Twin wishbones at the front please!

Evening all,

it's nice being on easter, and having a post-dissertation break even if it is just for a couple of days before my engineering life comes crashing back down(!)

I've been looking at the inner front wings / chassis rail area and wondering if it would be strong enough to house an upper set of wishbones.

Yeah I know they'd probably be cack for everyday, the geometry would take some thinking and the balljoints would last about 3.7 minutes but still..

It could be a possibility.

Having said that, is it worth playing with custom suspension on a car that handles so well already?

Wouldn't 2 wishbones half the load? A problem shared is a problem halved and all that I think it would be strong enough personally. If you consider the torque some folk put through the front wheels of these cars and the shell doesn't twist and distort.....

I think Alfa 156s have double wishbones. Maybe have a spin in one first to see if the effort is worthwhile?

Probably too much compromise to get them to fit to make any noticeable improvment to the handling and contact patch under hard loads.

Your best bet would be to try to incorporate something along the lines of the mk 4 setup as that could be made to fit - not sure if it would be worthwhile mind.

A better bet is to replace the rear beam with mk 4/5 kit, although that would make for a very different handling Corrado...

Defo agreed on the MK5 independant rear setup. Are the trailing arms all mounted to a subframe or do they connect to central bracket in the middle of the floor?

When MK5 GTIs are well under £10K these days, it becomes a question of cost - benefit. Potentially cocking up the alignment versus buying the donor car which is setup right in the first place. You would have to REALLY love Corrados to embark on such a project....and then sell it shortly after completion as every one seems to do these days....which I think is quite telling of the results personally

I'd imagine rear independant suspension would mean a lot of strengthening of the boot floor as it's not very thick and certainly not designed to take suspension loads.

What do you mean Kev, about selling so soon after completing? I agree it happens a lot :/

Very few people on the Corrado forum who complete big projects keep their cars for long after completion

In a bid to 'modernise' and improve their cars with R32 engines, Haldex conversions etc etc I think they lose sight of what makes a Corrado a good car, and end up ruining it's character with transplants that don't suit it.

The 24V engine is a classic example. When plonked into a Corrado, it's neither as quick or as nice to drive as people hope for. I think only Pete was happy with his R32 conversion!

Yeah, that makes a lot of sense.

I thought also people did it to recoup some of the ££££'s they spent doing it all, but that never happens! You might get 50% back.

I remember following CoxyLaad's build (Gallarado i think?) and just didn't understand the epic build which later got sold for a few grand. I blame it on their other halves!! LOL.

I mean, no-one has copied my style... no only leaving it as an early 16v but leaving it in the bay when it's down on compression... maybe that will be the next trend :s

boost panda wrote:I'd imagine rear independant suspension would mean a lot of strengthening of the boot floor as it's not very thick and certainly not designed to take suspension loads.

What do you mean Kev, about selling so soon after completing? I agree it happens a lot :/

Maybe not.

The rear floor is similar to the mk2 item which is, in turn, similar to the syncro item - the rear diff on the syncro was hung from the boot floor.

Most of the load for independant rear still goes through the top mount and there would be little point in changing that, it just becomes a case of looking for the best location to mount the lower wishbone and the various tie bars to keep it all in place.

Although as Kev said you need some big cash upfront (although a scrapper/write off that had a front end knock would be cheaper) be fairly handy with welding kit, have a Corrado that you don't mind getting used as an experiment and finally (although often the problem in the UK) somewhere with enough room to do it.

Retrofitting something along the lines of the BMW one series front end kit would work, all the links are ally and you would just need to weld up the tie rods that normally do the steering. Another option would be to take a complete rado front end and shove it on the rear - modify the rear beam brackets to take the front of the subframe and brace accross the lower rear end of the wheel arches to support the rear - then you just need to sort out the exhaust routing

Boost Panda wrote:Yeah, that makes a lot of sense.

I thought also people did it to recoup some of the ££££'s they spent doing it all, but that never happens! You might get 50% back.

I remember following CoxyLaad's build (Gallarado i think?) and just didn't understand the epic build which later got sold for a few grand. I blame it on their other halves!! LOL.

I mean, no-one has copied my style... no only leaving it as an early 16v but leaving it in the bay when it's down on compression... maybe that will be the next trend :s

I reckon they're sold through dissapointment mate, or they run out of money to finish it. Everyone knows modified cars are hard to price and often fetch less than standard ones, so doing projects as an investment is a daft idea.

Coxy got ~£8,500 for his IIRC! And the new owner had a big list of things to put right as well. Which is another forum pet hate of mine. People who go on about how good their car is but leave out the nitty gritty faults. I think we're quite unique on here in not being too ashamed or too proud to mention faults / mistakes!

Phatty and Coxy always used to say how easy it is to fit an R32 engine, but the massive "R32 into Corrado" thread proves otherwise.

Can't beat a valver on K Jet I still really fancy doing another 16V T some day....

Wow, that is strong money for a C!

Yeah I think you're right, I'm sure most people will fess up to the issues as they know someone else has probably had to fix it at some point. There will always be more you can do to a car, that's the funny thing so learning to be happy with what you got is so important imo. Unless you enjoy burning money or your first name is 'Sheikh'.

I do enjoy the Definitive threads on CF, they're great for info. I used to read the 16vT one back in the day, then I heard that 20vTs plug into early looms really easily and my interests shifted! lol. I'd like to do it myself though, and keep the KR too. It would be nice to stay with the original engine, even if most of the parts will be uprated.

Not as strong as £15K for Shaun's Storm Turbo! OK, it was a one owner car with only 15K or so on it (as you'd expect from a car based in Jersey!) but even so..... The guy clearly had a hard-on for it and wanted it, irrespective of cost.

Abso-freakin-lutely on appreciating what you've got! I was very happy with what I had until I wrecked it with my insessant fiddling! I was never motivated by the big hp guys. The technical aspects and making it reliable were more interesting to me than making 1000hp for 5 minutes.

Definitive that changes regularly Yeah they are a good reference for people.

16V T mate, no question. 20 VTs are bland. OK, they make good numbers if built properly but the 16V T is smoother and far more charismatic.....

Yandards wrote:

boost panda wrote:I'd imagine rear independant suspension would mean a lot of strengthening of the boot floor as it's not very thick and certainly not designed to take suspension loads.

What do you mean Kev, about selling so soon after completing? I agree it happens a lot :/

Maybe not.

The rear floor is similar to the mk2 item which is, in turn, similar to the syncro item - the rear diff on the syncro was hung from the boot floor.

I was under the impression (or assumption) that the rallye/syncro boot floor was thicker. I know lots of people have bodged it by just cutting out the spare wheel well and welding a plate across it. That said, the 2 or 3mm thick floor we know and love is probably good enough. Just don't ask me to do the stress analysis equations with Ixx and polar moments of inertia

As usual, I am wrong a fair emount of the time. All part of learning

kevhaywire wrote:Not as strong as £15K for Shaun's Storm Turbo! OK, it was a one owner car with only 15K or so on it (as you'd expect from a car based in Jersey!) but even so..... The guy clearly had a hard-on for it and wanted it, irrespective of cost.

Abso-freakin-lutely on appreciating what you've got! I was very happy with what I had until I wrecked it with my insessant fiddling! I was never motivated by the big hp guys. The technical aspects and making it reliable were more interesting to me than making 1000hp for 5 minutes.

Definitive that changes regularly Yeah they are a good reference for people.

16V T mate, no question. 20 VTs are bland. OK, they make good numbers if built properly but the 16V T is smoother and far more charismatic.....

I find there is a slight hierarchy amongst the VR owners, but i guess that is the same amongst any who own the flagship model of a vehicle. Actually, the elitism is shifting towards the R32 converts now; the blown VR owners seem to be too old (!) to get involved with such nonsense.

I'm the same. I loved my old mk2 16v, even more so with the 4 branch and Golf CL badge that's one of my big gripes with the C: it looks like a fast car, but it really isn't fast. Not to me. The VR is good when you wind it up, but imo that is really the only sporty one. The G60 is killed by that archaic engine design: non cross-flow. I had it in my Jetta 8v, and as such it will always remind me of that shopping car engine with a supercharger on! The 16v G60 is great though (don't kill me Yan :/ ) I'm actually trying to find a dead G so I can do all this engineering mumbo jumbo i witter on about.

I agree, although you need a lot of skill to produce a big hp engine, they're just so unpractical these days and in this climate (so to speak). I'd rather have something with twin maps, for leisure and pleasure

Yeah, I will stay with the KR. I don't think I will even go for the 9A; I mean VW Motorsport used the KR (probably cos the 9A wasn't invented yet, but still...) so I can too!

@Yan, your 16vG is a KR isn't it? Actually, hybrid engine is coming to mind. Oh, you aerospace boys!

I've heard things like plastic water pump impellers on the 20v shattering which is a little scary, and tbh I was expecting more than 150hp from 25% more valves and a turbo, even more than 180. I know they come in 225 but still....

Kev, yeah my 16vG60 is mostly a KR lump and you are correct that the VW MS folks used the 16v block and not the G60 one.

I have fitted digipants to manage it though, for exactly the same reason you are not chasing silly hp numbers, it has to be reliable and for me that involves retaining the safety features of the stock mangement.

As for the 20vT, its bloody soul less as all modern engines and ECUs are designed to make peak torque through the low RPM range to reflect modern driving styles. It's also been proven the a 5 valve head is just fecking stupid - the optimum layout is 4 valves.

Moving onto an older school VW 16v turbo, given the choice I would go for an ABF base block, its a proper 2l 16v (not like the 9A bodge up) and has all the sensors etc that are required to run a more modern ECU (crank and cam pos, 2 x knock, throttle pot etc). The club gti folks are frequently getting a reliable 170bhp with around 145lbft of torque (available for a good wedge of the power band) mapped when using megasquirt with no other engine mods - it is the addition of better engine management that is making the extra power there. I would use that as a base and turbo and ABF instead, again the club gti folk have done this - one of them has been running a mk 2 ABF turbo on stacked headgaskets that puts out over 300 bhp with 285 lbft of torque, it makes peak torque at 4500 so will retain the 3k and away characteristics of a stock valver engine (which I like).

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Can't really say I've noticed much in the way of elitism in Corrado land, aside from the very small minority of scenesters. The mechanics and engineers among us all appreciate eachother's efforts equally I'd say

Totally agree on the Corrado looking fast, but actually isn't

We mustn't forget the VR6 and G60 first hit the streets nearly 20 years ago. 20 years ago, a 200hp hatch was fast and the VR was top of the pile. Now it's not even average as far as HH's go. And that woeful over gearing and sluggy torque delivery below 4000, it just isn't fast, at all. Imo of course

The 8V and 60 feel like the could be quick, but what little torque there is, is spent all too quickly in the rev range. And yep, what VW were thinking strapping boost to that super restrictive 8V lump is a mystery. Cost I suspect. VW themselves proved what could be done with a proper cylinder head + the 60, so we can blame the bean counters for the half measure 8V job.

But the greatest thing of all about VWs is their mechanical shortcomings are VERY easily rectified and you can have a Corrado that looks fast, and *is* fast

RE: the 20V, standard ones (especially the later engines) make 160-165 all day long. 150hp was just VAG's usual internal pecking order mate. The Audis with the same motor always had to have the most power (in the sales brochures) but the reality is they were pretty much all the same.

It's only an ickle 1800 with an even icklely puny little turbo running a whopping 8 psi, so the power is reasonable. it's capable of a lot more once you get that pathetic little turbo off.

Yandards wrote:[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

I guessed that would be Toyotec's

I defo want to do another one some day, but it will be a proper low comp build. Not keen on spacers or stacked gaskets. I might do the old school trick of using S2 pistons (IIRC) and such like to keep it all VAG and reliable. Another popular trick is to use the 20V intake as it's actually pretty good.

I think some folk even use the S2 mani with a runner chopped off.

Yandards wrote:Kev, yeah my 16vG60 is mostly a KR lump and you are correct that the VW MS folks used the 16v block and not the G60 one.

I have fitted digipants to manage it though, for exactly the same reason you are not chasing silly hp numbers, it has to be reliable and for me that involves retaining the safety features of the stock mangement.

As for the 20vT, its bloody soul less as all modern engines and ECUs are designed to make peak torque through the low RPM range to reflect modern driving styles. It's also been proven the a 5 valve head is just fecking stupid - the optimum layout is 4 valves.

Moving onto an older school VW 16v turbo, given the choice I would go for an ABF base block, its a proper 2l 16v (not like the 9A bodge up) and has all the sensors etc that are required to run a more modern ECU (crank and cam pos, 2 x knock, throttle pot etc). The club gti folks are frequently getting a reliable 170bhp with around 145lbft of torque (available for a good wedge of the power band) mapped when using megasquirt with no other engine mods - it is the addition of better engine management that is making the extra power there. I would use that as a base and turbo and ABF instead, again the club gti folk have done this - one of them has been running a mk 2 ABF turbo on stacked headgaskets that puts out over 300 bhp with 285 lbft of torque, it makes peak torque at 4500 so will retain the 3k and away characteristics of a stock valver engine (which I like).

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Great info Yan. God, I love threads like these! I've read about Toyo before, but I will catch up on his build again. I saw a vid of hince once, he kept saying the engine had been "hoffed"? It was really cringy, and I didn't know wtf he was on about. I mean a mk2 16vT isn't anything new is it! Do either of you remember the Turbo Technics conversions?

Also Yan, why is the 9A a bodge up? Not enough sensors and poor management? They seem so highly praised and I've never seen one for less than £300.

kevhaywire wrote:Can't really say I've noticed much in the way of elitism in Corrado land, aside from the very small minority of scenesters. The mechanics and engineers among us all appreciate eachother's efforts equally I'd say

Totally agree on the Corrado looking fast, but actually isn't

We mustn't forget the VR6 and G60 first hit the streets nearly 20 years ago. 20 years ago, a 200hp hatch was fast and the VR was top of the pile. Now it's not even average as far as HH's go. And that woeful over gearing and sluggy torque delivery below 4000, it just isn't fast, at all. Imo of course

The 8V and 60 feel like the could be quick, but what little torque there is, is spent all too quickly in the rev range. And yep, what VW were thinking strapping boost to that super restrictive 8V lump is a mystery. Cost I suspect. VW themselves proved what could be done with a proper cylinder head + the 60, so we can blame the bean counters for the half measure 8V job.

But the greatest thing of all about VWs is their mechanical shortcomings are VERY easily rectified and you can have a Corrado that looks fast, and *is* fast

RE: the 20V, standard ones (especially the later engines) make 160-165 all day long. 150hp was just VAG's usual internal pecking order mate. The Audis with the same motor always had to have the most power (in the sales brochures) but the reality is they were pretty much all the same.

It's only an ickle 1800 with an even icklely puny little turbo running a whopping 8 psi, so the power is reasonable. it's capable of a lot more once you get that pathetic little turbo off.

Yeah, they are quite old engines, granted. Is the Corrado the first car VAG made the VR6 for? I know the GLader has been in production since late 80s, and they also made a baby bro, the Polo G40. That looks like a laugh too actually. To me it seems the VR has a really long box and the G60 one is really short? My bro, (Prodigal@CF) always mentions how 1st is useless, just way too short for the torque you have there. I bought him the VR6 gearstacks for his b'day a couple of years ago but we are yet to fit them.

I would agree with cost. So many of the commercial level cars have had many restrictions placed on them based on cost or manufacturing etc. That's why tuning companies do so good in my opinion. They take the standard, built-to-a-budget engine and improve on it.

When I was in Bim for my placement, I went to a local race and saw the unlimited class. Skylines, Mazdas etc etc and a Lotus 20vt with 500hp! Never found out the spec but it could sure shift. As yan said, it's an interesting idea making a 5valve head, but it probably should have stayed as R&D, although perhaps people love the whole new engine design thing. I dunno.

kevhaywire wrote:

Yandards wrote:[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

I guessed that would be Toyotec's

I defo want to do another one some day, but it will be a proper low comp build. Not keen on spacers or stacked gaskets. I might do the old school trick of using S2 pistons (IIRC) and such like to keep it all VAG and reliable. Another popular trick is to use the 20V intake as it's actually pretty good.

I think some folk even use the S2 mani with a runner chopped off.

I'm actually going to model a 20v intake one day, and flow test it to see if it really is good. Yeah, I've seen the chopped S2 mani done before. It always strikes me as a compromise, but I guess if it works and is cheap then why not!

One interesting observation:

Toyotec only manages high 13s passes on the 1.4 mile.

But there is a FWD 16vt Corrado in the states which does low 11s.

Youtube vids are found here: Boosted Dubs

Ah never mind. Seems the C is running about 450whp! Might have something to do with it great build thread though over on the boosted dubs site.

boost panda wrote:God, I love threads like these! I've read about Toyo before, but I will catch up on his build again. I saw a vid of hince once, he kept saying the engine had been "hoffed"? It was really cringy, and I didn't know wtf he was on about. I mean a mk2 16vT isn't anything new is it! Do either of you remember the Turbo Technics conversions?

Yeah, me too

Yeah I've noticed his style on the forums. He's kind of "use 50 words where 10 would do and throw in lots of acronyms and meaningless engine terminology for good measure".

Do I remember the TurboTechnics conversions? Is the Pope Catholic?

This was my very own TurboTechnics 16V - [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

It's on an incredibly slow archive site, so give it time to load

Mine was the Stealth Racing version though, which used the TT kit, but with radically updated fuelling. The original TT engines only made 180ish hp and pinked their socks off half the time.

Exactly Kev! I was reading a bit of his thread earlier, and it does seem like he's trying to hit a word count per post!

I think I was still a Peugeot 205 boy back in those days, so remember the 8v turbos which went like a scalded cat. Shame they weren't very reliable (the pug ones anyways).

That's a great read mate. I remember those days when 11psi was considered high boost! lol. Fun times. Now people don't seem to consider your car 'charged unless you're running at least 6psi. Also, how come the difference between low and high boost is only 4psi? Could you feel the difference?

Also, how did the K-Jet work with the additional 4 injectors? were they just paired up?

Does make me miss my mk2 16v tbh, but last I saw of it were some shots of it hurtling around the Nordschliefe so I'm happy it's gone to a good home!

I wonder how hard it is to convert mk2 8v to 16v... no...no...already have one project... :/

Yarp S2 rods and pistons on KR block will give 8.5:1 comp ratio (that's what I have fitted to my 16vG60.

Same with the cut down S2 manifold, the stock 16v item tapers along its length which is useless for FI. I ended up with an RPM Tuning item as a new casting although I do have a cut down S2 item.

I did chuckle last year when I took the car to BVF, had the engine bay open and some lad with a mk 2 wandered over and said I always wanted to fit a 20VT...

Yeah I remember the Pug 205 Turbos They were definitely widow makers due to wafer thin bodywork + massive speeds + brick wall = See ya in the next life!!

I stacked one of my 16V MK2s into the side of a warehouse and climbed out of it with nothing more than a grazed arm, but my GF at the time had a 205 "Style" (PMSL!!) which buckled internally from a very minor rear end with a mondeo - which has foam filled bumpers!!

You could indeed feel the 4 psi difference mate! It's not like a big 3 litre with a big turbo where a few psi here and there is nothing between friends. A little 1800 with a schitty T25 on the back of it needs all the boost pressure it can get

The extra 4 injectors (VR6) were driven by an aftermarket injector driver, all batched together. It was dead simple, but bloody effective!!