- Joined
- May 25, 2006
- Messages
- 16,219
- Points
- 2,029
Nope lampard and barry.
The quick question thread
- Thread starter punto_matt
- Start date
Currently reading:
The quick question thread
Re: Quick Question thread
Good. I'll watch it then. Can't bear to watch if that cnut is playing.
Good. I'll watch it then. Can't bear to watch if that cnut is playing.
Re: Quick Question thread
is it possible to make a higher revving FIRE engine, using different parts, say a 1.4 block for it's bore and pistons with a 1.0 crank to make it more oversquare, 16v head etc.
obviously would need lightening and balancing but has this or similar been done before, any links to cases of similar?
is it possible to make a higher revving FIRE engine, using different parts, say a 1.4 block for it's bore and pistons with a 1.0 crank to make it more oversquare, 16v head etc.
obviously would need lightening and balancing but has this or similar been done before, any links to cases of similar?
Re: Quick Question thread
well you couldnt use the 1.1 crank on a 1.4 anyways because the 1.4 comes from being bored AND stroked. Unless you wanted an ultra low compression engine
plus the 16v head isnt a great idea for high revs because there isnt an easily available solution to replace the hydraulic valve lifters... yet, although we live in hope.
A 1.4 8v with uprated everything and a fully flowed top end with ITBs would be the way to go for a screamer engine, although the 16vs can go fairly far as well.
well you couldnt use the 1.1 crank on a 1.4 anyways because the 1.4 comes from being bored AND stroked. Unless you wanted an ultra low compression engine
plus the 16v head isnt a great idea for high revs because there isnt an easily available solution to replace the hydraulic valve lifters... yet, although we live in hope.A 1.4 8v with uprated everything and a fully flowed top end with ITBs would be the way to go for a screamer engine, although the 16vs can go fairly far as well.
Re: Quick Question thread
can everyone post random crap on this thread until it gets to the next page please? its got the X8.: problem for me atm!
can everyone post random crap on this thread until it gets to the next page please? its got the X8.: problem for me atm!
Re: Quick Question thread
fine then
tim you got a job again yet?
fine then
tim you got a job again yet?
Re: Quick Question thread
i get the same stupid error crap
i get the same stupid error crap
Re: Quick Question thread
i get the compression, but imagine this could be sorted out by skimming head/block to ensure it's raised to a good level, though would probably require a fair bit of work, so boring out a 1.0 block would probably be the best route to go down, if the block could take it?
the idea is to get the bore to stroke ration as high as possible. so a lot more revvy in nature and able to gain from being revved. in fact a better start would be the older sohc 1.4 which is very oversquare and revvy, but being older parts availability isn't cheap along with off the shelf components not being easy to obtain, and a SOHC, i assume the 16v FIRE at least is a DOHC?
what's the problem of hydraulic lifters at higher revs then? is that the only downside to the 16v heads or are they generally of a poorer design?
i have nothing planned as such but feel like a fresh project, experimenting with these engines, a nice high revving engine in a relatively light car such as a stripped out panda or even an uno (pre 93 so carbs can be used :devil
well you couldnt use the 1.1 crank on a 1.4 anyways because the 1.4 comes from being bored AND stroked. Unless you wanted an ultra low compression engine
A 1.4 8v with uprated everything and a fully flowed top end with ITBs would be the way to go for a screamer engine, although the 16vs can go fairly far as well.
i get the compression, but imagine this could be sorted out by skimming head/block to ensure it's raised to a good level, though would probably require a fair bit of work, so boring out a 1.0 block would probably be the best route to go down, if the block could take it?
the idea is to get the bore to stroke ration as high as possible. so a lot more revvy in nature and able to gain from being revved. in fact a better start would be the older sohc 1.4 which is very oversquare and revvy, but being older parts availability isn't cheap along with off the shelf components not being easy to obtain, and a SOHC, i assume the 16v FIRE at least is a DOHC?
what's the problem of hydraulic lifters at higher revs then? is that the only downside to the 16v heads or are they generally of a poorer design?
i have nothing planned as such but feel like a fresh project, experimenting with these engines, a nice high revving engine in a relatively light car such as a stripped out panda or even an uno (pre 93 so carbs can be used :devil
Re: Quick Question thread
Not sure on the boring out idea, although i cant see it working very well personally, for a number of reasons.
The stroke on the 1.4 isnt really that long really compared to plenty engines out there, it can rev freely enough as it is. It will be reliable enough if the rods and associated bottom end parts are uprated and all is balanced.
The 16v is DOHC, although only one cambelt pulley is used to drive them.
The 8v FIRE head is a great head anyways - with enough spent on flowing, valves, guides, cams etc, and the intake, it can flow enough for whatever the engine can displace. If you had 1.4 litres of displacement then if built and mapped correctly you would be looking at at least 150bhp, based on what ive read about it.
The 16v lifters allow for valve float at higher revs. Im not sure on the safe RPM limit for them (oldschool will know) but i imagine 7500. Compared to the 8v head which is safe up to 8500 with no mods.
Go for it if you want the good power figures you need to spend a LOT of money though.
Not sure on the boring out idea, although i cant see it working very well personally, for a number of reasons.
The stroke on the 1.4 isnt really that long really compared to plenty engines out there, it can rev freely enough as it is. It will be reliable enough if the rods and associated bottom end parts are uprated and all is balanced.
The 16v is DOHC, although only one cambelt pulley is used to drive them.
The 8v FIRE head is a great head anyways - with enough spent on flowing, valves, guides, cams etc, and the intake, it can flow enough for whatever the engine can displace. If you had 1.4 litres of displacement then if built and mapped correctly you would be looking at at least 150bhp, based on what ive read about it.
The 16v lifters allow for valve float at higher revs. Im not sure on the safe RPM limit for them (oldschool will know) but i imagine 7500. Compared to the 8v head which is safe up to 8500 with no mods.
Go for it
if you want the good power figures you need to spend a LOT of money though.
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2004
- Messages
- 25,219
- Points
- 3,671
Re: Quick Question thread
:yeahthat:
the 8v engine's rev higher and give more torque low down. The 16v's have a lot more mid range grunt and more power output.
Even after my remap the highest i'd rev mine too is about 6,200rpm. Might change once I get the cams in.
:yeahthat:
the 8v engine's rev higher and give more torque low down. The 16v's have a lot more mid range grunt and more power output.
Even after my remap the highest i'd rev mine too is about 6,200rpm. Might change once I get the cams in
.
Re: Quick Question thread
im geting it on the random pic thread to:bang: can we go :spam: that nexti get the same stupid error crap
Re: Quick Question thread
only 6,200!! that's not even at full power in the tipo!! :slayer:
think i might abandon the idea as a dead cause probably just dreaming anyway, but just thinking about how much fun my old 1.4 was with it's Very revvy engine, hmmmm.... if parts were better available, then that'd be the route i'd be taking as that engine is(WAS ) :worship:
:yeahthat:
the 8v engine's rev higher and give more torque low down. The 16v's have a lot more mid range grunt and more power output.
Even after my remap the highest i'd rev mine too is about 6,200rpm. Might change once I get the cams in
only 6,200!! that's not even at full power in the tipo!! :slayer:
think i might abandon the idea as a dead cause probably just dreaming anyway, but just thinking about how much fun my old 1.4 was with it's Very revvy engine, hmmmm....
if parts were better available, then that'd be the route i'd be taking as that engine is(WAS ) :worship:
Re: Quick Question thread
tbh 6200 sounds crazy in a SuperFIRE engine with induction.
Chris i would be very very disappointed if those cams didnt give power all the way to the limiter. Glad youre trying them first have you a SS manifold? i forget.
tbh 6200 sounds crazy in a SuperFIRE engine with induction.
Chris i would be very very disappointed if those cams didnt give power all the way to the limiter. Glad youre trying them first
have you a SS manifold? i forget.
Re: Quick Question thread
whats everyones views on my closing long running threads like this and starting a new one with a link to the old one?
so no more error pages?
whats everyones views on my closing long running threads like this and starting a new one with a link to the old one?
so no more error pages?
Re: Quick Question thread
Can't say I get any errors on this. Only error I get it on is Captain mikes MM thread. For me that is
Can't say I get any errors on this. Only error I get it on is Captain mikes MM thread. For me that is
Re: Quick Question thread
are new threads sorted so it doesnt happen then?
if so, yes please!
are new threads sorted so it doesnt happen then?
if so, yes please!
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2004
- Messages
- 25,219
- Points
- 3,671
Re: Quick Question thread
No completely standard exhaust. Did try SS manifold and powerflow and was completely de-catted so lost back pressure and made it run like crap lost all its torque.
tbh 6200 sounds crazy in a SuperFIRE engine with induction.
Chris i would be very very disappointed if those cams didnt give power all the way to the limiter. Glad youre trying them first
No completely standard exhaust. Did try SS manifold and powerflow and was completely de-catted so lost back pressure and made it run like crap lost all its torque.
