saxo vts

rover_power · Post by **rover_power** » Wed Jan 07, 2004 12:29 am

hehe had a wee race with one the day after work in my wee 214, thought hee was going two pee all over me, but a left him standing.=my opinon of rover engiens has just gon up.

Gary · Post by **Gary** » Wed Jan 07, 2004 12:51 am

It most probably a rebaged VTR as the VTS are very quick little cars (espically to 60) and even in the Ti they give me a run for my money, i dont allow them to win though

GeraintUK · Post by **GeraintUK** » Wed Jan 07, 2004 12:56 am

Gary, u disgust me..........

i wouldn't give one of them the steam off my p*ss

now bring on an m3, evo or scooby, and i can't help myself

Gary · Post by **Gary** » Wed Jan 07, 2004 12:59 am

lol, only to 60mph after that they feel the strain and can be seen in the rear view mirror getting further away

Phil Mk3 Turbo · Post by **Phil Mk3 Turbo** » Wed Jan 07, 2004 1:25 am

GeraintUK wrote:Gary, u disgust me..........

i wouldn't give one of them the steam off my p*ss

now bring on an m3, evo or scooby, and i can't help myself

Thats what i was thinkin... :lol:

Gary · Post by **Gary** » Wed Jan 07, 2004 1:29 am

Hehe, Well you have to show the baseball cap wearing lax power generation up from time to time :wink:

Phil Mk3 Turbo · Post by **Phil Mk3 Turbo** » Wed Jan 07, 2004 2:00 am

Gary wrote:Hehe, Well you have to show the baseball cap wearing lax power generation up from time to time

No harm in that,

But the only way a Vts is staying with me is if i toe it. :wink:

Jonny 5 · Post by **Jonny 5** » Wed Jan 07, 2004 2:04 am

214 beats a VTs???

Maybe, but a VTS is deffo faster when not driven by a retard :twisted:

poplar · Post by **poplar** » Wed Jan 07, 2004 2:29 am

one the way home to glasgow last week i had a run in with what i think was a modded vts.....kept up with most the way (all 50miles of the A50!), but then he starting doing stupid speeds so i let him go

IMO it seemed quite evenly matched for my 216gti....figures are fairly similar in standard form too (apart from i've got 18bhp more!)

cookci · Post by **cookci** » Wed Jan 07, 2004 2:51 am

Mine keeps up with my brothers saxo VTS.

Well 2 races and 1 win either side. His is the new one lowered about a metre with K&N. Although i had a 30KG toolbox in my car at the time

.

He drives it HARD also.

Mine is Single cam honda with full stainless, decat and induction from states.

C2K · Post by **C2K** » Wed Jan 07, 2004 2:54 am

Doubt the VTS driver was trying. In a 214 16V it's about even with a VTR. I know, cause I raced one (with a passenged) up to 70 once. Stayed pretty much level. VTS is a different kettle of fish, not being funny but it would wipe the floor with a standard 214. Facelifted VTR's (100Hp versions) would probably stuff a 214 too.

poplar · Post by **poplar** » Wed Jan 07, 2004 2:55 am

mine had a boot full of alloys...(my excuse!)

coming of roundabouts i was quite a big quicker, but the rest was public roads which for me is a no, no

MGTurbo · Post by **MGTurbo** » Wed Jan 07, 2004 8:34 am

A 214 will NOT beat a VTS. They are heavier and have less power. A VTR maybe, but a VTS? No way. The VTS driver wasn't trying.

Craig · Post by **Craig** » Wed Jan 07, 2004 9:23 am

Have to agree here. A VTS, driven by someone at least half competent, who is trying, should beat a 214 easily. They are lighter and more powerful. They also handle pretty well, by all accounts.

I used to easily thrash VTRs with my old 420 GSi NAsp, and beat every VTS I ever had a go against. The latter were a lot harder to outdo, though! It would be fairly level from a standing start, but the 420 would always start to pull away by about third gear and continue to do so thereafter. Mind you, there was this one guy in a modified one who managed to edge ahead from the start. I stayed level with his rear quarter, then managed to reel him in and pass him. That was a close one. (My 420 was standard, BTW)

In my recently sold 216 GTi DOHC, VTRs were again no match. I don't think I ever had a go against a VTS in that one, but I'd expect it to be a close run thing, with the 216 just edging it.

It's not really fair to underestimate the Saxo VTS - it's a pretty good little car!

GT · Post by GT » Wed Jan 07, 2004 10:00 pm

Which 1.4 Rover engine are we talking about here?

Whilst the lower 16v engines, along with the older 8v equivellents have about 84Ps (82BHP-ish), the higher spec 16v ones carry 103Ps (100BHP-ish).

IIRC doesnt the VTR have originally 90BHP (now 100BHP) and the VTS 110BHP - from a 1.6?

In terms of weight, I believe the 214 is lighter than the equivellent MINI - which also carries a 1.6 (90BHP for a 'ONE' and 115BHP for a 'Cooper') - so dont feel under-rated by one next time you meet

ADSVVCCOUPE · Post by **ADSVVCCOUPE** » Wed Jan 07, 2004 10:08 pm

My old 214 sei would beet vtr's all the way but not a vts.
approx 0-60....7.7
top speed....125mph
120bhp.

MGTurbo · Post by **MGTurbo** » Wed Jan 07, 2004 10:09 pm

The VTS is 125bhp. 8 valve K8's are 76bhp, you'd be a fool to race anyone with that engine in a 200.

Gareth

Martin · Post by **Martin** » Wed Jan 07, 2004 10:12 pm

Jeez, have a look on www.roverload.com - this arguement has been covered SO many times!

poplar · Post by **poplar** » Wed Jan 07, 2004 10:15 pm

MGTurbo wrote:The VTS is 125bhp. 8 valve K8's are 76bhp, you'd be a fool to race anyone with that engine in a 200.

Gareth

i agree. i had the K8 spi...which at the time thought was fairly nippy :roll:

i'm going to 'Pod with a few guys with VTS's. expecting it to be a good match.

MGTurbo · Post by **MGTurbo** » Wed Jan 07, 2004 10:23 pm

The exception is when the K8 is in a Metro..

Should add that the 84?ps model was in the Mk3 200, was actually a 16v restricted.

Gareth

Post by **IrishRover** » Wed Jan 07, 2004 11:44 pm

GT wrote:Whilst the lower 16v engines, along with the older 8v equivellents have about 84Ps (82BHP-ish), the higher spec 16v ones carry 103Ps (100BHP-ish).

I thought the SEi 1.4 16v multipoint has 103BHP (105PS) and the 1.4 16v SPi (in my 214SLi) has 95BHP.

Nash · Post by **Nash** » Thu Jan 08, 2004 3:44 pm

I am sorry but i just dont belive you on this if it was a vtr then may be but not a vts. May be he just couldnt be arsed to race do remember they aint all driven by boy racers theres one by me which is driven by a 50 year old women and i bet its never been over 3k rpm.
A mate of mine had a 214GSi16v with de cat etc and was in that one day when he got thrashed by a vts no chance at all. I have raced one in my GSi turbo and it was easy after 70mph and the only reason i struggled before that was because it was wet and i had 15's on with no tread at the time, and i am only running 7psi boost.

Sheaf · Post by **Sheaf** » Thu Jan 08, 2004 4:54 pm

I raced a vtr in a coupeT, I'd only been driving the car a couple of hours and hadn't got the hang of pulling away without spinning the wheels well (considering the max power I'd driven before that was 110bhp). Twas on a motorway junction roundabout. Obviously I won but I was impressed by the way the vtr could accelerate hard round the corner. Was funny once I was rolling though, couldn't resist thrashing it even though it meant me getting in the wrong lane and having to go round the next roundabout twice...

Phil Mk3 Turbo · Post by **Phil Mk3 Turbo** » Thu Jan 08, 2004 6:30 pm

A 1.6 GTI as got to at least be even with a vts,

The honda engined ones must kill them. There 150bhp arn't they?

MGTurbo · Post by **MGTurbo** » Thu Jan 08, 2004 7:26 pm

Why will a 216GTI be even?

A Saxo VTS weighs about 930kg, the 216GTI is 100kg heavier, this makes ALOT of difference. The 0-60 of the latest Savo VTS is 7.8 seconds, according to Citreon. I've seen times lower than that, 7.3 - 7.5.

It is not to be under-estimated, they can go round corner's very well too.

Quarter mile is about 16.1 @ 88mph. Once a better exhaust and induction kit has been fitted, they have potential to be in the mid to high 15's. I say this from personal experience. I drove a modded one for a day and off the mark it was very nippy. Started to run out at 90-100mph but enough to see off most car's.

Gareth

poplar · Post by **poplar** » Thu Jan 08, 2004 7:33 pm

IIRC the figures are roughly...

vts
120bhp
127mph
0-60 7.6secs

216gti (dohc)
0-60 7.8secs
128bhp
125mph

they do go round corners very well. i'm trying to hook up with some mates from leicester so we go to Pod together. i don't expect to win, nor do i expect to lose...LOL

MGTurbo · Post by **MGTurbo** » Thu Jan 08, 2004 7:52 pm

Where did you get 7.8 seconds from? Just done some research and 0-60 in 8.6 seconds seems to be the norm. Also seen a kerbweight of 1110kg. I have driven a DOHC 216GTI and my money would be on the Saxo i'm afraid.

Gareth

cookci · Post by **cookci** » Thu Jan 08, 2004 9:07 pm

MGTurbo wrote:Where did you get 7.8 seconds from? Just done some research and 0-60 in 8.6 seconds seems to be the norm. Also seen a kerbweight of 1110kg. I have driven a DOHC 216GTI and my money would be on the Saxo i'm afraid.

Gareth

Hate to butt in but saxo's can't be THAT fantastic if mine keeps up with it.

Unless i have a good gain from my mods. SOHC honda rovers are ment to do 0-60 in 9.5

.

We both drove onto the dual carriageway at 30 and it was almost exactly the same and we were both thrapping it.

Christian

poplar · Post by **poplar** » Thu Jan 08, 2004 9:43 pm

gareth...should have read 8.7! LOL..

MGTurbo · Post by **MGTurbo** » Thu Jan 08, 2004 9:44 pm

Must be VTR's then. Seriously, no way a SOHC compares to a VTS. I'm not being pro-Citreon, Pro-boy racer etc, just simply stating the truth.

Gareth

MGTurbo · Post by **MGTurbo** » Thu Jan 08, 2004 9:45 pm

poplar wrote:gareth...should have read 8.7! LOL..

weirdjam · Post by **weirdjam** » Thu Jan 08, 2004 10:20 pm

I know of people round here that rebadged there furio's/west coasts as a vts (like as been said for vtr) and they only have 1.4 8v.

Post by **MarkCoupe** » Thu Jan 08, 2004 10:21 pm

MGTurbo wrote:Why will a 216GTI be even?

A Saxo VTS weighs about 930kg, the 216GTI is 100kg heavier, this makes ALOT of difference. The 0-60 of the latest Savo VTS is 7.8 seconds, according to Citreon. I've seen times lower than that, 7.3 - 7.5.

Gareth

Also have to agree, as much as id like to stick up for "14s Sohc Hondas, its highly unlikely, i mean the stats have been covered and theres just too big a difference, unless they are blind and temprarily parolised, like Gareth said ive seen times like that too, ive seen a 145bhp VTS That had a properly tweaked chaissis, and no spare wheel or rear seats do a 6.78 0-60mph. So is it the 106 GTi cos i was sure the VTS was 120bhp, same base engines but i know at least one of em has 120bhp.

Post by **MarkCoupe** » Thu Jan 08, 2004 10:24 pm

Oh and iirc correctly the D16 in a rover is 125bhp in a crx/civic its 130 , i THINK

poplar · Post by **poplar** » Thu Jan 08, 2004 10:26 pm

just for discussion sake, if i had to get rid of most my interior, spare wheel
and don't take a passenger with me this time (!) what increase in 0-60 would i make on standard?

add a full stainless exhaust system and induction kit.

what then?