VTS v VTS

24th June 2007, 09:01

Right need someone to clear this up, I have some people saying the 130bmp vts is the old shape and i have others saying its the new shape. Yet parkers say there both 120bhp?

wtf is this all about?

PLEASE HELP!

24th June 2007, 09:30

This come up very often and is very easy to clear up.

All VTS 16v Twin Cams all produced 120bhp (give or take a pony or two), there was no major mods made to the engine or ecu to gain more performance between the Phase1 and Phase2.

The only model whichs bhp changed over the years was the VTR 8v Single Cam, which came in a 90bhp and a 98bhp.

Who ever says there was a factory 130bhp VTS Clearly doesnt know what they are talking about and should be pointed out to them that they are confused, its up to you if you slap them or not

I personally would

Also there is no 106GTi 16v Twin Cam that was 130bhp as it was pretty much the same lump as the VTS just with Puegeot badges instead of Citroen badges

24th June 2007, 11:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by VTS_16v_Boy

This come up very often and is very easy to clear up.

All VTS 16v Twin Cams all produced 120bhp (give or take a pony or two), there was no major mods made to the engine or ecu to gain more performance between the Phase1 and Phase2.

The only model whichs bhp changed over the years was the VTR 8v Single Cam, which came in a 90bhp and a 98bhp.

Who ever says there was a factory 130bhp VTS Clearly doesnt know what they are talking about and should be pointed out to them that they are confused, its up to you if you slap them or not

I personally would

Also there is no 106GTi 16v Twin Cam that was 130bhp as it was pretty much the same lump as the VTS just with Puegeot badges instead of Citroen badges

there was a slight change in the engines on the vts over the years.

the 130bhp 16v engine debate started with the 2 prong head which is supposed to give 6% better flow rate than the old 16v head according to bench tests.

24th June 2007, 12:37

oh dear! you don't know what your about to start now!

Elliot (bullit) has a standard 130bhp VTS!....... apparently

24th June 2007, 12:43

There are loads of different arguments. Chiefly, that the head design got better over time, which is true and proved by QEP.

On the flip side emmisions laws got tougher too. I think it's fair to say that you may get a slight more out of an W or X plater (Y plates on got different emmisons regs) but I doubt it's much at all

24th June 2007, 13:01

lol at the end of round 1, there is no telling the outcome!

Haha

24th June 2007, 13:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by VTS_16v_Boy

All VTS 16v Twin Cams all produced 120bhp (give or take a pony or two)

That give or take a Pony or 2 sums it up perfectly, any difference would be so minimal, hence why on manufacturors figures they give 120bhp for both.

130bhp is pure and simply a myth

24th June 2007, 15:10

Like stated above, the two pronged head was meant to have produced a tad more than standard on a few cars so They rounded it up to 130 and decided it was the special 130 version :-)

24th June 2007, 15:16

How can you identify a 2 prong head?

I've had 2 Xreg S's & my first had more kick as standard as my 2nd one does with full exhaust/manifold & breathing mods. I have nothing on paper to prove this though so i'v just notched it down to getting used to the feel of the S

24th June 2007, 16:06

I'm not sure about this flow rate malarky, but there's some difference in performance when it comes to tuning. Many of you may know of Wayne (Chipwizards) and his day in, day out of tuning Saxo's and 106's... Well, he's found that with the 708's and re-map, the older models actually make better figures. The only thing he can put it down to is the fact that the new models have the EGR valve... As far as I know, there's no other difference.

24th June 2007, 18:09

well my dads got a mk1 vts and ive got a mk2 vts they both have been chipped and honestly i think the mk1 is faster but the mk2 seems more reliable as my dads keeps breaking lol !

24th June 2007, 18:24

theyre all the same tbh just depends on the sort of life theyve had.

24th June 2007, 18:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toad

I'm not sure about this flow rate malarky, but there's some difference in performance when it comes to tuning. Many of you may know of Wayne (Chipwizards) and his day in, day out of tuning Saxo's and 106's... Well, he's found that with the 708's and re-map, the older models actually make better figures. The only thing he can put it down to is the fact that the new models have the EGR valve... As far as I know, there's no other difference.

qep bench tested the head to find the improved airflow dude. they said there was a 6% better flow rate

a 2 prong head with an old bottom end is said to give the best of both, as its the 3 plug ecu/egr that effects the power.

and whoever said how do they identify a 2 prong head.

its easy thees to prongs in the head above the exhaust manifold

24th June 2007, 20:41

OK, hairy muff...

25th June 2007, 08:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by willsy

That give or take a Pony or 2 sums it up perfectly, any difference would be so minimal, hence why on manufacturors figures they give 120bhp for both.

130bhp is pure and simply a myth

Cheers

Quote:

Originally Posted by lil-daz-vts

well my dads got a mk1 vts and ive got a mk2 vts they both have been chipped and honestly i think the mk1 is faster but the mk2 seems more reliable as my dads keeps breaking lol !

Well I think the Phase1 is slightly slightly lighter than a Phase2 and also has the smaller 14' rims which might give it a slightly better 0-60mph time compaired to a Phase2 but mainly it goes on what Karl says below

Quote:

Originally Posted by Soulless

theyre all the same tbh just depends on the sort of life theyve had.

Spot on mate

25th June 2007, 12:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by CampDavid

There are loads of different arguments. Chiefly, that the head design got better over time, which is true and proved by QEP.

On the flip side emmisions laws got tougher too. I think it's fair to say that you may get a slight more out of an W or X plater (Y plates on got different emmisons regs) but I doubt it's much at all

I agree with this comment. I have a W reg and it was noticeably quicker than my friends 02 reg VTS (both standard at the time).

Its down to the better head but none of the new engine emission restrictions.

25th June 2007, 13:03

No! Negative! Incorrect!

IF there, and it's a big IF! ...was ANY difference ANYWAY, you wouldn't notice it.

25th June 2007, 13:47

Dunno, seen a fair few figures supporting this claim.. Just wish i'd saved the pics off the RR graphs so I could show you.

But as you say there's not going to be huge difference.

25th June 2007, 13:53

Far to many variable to to be honest, but Id Just like to ask . . .

Why didnt we just stop at:

NO THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A VTS 130bhp

25th June 2007, 14:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by Itsafastworld85

qep bench tested the head to find the improved airflow dude. they said there was a 6% better flow rate

a 2 prong head with an old bottom end is said to give the best of both, as its the 3 plug ecu/egr that effects the power.

and whoever said how do they identify a 2 prong head.

its easy thees to prongs in the head above the exhaust manifold

That makes sense i suppose then. Since the "130bhp" saxos are somewhere amongst the W and X reg where the horrible mess of the mark change happened. Its possible that these were still using the old style bottom end combined with the new 2 prong head & runing on a single plug ECU?

Hmm

25th June 2007, 14:12

Arg! Stop. No more pain! Pleeeeease. All are the same same same same same same same same same same same same same same same same same same same same same same same same same same same same same same same same same same same same same same same same same same same same same same same same same same same same same same ! ! !

25th June 2007, 14:17

How are they when some have different ECU's and the ERG valve and different head gaskets and according to QEP different headflow rates. In my book that doesn't class as the same same same

25th June 2007, 14:18

If we all agreed then life would be boring... a good long well documentated mystery is good for us

If someone offered me 10 horses on a plate for free, id argue till everyone accepd that id been given them

25th June 2007, 14:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mystic

Its possible that these were still using the old style bottom end combined with the new 2 prong head & runing on a single plug ECU?

Hmm

Dont know about bottom end but mines got the new style head and a single plug ecu.

I never claimed 10hp, I'm not even that bothered I just agree with the fact that there are variations between the different year's engines.

25th June 2007, 14:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by mardon

Dont know about bottom end but mines got the new style head and a single plug ecu.

Yeh the bottom end was just a guess but the W and early X reg seem to technically have more in common with the mk1's than the mk2's

25th June 2007, 14:23

Yeah they do. The only difference 106 wise is the digital dash and a few silver trim bits inside.

Isn't there a difference in tax between the models as well. Sure my mate was playing more on his 02 reg.

25th June 2007, 14:24

later 2001 onward model (later model X reg onwards) cars pay tax based on emissions too

25th June 2007, 14:25

Oh boy, lol!

I give up!

It's like a bunch of pirates in search for lost treasure. Hehe. I like these sorts of things, but I don't see the value in this perticular one.

To have driven 2 GTIs, and find one quicker than the other, and then base your descision on whether which series of production has more power, is laughable. LooooooooooooL!

25th June 2007, 14:27

In all the pirate movies i've seen the lost treasure was real... it was simply lost

25th June 2007, 14:38

Ryans gona jump me but Im gona say it anyway.

Doesnt mean jack! Look at Mk3 XR2i's, early ones had the same 8v CVH as the Mk2 XR2s but Ford replaced the Carb with EFi 110bhp outa Dagenham or somewhere, later they changed the 8v CVH for the first of the 16v Zetec engines and up'd the cc from 1600 up to 1800 and also threw in another cam.

1800 Twin Cam 16v you'd think thata destroy a 8v CVH . . . Wrong the Zetec put out a amzaing 110bhp

Only the later XR3i's and the RS1800 with different throttle bodies and few other minor changes made 130bhp and that was on the optomistic side.

So it is possible to change things and not make extra bhp, besides if they had made a more powerfull model dont you think they would have shooted about it and asked for more money

VTS_16v_Boy ducks for cover incase itsafastworld turns up and bets him with a large stick for mentioning Fords on a Saxo Forum

25th June 2007, 17:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by VTS_16v_Boy

Ryans gona jump me but Im gona say it anyway.

Doesnt mean jack! Look at Mk3 XR2i's, early ones had the same 8v CVH as the Mk2 XR2s but Ford replaced the Carb with EFi 110bhp outa Dagenham or somewhere, later they changed the 8v CVH for the first of the 16v Zetec engines and up'd the cc from 1600 up to 1800 and also threw in another cam.

1800 Twin Cam 16v you'd think thata destroy a 8v CVH . . . Wrong the Zetec put out a amzaing 110bhp

Only the later XR3i's and the RS1800 with different throttle bodies and few other minor changes made 130bhp and that was on the optomistic side.

So it is possible to change things and not make extra bhp, besides if they had made a more powerfull model dont you think they would have shooted about it and asked for more money

VTS_16v_Boy ducks for cover incase itsafastworld turns up and bets him with a large stick for mentioning Fords on a Saxo Forum

once again using fords as an example! when will you learn that when talking about the TU engine using a ford example means fuck all!

as i said CLEARLY the first time QEP BENCH TESTED! the heads and found 2 prong heads give 6% on average better airflow.

no everyone please stop with the crap

end of argument over!

wheres the lock key

25th June 2007, 17:06

I dont know whether to LOL or

25th June 2007, 17:37

Quote:

once again using fords as an example! when will you learn that when talking about the TU engine using a ford example means fuck all!

as i said CLEARLY the first time QEP BENCH TESTED! the heads and found 2 prong heads give 6% on average better airflow.

no everyone please stop with the crap

end of argument over!

wheres the lock key

so what are you trying to say

25th June 2007, 17:50

why, have you lost yours ryan