WARDY25
New member
Ill be there dont worrymits broom yellow with black abarth wheels,with white sticker at top of back window
Technical How hard is it to install a van aken turbo?
- Thread starter benfredjosh
- Start date
Currently reading:
Technical How hard is it to install a van aken turbo?
When I look at my car it's not just as easy as bolting the stuf on. From the turbo theres an oil feed coming from the section of the engine where the oil filter screws onto, and then you have the oil by pass going direct to the sump where a small pipe has been welded onto to connect the silcone pipe for the bypass! I'm sure it could be done but I question the wisdom in doing so as it may trun out to be more expensive and not done to as high a standard if Van Aaken don't do it, plus you will get a warrenty from them plus the TuV certificate which make sthe car easier to insure.
PLus I was sure they only charged £500 to fit the kit!
Worth considering.
Aaron.
PLus I was sure they only charged £500 to fit the kit!
Worth considering.
Aaron.
Aaron check my attachment for the current costs 
smokeme
Established member
J333EVO said:
The conversion in itself is really easy it's the tuning part that's difficult
you could get a rolling road place to setup the fueling etc if u used an MF2 though couldn't you?
smokeme
Established member
arc said:
yes you can, but you only need to go lean once to blow the engine. Dyno time is also very expensive.
:bang: Dont want to crash the party half way through but £2000 fitted seem's abit pricy to me and £1000 also sounds abit harsh as you will have some relability issues I would think?
Why not spend £1000 or £2000 on having your FIRE engine machined here there and everywhere to produce the same power as a Turbo and still staying Naturally Aspirated which of course who wants a turbo when you can have the same power from NA?
I guess that is a matter of opinion but to me a NA engine running 100 BHP and a Turbo running 100 BHP the NA would be faster due to having the 100 BHP all the way through the rev range and not just with the Turbo boost?
I am well aware of the increases in torque by the Turbo but surely the NA would mean you can get away without telling your insurance but they sure as hell will notice a Turbo if you have any kind of accident.... Also the Pssssst of the Turbo is a nice noise but so is the raw of a 100 BHP+ engine with a tiny little car flying past hehehe
Why not spend £1000 or £2000 on having your FIRE engine machined here there and everywhere to produce the same power as a Turbo and still staying Naturally Aspirated which of course who wants a turbo when you can have the same power from NA?
I guess that is a matter of opinion but to me a NA engine running 100 BHP and a Turbo running 100 BHP the NA would be faster due to having the 100 BHP all the way through the rev range and not just with the Turbo boost?
I am well aware of the increases in torque by the Turbo but surely the NA would mean you can get away without telling your insurance
but they sure as hell will notice a Turbo if you have any kind of accident.... Also the Pssssst of the Turbo is a nice noise but so is the raw of a 100 BHP+ engine with a tiny little car flying past hehehe
smokeme
Established member
EvilJaxx said::bang: Dont want to crash the party half way through but £2000 fitted seem's abit pricy to me and £1000 also sounds abit harsh as you will have some relability issues I would think?
Why not spend £1000 or £2000 on having your FIRE engine machined here there and everywhere to produce the same power as a Turbo and still staying Naturally Aspirated which of course who wants a turbo when you can have the same power from NA?
I guess that is a matter of opinion but to me a NA engine running 100 BHP and a Turbo running 100 BHP the NA would be faster due to having the 100 BHP all the way through the rev range and not just with the Turbo boost?
I am well aware of the increases in torque by the Turbo but surely the NA would mean you can get away without telling your insurance
A turbo will always produce more power for the money, i don't think £2000 will get 100hp NA unless you start off with a 1242cc or dramatically increase the compression. The highest power claimed for an 1108 that i've heard of was 97hp flywheel and it cost a lot of money to get there.
£125 for a 1242 engine from http://www.tbpsalvage.co.uk/ and then continue to do the full work to the engine which will cost around £2000, This time I wont mention any companys who did this type of conversion as last time mentioning them caused abit of upset but for £2000 you should be able to get Zero-balanced crank and flywheel, Ported and Polished cylinder head, Cut Valve-guides, Uprated camshaft, Polished valves, Raised compression ratio and Lightened flywheel Combined with the Group N exhaust system and a GSR induction kit power was between 85-100bhp...
dont hold me to this but im sure GSR do this kind of work now??
This time I wont mention any companys who did this type of conversion as last time mentioning them caused abit of upset but for £2000 you should be able to get Zero-balanced crank and flywheel, Ported and Polished cylinder head, Cut Valve-guides, Uprated camshaft, Polished valves, Raised compression ratio and Lightened flywheel Combined with the Group N exhaust system and a GSR induction kit power was between 85-100bhp...dont hold me to this but im sure GSR do this kind of work now??
I am also aware you get more bang for your buck with the Turbo but lets be honest thats a lazy persons way of getting performance from your car...
Look at the new BMW M5 thats running a 5 litre engine hitting 500 BHP, its possible to get 100 BHP from every litre if the engine is worked on well enough...!
did you ever see those mini's which where 1 litre reving at 10k RPM or there abouts and had like 130 BHP without turbo?
Look at the new BMW M5 thats running a 5 litre engine hitting 500 BHP, its possible to get 100 BHP from every litre if the engine is worked on well enough...!
did you ever see those mini's which where 1 litre reving at 10k RPM or there abouts and had like 130 BHP without turbo?
smokeme
Established member
I'm just saying that a turbo is cheaper, in the long run it will also produce the most power because there is a limit to how much air an egine ca suck before it won't start that is the reason of variable valve timing, fiats don't have it
Indeed i also forgot to mention tho that with Trickers 40mm Tb ontop of the mods i listed before you are looking at gains of 105 BHP maybe more...
I also see what your saying about the turbo but for the slight difference in gains of about 5 - 10 BHP more than a fully worked N/A engine the N/A will be faster surely as from the line the turbo will be idle waiting for when it hits the rpm when the boost kicks in so while that is happening the N/A 105 BHP engine is already fully rawing up the road at maximum power all the time...? As at the end of the day the Turbo is only a 1.1, 55BHP or a 1.2, 60BHP or 75 BHP until the turbo kicks in... the N/A are 1.1, 85 BHP or 1.2, 105 BHP is always running at that!
Also again in gains of 5 - 10 BHP is that really worth the relability issues?
I also see what your saying about the turbo but for the slight difference in gains of about 5 - 10 BHP more than a fully worked N/A engine the N/A will be faster surely as from the line the turbo will be idle waiting for when it hits the rpm when the boost kicks in so while that is happening the N/A 105 BHP engine is already fully rawing up the road at maximum power all the time...? As at the end of the day the Turbo is only a 1.1, 55BHP or a 1.2, 60BHP or 75 BHP until the turbo kicks in... the N/A are 1.1, 85 BHP or 1.2, 105 BHP is always running at that!
Also again in gains of 5 - 10 BHP is that really worth the relability issues?
Last edited:
Surely if your really after silly amounts of usuable power and torque it has to be a combination of the two???
True I often thought about that a fully worked 1242 engine with a turbo now that would produce some awesum power but your looking at prices of around £4000, all i am doing here is simply stateing a Turbo is not the only option and for the cheaper price comes relability issues and with the N/A you pay more but get rid of relabilty issues and i am also just getting into this topic as a fan of N/A I see myself as the educator hehe
also there always has to be another opinion or everyone would just be raving turbo!
also there always has to be another opinion or everyone would just be raving turbo!
You won't get 100+bhp from a n/asp 1242 without a race cam or vvt, with the race cam it'll never pass an emissions test.
A n/asp 1242 producing 90bhp will do so at a high rpm, you will have to be 'on the cam' for it to pull, a 1242 turbo will have a wider power band. Getting in the right rev band on a peaky engine will be more tricky than sataying on boost in a turbo.
A 1242 turbo will produce more torque than a 1242 n/asp. BHP is a calculation of torque and rpm, if you look at Andy Ellsom's 16v it produces 90 lb/ft or somesuch, the 120bhp figure is because it does it at very high rpm. A Van Aaken 1108 low boost produces 92lb/ft on it's own, staying under 6k revs.
A n/asp 1242 producing 90bhp will do so at a high rpm, you will have to be 'on the cam' for it to pull, a 1242 turbo will have a wider power band. Getting in the right rev band on a peaky engine will be more tricky than sataying on boost in a turbo.
A 1242 turbo will produce more torque than a 1242 n/asp. BHP is a calculation of torque and rpm, if you look at Andy Ellsom's 16v it produces 90 lb/ft or somesuch, the 120bhp figure is because it does it at very high rpm. A Van Aaken 1108 low boost produces 92lb/ft on it's own, staying under 6k revs.
just flicking through the classifieds and on this ad https://www.fiatforum.com/classifieds/showproduct.php?product=812&sort=1&cat=29&page=1 and in the comments
only post this as cinquecento_sunderland's comments were the catalyst for the debate.cinquecento_sunderland said:
interesting comment for someone who says the turbo conversion is a waste of time!!!cinquecento_sunderland said:
LOL
maybe he suddenly loves the turbo who knows....also
Fixitagaintomorrow:
Your right about the Torque being alot more etc... and this thread could stay running forever as everyone has their own opinion on what they would like and as far as it goes im a N/A guy all the way and wouldnt touch Turbo hense why id have an HGT over the GT...
Also you mentioned about at high revs which is in fact correct but Andrew Ellsom's car revs to about 9,000 rpm if im correct after his last remap and surely the 1.1 turbos and 1.2 turbos cant get anywhere near that so wouldnt that balance the odds abit say his 16v vs a 1.2 Turbo
OP
OP
i just think everyone in the forum has different prefrences? each 2 their own??? yeh lol this is out of hand its become a 4 page thread lol i think its evil jaxx sig takin upp all the room lol!
Its smaller than your's hehe and same size as Master Chef thats such a good thread!! Master Chef !
OP
OP
haha lolSimilar threads
