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!
 
 

Front Subframe Compatabilty


  • Please log in to reply
14 replies to this topic

#1
Guest_rmilbank_*

Guest_rmilbank_*
  • Guests
Joined: --
Hi im new to the forum and can see you guys obviously know your Pugs.

Im after some advice- i want to fit either a 1.6 or 1.9 GTi front subframe (hubs, subframe, lower arms, ARB the lot) on my 205. I have a 1400 with an MA Box. Are the shafts from either the 1.6 or 1.9 compatible with the gearbox. Also are there any other things i need to think about?

Cheers

Rich

#2
Sandy

Sandy
  • Pitcrew
  • 4,308 posts
Joined: 21 Oct 2003
  • Location:Nr Truro, Cornwall
The easiest way is to keep the TU hubs and shafts, then fit 1.9 brakes complete and subframe/wishbones, the latter requires the gear linkage post to be moved and the ARB drop links can foul the brake pipe brackets if you use it. Personally I prefer not to have the front ARB.

#3
swordfish210

swordfish210
  • Drivers
  • 2,374 posts
Joined: 02 Jan 2007
  • Name:Mark
  • Location:Bath
I'm running a 1.9 subframe on my TU engined 205 and as said the gear linkage post needs to be cut off, shortened a bit, moved and rewelded to the subframe in order for it to work properly. Again, yes you can keep the standard hubs and driveshafts. As for the brakes, the 1.6 or the 1.9 brakes will fit.

#4
Guest_rmilbank_*

Guest_rmilbank_*
  • Guests
Joined: --
Cheers sandy.

The only real reason for the subframe is strength. I want to use the car for road rallying. I was not sure of the quality of the shafts on the 1400, especially if i choose to fit a LSD. As for the TCA i have already managed to make one bend like a banana on an Endurance rally.

Are there uprated shafts on the market for 1400's and maybe beefier/even rose jointed TCA's?

#5
bren_1.3

bren_1.3
  • Drivers
  • 1,057 posts
Joined: 19 Apr 2004
  • Location:Blackpool @ home. Manchester @ uni

Cheers sandy.

The only real reason for the subframe is strength. I want to use the car for road rallying. I was not sure of the quality of the shafts on the 1400, especially if i choose to fit a LSD. As for the TCA i have already managed to make one bend like a banana on an Endurance rally.

Are there uprated shafts on the market for 1400's and maybe beefier/even rose jointed TCA's?


no uprated shafts, no uprated TCA's on the market. (bar the inner bushes)

a diff and 85hp xs/rallye isnt about to start snapping shafts... if the CV joints are knackered thats a different story.

a gti subframe allows you to run the gti suspension setup. if you chose that route, you can uprate the wishbones for rose jointed ones should you wish.

#6
Guest_rmilbank_*

Guest_rmilbank_*
  • Guests
Joined: --
Cheers Bren_1.3 can see what ur saying about the 85bhp and shafts. So is the only trouble with running the ARB, with the fixing of it to the damper and brake fouling? Is this the body mounted bracket?

I would be running GTi dampers and 1 piece braided lines to master cylinder so guess the fouling would be avoidable if bracket removed?

Does the master cylinder need uprating when using the 1.9 Calipers to avoid a long pedal?

#7
johnnyboy666

johnnyboy666
  • Drivers
  • 2,068 posts
Joined: 10 Feb 2007
  • Name:John
  • Location:Airdrie, North Lanarkshire
Garage View Garage
bren 1.3 - i have been contemplating those poly bushes for when i swap to 309 tca's have you used them/would you recomend them? i was thinking it would be worth fitting purely on the fact that they should last longer, but if theres any other advantages or disadvantages anybody knows of that would be nice to know??
(sorry for the slight hijack :unsure: )

#8
Guest_rmilbank_*

Guest_rmilbank_*
  • Guests
Joined: --
I have Ti Motorsport bushes on my front end. They tighten it up nice and definatly there is a difference...

#9
bren_1.3

bren_1.3
  • Drivers
  • 1,057 posts
Joined: 19 Apr 2004
  • Location:Blackpool @ home. Manchester @ uni
personally no.... ive never used the base model setup! ive only ever had a 205 euro rallye which comes with the gti suspension as standard and then a gti shell with a TU engine in it. :unsure:

Jrod sold/gave away a set recently. ive no doubt they tighten everything up as rmilbank says but maybe he could shed some light on their durability compared to o.e inner bushes.

uprated polybushes for the gti wishbones are generally considered (on here) to have a shorter lifespan than their o.e equivalents...

#10
Guest_rmilbank_*

Guest_rmilbank_*
  • Guests
Joined: --
My bushes have done quite a few events and have been swapped between arms on 2 occasions and still give good performance. Worth every penny IMHO.

#11
Jrod

Jrod
  • Veterans
  • 3,326 posts
Joined: 04 Apr 2006
  • Name:Jordan
  • Location:Portsmouth, Hampshire
I much preffered it with Ti poly bushes.

#12
Sandy

Sandy
  • Pitcrew
  • 4,308 posts
Joined: 21 Oct 2003
  • Location:Nr Truro, Cornwall
I've used base model arms for years. The only trouble with them is that they weren't really designed to articulate well at lower ride height, so the bushes are always a bit twisted and bind up. The wishbones are fine however.

#13
johnnyboy666

johnnyboy666
  • Drivers
  • 2,068 posts
Joined: 10 Feb 2007
  • Name:John
  • Location:Airdrie, North Lanarkshire
Garage View Garage
It was the ti motorsport ones that i was looking at, although there wasnt a price on the website - i think i'll give them a ring and see if my budget allows it lol
sandy- im not a fan of uber-low ride height anyway, my front setup at the moment is suposedly -40mm but i think its more and its really not great - hopefully, if the gaz group buy is still running after newyear then i might go for the gha's to sort that out. also the majority of my favorite roads dont really forgive a low ride height!

#14
Sandy

Sandy
  • Pitcrew
  • 4,308 posts
Joined: 21 Oct 2003
  • Location:Nr Truro, Cornwall
No, i'm not into low low either, I was referring to sensible lowering, about 40mm like mine is currently.

#15
Jrod

Jrod
  • Veterans
  • 3,326 posts
Joined: 04 Apr 2006
  • Name:Jordan
  • Location:Portsmouth, Hampshire
I was using mine at standard height. :ph34r: