded to the reader, and then the ECU is matched. As long as the key and reader match, then it is possible to recode another ECU to work, as long as it is exactly the same type of ECU - bear in mind there are lots of variations over the years

what was that variation Sparkz?

I know of a delivery mileage one that went for £400, but that was including lots of the associated bits as well. The shifter is different, and notwithstanding what others have posted above about problems, there is also the issue of the casing not having the holes to mount an 02A type mount to it - it is mounting via the chassis leg on a MK5, so there is no holes for the bracket to mount to

Cos I'm in a pernickity mood :oops: the ABV 2.9 came in all VR syncro's, be those Golf or Passat - so it is possible to get a 2.9 OBD2 engine

If I were to hazard a guess, I would say that your ECU is pre AF code, one of the very early coil packed versions, and this is a big part of your problems I suspect

5*100 are actually 323mm (as in the Leon Brembo's)