Technical Engines, 188.A4.000 vs 169.A4.000

[svennelainen]

I am looking for a bit of a winter project. Might even be winters before it's done but hey...
My Panda 4x4 is OK but I think it is wise to look into preparing an engine before it's breaking. I am NOT afraid of swapping engines. I've done more swaps than I have fingers (all of them still here) but never played around with a Fiat engine. The 100 hp Panda wasn't available in the north AFAIK, but there are numerous 1.2 Panda, 500 and Punto engines for sale. The breakers here are very organized and all parts are available on two web sites so finding a new engine is a breeze.

So when I'm looking at these market places both 188... and 169.A4.000 engines are listed for Pandas, Puntos and 500s. Do you know what the technical differences are?

For the record, I will most probably slap a GT15 on it an run with a mild 0.2 boost. There are quite a few Punto fanatics around here with the very same setup.

 

[koalar]

The Panda 4x4 1.2 is a different engine

I don't know all the differences but the throttle bodies, camshaft engine wiring loom, are different


Valve timing has been altered to give lower torque for off roading

I suspect the ECU will also be different as the timing is different


The latter panda engines have VVT and all 500 1.2

The sensor wiring and ECU are different along with a solenoid to control the VVT

They are not a straight forward swap,

 

[svennelainen]

The Panda 4x4 1.2 is a different engine

I don't know all the differences but the throttle bodies, camshaft engine wiring loom, are different


Valve timing has been altered to give lower torque for off roading

I suspect the ECU will also be different as the timing is different


The latter panda engines have VVT and all 500 1.2

The sensor wiring and ECU are different along with a solenoid to control the VVT

They are not a straight forward swap,

There is no straight forward swapping but nothing is impossible. I know the 4x4 have better low torque, but that will not really matter, nor the ECU. Torque will be present with a turbo anyways and the a DET3+ piggyback will fix the fuel mapping. In this case I'm more curious what the differences are between the 188.A4 and 169.A4 version of the engine.

I've read somewhere that the 169 is more prone to piston slap and ring wear. But it also seems that the 188 would be better for this project with less compression ratio. On the other hand, I think the 169 had oil cooled pistons?

188:

Cylinder bore, mm	70.8
Piston stroke, mm	78.9
Compression ratio	9.5

169:

Cylinder bore, mm	70.8
Piston stroke, mm	78.9
Compression ratio	11.1

It also looks like the 169 is made to burn leaner as it classifies for Euro 4.

 

[jrkitching]

So when I'm looking at these market places both 188... and 169.A4.000 engines are listed for Pandas, Puntos and 500s. Do you know what the technical differences are

In a nutshell, the 188 is a 60HP fixed camshaft engine, the 169 is a 69HP VVT engine.

In practice, the differences in performance are not great; there are several folks here, myself included, who prefer in in its 60HP form. It's got more flexibility at low rpm, has a less demanding cambelt replacement procedure, and seems less prone to rattle and get tappety at high mileages.

Both are good engines, but as koalar says, not easily interchangeable , since most of the ancillaries needed to make it work are completely different, and they have fewer common parts than you might think. Also. folks have found that there are no significant power gains to be had on either engine without making major modifications and spending huge sums of money.

The 100HP engine is another kettle of fish entirely, and easier to get a gain from tuning/turbocharging, but I'd have serious reservations about whether the 4x4 drivetrain could cope with the power, even if it could somehow be made to work.

If you need to replace an engine, my advice is to replace it with whatever was there before.

 

[koalar]

Completely different wiring, ECU, sensors, pulleys

Not a straight engine swap

Be easier with a donar vehicle and swap the engine, dash, ECU, body computer,, locks and engine wiring harness,

 

[Pugglt Auld Jock]

The Panda 4x4 1.2 is a different engine

I don't know all the differences but the throttle bodies, camshaft engine wiring loom, are different


Valve timing has been altered to give lower torque for off roading

I suspect the ECU will also be different as the timing is different


The latter panda engines have VVT and all 500 1.2

The sensor wiring and ECU are different along with a solenoid to control the VVT

They are not a straight forward swap,

In a nutshell, the 188 is a 60HP fixed camshaft engine, the 169 is a 69HP VVT engine.

In practice, the differences are not great; there are several folks here, myself included, who prefer in in its 60HP form. It's got more flexibility at low rpm, has a less demanding cambelt replacement procedure, and seems less prone to rattle and get tappety at high mileages.

Both are good engines, but as koalar says, not easily interchangeable , since most of the ancillaries needed to make it work are completely different, and they have fewer common parts than you might think. Also. folks have found that there are no significant power gains to be had on either engine without making major modifications and spending huge sums of money.

The 100HP engine is another kettle of fish entirely, and easier to get a gain from tuning/turbocharging, but I'd have serious reservations about whether the 4x4 drivetrain could cope with the power, even if it could somehow be made to work.

If you need to replace an engine, my advice is to replace it with whatever was there before.

So many good and relevant things to think about here. I do understand that our OP is looking for a bit of a project to keep him occupied on all those dark winter evenings and, judging from his post and how mention is being made of turbo chargers etc, it sounds like he's wanting to up the performance by a fair margin? The Panda, as others have said, isn't an easy engine to get more power from and the gearboxes are not renowned for reliability in standard form so probably wouldn't take kindly to a big hike in torque. Also the 4x4 chassis is not designed or intended to cope with "spirited" motoring on the highway and I think would be quite a handful with a powerful engine.

For what it's worth, if t'wer me, I'd be very carefully building a good quality standard engine using quality parts only to replace the one in the Panda and, perhaps, if the performance bug was biting me too hard to ignore, buying a project car which could be more easily "hotted up".

 

[koalar]

gearboxes are not renowned for reliability in standard form

The C510.5.21 gearbox was drag raced at 420nm+ of torque without problems (official is 300nm)

The driveshafts normally broke first

At 450nm the differential use to occasionally bust

The 300nm is also the official number for the C514

In the real world I'd expect a similar 420

Official figures also depends where you look, the same gearbox is often quoted differently depending on application, might depend on other factors like weight of car

They have been drag raced hard for decades with very few failures


No idea about the 4x4 running gear


Its fairly easy to double the output of the 1.3

And then some

1.3 been past 300bhp and the 1.7 and 1.9 to over 600bhp, probably not that great in the road

 

[varesecrazy]

In a nutshell, the 188 is a 60HP fixed camshaft engine, the 169 is a 69HP VVT engine.

In practice, the differences in performance are not great; there are several folks here, myself included, who prefer in in its 60HP form. It's got more flexibility at low rpm, has a less demanding cambelt replacement procedure, and seems less prone to rattle and get tappety at high mileages.

Both are good engines, but as koalar says, not easily interchangeable , since most of the ancillaries needed to make it work are completely different, and they have fewer common parts than you might think. Also. folks have found that there are no significant power gains to be had on either engine without making major modifications and spending huge sums of money.

The 100HP engine is another kettle of fish entirely, and easier to get a gain from tuning/turbocharging, but I'd have serious reservations about whether the 4x4 drivetrain could cope with the power, even if it could somehow be made to work.

If you need to replace an engine, my advice is to replace it with whatever was there before.

A UK 4x4 owner fitted a Rotrex Supercharger


But I fully agree with the above

 

[svennelainen]

In a nutshell, the 188 is a 60HP fixed camshaft engine, the 169 is a 69HP VVT engine.

In practice, the differences in performance are not great; there are several folks here, myself included, who prefer in in its 60HP form. It's got more flexibility at low rpm, has a less demanding cambelt replacement procedure, and seems less prone to rattle and get tappety at high mileages.

Both are good engines, but as koalar says, not easily interchangeable , since most of the ancillaries needed to make it work are completely different, and they have fewer common parts than you might think. Also. folks have found that there are no significant power gains to be had on either engine without making major modifications and spending huge sums of money.

The 100HP engine is another kettle of fish entirely, and easier to get a gain from tuning/turbocharging, but I'd have serious reservations about whether the 4x4 drivetrain could cope with the power, even if it could somehow be made to work.

If you need to replace an engine, my advice is to replace it with whatever was there before.

Ah, that is enough reason to keep playing with the 188. VVT requires a whole new level of mapping for very little effect.

From reading other posts in this forum I actually expected some get-another-car replies, but don't you guys worry about that. I've had far worse cars with way more power in my workshop.
My Punto friends, some Swedish and a few Finns, say the car runs fine with 0.3-0.4 boost. That's not what I am aiming for, rather 0.2 low boost. And with the videos of people beating the crap out of the Pandas off road, the transmission will definitely survive.

Have in mind, there are people out there with wilder ideas...

 

[koalar]

I suspect there will be no noticeable real word difference at 0.2 bar, assuming you can get the MAP to read correctly and not go into limp mode

On the original ECU you can get around 130 hp normally aspirated, which would be notable

More info here

What is the Panda A5 | FIAT Panda (Mk3)

Keep stumbling on videos of the Panda A5 There several about I could not find any info on its specs Was it a kit car, factory build One video of in car footage shows a sequential gearbox, which I have now lost

www.fiatforum.com

The 1.2 and 1.2 vvt have an identical power curve low down as tested on an engine Dyno, just held on longer with a 500 rpm increase

What is the Panda A5 | FIAT Panda (Mk3)

Keep stumbling on videos of the Panda A5 There several about I could not find any info on its specs Was it a kit car, factory build One video of in car footage shows a sequential gearbox, which I have now lost

www.fiatforum.com

Later eco cars had slightly different gearbox ratios and nearly all weighed more with aircon

 

[svennelainen]

I suspect there will be no noticeable real word difference at 0.2 bar, assuming you can get the MAP to read correctly and not go into limp mode

I think we have a fairly different opinion on the effect of a turbo assist.

 

[koalar]

0.2 bar
3psi
8v engine
Pump petrol
Short duration low lift cam
Stock ECU
Less than 10% would be my guess

Most of the time your driving at the 20-40 bhp range

Changing it to 22-44 in a heavy ish 4x4
Not going to be noticeable in my opinion

Weighing up expense Vs gains,

Going to the tjet makes more sense,

 

[koalar]

A UK 4x4 owner fitted a Rotrex Supercharger


But I fully agree with the above

Got any link,, was it on here

Been fitted to earlier puntos in place of the power steering pump, but then run by a Haltech ECU at over a grand on top

 

[348azeus]

I think we have a fairly different opinion on the effect of a turbo assist.

Would love to see this project. Like you say the wiring and ecu side can be overcome. The basic engine block is same have you thought about using the 1.4 8v ?

 

[Pugglt Auld Jock]

Ah, that is enough reason to keep playing with the 188. VVT requires a whole new level of mapping for very little effect.

From reading other posts in this forum I actually expected some get-another-car replies, but don't you guys worry about that. I've had far worse cars with way more power in my workshop.
My Punto friends, some Swedish and a few Finns, say the car runs fine with 0.3-0.4 boost. That's not what I am aiming for, rather 0.2 low boost. And with the videos of people beating the crap out of the Pandas off road, the transmission will definitely survive.

Have in mind, there are people out there with wilder ideas...

I feel I need to say sorry if I came over a bit negative in my post above. It's not my intention to dampen your enthusiasm. When much younger - 1960's and early 70's - and at college learning my trade, I spent much of my free time at Santa Pod and various hillclimb venues. You see some really weird and unlikely, but wonderful, vehicles competing in these disciplines and I enjoy seeing the unique innovation thought up often on a shoestring budget. I do hope you keep us updated on what you're doing and I can't wait to see what you end up with. Just to ignite an age old argument, I have a very soft spot for superchargers as against turbos. Yes they have some downsides, but I just like how much more responsive and generally "driveable" a nicely set up supercharger is.

 

[svennelainen]

Would love to see this project. Like you say the wiring and ecu side can be overcome. The basic engine block is same have you thought about using the 1.4 8v ?

It's mostly an availability thing. I can purchase 10 of the 1.2 within a minute. Secondly compatibility. I've converted or modified engines a lot and quite a few people who buy the engines say they know what they're doing, but after a few months they always call for support. If I sell the car I prefer it not being totally of the chart unless I re-swap it before selling.
I know a few Finns that mix and match 1.2 and 1.4 engines, even adapting the VVT with the standard ECU. Jonik's Youtube is full of hybrid swaps, like a 1.4 head on a 1.2 with an Alfa Romeo cam shaft and home made VVT adjustment. Because why not. It's the same guy with the supercharger I posted earlier. The 1.4 head has ALL the fittings for the 1.2 sensors. They're just not drilled from factory so adapting a 1.4 would actually not be that hard. I may go that route, time will tell...

 

[MrMagoo]

If you know your way around the electrical systems then you can fit any engine you like.
The 1.4 turbo, which can be brought relatively cheaply, is capable of absurd power.

 

[348azeus]

What I’d really like to see is you fitting a 1.4 multiair but with a 16v head. Then once you’ve done it I can do the same thing to my 124.