Jump to content

Welcome to 205GTIDrivers.com
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
 
 

Photo

Vtr In A 205


  • Please log in to reply
23 replies to this topic

#1
stealth_pug

stealth_pug
  • Drivers
  • 115 posts
Joined: 04 May 2006
  • Location:Leamington Spa
hi, just wandering how difficult a vtr conversion into an xs is. im just thinking about any mechanical problems at the moment as in the actual positioing of the engine
thanks

#2
Sandy

Sandy
  • Pitcrew
  • 4,308 posts
Joined: 21 Oct 2003
  • Location:Nr Truro, Cornwall
Mechanically it's bolt in, but the electrics and providing pressurised fuel complicates it.

#3
d-9

d-9
  • Veterans
  • 2,364 posts
Joined: 05 Jan 2004
  • Location:Gloucester
not worth the hassle, XS engine with mods would be just as good.

#4
Guest_Pugw0t_*

Guest_Pugw0t_*
  • Guests
Joined: --
yeh vtr engines r pretty weak, vts now they've got abit of go.

#5
timmsy19

timmsy19
  • Drivers
  • 1,055 posts
Joined: 02 Jan 2006
  • Name:Graham
  • Location:Eastbourne E.Sussex
dont bother with the vtr its not as quick as an xs even in standard form

#6
stu_woac

stu_woac
  • Drivers
  • 497 posts
Joined: 22 Dec 2004
  • Location:Dawlish, Devon
hmmm if you want to go injection then look for a 1.6 106 rallye engine
or go for the 16v opition, the vtr engine is a good base for modding your get alot more power from it in the future,

ummm they are not a weak engine I dont understand the comment

there isnt much more hassle to put this engine in so dont understand that comment either

so you need a unlocked ecu
and a 205 gti tank and return line wow such a hassle

#7
Sandy

Sandy
  • Pitcrew
  • 4,308 posts
Joined: 21 Oct 2003
  • Location:Nr Truro, Cornwall
To expand a little; getting an unlocked ECU with the engine sounds easy, but often isn't and the looms are often difficult to decipher because the numbers wear off the wires. Fitting the tank is easy in principle, but can be alot of hassle in practice with the age of the pipes and bolts making for lots of breakages. The fuel lines aren't straight forward, because of the brake line on the drivers side on base models gets in the way and using the low pressure hose already there would be ill advised. It's not rocket science, I was pointing out that these are the issues that need to be dealt with. It's up to the person doing it to decide how much hassle that is.

Edited by sandy309, 08 October 2006 - 07:09 PM.


#8
christopher

christopher
  • Drivers
  • 1,918 posts
Joined: 24 Mar 2004
  • Location:Copenhagen, Denmark
Garage View Garage
One could of course transplant the VTR engine and use carbs instead of the standard injection. So the hassle with injection, fuel tank, sender, pump and ECU would all not be needed.

#9
stu_woac

stu_woac
  • Drivers
  • 497 posts
Joined: 22 Dec 2004
  • Location:Dawlish, Devon

To expand a little; getting an unlocked ECU with the engine sounds easy, but often isn't and the looms are often difficult to decipher because the numbers wear off the wires. Fitting the tank is easy in principle, but can be alot of hassle in practice with the age of the pipes and bolts making for lots of breakages. The fuel lines aren't straight forward, because of the brake line on the drivers side on base models gets in the way and using the low pressure hose already there would be ill advised. It's not rocket science, I was pointing out that these are the issues that need to be dealt with. It's up to the person doing it to decide how much hassle that is.


cheers sandy for pointing out why they can be a problem, I couldn't be bothered earlier, having a bit of a bad week so being abit snappy today :)

the return pipe is easy over come by drilling holes and putting new pipe clips to the back of the car

#10
calvinhorse

calvinhorse
  • Drivers+
  • 1,763 posts
Joined: 15 Aug 2006
  • Name:Calvin
  • Location:Derbyshire
or use the xs head and carb on vtr bottom end!! my personal favorite!!

#11
stealth_pug

stealth_pug
  • Drivers
  • 115 posts
Joined: 04 May 2006
  • Location:Leamington Spa
thanks for the replies. I was planning on using carbs to keep it simple. I have an xs engine waiting to be stripped but it went in smoke so not sure if i will be able to use the head. So basically if i use carbs it is a straightforward swop over? The reason i want to do it is that the 205 has been in the garage for 6 months with a blown engine and i just want to put something back in it so i can drive it again and a mate will soon be selling his vtr engine which has only done 20k and runs really well. Im only 19 and will soon have 1 year no claims so can't have much more power or i won't be abe to insure it. What carbs would be best to use? I currently have a 1.4 xs carb and the 1.1 base model carb still or is there anything which would be better?
thanks

#12
Sandy

Sandy
  • Pitcrew
  • 4,308 posts
Joined: 21 Oct 2003
  • Location:Nr Truro, Cornwall
The XS head on the VTR bottom end would give you about 11.2:1 compression ratio, which wouldn't really be suited to distributor ignition and the standard carb from the XS certainly wouldn't be able to fuel it. Sam has been through most of these permeatations and ended up with a reasonably good engine using 40 DCOE carbs and the XSi 106 head. It's still not easy though because the engine mount is an obstacle on the drivers side and the Chadil inlet manifold is pretty rubbish. He ended up on TB's by the end.

#13
stu_woac

stu_woac
  • Drivers
  • 497 posts
Joined: 22 Dec 2004
  • Location:Dawlish, Devon
tee sa english ralle team maing dcoe manifold or the xs that is a straigt v shape, I'mtinkingabout it but dont know yet I'll put a lin u in a bit

#14
Sandy

Sandy
  • Pitcrew
  • 4,308 posts
Joined: 21 Oct 2003
  • Location:Nr Truro, Cornwall
Eh??

If you want to see all the combinations Sam and me have tried, there are details on www.dcoe.net

Edited by sandy309, 10 October 2006 - 06:49 PM.


#15
stu_woac

stu_woac
  • Drivers
  • 497 posts
Joined: 22 Dec 2004
  • Location:Dawlish, Devon
there is a rally team in the uk making dcoe manifolds for the xs head, that are straight and in the v shape

lol who wrote the rubbish b4 hand looks like the germlins were out to play

#16
Sandy

Sandy
  • Pitcrew
  • 4,308 posts
Joined: 21 Oct 2003
  • Location:Nr Truro, Cornwall
Any links or pics, I haven't seen that. I'd go straight to the black top VTR/106 Rallye/XSi/306 1.6 head personally, better ports and bigger valves as it comes.

#17
stu_woac

stu_woac
  • Drivers
  • 497 posts
Joined: 22 Dec 2004
  • Location:Dawlish, Devon
Posted Image

#18
d-9

d-9
  • Veterans
  • 2,364 posts
Joined: 05 Jan 2004
  • Location:Gloucester
or you could fit a standard VTS engined and get 140bhp with a half decent exhaust and filter

*argues with sandy lots*

#19
Sandy

Sandy
  • Pitcrew
  • 4,308 posts
Joined: 21 Oct 2003
  • Location:Nr Truro, Cornwall
That manifold is definately looking better than the Chadil one, but I wouldn't spend money on the XS head when there's a better one available.

The exhaust won't be a simple fit though Doug?

#20
Guest_simran_*

Guest_simran_*
  • Guests
Joined: --
where can i buy one of those inlet manifolds from, and does it get around the problem of fouling the top engine mount, or does that need to be modified/a new one made to allow that manifold to fit? quite interested.