VW/Audi 1.8T

[The Radium King]

Anyone ever look at a VW/Audi 1.8T engine as a possible replacement in a boxster? it makes 250 HP in oem trim out of an auto tt so, given it is a turbo, there should be lots of power still on the table. the transmission should bolt right up, and dimensions are fine - the 1.8t is 1" taller otherwise narrower and shorter; 911 engine swaps have proven that a 1" taller engine can fit in the boxster. intercooler plumbing would have to be sorted out, but this can be done in any number of ways as proven by various companies that have been putting turbos on boxsters for the past 15 years (air/water using the third rad, air/air in the undercarriage, etc.). ps, it weighs about 150 lbs less than a m96 engine.

[The Radium King]

checking a bit more, and the height may be off (one source says 1" taller, another says 5" taller). if anything more than 1" taller then dry sump would be required. not a big deal, as these appear to be readily available for the 1.8t - it looks like the engine sees a lot of development for open wheel racing and all the go-fast technology is transferable.

[Ian c]

Let me know if you decide to do this ...
I have parts in my storage that will get you to around 400
All you need to do at this kind of hp is better rods which are around $600

[The Radium King]

I doubt i'll ever do it, but wondering if it has been considered by those that do (kpaz et al). it really came from looking at the racing regs in my area; stu runs at 2550 max displacement with a 1.3 modifier for forced induction. so, I could look at a 2.5 na engine or a 1.8 turbo engine. 2.5 na made me think immediately of a boxster (or, a 2 L s2000 that makes 250 hp). a quick search of 1.8 L turbo engines produced the 1.8t as the winner. if I could make 50 hp and lose 150 lbs by putting a 1.8t in a boxster (did I mention compatible bosch dme) ...

[The Radium King]

250 hp 2 L s2000 engine (f20c) is only 1.5" higher than the m96 ...

[woodsman]

The Honda 's an OEM race engine built by one of the finest engine builders worldwide but would it have enough low end power to remain enjoyable around town?
P.S. If my engine ever grenades I'll be gettin' into a S2000 real quick! For me, a transplant with anything less than a quad-cam V8 is too much bother ( after all what I really want is a Ferrari!).

[The Radium King]

s2000 walks around at about the same weight as the boxster, so it should be able to move it. it is known for not much torque, but when you redline at 9000 rpm who needs torque?

the 1.8t is the ticket though. no tranny adaptor, relatively plug and play dme, 250 stock hp (that moves the awd 3300 lb audi tt around nicely enough) engine under $2k on ebay, 150 lbs lighter.

if it'll fit.

[Ian c]

They're actually 225 stock on the bigger tt , 180 on its little brother .
Add 40-45 with a remap

[stephen wilson]

I've driven the 2.2L S2000, and it pulls fine down low. I don't know why you'd do that swap though, it's not really an upgrade in power.

[The Radium King]

sorry, this was more of a discussion on the 1.8T, not the s2000.

[stephen wilson]

True. My wife just bought an A5 with the 2.0T. We'll see how it goes, it's our first Audi, or turbo car.

[Kenny Boxster]

The S2k engine has a lot of horsepower for it's size, but what a lot of people do not realize is it produces relatively low torque for the horsepower output. Personally If I wanted a S2k like engine, I'd ride a motorcycle. Shelby Carroll once said,"horsepower sells cars, torque wins races". I find the 2.7l needing more torque; I would not want to downgrade to even less! Long ago I thought the 4 cylinder cranking out 250hp was really incredible engineering, but a let down of expectations once I saw how an S2k really fared.

[The Radium King]

wow. should never have mentioned the s2000.

ps, goggle dynos for an audi 1.8t - it makes as much or more torque as the 986 s.

[stephen wilson]

I was afraid the A5 would be a slug, with the same 200 HP as our old RSX, but 800 pounds of extra weight. But it isn't bad, like you say, it has ~ 100 ft./lbs. more torque than the N/A 2.0, from around 1500 RPM and up.

[OHBoxsterS]

Originally Posted by stephen wilson

I was afraid the A5 would be a slug, with the same 200 HP as our old RSX, but 800 pounds of extra weight. But it isn't bad, like you say, it has ~ 100 ft./lbs. more torque than the N/A 2.0, from around 1500 RPM and up.

Not sure about the 1.8t, but for $3500 in bolt-ons and a tune, the 2.0t will make 400-450whp.

That would be absolutely wild in a Boxster S!

[kcpaz]

Originally Posted by OHBoxsterS

Not sure about the 1.8t, but for $3500 in bolt-ons and a tune, the 2.0t will make 400-450whp.

That would be absolutely wild in a Boxster S!

I can confirm this, having raced a Boxster S with 430whp using a 2.5 turbo 4 cylinder

[woodsman]

are the 1.8T and 2.0T 20-valve engines?

[Ian c]

Yes they are

[Ian c]

Off topic , but here are some pics of one I built a couple of years ago .

[wanna986]

Ian c, that is beautiful.