Have i made the worst choice??

18th March 2011, 21:30

I have a saxo 16v but i have put a vtr gearbox on as i didnt have a vts one when i had the engine dropped in. Question is have i gone wrong asin worst for performance? Some say the vtr box does more top end with a longer rev range and other say it slows the car down top end. Can anybody explain. Mine is abit sluggish off the mark.

18th March 2011, 21:33

don't know mate

18th March 2011, 21:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by Railroader

don't know mate

why post then!

the only thing you will suffer on is acceleration other than that the vtr box is fine on the vts some people really like it some hate it its all down to how you drive and the sort of driving you do.

18th March 2011, 21:39

Found this on a thread from 2004 for you mate,
Your vtr box as it is much shorter cut resulting is some wicked accel times,only draw back is that u will use abit of fuel crusing at 110mph but drop it to 80-90mph and it should be cool,thats only on long journeys. hear are a list of the gear ratios

954 cc and 1124 cc
1st===3.417:1
2nd===1.180:1
3rd===1.276:1
4th===1.026:1
5th===0.767:1
rev===2.500:1
final drive===4.286:1

1360 cc
1st===3.636:1
2nd===1.950:1
3rd===1.276:1
4th===1.026:1
5th===0.767:1
rev===2.500:1
final drive===3.765:1

1587 cc (vtr)
1st===3.417:1
2nd===1.810:1
3rd===1.276:1
4th===1.026:1
5th===0.767:1
rev===2.500:1
final drive===3.765:1

1587 cc (vts)
1st===3.417:1
2nd===1.950:1
3rd===1.360:1
4th===1.050:1
5th===0.850:1
rev===2.500:1
final drive===3.938:1

18th March 2011, 21:44

So first gear is no different... Mine seems to be sluggish abit low revs. I do agree with with it using more petrol over 100mph!! i can sit at 70-80mph and it dont use much at all.

18th March 2011, 21:48

Well i was shocked when i saw that as well cos it says 1.4 furio box is better than a VTR

18th March 2011, 21:51

I did have a 1.4 box :'( it got thrown away. I have a vtr box on at the moment and a 1.1 if i was to ever need it. What gearbox would be better all round like off the mark and fuel economy at around 80mph? Im guessing a 16v box?

18th March 2011, 21:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by citroen_saxo_vtr

I did have a 1.4 box :'( it got thrown away. I have a vtr box on at the moment and a 1.1 if i was to ever need it. What gearbox would be better all round like off the mark and fuel economy at around 80mph? Im guessing a 16v box?

yeah id say a VTS chap

18th March 2011, 21:57

Trouble is finding one! its not to bad to find a vts or gti breaking but theres nothing to say it hasnt had a vtr box fitted to it before lol. As far as im aware theres no way to identify what gearboxes are what is there??

18th March 2011, 21:59

saxospares is the man to ask, he breaks and scraps saxos

18th March 2011, 22:01

cleared things up for me too, cheers guys

18th March 2011, 22:04

you're looking at roughly 15% reduction in 'in gear acceleration' (that's just in 2nd though) using a VTR box over a VTS.

18th March 2011, 22:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by adsayer

you're looking at roughly 15% reduction in 'in gear acceleration' (that's just in 2nd though) using a VTR box over a VTS.

So by using a vtr box you loose a fair bit of power basically through all gears? A vts will be quicker than me off the mark until mine hit higher revs then they will sit together happy but never really tried it top end, i dont fancy sitting next to someone at high speeds.

18th March 2011, 22:34

You won't gain anything in top speed or time to top speed dude. The only thing you'll gain is higher mpg if you're at a constant 70 on the motorway.

18th March 2011, 22:39

As said all the way up this...

Most people swear by S lump with R box

R box will be shorter i imagine, since the S lumps got more power (citaaation neeeeded)

18th March 2011, 22:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oc2

As said all the way up this...

Most people swear by S lump with R box

R box will be shorter i imagine, since the S lumps got more power (citaaation neeeeded)

Always thought r box was longer...

18th March 2011, 22:58

strip the boxes, put the 1.1 final drive in the vtr box, should be the same as a 1.4 xsi box then

20th March 2011, 02:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by Furio-Gazza

Found this on a thread from 2004 for you mate,
Your vtr box as it is much shorter cut resulting is some wicked accel times,only draw back is that u will use abit of fuel crusing at 110mph but drop it to 80-90mph and it should be cool,thats only on long journeys. hear are a list of the gear ratios

954 cc and 1124 cc
1st===3.417:1
2nd===1.180:1
3rd===1.276:1
4th===1.026:1
5th===0.767:1
rev===2.500:1
final drive===4.286:1

1360 cc
1st===3.636:1
2nd===1.950:1
3rd===1.276:1
4th===1.026:1
5th===0.767:1
rev===2.500:1
final drive===3.765:1

1587 cc (vtr)
1st===3.417:1
2nd===1.810:1
3rd===1.276:1
4th===1.026:1
5th===0.767:1
rev===2.500:1
final drive===3.765:1

1587 cc (vts)
1st===3.417:1
2nd===1.950:1
3rd===1.360:1
4th===1.050:1
5th===0.850:1
rev===2.500:1
final drive===3.938:1

No figures for 1.3 Rallye gearbox?

20th March 2011, 03:20

R box is longer.

Ive had an S box in a VTR and I wish I hadn't.

If anything, id want to do what youve done and use an R box in a VTS.

You may suffer on acceleration... but you sail past laughing while everyone else is messing with gears

20th March 2011, 13:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by outrage_uk

R box is longer.

Ive had an S box in a VTR and I wish I hadn't.

If anything, id want to do what youve done and use an R box in a VTS.

You may suffer on acceleration... but you sail past laughing while everyone else is messing with gears

Thats the fun part i like, it dont go until 2500rpm then takes off all the way, i can sit next to a vtr in first off the mark and it will get away quicker but soon as i hit that power band im straight next to it and still in second when he has to change up. Its weird. For some odd reason my ecu has been restricted to 6250rpm!! it is a vts ecu.