Golf MK4 180BHP-any better than chipped 150bhp?

[Dino D]

While looking around for MK4 1.8t Golfs I came accross a 180bhp (with the red I), 1999, black leather, heated recaros, FVWSH, 89k miles for only £4,450. Does this sound a bit too cheap?

Also, is the 180bhp model simply an uprated chip or does it have a different turbo intercooler etc? Is it better to just plump for the 150 bhp and have it chipped?

Cheers

[iguana]

Dino D said:

While looking around for MK4 1.8t Golfs I came accross a 180bhp (with the red I), 1999, black leather, heated recaros, FVWSH, 89k miles for only £4,450. Does this sound a bit too cheap? Also, is the 180bhp model simply an uprated chip or does it have a different turbo intercooler etc? Is it better to just plump for the 150 bhp and have it chipped? Cheers

I think 180s had the ko3s turbo, so more grunt than a 150 with a ko3 as stock & also when chipped.

[Dino D]

Cheers

[225]

The 150/180 are prett much identical, the 225 version used in LCRs/TTs/S3 etc has bigger turbo and an extra intercooler amoungst other things.

[mk1fan]

In answer to the original question. Yes the 180 is the better engine. If you ran the same chip/map in a 150 and a 180 you would see more from the 180. It is not just a factory remap. You can take the 180 further as well. Can't remember off hand what the 'desirable' engine code is but you should find the info on one of the many dedicated sites.

One thing to check is the intercoller as the pipes have a habit of blowing off these. Just the excuse needed to fit a fmic though!

[Mr Whippy]

6sp gearbox too...

Still not a stunningly rapid car because of the weight though, but will remap better than the older 150. Note I think that from 01 onwards I think the 150bhp was also 180bhp spec engine and gearbox too, just detuned from what I read when thinking of buying.

Decided I'd rather have a car that handled over a 195bhp Golf though

Dave