Mo
Member
Registered: 29th Jan 03
Location: Bolton, Drives Q3 S-line +
User status: Offline
|
wanted to seen the beastly corsa in action 
i'm sure they'll let u in (since it's u  )
[Edited on 27-02-2004 by Mo]
|
Andy
Member
Registered: 28th Dec 99
Location: Cumbria, UK
User status: Offline
|
It'll be up and running from early April (unlike last year when it didn't really get sorted till late September). I'm sure you'll get the opportunity to get a spin in it. Or if you want, you're more than welcome to come up this way for a day for a brew up and a high speed spin through the hills 
|
Mo
Member
Registered: 29th Jan 03
Location: Bolton, Drives Q3 S-line +
User status: Offline
|
hmmmmm sounds tempting. i might just take u up on that. plus i need some advice on tuning my 1.6 16v sport and u seem to be the man 
u'll have to update me on your location in cumbria as well
|
Marc
Member
Registered: 11th Aug 02
Location: York
User status: Offline
|
You cant beat cc for mid range torque though, to get a smaller engine like a 1.6 to have similar torque you have to sacrifice it from somewhere else.
|
broster
Premium Member
Registered: 6th Dec 02
Location: Drives: E39
User status: Offline
|
carl, i know your point but i believe you could tune the 1.6 to 150bhp and it would still be as reliable as standard. yeah i know about all the variances in engines etc and no 2 will be the same. in my eyes the 1.6 engine is the top choice to have in a corsa. look at andys car. hes shown what can be done to it. ok its cost a bit. your electric motor example is a bit unfair in this case as we aint talkin about increasin the revs that much etc. i will always believe that in a corsa a tuned 1.6 is better than a standard 2.0 or even a tuned 2.0. just the way i see it. you see it differently. hence people do different things!
|
Andy
Member
Registered: 28th Dec 99
Location: Cumbria, UK
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by 16vmarc
You cant beat cc for mid range torque though, to get a smaller engine like a 1.6 to have similar torque you have to sacrifice it from somewhere else.
For low down and mid range torque, more ccs are better and for what it's worth, I think the 2L lump is a great engine. If you want an economical fit and forget power upgrade, then the 2L is a great option. But the 1.6 is sooo tunable and weighing 50kgs less than the 2L, is always going to help with handling. Does cost more though
|
corsa120
Member
Registered: 4th May 02
Location: Northamptonshire
User status: Offline
|
yes forget how many revs my motor increased by what my point is the motor is now producing more POWER with the same internals meaning the uprated parts will last but the remaining parts u never bothered to uprate i will not stand the power forever.
the theory is more power u put in your engine THE HARDER IT WILL WORK meaning a slight reduce in reliability and wear and tear, and the reason i say reliability will decrease is becuase 1.6 is not really a big engine is it lets face it. niether is 2.0 but thats not my argument
you all seem to have got me wrong im saying a 2.0 is better in any way shape or form im just saying a 2.0 producing 150bhp standard will be under no strain at all this is because of the bigger capacity of the 2.0, and andy shut up the handling is no different ive bin a 2.0 litre corsa and feels same once you uprate shocks etc, i mean if u tune a 2.0 to 300bhp my argument will be the same thats double the power = more strain = less reliability BUT LIKE SAID IT COULD TAKE YEARS I DONT MEAN IT'LL BLOW UP WITHIN 2 WEEKS.
|
John_C
Member
Registered: 5th Mar 03
Location: South east, Bromley
User status: Offline
|
u need to calm down  i think andy would know what he's talking about. i haven't heard andy's engine have any probs running that power & i think he's had it a while
|
starkie
Member
Registered: 1st Jul 03
Location: Leslie, Fife
User status: Offline
|
yeah i can see where you all are coming from i know about my bikes aswell as also have an rvf 400 with a two brothers race system and hrc ignition etc lol so i know about the power to weight ratio etc i have a red top sitting in the garage the now and have a magnex 4 branch manifold wolf 3d management system and throttle bodies off an ecotec which i will adapt to suit either engine but most things i have will suit either engine so it really is a tough one
|
corsa120
Member
Registered: 4th May 02
Location: Northamptonshire
User status: Offline
|
yes john-c he might have had it for awhile but my theory to test, lets how long it lasts compared to that of a standard 1.6 16v bet its not as long
|
John_C
Member
Registered: 5th Mar 03
Location: South east, Bromley
User status: Offline
|
its not a test you can do fairly & would have to take place over a long period, but sum 1 like andy knows his engines and i'm sure looks after it a lot better that most standard 1.6 drivers. Also andy's got more to lose if it does go wrong
|
Andy
Member
Registered: 28th Dec 99
Location: Cumbria, UK
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by corsa120
yes john-c he might have had it for awhile but my theory to test, lets how long it lasts compared to that of a standard 1.6 16v bet its not as long
My engine is uprated - steel con rods, forged pistons and hardened rings, titanium valve caps, uprated shells, 21/4N valves etc. I've uprated internals cos it's revving to 9000rpm, that's 35% higher than standard; hence the need to uprate to maintain reliability. I have no doubt that the longevity of this engine will be comparable to a standard engine because I have uprated the internals. But you don't seem to understand my point that an increase of 10% in revs can easily be handled by the standard engine with just a couple of minor mods. Yes, it's making 50% more power, but that's becuase by altering the induction/ exhaust and flowing the head, you increase the volumetric efficiency - ie you get better cylinder filling. There's no extra wear in that 
[Edited on 28-02-2004 by Andy]
|
corsa120
Member
Registered: 4th May 02
Location: Northamptonshire
User status: Offline
|
yes andy exactly my point you have uptrated the internals so yes you car is safe fair enough, but alot of peeps on here spend 2 grand tuning there 1.6 upto 160-70 bhp with just bolt on mods like the inlet/ecu/cams/zorst ete etc this is all fine and well but the actual internals and the heart of the engine that have been left are under more load this resulting in more wear and less reliability hence my argument lol
why do you think a van uses more fuel when it has full load because engine is put under more strain hence its WORKING harder same principle goes for tuning
|
Andy
Member
Registered: 28th Dec 99
Location: Cumbria, UK
User status: Offline
|
But I think that people who go this route generally uprate the two weakest components - rod bolts cam belt rollers. On the 1.6, the pistons and rods are considered good for at least 7750rpm and the crank for at least 8500rpm. Even at 7500rpm, you're not really stressing it that much (provided you've carried out the two mods above). The 1.6 is a lovely little engine
[Edited on 28-02-2004 by Andy]
|
corsa120
Member
Registered: 4th May 02
Location: Northamptonshire
User status: Offline
|
agree to disagree
|
Andy
Member
Registered: 28th Dec 99
Location: Cumbria, UK
User status: Offline
|
Yes
|
broster
Premium Member
Registered: 6th Dec 02
Location: Drives: E39
User status: Offline
|
lol at this thread, its actually really good reading! alot of good points in it! all correct in their own way!
|
starkie
Member
Registered: 1st Jul 03
Location: Leslie, Fife
User status: Offline
|
i would agree with that i couldnt believe the responce i got in such a short time anyone of you done the red top conversion who didnt use the pvd conversion kit?
|
Greasemonkey
Member
Registered: 17th Apr 02
Location: Drives a Tractor
User status: Offline
|
Now there is another thing i gota get ASAP, i got new revised rollers fitted, they are brand new, will these be ok for a month or so untill i get some Metal SBD rollers, when i say brand new i mean there fitted to the engine and it aint even been run yet lol,
|
