Mk2 spec

Chat about your MKI or MKII Polo (86 and 86F)
GroovyCarrot
Sponsor
Posts: 2305
Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2004 7:35 am
Location: Saffron Walden, Essex

Mk2 spec

Post by GroovyCarrot »

I've been looking around to try and find the performance spec of a 1043cc 4 speed 1985 Polo C. I imagine it'd not going to be great, but I'd just like to know what it can do out of curiosity :) Anyone know the torque, bhp, 0-60 and top speed of this car?
Sqaureback Steve
New
Posts: 15
Joined: Sat Mar 13, 2004 12:52 am

Post by Sqaureback Steve »

Well, Standard is ment to be 45 bhp, Mine RRed at 43.7 at the fly, with a blowing exhaust and a screwed up mixture. This was also on a RR that is suspected to be a little bit out as nearly every one else complained about getting below standard figures with tuned up cars.

Top speed wise - I don't know, My sppedo goes up to 100mph, Mine goes off that, But estimated about 105 mph?
GroovyCarrot
Sponsor
Posts: 2305
Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2004 7:35 am
Location: Saffron Walden, Essex

Post by GroovyCarrot »

Cheers for that, good start :)

Another couple of things I could do with knowing, firstly the weight of the car (although I guess I could find it out easily enough myself if I could be bothered..) and secondly where the red line would be if it were fitted with a rev counter.. if anybody would be so kind :)
polokris
Silver Member
Posts: 473
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2003 2:51 pm
Location: south wales

Post by polokris »

ahhh yesss... the red line.... LOL... there is no red line, it jus keeps GOIN AND GOING!! past 8k, iv only done it once, sounded as if she was gonna pop.... and the weight has got to be under 900KG??

they say the 1.0 will do 60 in 3 weeks... or more like 17secs.... but iv had 13secz in the wet, whilst spinnin a bit in 1st,

u got to do it ur self, there are no real accurate specs on cars.
GroovyCarrot
Sponsor
Posts: 2305
Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2004 7:35 am
Location: Saffron Walden, Essex

Post by GroovyCarrot »

Hehe, fair enough then :) Don't think I'll be trying for >8000rpm though, I value my engine being in less than 50 pieces..
User avatar
bstardchild
Moderator
Posts: 3057
Joined: Sun Mar 28, 2004 9:53 pm
Location: Norfolk - "Its just Black & Dirty"

Post by bstardchild »

GroovyCarrot wrote:Hehe, fair enough then :) Don't think I'll be trying for >8000rpm though, I value my engine being in less than 50 pieces..
No tacho = change up when the valves start to bounce :lol:
GroovyCarrot
Sponsor
Posts: 2305
Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2004 7:35 am
Location: Saffron Walden, Essex

Post by GroovyCarrot »

Gotta love that method :D
Domster
New
Posts: 10
Joined: Sun Feb 08, 2004 6:17 pm

Post by Domster »

lol! 8000! That must be so much fun!
mcdinky15
New
Posts: 5
Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2003 1:00 pm
Location: pontefract west yorkshire
Contact:

Post by mcdinky15 »

l asked a similiar question on my mk2 1043cc on porka.net and these are the figures l got told 45bhp pushing out 57bhptorque per tonne not sure if this true but there u go
GroovyCarrot
Sponsor
Posts: 2305
Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2004 7:35 am
Location: Saffron Walden, Essex

Post by GroovyCarrot »

If anyone's interested, I just looked up the unladen weights to be:

1.0: 700kg
1.1: 710kg
1.3: 720kg

Assuming the 1043cc is putting out 45bhp, that works out to 64.3 bhp / tonne.
Tahrey1043
Bling Bling Diamond Member
Posts: 5184
Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2003 1:15 am
Location: Birmingham! Enjoys: The pseudo-G-Smiles provided by a 1.6 Megane Sport valver...
Contact:

Post by Tahrey1043 »

Wow.... it gained 100kg from mk2 to mk3 O_O

Figures i have for mk3 - 0-60 in a molecule under 20 secs, max of around 91mph. Downhill max somewhere in the fog beyond the ton :D Max "reccomended" continual engine speed = 6300... do your own maths for that, top gear could be anything from 15.5 thru 16.8, 17.6, 19.6, 20.4 or 21.2 (the last one being high 5 speed, the two before that 3+E).

Mk2 probably a bit quicker off the mark thanks to the lower weight, top speed might be a squidge lower on the flat though thanks to slightly less aerodynamic bodywork.
GroovyCarrot
Sponsor
Posts: 2305
Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2004 7:35 am
Location: Saffron Walden, Essex

Post by GroovyCarrot »

Ah, excellent, decent figures to go on :)

I'm not quite sure how the mk2 is any less aerodynamic than the mk3 though.. I'd certainly doubt it'd take more than 1 mph or so off the top speed, anyway.. although I would imagine the fuel injected engines on the mk3s would give them a bit of a speed advantage..

Anyway, cheers for that, very useful stuff :)
Gareth_GT_Hatch
Platinum Member
Posts: 1116
Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 9:04 pm
Location: Manchester Drives: '83 GL Classic

Post by Gareth_GT_Hatch »

The front ends a bit squarer on the mk2 which makes it slightly less aerodynamic (but not much) You're In luck. I have in front of me here (thanks to optima21) a VW motoring magazine dated Feburary 1986 with a road test uf your car. Heres their own stats fot it:

0-40mph 9.4
0-50mph 13.1
0-60mph 18.4
0-70mph 25.8

3rd gear 30-50 10.3
4th gear 30-50 14.5
4th gear 50-70 25.8

Done with 2 people in car and 3/4 tank of petrol

Top gearing: 16.8mph per 1000rpm

max speed 88mph

Max hp 45bhp @ 5600rpm
Max torque: 54.6lbft @ 3600 rpm

kerb weight: 1610lbs (about 730Kg)

Hope that helps! :D
GroovyCarrot
Sponsor
Posts: 2305
Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2004 7:35 am
Location: Saffron Walden, Essex

Post by GroovyCarrot »

Wahey! Perfect, nice one :D

Thanks for looking that lot up.. handy that you had that magazine :)
Gareth_GT_Hatch
Platinum Member
Posts: 1116
Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 9:04 pm
Location: Manchester Drives: '83 GL Classic

Post by Gareth_GT_Hatch »

Well, Its not like ive got a mass of vwm magazines lying about. Dom gave me this one at last sundays meetup. Its just lucky I guess

Happy to help! :)
Post Reply