corsasport.co.uk
 

Corsa Sport » Message Board » Help Zone, Modification and ICE Advice » XE series 1.2 ?


New Topic

New Poll
  Subscribe | Add to Favourites

You are not logged in and may not post or reply to messages. Please log in or create a new account or mail us about fixing an existing one - register@corsasport.co.uk

There are also many more features available when you are logged in such as private messages, buddy list, location services, post search and more.


Author XE series 1.2 ?
blackula
Member

Registered: 26th Apr 03
Location: Cheshire
User status: Offline
12th Jun 03 at 14:21   View User's Profile U2U Member Reply With Quote

Its discussed the 1.2 16v Corsa engine used in B and C, is largely untuneable. Is this because its a poor or economy based engine or a general lack of bits or just not worth modding at its capacity.

How closely related is it to the 1.4 and 1.6 XE regarded by Tuners like Velos as highly tuneable. Or is not an XE Series and not related.

SO far on a 1.2 Sxi Corsa C, a drilled airbox and K&n panel filter have netted a 7 bhp gain at wheels, std car making 55. Modded 62. This was using Optimax petrol. If there is a way to uplaod dyno prinouts, then I can.




Mikorsa16v
Member

Registered: 2nd Sep 02
Location: Burgess Hill, West Sussex
User status: Offline
12th Jun 03 at 14:50   View User's Profile U2U Member Reply With Quote

for a start
1.2 16v corsa B - 65bhp std
1.2 16v corsa C - 75bhp std

not worth throwing money in a 1.2 IMO

these engines are not related to the 1.4 and the 1.6 engines as these were developed by lotus and the 1.2 wasnt cant remember exact details
greg0r
Member

Registered: 22nd Apr 03
Location: Dunstable, UK (Sadly)
User status: Offline
12th Jun 03 at 14:50   View User's Profile U2U Member Reply With Quote

i thoguth the standard 1.2 16v was 75BH on the Corsa C

i was reading a review, that they've modified and tweeked the engine, when they came out with the new 'C' shape

Greg
greg0r
Member

Registered: 22nd Apr 03
Location: Dunstable, UK (Sadly)
User status: Offline
12th Jun 03 at 14:51   View User's Profile U2U Member Reply With Quote

yea, you beat me before i could post

thought as much!
Mikorsa16v
Member

Registered: 2nd Sep 02
Location: Burgess Hill, West Sussex
User status: Offline
12th Jun 03 at 14:53   View User's Profile U2U Member Reply With Quote

Sam
Moderator
Premium Member


Registered: 24th Dec 99
Location: West Midlands
User status: Offline
12th Jun 03 at 14:59   View User's Profile U2U Member Reply With Quote

The 1.2 16v engine is totally different to the 1.4 and 1.6 16v engines.

I would say one of the problems with the 1.2 apart from the size of the engine, is to do with the inlet manifold design.
blackula
Member

Registered: 26th Apr 03
Location: Cheshire
User status: Offline
12th Jun 03 at 15:09   View User's Profile U2U Member Reply With Quote

The Corsa C 1.2 is 75 bhp, the figure I quoted is wheels horsepower, i.e real horsepower after transmission losses.

Whatever 55 is a percentage of 75 thats your transmission and wheel losses etc.

Some dyno's give flywheel power figures its often a conversion from wheels hp and innacurate.


What I was also asking is as its called XE is it similar, the answer would appear not !

Cheers
paul_spurrell
Member

Registered: 14th Sep 01
Location: Bath Avon
User status: Offline
12th Jun 03 at 17:59   View User's Profile U2U Member Reply With Quote

the 1.2 was actually developed by Suzuki

 
New Topic

New Poll

  Related Threads Author Forum Replies Views Last Post
wots best for a 15" sub SONNY Help Zone, Modification and ICE Advice 17 1561
23rd Apr 03 at 11:14
by DIGGIDY
 
ne1 heard of this? ChazSXi General Chat 16 1224
7th Jul 03 at 21:26
by ChazSXi
 
ne 1 collect dvds? DanielJ General Chat 42 2142
25th Sep 03 at 00:42
by BarryAstra
 
Pheonix Nights Super_si General Chat 38 2042
10th Oct 03 at 15:53
by Super_si
 
BMW 330ci Phil321 General Chat 70 2888
18th Dec 03 at 16:42
by Ditch
 

Corsa Sport » Message Board » Help Zone, Modification and ICE Advice » XE series 1.2 ? 28 database queries in 0.0069699 seconds